Anglicans discussion

We can continue discussing some of the questions Ibrahim brought up here, or other questions others might want to discuss.

As for the question of theodicy Ibrahim and James introduced, I'd tackle that, but I don't think I'd have much better luck than the hundreds of better Christian thinkers who have gone before me. I want only to say that my opinion on the matter is this: Why does a just God allow such seemingly random evil? I don't know, it doesn't make sense, but clearly evil (both random and consquential) exists, and I trust there's a valid reason and that God does not desire our suffering. I don't think, in this lifetime, we're ever going to get a better or more complete or more satisfying answer than the answer God gave Job. This is what I love about the Bible: it never lies about the world. "In this world," Christ says, "you SHALL have tribulation." Things often, frankly, suck, and the Bible makes no bones about it and offers no pat, easy, answers for why, though the theologians try their best to answer the theodicy questions the Bible itslef never really does. Job's friends had a variety of theologian's answers to his suffering, and not ONE of them was right in Job's case. The Bible offers some ideas here and there (from free will to natural consquence), but none explains suffering in every case. God does not answer our intellectual confusion; instead, he answers our heart's cries as He Himself shares in our suffering.

The other book I am currently reading, The Reason for God:Belief in the Age of Skepticism, by Timothy Keller, is an excellent Apologetic book for our times. He has two Interesting Chapters, the first of which I have finished: "How Could a Good God Allow Suffering?" and the other, which I have not got to yet: "How Can a Loving God Send People to hell."

A good point on suffering for the atheist he makes is that just because they may not be able to think of a reason why God allows suffering, does not mean that there is not a reason. Pretty good logic. He also brings into the same chapter some good points about God's redemption through suffering. He sites the example of Joseph, with his kidnapping by his brothers , selling him to slaves and his years imprisoned in Egypt. Then how God raised Joseph up as a leader who came to the great rescue of his family and Israel during a great famine.

If anyone reads the book, I started a thread for discussion on it. I know Reading recluse was reading it and James F had it on his "to read list."

Pretty good logic but pretty poor comfort. I think theologians too often dismiss the reality of suffering by trying to explain it. No explanation actually HELPS the tortured person; only God can do that Himself. The cross is a comfort, and that is what is so unique about Christianity--this idea that God Himself shared in our suffering.

As for "How can a loving God send people to hell?" I don't believe He does "send" anyone to hell. He relentlessly pursues every lost sheep with is Hlove, though He have 99 already at home. He runs to greet the prodigal before the boy says a word. He seeks out the single lost coin. He longs to gather us under his wings like a hen. If anyone goes to hell, it's not because God SENT them there. It's because they didn't want to be with God.

You are right Skylar, God does not send anyone to Hell. Keller brings that out in the book. The chapter titles are actually questions that people have frequently asked him. They are all those skeptic questions people bring up.

It sounds like an interesting book. I'll have to read it sometime. (Book 101 on the to read list...)

I am posting this on "Theological discussions" thread, I guess since it is theological. It has rules for the early church order and the Apostolic tradition. I thought my fellow Anglican friends and others interested in the early church might enjoy this:

http://www.bombaxo.com/hippolytus.html