Dan posted this in the thread where's been ignoring and diverting attention away from multiple questions and clarifications regarding some comments he made. He's also been gracious enough to share his condescending and insulting thoughts on my inability to understand his"wisdom". This will take a bit of both correction before I answer.
"I'm left wondering if you all see any irony in suggesting that
progressive types are somehow devaluing life and yet conservative
evangelicals are the ones who insist that every human who has ever lived
is utterly disgusting and, in their natural state, deserving of an
eternal punishment of eternal torture... That these humans are
disgustingly sinful and wholly unworthy of being in God's presence... do
you see any irony in that? Why are humans to be valued if they are out
early sinful and entirely depraved?
I get why we Progressive
types value people, because we believe humanity is to be valued by
nature of being part of this creation. We don't tend to think of
humanity is utterly depraved like you all do. But given your worldview,
why is a depraved Humanity worthwhile and to be valued?"
"I'm left wondering if you all see any irony in suggesting that
progressive types are somehow devaluing life..."
I'm wondering if you actually read my comment and understood it. To start with, I never even one time used the term "progressive" in any way shape or form. If you can't understand that incredibly simple fact, this might get a little deep for you.
What I did refer to is those who have a Naturalistic or Materialistic worldview. While I'm not going to go into detail as to what those worldviews entail, let's just say that referring to humans as a "computer made of meat", doesn't exactly demonstrate a high value of human life. My suggestion is that you do some research into those who hold these worldviews, before you comment more.
"...conservative
evangelicals are the ones who insist that every human who has ever lived
is utterly disgusting and,..."
We'll start with the imprecise broad brush. The position you misstate so poorly is not necessarily attached to "conservative evangelicals". Perhaps either research or precision would be helpful before you take to your keyboard.
The position you mischaracterize is the Calvinist position of Total Depravity. Nowhere in any honest characterization of this position is there ever a sense that humans are "utterly disgusting". The heart of this theology is that humans were created in the very image of God, and that all of creation was affected by man's fall into sin. This fall doesn't diminish the inherent value in man.
"...in their natural state, deserving of an
eternal punishment of eternal torture... That these humans are
disgustingly sinful and wholly unworthy of being in God's presence... do
you see any irony in that?"
Do I see irony in acknowledging that sin has consequences? No. Yet, humanity's sinful nature doesn't negate the intrinsic value of being created in the image of God.
"Why are humans to be valued if they are out
early sinful and entirely depraved?"
Because humans are created in the image and likeness of God.
I'll stop here and point out that you've done what many people do, in singling out one aspect of Reformed theology and divorcing it from the entirety of the theological construct.
If, the picture you paint is accurate, then why would God have sent His son to redeem both fallen, sinful humanity and all of His creation.
"I get why we Progressive
types value people, because we believe humanity is to be valued by
nature of being part of this creation."
Great example of combining misstating what I said, with an appeal to numbers, and misleading language.
The first, and most obvious fail is your goal post move of substituting "progressives' for the actual terms I used.
The second is your attempt to speak for all "progressive types".
The third is that I guarantee you there are plenty of "progressive types" who will vehemently disagree with your notion of "creation".
The fourth is that, if my memory serves, your version of creation might not be the same as others. So, some questions to answer before anything else.
1. When you use the term "creation" are you referring to a singular event?
2. Are you referring from "creation" ex nihilo?
3. Is there a creator? If so who?
4. Describe what "creation" means to you? Details, mechanism, who, etc.
5. What is it about "creation" that gives humans intrinsic value?
6. Can you explain why Buddhists, Shintoists, Pantheists, Panentheists, Atheists, Agnostics, or Animists would agree with your hunch?
Let's move the goal posts back for just a second, and how about if you respond to what I actually said?
"We don't tend to think of
humanity is utterly depraved like you all do. "
Again, an argument from numbers and a mischaracterization of the position you are "arguing against"
"But given your worldview,
why is a depraved Humanity worthwhile and to be valued?"
1. Because depraved humans are created in the very image and likeness of God.
2. Because God is the giver of life.
3. Because human sinfulness and depravity isn't the entirety of the story.
In the past you've suggested that humans are born without sin. That humans are intrinsically good. That infants are completely innocent. Correct?
If all of those things are objectively True, and human life has intrinsic value as being part of some vague and amorphous creation, then how could anyone agree that it's appropriate to end the lives of those innocent, good, sinless humans?
Since you started this, and given your recent aversion to answering questions. This post has some special rules.
1. First, acknowledge the fact that you've switched the terms and falsely characterized what I actually said.
2. Second, answer any and all questions completely and succinctly before you say anything else.
Failure to do so, will result in your comments being held, edited, or deleted depending on your attitude.
