Loving God out of fear of punishment? What I understand you to mean, is that you think the bible presents a picture of an ogre type god with a love me or burn mentality, or something to that affect. Is this true? Whether this is what you mean or not, this a concept not found in the Holy Scriptures, nor is it an accurate picture of the heart of Yahweh, the God of the bible. What the bible presents is the fact that mankind has lied, stolen, lusted, blasphemed (God Himself), coveted, been rebellious to parents, and commited many other sins. Since there is a such thing as absolute moral laws, and this type of law is universal in it's scope, and since mankind has a conscience (which means con=with, science=knowledge), mankind has sinned "with knowledge" that the fact that those actions are wrong. Yet mankind has chosen to violate the law of the conscience and do wrong anyway. The Holy Scriptures (James 4:12) say that there is one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy. Suppose this is true. If so, then when one breaks this Lawgiver's commands and laws, (which the bible calls sin) they are commiting spiritual and moral acts, crimes if I may say, against the Lawgiver Himself (though it may be against others as well). According to the bible, this Lawgiver just happens to be called the Judge of all the earth, and that there will be a day that every soul will stand before the throne of the Judge Himself, and give an account for their life on earth.
And I saw the dead, the great and the small,
standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and
the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books,
according to their deeds.
(Rev 20.12)
Yet despite this, the bible teaches that on a table with two cups, one called mercy and the other called judgment, God would prefer to take the cup of mercy and pour it out on those He created and made in His image, rather than judgment. God desires all to come to repentance and for none to perish, but will not make a choice for us whether or not we will do so. If we do so, it is only because of our choice for our lives, not His choice for our lives. Ezekial, who was known as a prophet of God, said Yahweh told him to say 'As I live,' says the Lord God, 'I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn, turn from your evil ways!
For why should you die, O house of Israel
(Eze 33:11)
...times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.
(Acts 17:30,31)
Now atheist, at this point, say you were to suppose all this to be true. This may be a little fearful, yet Glenn Miller, has this to say about fear.
Fear itself is not a 'bad' thing; it is generally very positive in that it warns us of real dangers. It can become pathological, of course, and require therapy (e.g. claustrophobia), but the self-preservation drives that use fear as "early-warning systems" to keep us out of trouble, is still an important function in our lives.
Sometimes, it can be difficult to tell the difference between "scare tactics" and "legitimate warnings", and it has seemed to me over the years that the difference between the two concerns motivation.
* "Legitimate warnings" are based on human concern for one others, ranging anywhere from simple "community bonds" [e.g., where a motorist will stop on a road and begin flagging other motorists (often perfect strangers) around a dangerous spot on the roadway], to heart-wrenching appeals from a parent or a spouse or a friend to a dearly-loved one about the dangers of continuing on some truly disastrous or criminal path. These are all motivated by human compassion and commitment and concern. Sometimes they would need to be forceful and vivid, though, in order to break through stubbornness or callousness. Legitimate warnings treat the other person as valuable (worth preserving) and as agents (capable of responding reasonably).
* "Scare tactics", on the other hand, have traditionally been used by those interested in power, fame, advancement, and control. Their message is manipulative, and appeals solely to the self-preservation element (never to the benefit to the community as a whole), and is never motivated by love. Those users of scare tactic treat people as objects, as statistics, as pawns.
So basically, the bible is contains truths that are legitamate warnings, such as if one continues in a life of sin where self is master and lord of their heart and life, they are storing up wrath and punishment for the day of Judgment.
A fairly good analogy or two created by Glenn Miller that is a fairly good presentation of the bible's message of God's thoughts towards man is as follows:
The element of removal of the abusive from the community of persons:
I came upon a man the other day, physically abusing the people around him. I asked him to stop beating his fellow humans, but he said he didn't want to--he liked being cruel. He said it made him feel 'important' and 'powerful'. I told him it was wrong to destroy others like that, and he said his heart didn't care. He enjoyed the freedom, ability, and leisure to hurt others, and I asked him why he couldn't enjoy the freedom from pain that the others would feel, if he stopped his violence. He said his freedom was more important than theirs--that he was more important that the many victims of his cruelty.
I then warned him that behavior like that would lead to quarantine and exile--a serious loss of privilege, lack of access to resources, and forced removal/reduction in his ability to hurt others--his freedom and self-determination. He said it didn't matter to him--that it was too far away, and that maybe he would escape the authorities.
I even made a special offer--as the ruler of the land: "I can literally give you a new heart, friend; one which can feel important and worthwhile WITHOUT having to make others miserable. That way you would avoid exile, and actually be happy about not abusing others (instead of miserable when you aren't abusing them)!"
He made an obscene gesture at me, snarled, and moved a little down the road to assault someone else.
"My offer is still good, friend, but in a few hours or days, I will act in defense of those people you are hurting...I can only be patient for so long, before, as protector of these people, I have to act in their interest and for their relief from you...I will not force you to make the decision right now, but I will make the decision FOR YOU--in favor of exile--if you continue manifesting a cruel character in this way...
The element of rescue:
I was on duty on the Coast Guard Rescue boat the other morning, when I spotted what I thought was drowning woman. A mile or so off shore, she was treading water and looked quite weary and dehydrated. We sped over to help her, but she swam away from the life preservers we tossed her, she wouldn't grab hold of the lifeguard hooks we extended to her, and she swam away from the life raft and swimmers we sent out to help her. It was bizarre.
I asked her if she wanted some help--actually expecting her to be relieved and even grateful, and she screamed "no, go away!"--even though every now and then she would literally sink under water for a few minutes at a time, and come up frantically gasping for air. She said she was "doing fine without help", and that she intended to stay out there forever like that, just "doing fine".
I pointed out to her that she looked exhausted, dehydrated, seemed ready to drown any minute, and that she would be too tired to make it to shore if she waited much later--and she denied it. She said it wasn't really all that bad, that she had made it okay so far on her own, and that she could no doubt keep it up indefinitely.
I told her I thought she obviously needed medical attention, rest, water, and she refused. She said she was her "own person" and that I could not force her to get out of the water. I told her, cautiously--since she would go ballistic whenever I tried to help her--that I didn't think she was in any mental state to be able to make such decisions, and that I would have to subdue her and force her into the boat--for her own good. And you should have heard the curses, threats of lawsuits, murder, suicide from her...as she constantly kept swimming away from our boat and from our every attempt to rescue her...
"I kept sending people out, but she kept evading them...I offered and begged and offered and pleaded and offered and implored...and she railed and railed and railed...and always swam away further...and about sundown she went under for the last time...why wouldn't she accept the free help? I'll never know...I was in anguish for weeks and weeks over this senseless loss...
My illustrations are designed specifically to highlight (a) that the offer is an offer of help from self-determined courses of action; (b) that the end result (exile or drowning) is a perfectly reasonable outcome, given the context of community and the context of reality; and (c) that the denial of need doesn't automatically mean the absence of need [e.g, alcoholics, drunk drivers, and perpetrators of domestic violence all say "I'm fine..."]...
I also tried to illustrate, in the case of the drowning woman (with her periodic going under for a few minutes, only to quickly resume the "I am just fine" posture), that most people (everybody?) have mini-experiences in life that are 'foretastes' of a future without love, life, or God.. They have moments/periods of lostness, or alienation, or unease, or disintegration, or emptiness, or insignificance, or coldness of heart, or treachery, or exclusion by others, or rabid pride, or disdain of others, or apathy toward the plight of the "less fortunate", or causeless agitation, or angry hubris toward the kindness of others (including God), or even negative over-reactions to the overtures of the Lord in their life--all of which could be seen as foretastes of future Exile from Life...
Where MY analogies are woefully discontinuous are:
1. I don't have the rescue attempts motivated by love (with the possible weak exception of the ruler's appeal to the cruel one about his own happiness?)
2. I don't have the extreme costliness of the rescue to the rescuer. (For example, I would somehow have to get the rescuer himself to 'drown' deliberately instead of the woman, to save her life).
Anyways atheist, just food for thought and entertainment of the mind.
Now I know all of this is off the initial discussion. If you wish to discuss this, let's do so, but I have some questions for you first. Then we can get to this here. Is that ok?
SoaringEagle
