Evangelical minister stops believing in hell and gets fired

[earl]

Interesting yet sad state of affairs.
ABC News: Minister Questions Hell -- and Loses Flock

earl

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by earl

Interesting yet sad state of affairs.
ABC News: Minister Questions Hell -- and Loses Flock

earl

Why? He violated the basic tennants of Christianity...has no business being a minister if he can't follow the Christian tennants...

[earl]

Hell's a basic tennant of Chistianity? Hmmm? earl

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by earl

Hell's a basic tennant of Chistianity? Hmmm? earl

Indeed Earl. Jesus talks more about hell, then He does about heaven...and what He says is "Don't go there"...

[Saltmeister]

The notion of hell can be quite political. But what do we define as hell? It is, obviously "a horrible place." I think asserting that "hell" exists can be just as misleading as saying "hell" doesn't exist, especially if we give people a definition of hell. Hell may "exist" in terms of one definition, but may be non-existent according to another definition.

Jesus in the New Testament seems to have resorted to giving depictions of "hell" rather than actually defining what it was, as that would have set limits and boundaries on the meaning of hell -- causing people to be "manipulated" with regards to different definitions of hell. He preferred to say things like, "the kingdom of heaven is like ........"

Hell is a label. Take a string of concepts of "horrible places" from the New Testament that we do not want as a destination. These "horrible places" could be called anything from "notorious fast-food McDonalds" to "Jimmy Barne's naughty playground." We could just as well call them "hell" by tradition.

Jesus' message seems to have been intended as something simple, but rather hard to do: hold fast to the things that are important, don't be manipulated by rules, by propaganda, popular culture and popular ideas. God wants a relationship with you, but at the same time we have to figure out what's important in our lives.

If I was going to talk about "hell," I would prefer not to use the word "hell" (I'm just using it now to make a point). Jesus didn't, at least not that much. In one sense there is such thing as a "hell" and in another sense there isn't. It's like saying there is a root to all evil in the world but you can't quite put your finger on where all this evil is coming from. According to one definition, that source of evil may be George W. Bush and according to another it may be obesity and heart disease and bad diets.

If we say, "there is a hell," people are likely to then ask, "ok, so what is hell? What happens to people in hell? How long do we stay there?" Whatever answer we give them, we'd be misleading and manipulating them. They'd be confined to whatever thinking we drill into their minds. If we say, "there isn't a hell," they'd be manipulated by the idea of hell not existing. If we say we can't answer the question, they'll find someone else to answer it. Sooner or later they'll find who someone does answer the question and they'd be brainwashed and manipulated by what they're told.

Jesus' response was not to say hell is this big or this small, this long or this short, this wide or this deep, but to use metaphors and similes -- that heaven is like this, hell is like that -- and if we understand what he was saying then we're hunky dory.

Jesus affirms that there is a so-called "hell," but doesn't define it lest we're manipulated by the definition.

I guess we do eventually need to answer the question, but we need to do what Jesus did -- answer in metaphors and similes, or just share your personal experiences -- and make it something meaningful. The reason is because if we don't, they'll find someone else and the answer will probably manipulate or brainwash them -- so we save them and ourselves from that happening -- because by explaining it to others we explain it to ourselves. We help ourselves by helping others. Mutual assistance through sharing of personal beliefs and experiences. Mutual guidance.

In which case I hope this view of mine was a constructive contribution.

The article listed didn't give the whole story about Pearson's dramatic transformation, so here's what happened next. Read the ending (page 2), I don't think it's as bad as it seems. His previous stardom and celebrity status gone, he now sees a new purpose. Much like the conversion of Paul.

To hell and back - Dateline NBC - MSNBC.com

Yes, Jesus affirms there is a "hell," but methinks our common perception of hell may be a bit misguided.

[Pico]

Originally Posted by earl

Interesting yet sad state of affairs.
ABC News: Minister Questions Hell -- and Loses Flock

earl

Well, God commands us to stand on the authority of his word. And his word does talk about hell. So this guy is not standing of the authority of his word, so it is a good idea to get him out.

Jesus said: "If you break my commandments and teach others to do the same, you will be the least in the kingdom of Heaven."

[earl]

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

The notion of hell can be quite political. But what do we define as hell? It is, obviously "a horrible place." I think asserting that "hell" exists can be just as misleading as saying "hell" doesn't exist, especially if we give people a definition of hell. Hell may "exist" in terms of one definition, but may be non-existent according to another definition.

Jesus in the New Testament seems to have resorted to giving depictions of "hell" rather than actually defining what it was, as that would have set limits and boundaries on the meaning of hell -- causing people to be "manipulated" with regards to different definitions of hell. He preferred to say things like, "the kingdom of heaven is like ........"

Hell is a label. Take a string of concepts of "horrible places" from the New Testament that we do not want as a destination. These "horrible places" could be called anything from "notorious fast-food McDonalds" to "Jimmy Barne's naughty playground." We could just as well call them "hell" by tradition.

Jesus' message seems to have been intended as something simple, but rather hard to do: hold fast to the things that are important, don't be manipulated by rules, by propaganda, popular culture and popular ideas. God wants a relationship with you, but at the same time we have to figure out what's important in our lives.

If I was going to talk about "hell," I would prefer not to use the word "hell" (I'm just using it now to make a point). Jesus didn't, at least not that much. In one sense there is such thing as a "hell" and in another sense there isn't. It's like saying there is a root to all evil in the world but you can't quite put your finger on where all this evil is coming from. According to one definition, that source of evil may be George W. Bush and according to another it may be obesity and heart disease and bad diets.

If we say, "there is a hell," people are likely to then ask, "ok, so what is hell? What happens to people in hell? How long do we stay there?" Whatever answer we give them, we'd be misleading and manipulating them. They'd be confined to whatever thinking we drill into their minds. If we say, "there isn't a hell," they'd be manipulated by the idea of hell not existing. If we say we can't answer the question, they'll find someone else to answer it. Sooner or later they'll find who someone does answer the question and they'd be brainwashed and manipulated by what they're told.

Jesus' response was not to say hell is this big or this small, this long or this short, this wide or this deep, but to use metaphors and similes -- that heaven is like this, hell is like that -- and if we understand what he was saying then we're hunky dory.

Jesus affirms that there is a so-called "hell," but doesn't define it lest we're manipulated by the definition.

I guess we do eventually need to answer the question, but we need to do what Jesus did -- answer in metaphors and similes, or just share your personal experiences -- and make it something meaningful. The reason is because if we don't, they'll find someone else and the answer will probably manipulate or brainwash them -- so we save them and ourselves from that happening -- because by explaining it to others we explain it to ourselves. We help ourselves by helping others. Mutual assistance through sharing of personal beliefs and experiences. Mutual guidance.

In which case I hope this view of mine was a constructive contribution.

The article listed didn't give the whole story about Pearson's dramatic transformation, so here's what happened next. Read the ending (page 2), I don't think it's as bad as it seems. His previous stardom and celebrity status gone, he now sees a new purpose. Much like the conversion of Paul.

To hell and back - Dateline NBC - MSNBC.com

Yes, Jesus affirms there is a "hell," but methinks our common perception of hell may be a bit misguided.

A gospel of inclusion, (what is known as Christian universalism)-yes I think he's got it right now. And if you can judge by the "fruits of the spirit" by the rest of the story you shared, his happiness and service to the dispossessed as well as being served by the dispossessed (Jesus' life I'm told), could be an outward sign of the Truth of his new conviction. Yes I do believe in "hellish" states, but like you, I don't think they're quite what many evangelicals/fundamentalists make them out to be. I think they are as has so often been described in near death experiences such as:
Earthbound - near-death experiences

Interestingly, elsewhere on this guy's fascinating website he compiled a summary of reported near death experiences as to content and discovered it seemed to be that only self-described Christians ever had "hellish" experiences as oppsed to non-Christians whatever that means. earl

[flowperson]

tenant...n...1.One who temporarily holds or occupies property owned by another. 2.An inhabitant...from the Latin ... tenere..to hold.

tenet...n...1. a fundamental principle of dogma...from the Latin tenere...to hold

source..The American Heritage Dictionary, 1983

There appears to be no word "tennant". It is curious that both of the words "tenet" and "tenant" etmiologically descend from the same Latin root, and that both seem to imply temporariy conditions and not a state of permanent ownership. To hold anything implies that this state or condition is temporary and that it need be eventually "let go of" so that it may revert to its original state of being and possession.

Thus we see that precision of language and its meanings is critical to the viability of any ideological argument regarding the "truth" of the term under consideration.

I would also suggest that the terms "heaven" and "hell" are relative abstractions, and as such only relate to a person's state of being to the extent of that person's beliefs in the concepts. Although I seem to remember being imbedded within both abstract conditions at differing times in the past.

flow....

[Tao_Equus]

Tennants : the No.1 best selling Scottish lager.

(just for information)

[earl]

Well Flow I had been tempted in my original response to Q to tease him a tad re his use of tennant (tenant) by indicating that perhaps I could agree partially with the notion of hell being a tenant of Christianity-a temporary place-holder given the link I gave to near death research suggesting that the insights some NDE'rs have had into hellish states implies they are not "eternal" states, (nor based on some sort of external judgment). earl

[flowperson]

Tao...Up the Queen me bucko !
Aye to the lager thingy !
Heaven and hell are only a few swigs away...eh ?

Earl...Here's to temporariness (I'm quite sure that's not a word) !

Q...welcome back...we all missed you !

flow....

[shadowman]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Indeed Earl. Jesus talks more about hell, then He does about heaven...and what He says is "Don't go there"...

this isnt true, he talks mostly about having a relationship with his father, and the kingdom of heaven.....

[ardenz]

Hell ! I don't need no religion

[earl]

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

The notion of hell can be quite political. But what do we define as hell? It is, obviously "a horrible place." I think asserting that "hell" exists can be just as misleading as saying "hell" doesn't exist, especially if we give people a definition of hell. Hell may "exist" in terms of one definition, but may be non-existent according to another definition.

Jesus in the New Testament seems to have resorted to giving depictions of "hell" rather than actually defining what it was, as that would have set limits and boundaries on the meaning of hell -- causing people to be "manipulated" with regards to different definitions of hell. He preferred to say things like, "the kingdom of heaven is like ........"

Hell is a label. Take a string of concepts of "horrible places" from the New Testament that we do not want as a destination. These "horrible places" could be called anything from "notorious fast-food McDonalds" to "Jimmy Barne's naughty playground." We could just as well call them "hell" by tradition.

Jesus' message seems to have been intended as something simple, but rather hard to do: hold fast to the things that are important, don't be manipulated by rules, by propaganda, popular culture and popular ideas. God wants a relationship with you, but at the same time we have to figure out what's important in our lives.

If I was going to talk about "hell," I would prefer not to use the word "hell" (I'm just using it now to make a point). Jesus didn't, at least not that much. In one sense there is such thing as a "hell" and in another sense there isn't. It's like saying there is a root to all evil in the world but you can't quite put your finger on where all this evil is coming from. According to one definition, that source of evil may be George W. Bush and according to another it may be obesity and heart disease and bad diets.

If we say, "there is a hell," people are likely to then ask, "ok, so what is hell? What happens to people in hell? How long do we stay there?" Whatever answer we give them, we'd be misleading and manipulating them. They'd be confined to whatever thinking we drill into their minds. If we say, "there isn't a hell," they'd be manipulated by the idea of hell not existing. If we say we can't answer the question, they'll find someone else to answer it. Sooner or later they'll find who someone does answer the question and they'd be brainwashed and manipulated by what they're told.

Jesus' response was not to say hell is this big or this small, this long or this short, this wide or this deep, but to use metaphors and similes -- that heaven is like this, hell is like that -- and if we understand what he was saying then we're hunky dory.

Jesus affirms that there is a so-called "hell," but doesn't define it lest we're manipulated by the definition.

I guess we do eventually need to answer the question, but we need to do what Jesus did -- answer in metaphors and similes, or just share your personal experiences -- and make it something meaningful. The reason is because if we don't, they'll find someone else and the answer will probably manipulate or brainwash them -- so we save them and ourselves from that happening -- because by explaining it to others we explain it to ourselves. We help ourselves by helping others. Mutual assistance through sharing of personal beliefs and experiences. Mutual guidance.

In which case I hope this view of mine was a constructive contribution.

The article listed didn't give the whole story about Pearson's dramatic transformation, so here's what happened next. Read the ending (page 2), I don't think it's as bad as it seems. His previous stardom and celebrity status gone, he now sees a new purpose. Much like the conversion of Paul.

To hell and back - Dateline NBC - MSNBC.com

Yes, Jesus affirms there is a "hell," but methinks our common perception of hell may be a bit misguided.

Just saw this interivew/story replayed on MSNBC last night. Hearing him telling his story for which this is the transcript was even more affecting, particularly when they also had interviews with his former evangelical brethren speaking of "loving him yet he's going to hell." His story of what he went through, including how all of his "Christian", close friends, turned their backs on him after he stopped preaching the gospel of judgment/condemnation was both a sad testiment to that evangelical view and a sad commentary on what behavior is truly "spiritual/religous." Discovered the new church he has in Tulsa that they mentioned in their piece has a website that also accesses his audio "preaching" for those that might want to hear him for themselves:

New Dimensions - The Friendliest, Trendiest, Most Radically Inclusive Worship Experience!

take care all in the true name of Christ. earl

[17th Angel]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Why? He violated the basic tennants of Christianity...has no business being a minister if he can't follow the Christian tennants...

Says you...

I know thousands of christians would disagree with you there.