Then came the question everybody who has a heart should ask at some point:
Why would all the others who are not of whatever creed one professes, why won't they enter heaven?
In more compassionate groups (like the one I like to think I attend), the question is modified into:
Can (with a note of hope) others enter heaven? and how??
More often than not, the "how" part isn't about the means with which they may be saved, but rather how that notion can be reconciled with Scripture.
This time, I stayed silent while they debated, because I wanted the conversation to run its full course, before I ask the more or less rhetorical question that mentally knocked me out about two years ago, which is:
In your opinion, what percentage of people needs to be saved before God calls his "Creation" project a success?
I expected almost any response except the one I recieved, which was an uproar of different cries so mixed up that I couldn't understand a word anybody was saying.
This I understood though, people seemed to be saying that I was wrong to ask the question, and this notion of blasphemizing a question was probably the first of its kind for that particular group.
After the initial torrent subsided, a few people began arguing with me in an attempt to defend God, but the rest of the group seemed to want to close the subject.
And so the subject was closed hurriedly, which I didn't mind, since all I wanted was merely to put that question on the table.
The one thing I felt bad about was how the table seemed to want to slip away, and trying to hold it still is something which I wasn't about to do. (I know better than to try that)
I am writing it here though, because I feel the need for it to be out there...
So let me ask that again:
How many people need to be saved, and what is the percentage of humans throughout the history of the world that needs to be redeemed, in order for "Creation" to be deemed a successful project, one worth the trouble it's caused so far?
Oh and please bear in mind, that for an Omniscient God, that number must've been known before the beginning of Time, and with that knowledge, he still went on with creating us.
Why can't that mean something? And why shouldn't we wonder what that something is?!
well beleive me or not i had some part of this question in my mind long time ago,i'm even hoping to hear a specific answer ( that i have in mind )for it .
ReplyDeletei understood your question when you said it and i'm still considering it till now
the first answer that came to my mind was 100 % (yes that's what i wanted to hear ),...but this may be against the human's free will (erada !!) at least for some people,and i believe in freedom allot, if he was intending to force them to live with him at the end then why is this loooooooong story from day 1 ?????
then when i read now those words
"How many people need to be saved... in order for "Creation" to be ... worth the trouble it's caused so far?"
i felt like God would say " even if only 1 , it worth the trouble "
i felt that we will never be able to understand the depth of GOD's love !!
then when i re-read the phrase again "How many ... and what is the percentage ... in order for "Creation" to be deemed a successful project, one worth the trouble it's caused so far? "
and i felt that here again we are measuring God with our own rules ,logic, percentages, definitions of success or failure
and I remembered :
" and Man created God in His own image, in the image of MAn He created him; "
but at the end i do agree with you that the group response to the question was totally unexpected !!!
Okay, a couple of things, my friend.
ReplyDelete1- Free will: Nobody's denying it. The question by itself implies nothing regarding free will.
However, since your thoughts went in that direction, let's try another question. Right now some of us love God, and want to live with Him, yet we do pretty horrible things sometimes in free will. But in our idea of heaven, we will not be able to do any horrible thing at all, we will be "perfect". Why do you not see this as a form of invasion of free will?
2- " even if only 1 , it's worth the trouble ". Perhaps I didn't make myself clear, I didn't mean only the trouble God went through (figuratively) in Creation itself, followed by keeping up with a fallen humanity, then Incarnation, then the Cross and Resurrection and all that follows. That is all important & is a part of my point, but I also mean the trouble we Humans go through... I am talking about the mountains of pain we both experience and cause to others in this world (& possibly, experience in the next), and the weakness and the sickness and the death. With all due respect to what you think God would say, I think we also should get a say in deciding if it was worth it, because we've had (3'asb 3anenna) an enormous amount of "trouble" for the sake of that project called Creation.
3- I completely fail to see your point about "depth of God's love", if it's because (as you see it, but I'll spin it a little to show you my point of view) He'd let most of His children live in endless suffering so that a few others would have a shot at eternal happiness, if that is really love then I've got it completely wrong!
If I didn't get your point, please elaborate.
4- As for measuring God with our own rules and the conclusion you drew (Man created God), ouch!
I believe there's a bit of confusion here.
There is a difference between casting God in a fallen state like ours (creating Him in our own image, as you said), and describing Him in our language.
The first is about taking things that -as per the Holy Spirit in us, and Scripture- are corruptions (such as anger, revenge, hatred) and claiming that God has them too.
The second is about describing God in true (yet insufficient) terms that are close to our understanding. That is actually something God does a lot when speaking with us, and all the prophets do it as well.
After all, what is the difference between describing God and the Kingdom of Heaven in terms that I personally can relate to (such as percentage, project, success) and describing Him in terms that peasants 2000 years ago could relate to? like Shepherd, lost sheep, fields and seeds... and the list is endless. Why is that okay? and why didn't we call it "creating God in our image"?
So sorry for the long reply.
I had this question in mind for a long time, yet I never managed to clearly word it out to myself for some reason. Lack of organization of thoughts, I suppose.
ReplyDeletePure logic, to me, says 100%
God is perfect and wouldn't settle for a 99% chance success, set aside the fact that he already has the results of the scheme written down.
I disagree with the ''One being enough'' proposition. It's clearly unjust to the rest of the human race, considering the trouble they have gone through, by just being born, aside from any sin.
I do believe a 100% will be achieved. However, there is some unjustified negative energy that resulted of the equation, which is, as I mentioned above, the trouble humans had to go through. Trouble they had no hand in. Isn't the project supposed to result in a solely perfect outcome?
I'd like to know your answer on both questions, the one you suggested and the one I did.
Can I quote replies? at least I'll start with quotes from loved ones then summarize/recap if I feel the need to...
ReplyDelete"If my mind forgets, my heart never forgets because wounds are deep.
This is one way to see things.
Though there are lots of good, happy things that made my heart smile, being good, meza2tat.
But still I look at the wounds.
This is how we let the bad things overcome the good things.
We could & should make the good things overcome the bad things. be mosa3det Rabena
Good things should & could make us forget all the bad things.
Be happy , rejoiced in the Lord we maz2tateen.
We're under training …. Every lesson needs time."
(slightly edited, just spelling, sentence structure & stuff like that)
"A woman giving birth to a child has pain because her time has come; but when her baby is born she forgets the anguish because of her joy that a child is born into the world. So with you: Now is your time of grief, but I will see you again and you will rejoice, and no one will take away your joy."
Get it?
If not, let's get back to the "project" analogy.
A project could be frustrating, tiresome, and even disappointing at some point... then you stay at it till it's done and the end result is perfect!
The process can have any number of struggles and failures (leaving room for that free will of others, among other things) and yet result in a success!
And when things work, and if the fruits are just that good, you don't care about the blood and sweat.
To me, that is both a belief and an experience.
But what if a man wants neither? Neither pain nor glory!
I'd like to research that question more (lots of existential thinkers would start poking their noses in at this point)
But for now and as per my understanding, this is one more proof that our understanding of free will is flawed, because in this instance we don't get to choose a third option... so we're not given truly free choice about our life, nor our final destination, it seems.