Rense contributor J. Speer-Williams wrote a piece entitled "Must We Love A Wrathful God?". The article was followed by an apologetic written by Alton Raines, also a regular Rense contributor.
Williams' Christian childhood was a parade of bruisings from his father, following which he was required to hug his father and say "I love you". He ponders whether his confusion between love and fear was really necessary.
Raines hasn't a clue what Williams' endured as a child but that doesn't stop him from waxing holy. His rebuttal begins:
There are consequences for our actions in this life, why should it be any different with God? Now an earthly father, a fallible creature, may or may not dispense proper or appropriate punishment, and that, like all things under chaos, under sin, will also come into judgement. But that judgement will be by Almighty God who is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and infallible, perfect and holy. What possible worry could anyone have over the judgement of God if one has a contrite heart about wrong doings? Yes, when an earthly father disciplines or chastizes, it can be a dreadful thing, knowing he is a fallible judge. Nonetheless, apart from literal abuse, I believe it is a healthy and good thing resulting in proven moral character.
Following this, Raines commences to preachin' 'bout the perfect nature of God. Raines ends by telling us he was raised Christian without the bruises and therefore suffers not from the "confusion" inflicted upon Williams - which Raines describes as "unfortunate".
"Unfortunate" isn't even a tip of the iceberg and the word itself implies unworthiness. Williams was repeatedly abused - mentally, emotionally, physically and spiritually - by an adult member of a Christian congregation. How many members of the Church saw signs of abuse and remained silent? Did anyone speak with the pastor? How about the school authorities? I myself was interrupted in the girls' gym shower at age 17 by another student who began screaming when she saw the bruises on my body. Knowing that telling the truth in this instance was not the Catholic way of honoring one's father and stepmother, I made up an elaborate story for the gym teacher and the principal. Case closed, no parent contacted. It was my first grown-up masterpiece of deception; created purely out of fear to protect adults and save myself from few hits for being so stupid as to get caught.
Williams knows what I am talking about. Raines does not.
By adding Raines' remarks to Williams' essay, Rense was probably trying to present a balanced view of "God" - given the title of the piece and keeping in mind Rense's journalistic style of adding comments when he perceives an imbalance. However, Raines grew up in a loving stable Christian home believing that justice is meted out to the unfortunates and the perpetrators at or after death. We the unfortunates find little comfort in this belief which abides cruelty to children.
The added comment was probably well-intentioned but definitely off the mark.
Williams' Christian childhood was a parade of bruisings from his father, following which he was required to hug his father and say "I love you". He ponders whether his confusion between love and fear was really necessary.
Raines hasn't a clue what Williams' endured as a child but that doesn't stop him from waxing holy. His rebuttal begins:
There are consequences for our actions in this life, why should it be any different with God? Now an earthly father, a fallible creature, may or may not dispense proper or appropriate punishment, and that, like all things under chaos, under sin, will also come into judgement. But that judgement will be by Almighty God who is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and infallible, perfect and holy. What possible worry could anyone have over the judgement of God if one has a contrite heart about wrong doings? Yes, when an earthly father disciplines or chastizes, it can be a dreadful thing, knowing he is a fallible judge. Nonetheless, apart from literal abuse, I believe it is a healthy and good thing resulting in proven moral character.
Following this, Raines commences to preachin' 'bout the perfect nature of God. Raines ends by telling us he was raised Christian without the bruises and therefore suffers not from the "confusion" inflicted upon Williams - which Raines describes as "unfortunate".
"Unfortunate" isn't even a tip of the iceberg and the word itself implies unworthiness. Williams was repeatedly abused - mentally, emotionally, physically and spiritually - by an adult member of a Christian congregation. How many members of the Church saw signs of abuse and remained silent? Did anyone speak with the pastor? How about the school authorities? I myself was interrupted in the girls' gym shower at age 17 by another student who began screaming when she saw the bruises on my body. Knowing that telling the truth in this instance was not the Catholic way of honoring one's father and stepmother, I made up an elaborate story for the gym teacher and the principal. Case closed, no parent contacted. It was my first grown-up masterpiece of deception; created purely out of fear to protect adults and save myself from few hits for being so stupid as to get caught.
Williams knows what I am talking about. Raines does not.
By adding Raines' remarks to Williams' essay, Rense was probably trying to present a balanced view of "God" - given the title of the piece and keeping in mind Rense's journalistic style of adding comments when he perceives an imbalance. However, Raines grew up in a loving stable Christian home believing that justice is meted out to the unfortunates and the perpetrators at or after death. We the unfortunates find little comfort in this belief which abides cruelty to children.
The added comment was probably well-intentioned but definitely off the mark.
