#kalimiros

As I've said before - I sat on my distaste for Penal Substitution Theology for years - decades - before I started asking tentative questions from my pastors.

I am more afraid of my own heart than of the pope and all his cardinals. I have within me the great pope, Self. — Martin Luther

This was the reason why.

Proto influences could include C. S. Lewis.

If anything, the book is Lewis’ creative answer to MacDonald’s universalism – in which he has a way of poetically demonstrating the possibility of salvation for all – but not without their cooperation. It is the River of Fire set in a pleasant land that any Englishman should enjoy. 🙂 -- Fr. Stephan Freeman, Falling between the Cracks, Comments

But it wasn't until I read, the River of Fire, or The Ancestral Sin, that I became convinced that I wasn't entirely delusional.

I can believe in a God that isn't just a sow's ear called a silk purse. A megalomaniacal, very human, warlord. Christian tradition can allow for it.

Now there's debate. Not the least of which is Vladimir Moss.

Nevertheless, it's problems are no more significant then the problems with Penal Substitution, maybe less so.

I've been thinking about the following for a couple of days. Fr. Powell's devotional prompted me to go ahead and publish it even though it's edgier than I would like. I still sat on it for a bit, then Father Freeman reprinted his post on our interconnectedness.

Consider this a raw insight into my mind.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I listen to several You-Tubers who call themselves atheists, and they all (1)(2)(3)(4) followed a similar trajectory. I might also add that a Seventh-Day Adventist Pastor experimented with a, "A Year Without God", and he became an "agnostic atheist". They all grew up with a narrative about God, largely in the Evangelical tradition; they bought into the narrative; started picking at the inconsistencies in their understanding vs the reality of life; and then stopped calling themselves Christian.

I came from a relatively questioning home. From the beginning, rather than assume that I had the correct narrative of history and Christianity, I assumed that the narrative that had created over 10 centuries of martyrs had been obscured, that the reason Christianity has lost its savor is the fact that somewhere down the line, the true story was lost. I assumed that the reason I was questioning my Christianity, was because the Christianity I was questioning wasn't Paul's or Steven's Christianity. It was an obscured Christianity - distorted even. It was THAT, that I questioned.

It started with Indulgences. Were they a distortion, or is heaven truly measured out in treasuries of grace and merit verses sins committed - with weight added and subtracted for monies paid, good works done, etc.… Could I somehow figure out exactly how much "sin" I was accruing if I worked late on a Friday night (Remember, I'm an Adventist in a secular Corporatocracy where firms demand employees work on their schedules)? One demerit for every minute? maybe one for every second? Or was it just one demerit for the day, and call it good? If I believed in penance, what would it cost?

Pick your poison - Theft. If you steal office supplies, is that the same as $100 dollars? What about the number of people that are affected, does that change the formula? If I look at a woman with lust in my heart, the Bible calls that a sin, so is the second look free? What if I go further, is that a new sin, or are we still working off the old one? Hate is murder; how many people have you murdered today? If you flip someone off in traffic, is that murder, or do you have to pray for their destruction to make it count? To be homosexual means to engage in certain practices; isn't sodomy equally as sinful as any extramarital, or for that matter, any premarital encounter?

Protestants took the whole accounting process for granted.

They then posited a "Good God", and tried to cram a "get out of Hell" proviso to the whole accounting process to make it so. Christ came to earth and "paid it all!" Which reminds me of Paul, Romans 6:15, "Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace?" The answer for too many Protestants seems to be, "Sure!"; the rest hear, "by no means!" and struggle with the inherent "legalism".

That is a petty system, and the God running that system is a petty God. That system has also been used by petty men for their own gain.

I needed a real God. Not a petty God - a glorified accountant. I was a sinner in the hands of this petty, angry God. And it must be said...

That God was a Demon.

My Pastors couldn't see how toxic this God was. Christ gave himself on our behalf, it was his choice. But - Really? Would we hold Abraham on his pedestal as a righteous Patriarch had he gone through with eviscerating Isaac, even though Isaac seemed to be okay with it?

I shudder to think of the world we would be living in if we truly thought so. I needed a better narrative.

Then I discovered Orthodoxy.

Protestant consensus suggested that there were no developed theories of atonement in Christianity prior to Anselm. Many seemed to think that because of this, we somehow have a superior advantage. However, as I began to dig and look for Eastern Orthodox connections, many pieces started coming together - the role of a physician in healing disease, the kinds of sacrifices a fireman makes when saving people from a burning building - these kinds of illustrations. Things were starting to feel as though they were making more sense. I think the narrative that finally clinched it for me was Kalimiros' River of Fire. This was a narrative that explained Christ's resurrection, and more importantly, my own role to play in my own Salvation. A joyous labor that would draw me closer to him and incidentally make me more human if I was faithful; and one with dire consequences if, like the foolish virgins, I chose to fritter his gift away with idleness and self importance. The Ancestral Sin by John S. Romanides was also helpful. Both men have been criticized, and maybe they don't offer a full truth. However, the God they offer is far superior to the one I've experienced in the West.

Sin is still sin. But the perspective is a little different. Yes, I believe homosexuality is a sin, but so is promiscuity at all levels. God loves all of us though, and just because someone else isn't fighting the same struggles I am, doesn't mean that they don't deserve God's love just as much, if not more. Abortion may not be God's desire, but women who have had abortions are still loved by him, and further, the cancerous conditions that led them to think that abortion is the best option are still festering in society and need to be addressed. This is THE much larger struggle now that Satan's easy solution, the normative status quo, has been threatened by the overturning of Roe v. Wade in our nation's highest court.

Helping these and others may or may not save them, but remember Matthew 25 - "Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me."

I must not condemn, rather, I must assume that doing what I can to aid them in defeating their own demons will, in at least a small part, help me to defeat my own in our acquiring the kingdom.

Lord have mercy upon me -