I am more than a little concerned about your post here. It seems that you did not attempt to address what I have written and instead are spamming my site. If you do it again I will delete all your posts.

In his new book “Love Wins” Rob Bell seems to say that loving and compassionate people, regardless of their faith, will not be condemned to eternal hell just because they do not accept Jesus Christ as their Savior.

Concepts of an afterlife vary between religions and among divisions of each faith. Here are three quotes from “the greatest achievement in life,” my ebook on comparative mysticism:

(46) Few people have been so good that they have earned eternal paradise; fewer want to go to a place where they must receive punishments for their sins. Those who do believe in resurrection of their body hope that it will be not be in its final form. Few people really want to continue to be born again and live more human lives; fewer want to be reborn in a non-human form. If you are not quite certain you want to seek divine union, consider the alternatives.

(59) Mysticism is the great quest for the ultimate ground of existence, the absolute nature of being itself. True mystics transcend apparent manifestations of the theatrical production called “this life.” Theirs is not simply a search for meaning, but discovery of what is, i.e. the Real underlying the seeming realities. Their objective is not heaven, gardens, paradise, or other celestial places. It is not being where the divine lives, but to be what the divine essence is here and now.

(80) [referring to many non-mystics] Depending on their religious convictions, or personal beliefs, they may be born again to seek elusive perfection, go to a purgatory to work out their sins or, perhaps, pass on into oblivion. Lives are different; why not afterlives? Beliefs might become true.

Rob Bell asks us to reexamine the Christian Gospel. People of all faiths should look beyond the letter of their sacred scriptures to their spiritual message. As one of my mentors wrote “In God we all meet.”

Yes, your scores are nice! No worries about correlations, just insights.

Blessings to you too,
Dave

From what I have been able to conclude in my own interactions with conservatives (religious and political), the loyalty/authority/purity paradigm results in a defensive posture that seeks to convert or avoid any perceived competing individuals, groups, or ideas. Based on the premise that their authority is God / the Bible, their loyalty to both authoritarian structures (God, the Bible, church, pastor, elders, husband; political party) and righteous causes (anti-abortion, anti-gay), and the belief that deviations from these in any way is tantamount to heresy, I can understand why arguments from the harm/fairness realm hit a brick wall. One of my local conservative (Reformed) acquaintances shared a quote of Calvin’s a while back that explained a lot: “A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God’s truth is attacked and yet would remain silent.” The particulars of interpretation concerning God’s truth are not on the table for discussion. So, if in discussion, I raise a point that differs from a conservative friend’s POV, the reaction is fairly predictably defensive at best, and aimed, ultimately, at converting me/my ideas. If that fails, I’ve experienced “shunning.” There’s not a lot of interest in being closely associated with those who disagree with their objects of loyalty. And you know where I stand on loyalty: it’s my LOWEST priority!

Trying to share opposing viewpoints is kind of like beating a dead horse. It isn’t going to change their minds…they’re pretty set in stone already. You, on the other hand, are open to looking at matters through a lens of objectivity, weighing whether others are harmed or treated fairly. I tend to think that’s a blessing. God has plans for you, to use your gift of mercy and compassion to bless others. Those whose hearts are hard probably can’t receive it. In God’s good timing, we can hope for a softening though, right?

While I was immersed in conservative evangelical culture (both church and homeschooling community), I couldn’t sort all this out very clearly. Having gotten some time and distance between these groups and myself, I realize how much my speech and actions were becoming exactly like them. There was not a devious conspiracy on their part to control my mind (ha), but slowly I had begun to think and talk and act just like those with whom I spent most of my time. Naturally. The year-plus that we spent out of church altogether, was helpful. Since we worked up the courage last fall to try church again in a mainline denomination (UMC), every member of my family has felt a great weight lifted, and each time we are at church we feel a little more healed and renewed in spirit. The “yoke” is light and easy in the UMC where we attend. Every church is different, though, even in the same denomination. There is always a dynamic at play — pastor, people, Holy Spirit.

I think it’s admirable that you are trying very hard to understand yourself and be more aware of your part in interactions with difficult people and groups. I just want to encourage you not to beat yourself up for whatever you may perceive as a failure. At least, realistically-speaking, don’t get stuck there. Imagine if the Apostle Paul had gotten bogged down with his failure to reach various groups? He simply kept telling the good news and going on to the next thing/place.

The moral foundations questionnaires have been interesting for me to take and contemplate my results. Do you think my scores are nice? I’m not so sure I shouldn’t be worried about a couple of the correlations! That’s my neurotic side, I suppose

Blessings,
Susan