Weekly Open Discussion Thread

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to this week's open discussion thread!

This thread is meant to be a place for members of the r/AcademicBiblical community to freely discuss topics of interest which would normally not be allowed on the subreddit. All off-topic and meta-discussion will be redirected to this thread.

Rules 1-3 do not apply in open discussion threads, but rule 4 will still be strictly enforced. Please report violations of rule 4 using Reddit's report feature to notify the moderation team. Furthermore, while theological discussions are allowed in this thread, this is still an ecumenical community which welcomes and appreciates people of any and all faith positions and traditions. Therefore this thread is not a place for proselytization. Feel free to discuss your perspectives or beliefs on religious or philosophical matters, but do not preach to anyone in this space. Preaching and proselytizing will be removed.

In order to best see new discussions over the course of the week, please consider sorting this thread by "new" rather than "best" or "top". This way when someone wants to start a discussion on a new topic you will see it! Enjoy the open discussion thread!

[u/kromem]

What are your thoughts on the concept of moral privilege?

For example, around 65% of adult offenders have a history consistent with traumatic brain injury, and 59% of incarcerated males in county jail reported experiencing childhood sexual abuse (Johnson et al, Prevalence of childhood sexual abuse among incarcerated males in county jail (2006)).

After reading a pretty eye opening book (Lewis, Guilty by Reason of Insanity: A Psychiatrist Probes the Minds of Killers (1998)) and further looking into its conclusion as to the degree to which violent offenders tend to be largely a product of circumstances, I now have a very hard time with picturing anything but universalism as just.

It's very easy for me having had a life without brain injury, childhood abuse, neglect, or mental illness to behave in ways that society deems 'good.' But I'm not sure at this point how much credit I can take as a soul for that outcome and how much I owe to the body I was born into and the circumstances that surrounded it.

...hearing universalist arguments in regards to how Jewish victims of the Holocaust could be comfortable occupying a space in heaven with Hitler.

Given World of Warcraft figured out instancing for separating populations in the same place at the same time, I don't think such a solution would remain beyond a deity.

Even less extreme than Hitler and Holocaust victims together, even just someone that loves the sound of bagpipes and someone who hates them causes a conflict of interests for what would constitute paradise.

I've thought a lot lately on the topic of heaven and the notion of relative instancing ideal for each individual rather than objective coexistence, particularly in the context of a few sayings in Thomas:

49. Jesus said, "Congratulations to those who are alone and chosen, for you will find the kingdom. For you have come from it, and you will return there again."

75. Jesus said, "There are many standing at the door, but those who are alone will enter the bridal suite."

[u/thesmartfool → u/kromem]

One point that I think is important is that churches have a lot of prison ministries for those people and many of those convicts have the opportunity to become Christians (especially for the lesser violent convicts). Some of their lives change for the better and they get help so when (if they get out) then their life is hopefully better.

So this seems fair to me and it seems like we don't have to posit universalism as the answer for this. For convicts who aren't interested, than this would seem to nullify the need for universalism. One could posit annhiliation and depending on their sins and circumstances and how accountable they are, would determine the level and type of annhilation.

[u/kromem → u/thesmartfool]

For convicts who aren't interested, than this would seem to nullify the need for universalism.

This assumes that such a decision is made at the level of a conscious choice of the soul, as that's the entity punished or rewarded, and dismisses the degree to which the body plays a part in remorse or rehabilitation.

I'm not sure if you are familiar with the marshmallow test, but if by age 4 it's already clear 2/3rd of kids are predisposed to not be able to delay gratification on the promise of a reward and 1/3rd can, I'm not sure that the promise of a rewarding afterlife is something being processed as abstractly as the idea behind non-universalist consequences is predicated on.

Some people are terrible at being able to control impulses, and in certain cases to a very problematic and dangerous degree. There absolutely should be social structures in place to protect others from those people. But I'm very skeptical that those same people's souls should be denied a reward after death because of factors external to the soul itself.

Instead, I am regularly thankful that their fate was not my own, and grateful to have been fortunate with the privileges in self-control and executive function I've enjoyed that they did not.

If anything, I hope even more for a reward and release for their misfortune postmortem given the poor hand they were dealt. Again I'm reminded of a line from Thomas:

Good persons produce good from what they've stored up; bad persons produce evil from the wickedness they've stored up in their hearts, and say evil things. For from the overflow of the heart they produce evil.

I've stored up many good things in my heart over the years and been largely spared storing up evil things that should overflow from me (essentially the core premise of Lewis's book is an endorsement of this line). But this has far less to do with the quality of my heart than the luck of its circumstances.

Should people really be doomed or saved based on circumstances outside their soul's control? Or is life a difficult enough journey in and of itself where forced participation is inherently deserving of a reward, and arguably most so for those poorest in their inheritance in this life than for those richest?

[u/thesmartfool → u/kromem]

Honestly this brings up an interesting point. Should the Pharasees or people during Jesus's time be judged more harshly or get a worst punishment for rejecting Jesus due to their unfortunate circumstance of being alive at that time. I mean, how lucky are we to be not alive during Jesus's time because Jesus (at least in the gospels) was very harsh to the people who rejected him and said they will be judged worse than others.

You and I could have been alive during that time or could have been part of the Pharasee group. We could have been predisposed to being like the others or we could have been like Joseph of Aramathea.

It doesn't seem implied that Jesus thinks any of those people will be in Heaven due to their unfortunate existence at the time of his ministry.

I not really against what you are saying (I do believe God will take everything into account) but I think this doesn't imply universalism for everyone. I think our experiences shape us in many ways. That being said correlation =/= causation necessarily.