The words of Jesus compared to that of the Old Testament

@Krumple,

Pyrrho;130132 wrote:

Which is to say, that it really is a lie to say that Jesus is all about love.

I'll buy that. I think he was human. I've thought of it as central that he said the Mosaic law could be replaced by two rules: love god and love your neighbor as you love yourself.

TickTockMan;130134 wrote:

I've had the Lodi line stuck in my head for about two days now.
I guess it's better than "Seasons in the Sun" though.
Cursed earworms!
Earworm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I've never understood the whole Missionary gig.

Earworms!!! I'd rather have Seasons in the Sun than Boogie Fever. Now I have Season in the Sun Earworm. Thanks a lot.

Krumple;130140 wrote:

Missionaries in my opinion are for cultural genocide. They go in, and reform the tribes, and peoples of their small communities to adopt their religious beliefs. It ultimately destroys their traditional way of life or makes them lose a part of their native traditions. Some will try to incorporate old traditions but the missionaries know that once you plant the seed it is only a matter of time before you get total cultural reform. It's wrong, and they know it is wrong but it is all in the name of ignorance.

If I told this story before, ignore it... but I knew this woman who taught Hopi children. She said the Hopis would tell the story of how they took a Missionary and cut him up and buried him. She said they'd tell the story as if it happened a few years ago. It was 400 years ago. Those crazy Hopis! There's an interesting movie if you ever see it in the cheapo bin of a used bookstore called "Black Robe." It's about Jesuit missionaries in America.

1 Reply

@Alan McDougall,

The purpose of this thread was not to insult the memory of Jesus, it was to compare the Father God of love and mercy that Jesus presented and the wrathful god of the old Testament and decide if they were the same entity

It has been nearly two thousand years since Jesus walked as a man, but His existence is debated more than any other subject that I know of personally. He is fought against by all other beliefs as well as atheists. Some beliefs believe Him to have been a good man and a good teacher, but nothing more than that. They are like the man who called Jesus a good man. It's like calling Muhammad Ali a boxer . Although it is true that he was a boxer it is an understatement. He is the greatest boxer of all time.

[RIGHT]Quotes About Jesus Christ [/RIGHT]

The Jews tried to keep Christ contained within their law, while the Greeks sought to turn Him into a philosophy; the Romans made of Him an empire; the Europeans reduced Him to a culture, and we Americans have made a business of Him.
God may thunder His commands from Mount Sinai and men may fear, yet remain at heart exactly as they were before. But let a man once see his God down in the arena as a Man--suffering, tempted, sweating, and agonized, finally dying a criminal's death--and he is a hard man indeed who is untouched. - J.B. Phillips, "Your God Is Too Small"

I know men and I tell you that Jesus Christ is no mere man. Between Him and every other person in the world there is no possible term of comparison. Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and I have founded empires. But on what did we rest the creation of our genius? Upon force. Jesus Christ founded His empire upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for Him. -Napoleon

No one else holds or has held the place in the heart of the world which Jesus holds. Other gods have been as devoutly worshipped; no other man has been so devoutly loved. --John Knox

Even those who have renounced Christianity and attack it, in their inmost being still follow the Christian ideal, for hitherto neither their subtlety nor the ardour of their hearts has been able to create a higher ideal of man and of virtue than the ideal given by Christ of old. --Fyodor Dostoyevsky

A man who was completely innocent, offered himself as a sacrifice for the good of others, including his enemies, and became the ransom of the world. It was a perfect act. --Mahatma Gandhi

Jesus of Nazareth, without money and arms, conquered more millions than Alexander the Great, Caesar, Mohammed, and Napoleon; without science and learning, he shed more light on things human and divine than all philosophers and scholars combined; without the eloquence of school, he spoke such words of life as were never spoken before or since, and produced effects which lie beyond the reach of orator or poet; without writing a single line, he set more pens in motion, and furnished themes for more sermons, orations, discussions, learned volumes, works of art, and songs of praise than the whole army of great men of ancient and modern times. -Philip Schaff

I am an historian, I am not a believer, but I must confess as a historian that this penniless preacher from Nazareth is irrevocably the very center of history. Jesus Christ is easily the most dominant figure in all history.--H.G. Wells

As the centuries pass, the evidence is accumulating that, measured by His effect on history, Jesus is the most influential life ever lived on this planet. -- Historian Kenneth Scott Latourette

Here is a man who was born in an obscure village, the Child of a peasant woman.

He worked in a carpenter shop until He was thirty, and then for three years He was an itinerant preacher.
He never wrote a book. He never held an office. He never owned a home. He never had a family.

He never went to college.

He never put His foot inside a big city.

He never traveled two hundred miles from the place where He was born. He never did one of the things that usually accompany greatness.

He had no credentials but Himself.

He had nothing to do with this world except the naked power of His Divine manhood. While still a young man, the tide of popular opinion turned against Him.

He was turned over to His enemies. He went through the mockery of a trial. He was nailed to a Cross between two thieves.

His executioners gambled for the only piece of property He had on earth while He was dying-and that was His coat. When He was dead He was taken down and laid in a borrowed grave through the pity of a friend. Such was His human life-He rises from the dead.

Nineteen wide centuries have come and gone and today He is the Centerpiece of the human race and the Leader of the column of progress. I am within the mark when I say that all the armies that ever marched, and all the navies that ever were built, and all the parliaments that ever sat, and all the kings that ever reigned, put together, have not affected the life of man upon this earth as powerfully as has that One Solitary Life. --James C. Hefley

Socrates taught for 40 years, Plato for 50, Aristotle for 40, and Jesus for only 3. Yet the influence of Christ's 3-year ministry infinitely transcends the impact left by the combined 130 years of teaching from these men who were among the greatest philosophers of all antiquity. -Unknown

I have read in Plato and Cicero sayings that are very wise and very beautiful; but I never read in either of them: "Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden." --Augustine

Buddha never claimed to be God. Moses never claimed to be Jehovah. Mohammed never claimed to be Allah. Yet Jesus Christ claimed to be the true and living God. Buddha simply said, "I am a teacher in search of the truth." Jesus said, "I am the Truth." Confucius said, "I never claimed to be holy." Jesus said, "Who convicts me of sin?" Mohammed said, "Unless God throws his cloak of mercy over me, I have no hope." Jesus said, "Unless you believe in me, you will die in your sins." --Unknown

Fundamentally, our Lord's message was Himself. He did not come merely to preach a Gospel; He himself is that Gospel. He did not come merely to give bread; He said, "I am the bread." He did not come merely to shed light; He said, "I am the light." He did not come merely to show the door; He said, "I am the door." He did not come merely to name a shepherd; He said, "I am the shepherd." He did not come merely to point the way; He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." --J. Sidlow Baxter

Jesus is the God whom we can approach without pride and before whom we can humble ourselves without despair. -Blaise Pascal

As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene....No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life. --Albert Einstein

An unsurpassed master of the art of laying bare the inmost core of spiritual truth. --Geza Vermes

Jesus was the greatest religious genius that ever lived. -- Ernest Renan
There is something so pure and frank and noble about Him that to doubt His sincerity would be like doubting the brightness of the sun. -- Charles Edward Jefferson

A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg - or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God; or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.--C.S. Lewis

Jesus Christ is to me the outstanding personality of all time, all history, both as Son of God and as Son of Man. Everything he ever said or did has value for us today and that is something you can say of no other man, dead or alive. There is no easy middle ground to stroll upon. You either accept Jesus or reject him. --Sholem Asch

Jesus is God spelling Himself out in language that men can understand. --S.D. Gordon

Only Christ could have conceived Christ. -- Joseph Parker
In Jesus, God wills to be true God not only in the height but also in the depth - in the depth of human creatureliness, sinfulness and mortality. --Karl Barth
It was this same Jesus, the Christ who, among many other remarkable things, said and repeated something which, proceeding from any other being would have condemned him at once as either a bloated egotist or a dangerously unbalanced person...when He said He himself would rise again from the dead, the third day after He was crucified, He said something that only a fool would dare say, if he expected longer the devotion of any disciples-unless He was sure He was going to rise. No founder of any world religion known to men ever dared say a thing like that! --Wilbur Smith

I accept the resurrection of Easter Sunday not as an invention of the community of disciples, but as a historical event. If the resurrection of Jesus from the dead on that Easter Sunday were a public event which had been made known...not only to the 530 Jewish witnesses but to the entire population, all Jews would have become followers of Jesus. --Pinchas Lapide, Orthodox Jewish scholar, Germany (born 1922)

Because Christianity's influence is so pervasive throughout much of the world, it is easy to forget how radical its beliefs once were. Jesus' resurrection forever changed Christians' view of death. Rodney Stark, sociologist at the University of Washington, points out that when a major plague hit the ancient Roman Empire, Christians had surprisingly high survival rates. Why? Most Roman citizens would banish any plague-stricken person from their household. But because Christians had no fear of death, they nursed their sick instead of throwing them out on the streets. Therefore, many Christians survived the plague. --"2000 Years of Jesus" by Kenneth L. Woodward, NEWSWEEK, March 29, 1999, p. 55.

Despite our efforts to keep him out, God intrudes. The life of Jesus is bracketed by two impossibilities: "a virgin's womb and an empty tomb". Jesus entered our world through a door marked,"No Entrance" and left through a door marked "No Exit." --Peter Larson

I would like to ask Him if He was indeed virgin born, because the answer to that question would define history. -Larry King

The most pressing question on the problem of faith is whether a man as a civilized being can believe in the divinity of the Son of God, Jesus Christ, for therein rests the whole of our faith. --Fyodor Dostoevski

The bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is the crowning proof of Christianity. If the resurrection did not take place, then Christianity is a false religion. If it did take place, then Christ is God and the Christian faith is absolute truth. --Henry Morris

If I might comprehend Jesus Christ, I could not believe on Him. He would be no greater than myself. Such is my consciousness of sin and inability that I must have a superhuman Saviour. --Daniel Webster

Our problem is this: we usually discover him within some denominational or Christian ghetto. We meet him in a province and, having caught some little view, we paint him in smaller strokes. The Lion of Judah is reduced to something kittenish because our understanding cannot, at first, write larger definitions.--Calvin Miller

People talk about imitating Christ, and imitate Him in the little trifling formal things, such as washing the feet, saying His prayer, and so on; but if anyone attempts the real imitation of Him, there are no bounds to the outcry with which the presumption of that person is condemned. --Florence Nightingale

Even Christ pleased not Himself. He was utterly consumed in the zeal of His Father's house. As man He ever moved for God. As God He ever moved for man.--Geoffrey T.Bull

There was no identity crisis in the life of Jesus Christ. He knew who He was. He knew where He had come from, and why he was here. And he knew where He was going. And when you are that liberated, then you can serve. --Howard Hendricks

The Lord ate from a common bowl, and asked the disciples to sit on the grass. He washed their feet, with a towel wrapped around His waist - He, who is the Lord of the universe! --Clement of Alexandria

How was it that, even in the common tasks of an ordinary life, Jesus drew the praise of heaven? At the core of His being, He only did those things which pleased the Father. In everything, He stayed true, heartbeat to heartbeat, with the Father's desires. Jesus lived for God alone; God was enough for Him. Thus, even in its simplicity and moment-to-moment faithfulness, Christ's life was an unending fragrance, a perfect offering of incomparable love to God. --Francis Frangipane

Jesus Christ: The meeting place of eternity and time, the blending of deity and humanity, the junction of heaven and earth - Anonymous

You cannot go outside of A and Z in the realm of literature; likewise Christ Jesus is First and Last of God's new creation, and all that is in between; you cannot get outside of that. --T. Austin Sparks

It is as if God the Father is saying to us: "Since I have told you everything in My Word, Who is My Son, I have no other words that can at present say anything or reveal anything to you beyond this. Fix your eyes on Him alone, for in Him I have told you all, revealed all, and in Him you will find more than you desire or ask. If you fix your eyes on Him, you will find everything, for He is My whole word and My reply, He is My whole vision and My whole revelation. --Anthony M. Coniaris

Whenever the method of worship becomes more important than the Person of worship, we have already prostituted our worship. There are entire congregations who worship praise and praise worship but who have not yet learned to praise and worship God in Jesus Christ. --Judson Cornwall

The message of Christ is not Christianity. The message of Christ is Christ. --Gary Amirault

To holy people the very name of Jesus is a name to feed upon, a name to transport. His name can raise the dead and transfigure and beautify the living. --John Henry Newman

God will answer all our questions in one way and one way only. Namely, by showing us more of his Son. -- Watchman Nee

Christianity is not a doctrine, not truth as truth, but the knowledge of a Person; it is knowing the Lord Jesus. You cannot be educated into being a Christian. --T. Austin-Sparks

I have one passion. It is He, only He. --Count Zinzendorf

1 Reply

@Arjuna,

Arjuna;130152 wrote:

If I told this story before, ignore it... but I knew this woman who taught Hopi children. She said the Hopis would tell the story of how they took a Missionary and cut him up and buried him. She said they'd tell the story as if it happened a few years ago. It was 400 years ago. Those crazy Hopis! There's an interesting movie if you ever see it in the cheapo bin of a used bookstore called "Black Robe." It's about Jesuit missionaries in America.

I have heard similar stories, and you reminded me of one, "Don't sleep there are snakes." It is a great book about a missionary who went to the amazon to bring christianity to this small tribe only to have this tribe teach him that christianity is just unauthenticated stories.

YouTube - Losing Religion to the Amazonian Piraha Tribe - Daniel Everett

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

Alan McDougall;130193 wrote:

The purpose of this thread was not to insult the memory of Jesus, it was to compare the Father God of love and mercy that Jesus presented and the wrathful god of the old Testament and decide if they were the same entity
...

Three things:

If they are not the same, then Jesus was a liar, as he said they were the same. This would mean that Christianity is essentially false. (It may, of course, be false for other reasons anyway, but it would absolutely be false if the God of the Old Testament is not the God of the New Testament.)
The way you have worded the question prejudices the issue. In the Old Testament, God helps the Israelites in battle against their enemies occasionally, and in the New Testament, Jesus goes on and on about hellfire and damnation. So your characterization is not really accurate. This leads directly to the third point:
I don't see any particular conflict between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament (at least, no more so than trying to imagine the God consistent within the Old Testament and the God consistent within the New Testament). [As an aside, this position might surprise you, given that I am an atheist and that I regard Christianity as complete rubbish, but I select the answer that would allow it to possibly be true. Well, this is the right answer to this question; they are the same God.]

1 Reply

@Pyrrho,

Pyrrho;130302 wrote:

Three things:

If they are not the same, then Jesus was a liar, as he said they were the same. This would mean that Christianity is essentially false. (It may, of course, be false for other reasons anyway, but it would absolutely be false if the God of the Old Testament is not the God of the New Testament.)

Well technically Jesus would also be the god of the old testament. Wouldn't he? This is one discrepancy that Christians try to dodge. Or is the god of the old testament some other god?

If Jesus is god. then;

Jesus would have to be the god of the new testament.

and

Jesus would have to be the god of the old testament.

Jesus and the god of the old testament are clearly opposites. Most Christians shy away when you ask them this question. The fact of the matter is, Jesus would have to be, yet if he is there is a conflict. Not just a minor conflict but a major one since the god of the old testament is a tyrant.

2 Replies

@Krumple,

I think the idea of progressive revelation explains a lot of the so called discrepancies in terms of the moral implications. Where progressive revelation is defined as the notion that religious truth is revealed by God progressively and cyclically over time. Thus what may have been considered just during a certain stage is not necessarily the case for those living under a new revelation.

This is not to say that the Law is obsolete because that is not the case, but in light of new revelations since that time, we understand more fully the purpose of the Law, which is knowledge of sin. Thus the lessons for us to learn in the OT are spiritual in nature. Which is why the OT for me(at least when describing God's judgment on the utterly corrupt people of Canaan; for there are many places describing God's love and mercy and justness in the OT as well but atheist seem to gloss over this) shows me how seriously I should treat sin within my own life.

It is for this reason and several more that I see no inherent problem/discrepancy between the OT and the NT

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Krumple;130318 wrote:

Well technically Jesus would also be the god of the old testament. Wouldn't he? This is one discrepancy that Christians try to dodge. Or is the god of the old testament some other god?

If Jesus is god. then;

Jesus would have to be the god of the new testament.

and

Jesus would have to be the god of the old testament.

Jesus and the god of the old testament are clearly opposites. [emphasis added] Most Christians shy away when you ask them this question. The fact of the matter is, Jesus would have to be, yet if he is there is a conflict. Not just a minor conflict but a major one since the god of the old testament is a tyrant.

I don't think so. Many people say such things, but they seem to forget how Jesus seemed to really enjoy talking about hellfire and damnation for his enemies. If anything, Jesus is more vicious than anything in the Old Testament, as there the killing and evil tends to be finite, rather than going on about torturing people in hell forever.

2 Replies

@Pyrrho,

Pyrrho;130460 wrote:

I don't think so. Many people say such things, but they seem to forget how Jesus seemed to really enjoy talking about hellfire and damnation for his enemies. If anything, Jesus is more vicious than anything in the Old Testament, as there the killing and evil tends to be finite, rather than going on about torturing people in hell forever.

You are right. There are quotes about hellfire and millstones. There are also quotes about turning the other cheek.
I don't think a coherent picture of Jesus can be had from these contradictions. I view Jesus as a literary character who has been tampered with.

---------- Post added 02-20-2010 at 10:52 PM ----------

Arjuna;130152 wrote:

I'll buy that. I think he was human. I've thought of it as central that he said the Mosaic law could be replaced by two rules: love god and love your neighbor as you love yourself.

I agree. But I suppose it's a matter of taste. A person can emphasize any part of the text they want. Back when I took this text as more than a brilliant piece of narrative fiction, the inherent contradictions of this Jesus character disturbed me. The pieces don't fit. I suspect they have been tampered with. After all, to put words in the mouth of Jesus is quite the power-move for one's position. At least in the age of belief.

0 Replies

@Pyrrho,

Pyrrho;130460 wrote:

I don't think so. Many people say such things, but they seem to forget how Jesus seemed to really enjoy talking about hellfire and damnation for his enemies. If anything, Jesus is more vicious than anything in the Old Testament, as there the killing and evil tends to be finite, rather than going on about torturing people in hell forever.
Reconstructo;130462 wrote:
You are right. There are quotes about hellfire and millstones. There are also quotes about turning the other cheek.
I don't think a coherent picture of Jesus can be had from these contradictions.

Better yet, IMO, there is no contradiction because when Jesus spoke hellfire, He spoke of it in a factual manner and not a ought manner. He basically spoke of it in a "if this happens, then this will be the result." No where does He say he wanted people to go there, in fact quite the opposite. Also, I might find it hateful if such a place existed and we were not told about it. And no where in the bible does is say that Jesus enjoyed speaking about these things.

However when he spoke in an ought manner He said things like "you have heard it said 'you shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." Clearly Jesus was about love, however he did speak about damnation but not in such a way as to wish it upon people but in a way as to hope that people would not end up there

1 Reply

@Amperage,

Amperage;130485 wrote:

Better yet, IMO, there is no contradiction because when Jesus spoke hellfire, He spoke of it in a factual manner and not a ought manner. He basically spoke of it in a "if this happens, then this will be the result." No where does He say he wanted people to go there, in fact quite the opposite.

Wait, wait, wait a second here. Okay what you are implying here is if he has no control over the existence of hell, and using it as a warning measure. Sort of like teaching a child, "Hey streets are dangerous, you shouldn't cross until you look both ways first." But if that is your argument then I have a new argument for you. First of all, we teach children in that fashion because the dangers of the road are out of our ability to control. However; if Jesus is god, and god can do anything, then why even create hell in the first place if (as you say) "he doesn't want people to go there".

That contradicts everything. Why make a place if you don't want people to end up there? That is like placing a bomb in the street then warning people there is a bomb, don't go down that street or else. If you place the bomb there, you have the intention of people getting hurt by it. Therefore god has the intention of someone getting hurt by it or else there is no reason for it being there. Therefore Jesus had to of meant it as a threat and not a concern for safety or their well being.

Amperage;130485 wrote:

Also, I might find it hateful if such a place existed and we were not told about it. And no where in the bible does is say that Jesus enjoyed speaking about these things.

How about it is more hateful to make hell in the first place? Then there is no need to warn anyone about it.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Krumple;130572 wrote:

Wait, wait, wait a second here. Okay what you are implying here is if he has no control over the existence of hell, and using it as a warning measure. Sort of like teaching a child, "Hey streets are dangerous, you shouldn't cross until you look both ways first." But if that is your argument then I have a new argument for you. First of all, we teach children in that fashion because the dangers of the road are out of our ability to control. However; if Jesus is god, and god can do anything, then why even create hell in the first place if (as you say) "he doesn't want people to go there".

That contradicts everything. Why make a place if you don't want people to end up there? That is like placing a bomb in the street then warning people there is a bomb, don't go down that street or else. If you place the bomb there, you have the intention of people getting hurt by it. Therefore god has the intention of someone getting hurt by it or else there is no reason for it being there. Therefore Jesus had to of meant it as a threat and not a concern for safety or their well being.

How about it is more hateful to make hell in the first place? Then there is no need to warn anyone about it.

Well according to my understanding of the Bible, Hell was created for satan and the fallen angels not for you and I. You and I, OTOH, were always supposed to be eternally connected with God. What is Hell? Hell is a place of separation from God. So why do you and I end up there? Due to our own sin, we ourselves have done the separating.

So it is in this sense that I say that we are warned; for the wages of sin are death. Now then, having known this in advance, and having proven to us that could not save ourselves(OT Law), and God, not wanting that anyone to perish but for all to have everlasting life, saw fit to send His son to become sin so that through Him, we could be made righteous.

So in conclusion it is my opinion based upon my understanding of biblical text that God did NOT create Hell to send us there, but He made it for a completely different reason but alas, due to our own transgressions we too can end up there. Now let us not confuse this next part. It does NOT follow that had He not created Hell in the first place, we would not have ended up there because what DOES follow is that upon separation from God, Hell results.
That is to say, Hell became logically necessary(unavoidable) upon the existence of a free-willed being whom separated itself from God(satan and the fallen angels), however, free-willed beings whom separate themselves from God is not a logical necessity as far as I can reckon. That is to say that free-willed beings are not forced to separate themselves from God otherwise this would contradict the notion of free will. Now, having said that, God has provided a means of escape(Jesus). And Christ died for ALL. therefore ALL have a means of escape. We created a problem and God solved it. Thank God!

1 Reply

@Amperage,

Amperage;130580 wrote:

Well according to my understanding of the Bible, Hell was created for satan and the fallen angels not for you and I. You and I, OTOH, were always supposed to be eternally connected with God. What is Hell? Hell is a place of separation from God. So why do you and I end up there? Due to our own sin, we ourselves have done the separating.

There can be no separation if there is no determining factor. It was god who placed the determining factor therefore he would be the cause of a person ending up there. You refuse to acknowledge that because you want to deny that a god purposely allows for such a case to happen in the first place.

Amperage;130580 wrote:

and God, not wanting that anyone to perish but for all to have everlasting life, saw fit to send His son to become sin so that through Him, we could be made righteous.

I don't want to live for ever, not in heaven not anywhere. I would beg for non-existence in less than a hundred years I bet. There is absolutely NOTHING that I would want to do for the rest of eternity, NOTHING. How can you sell me that eternal living is somehow a great thing? It's not, and I feel anyone who adopts this idea of eternal life has not even thought what it would mean. So if that is what I have to do for eternal life, I'll take the opposite please. Thank you.

Amperage;130580 wrote:

So in conclusion it is my opinion based upon my understanding of biblical text that God did NOT create Hell to send us there, but He made it for a completely different reason but alas, due to our own transgressions we too can end up there. Now let us not confuse this next part. It does NOT follow that had He not created Hell in the first place, we would not have ended up there because what DOES follow is that upon separation from God, Hell results.

Doesn't he set the parameters for how or what ends up there? Could he not design it that no one ends up there who he doesn't want to end up there or is that ability beyond him? You are talking in circles to rationalize something that is irrational. If he makes the rules then by all means he can set the factors for what goes where so why not alter it to get the desired result without error?

Amperage;130580 wrote:

That is to say, Hell became logically necessary(unavoidable) upon the existence of a free-willed being whom separated itself from God(satan and the fallen angels), however, free-willed beings whom separate themselves from God is not a logical necessity as far as I can reckon. That is to say that free-willed beings are not forced to separate themselves from God otherwise this would contradict the notion of free will. Now, having said that, God has provided a means of escape(Jesus). And Christ died for ALL. therefore ALL have a means of escape. We created a problem and God solved it. Thank God!

Actually god created the problem because he gave free will. Had he not given free will there would been no way to make the choice. Therefore he would be the programmer who get's mad at the program that he wrote. Call sin a bug if you want but implying it was an unintentional programming error that would mean god is a lousy programmer.

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

The New Testament was written by men; men have biases; men make mistakes; different men have different opinions and different agendas; people see things from different perspectives.

While one can certainly find conflicting scriptures in the New Testament, it is not difficult to glean its core tenets, ideas repeated often and by different authors. If two verses of scripture seem contradictory, ask yourself which falls closest to the spirit of a core tenet?

By the way, if there were no contradictions at all, if accounts written by different authors were in lockstep, that would be a "red flag" to any text critic of any compilation of writings about one event. Some difference in accounts by different authors is the norm.

Reading the history of the very early 1st and 2nd century AD church proved enlightening to me. I wanted to learn how the earliest followers of Christ lived, how THEY understood Christ's teachings.

They answered insults and abuse with love. As one early church father wrote, "Once you know love, it is impossible to hate." They were extremely active in giving to those in need -- not just with their material resources, but with their time and effort. And not just to fellow Christians.

Although things became political and ugly later, in the very earliest days of the church, according to letters sent back and forth by early church fathers, the complaint against certain sects like the gnostics was not so much theology but that these sects practiced a Christianity of "sitting around and talking" instead of "getting out and doing".

Clement was an early Bishop of Rome and a pupil of the Apostle Peter. First Clement, an epistle considered authentic by most scholars and widely distributed throughout the early church, was written by Clement in the late 1st century AD, It makes an interesting read. I don't care for all the references to the Old Testament, but Clement draws from these a theology quite different from Old Testament Judiasm.

One theme of Clement is love shown by works -- he describes divine love as something which cannot be understood in words, it has to be expressed in a life of love and loving works, by giving all one has without discernment or hesitation.

Also interesting is that Clement never refers to "hell" or eternal punishment. Per Clement, we are born to die, but Christ offers us a chance at immortality. Those who do not achieve immortality just... die.

BUT Christ is not the only way to immortality -- Clement actually says that Christ is only one of many gates. He also says that immortality is not all or nothing. Clement encourages Christians to strive to finish the race and win "the crown", but if you can't make the finish line, it's OK -- just come as close as you can. Clement reminds us that each will be rewarded according to his works.

The very earliest church did live by what appear to be the core tenets of New Testament Christianity.

Was Christ resurrected? I believe "yes". The changed lives of all the apostles is strong evidence -- remember, they changed to lives of hardship, persecution and near-certain martyrdom. That's not something one normally does for a "group lie". There are no secondary benefits, so if you didn't believe in immortality, if you didn't believe you had seen Jesus resurrected, why would you choose this life? And if these men were not credible, why did so many believe and follow them?

I dare not try to imitate Clement's eloquence about the hereafter -- not specific descriptives, which he says man cannot know. But still Clement's passion and hope and confidence and joy just leap off the written page. If Clement gained this much from being a pupil of Peter, what must Peter and the other disciples have seen, heard, felt?

Clement is not the only non-canonical early church father whose love and surety and passion is contagious. And the early church liturgy -- it's hard to read the Odes of Solomon and not feel the urge to just run over to the arena and get eaten by a lion so you can get to heaven that much sooner.

In fact, the very early church developed a problem with Christians actually going out of their way to become martyrs -- which had to be corrected by some of the early church fathers.

Christ and Christianity may not be someone's cup of tea -- there are many gates to the next world. IMO, it's a good thing to keep them all open, including Christ's gate.

rebecca

0 Replies

@Alan McDougall,

Alan McDougall;129615 wrote:

His teachings promoted the value of those who had commonly been regarded as inferior: women, the poor, ethnic outsiders, children, prostitutes, the sick, prisoners, etc. For over a thousand years, countless hospitals, orphanages, and schools have been founded explicitly in Jesus' name.

What do you think?

It is on the backs of women, the poor, ethnic outsiders, children, the sick, prisoners etc that Christianity survived and who knew it there was a silent, muted majority that had never been before recognised and equalised.
I wonder when the rich took over the religion and the afforemtioned became the second class citizens again? This is harsh, but the reigns are not in the hands of its parishioners. The reigns are in the hands of men and money.
Do you speak up in church or are you silenced?

---------- Post added 02-21-2010 at 08:53 AM ----------

Krumple;129623 wrote:

You only want to see and hear what you want to and ignore the whole picture.

Just you cant see a truth, does not mean it is not there.

Krumple;129623 wrote:

Outdated knowledge that corrupts the minds of people who should know better.

Please give me an example of something Jesus said that one should know better than.
I am not doubting your conviction i am questioning it.

1 Reply

@sometime sun,

sometime sun;130591 wrote:

Just you cant see a truth, does not mean it is not there.

It also does not mean it is. We should take a better stance on this situation. Just because I can not see gremlins, does it mean I should believe they exist? We take the lack of evidence as evidence in cases like this, but when it comes to god, no one uses this method anymore, well believers don't. So do you believe in gremlins?

sometime sun;130591 wrote:

Please give me an example of something Jesus said that one should know better than.

"I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, `Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him."

sometime sun;130591 wrote:

I am not doubting your conviction i am questioning it.

You doubt me, but do not doubt anything other than me. You can see the flaw in me, but can't see the flaw in the theology? You assume the theology is correct, and myself incorrect. From this foundation of your thought you don't care to understand what I say, but instead already conclude that what ever I will say will ultimately be false. So why even bother asking me?

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Krumple;129655 wrote:

I am using the work to point out the whole picture. The whole picture does not support this belief that jesus is love.

I cant see what you are seeing, show me your picture please so i can see your further. And do you still hold at least that any whole picture needs to accept love is all that is needed for life to thrive? Even tough love is necessary.

Krumple;129655 wrote:

There are millions who believe that aliens have abducted people. There are millions who believe that an alien space craft crashed in Roswell New Mexico. Does that make it true?

Again what is not truth? Or does your truth only count? sounds alot like what is better for you is better for everyone. Is this what you are saying, your truth is the only one?

Krumple;129655 wrote:

because he is the ultimate good guy and youll defend him with even your own life.

Got to die for something, i would rather defend than attack.
But you are right sometimes in life you must be prepared to attack.

Krumple;129655 wrote:

If you place any of the apolosles infront of him trying to save him from this sacrafice to come, it would have placed the apolsles above and beyond the hero of the story. They couldn't have that so you don't see it in the story. Since you don't see it in the story it points out that it is fabricated. It is fabricated because it does not depict true humanism. They should have been creating a riot to save Jesus, no sensable human would have let him suffer like that.

Now this is interesting, and will grant you a thanks for this perspective, but will leave you with, what do you think 'humanism' was before Christ?
You must reason that Christ was the very first concept of true Sacrifice.
If you can find me a 'story' that describes and realises the first Sacrifice the first Salvation comparable to this i would be grateful. Very.
The very first last human Sacrifice.

Krumple;129655 wrote:

If jesus is rescued then he is the victim not the savior.

You have to look deeper into what rescue means, there are some things God must not do? There are some things God cant do?
But i agree if he were 'rescued' he would have become a 'victim'.
Victim another word you use with negative connotation.
Victims are not bad things. They are good things that bad things have happened to.

Krumple;129655 wrote:

Yet no one, absolutely no one questions this or wonders why these followers didn't do anything, not a single person questions where they were. How could you sit by and allow this sort of thing to happen to someone that has taught you so much? Why? Because it's a made up lie.

No one question this? what do you think you just did? You dont think just because someone believes in Christ put there faith in more than just a 'story' they dont question the it, they dont question their God, they dont question themselves?

Some doubts dont matter. (said like a true blind Christian)(I hope)

---------- Post added 02-21-2010 at 09:40 AM ----------

Krumple;130613 wrote:

So do you believe in gremlins?

Depends on what gremlins are.
I dont not belive in them because i am told not to if that is what you are driving at.

Krumple;130613 wrote:

"I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, `Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him."

Quick reply; belief will do things for you,
whether those things are done depends upon your beliefs validity.
A truth to be proved does not mean your doubt shall win.
A truth to be proved does not need to move the mountains or boil the seas, just needs to change one heart.
Our surroundings are only our limits until we question them.
The world is yours, it will bend to your will. Dont break it. Will or the world.

Krumple;130613 wrote:

You doubt me, but do not doubt anything other than me. You can see the flaw in me, but can't see the flaw in the theology? You assume the theology is correct, and myself incorrect. From this foundation of your thought you don't care to understand what I say, but instead already conclude that what ever I will say will ultimately be false. So why even bother asking me?

I said i didn't doubt your conviction.
Me too, i dont doubt anything other than me, and if i do it is all because of me, what i have learned and what i have seen.
I believe you believe what you believe is correct.
I wouldn't have my own if i believed what you did now would i?
Bother asking you? What a horrible thing to say, I am bothered because you are bothered and you express it rather well i might add.
And just for good measure it bothers me also.

(Lauren Hill is really working for me this morning)

---------- Post added 02-21-2010 at 09:59 AM ----------

Alan McDougall;129863 wrote:

Remember the Resurrection , after Jesus rose from the dead these very same people often layed down their lives in the thousands out of their love for him. Why the heck should they die in the thousands in Nero's lion dens if the whole event as nothing but a silly lie
"

Suicide is a lie, murder is not?

If they layed down their lives for something, for love makes it sacrifice.

It seems and i shall ask for the all, that suicide and sacrifice is different how?

I know my answer, i wonder how many others could reason the difference?

If it is not answered by someone here i may have to open a thread;
'What is the difference between suicide and sacrifice?'
I would be interested in what you clarify as the differences???

2 Replies

@sometime sun,

It seems fate that every time you and I engage in debate our thoughts get separated into 50 different subsets which necessitate individual subset responses which perpetually get more and more divergent to the point that neither of us can ever consolidate our posts.

Krumple;130584 wrote:

There can be no separation if there is no determining factor. It was god who placed the determining factor therefore he would be the cause of a person ending up there.

The determining factor, IMO, was not born out of choice but necessity of nature. The only things unavoidable for God are those things which are logically necessary, therefore it would seem to follow that a logical necessity exists such that God and sin must be separated.

Now you may try to raise the point, 'well if God created everything, then God created sin.' To which I will say to this point that there is a fundamental difference between allotting for sin(acting apart from the will of God) and sinning. God through His infinite wisdom saw fit to grant us free will which means God created within us the ability to do things that He Himself would have us not do. However, he does not compel us to ever actually sin. God created us capable of sinning but did not introduce sin.

Krumple;130584 wrote:

You refuse to acknowledge that because you want to deny that a god purposely allows for such a case to happen in the first place.

While you seem to want to pass the blame onto God instead of taking responsibility for your own actions.

Krumple;130584 wrote:

I don't want to live for ever, not in heaven not anywhere. I would beg for non-existence in less than a hundred years I bet. There is absolutely NOTHING that I would want to do for the rest of eternity, NOTHING. How can you sell me that eternal living is somehow a great thing? It's not, and I feel anyone who adopts this idea of eternal life has not even thought what it would mean. So if that is what I have to do for eternal life, I'll take the opposite please. Thank you.

IMHO this is an unintelligible answer since one cannot understand non-existence. I don't believe a human mind can fathom what it means to not be. I can easily fathom reincarnation but I can't nor can I see how anyone can fathom non-existence. We be!

Krumple;130584 wrote:

Doesn't he set the parameters for how or what ends up there? Could he not design it that no one ends up there who he doesn't want to end up there or is that ability beyond him? You are talking in circles to rationalize something that is irrational. If he makes the rules then by all means he can set the factors for what goes where so why not alter it to get the desired result without error?

No (non contradictory)ability is beyond Him, however, God does, IMO, seem to have priorities. In other words there are things within His own job description(nature) that require that He not use His power.
For example, it is my opinion that it is within God's power to make me in such a way that I will never sin. However I maintain that God cannot do this without infringing upon my own free will. Now the only reason God does not infringe upon my free will must be because He is obligated to maintain it(perhaps through His own will and knowledge).
So, if an overriding priority for God is maintenance of our free will then it follows that He(by His own doing) is rendered powerless to stop us from dooming ourselves. So God's goal should not be in preventing the doom but rescuing us from the doom.

Simply because "he makes the rules" does not mean that He can defy contradictions. What I mean to say is, it may be the case that sin and God are contradictory to one another such that, they must exist separated. With that being the case it is not by rule that such a place exist but by necessity. Combining this fact with the fact that God "seemingly" has the overriding priority to maintain our free will, we see that His only option was not to not create Hell but somehow reconcile us from Hell. Which is exactly what He has done.

Krumple;130584 wrote:

Actually god created the problem because he gave free will. Had he not given free will there would been no way to make the choice. Therefore he would be the programmer who get's mad at the program that he wrote. Call sin a bug if you want but implying it was an unintentional programming error that would mean god is a lousy programmer.

If I told you to go right and you went left would that make me a bad instructor? Neigh, it would make you a bad student. For you had been instructed to go right. Without the option of forcing your hand I cannot do more than that. Free will is not the problem as evidenced by the life of Jesus. Granted we are not Jesus, however, the point still stands that he was a man and he did no wrong before God. I agree that had God not given us free will, there would be no way to make the wrong choice. Therefore it must be concluded that free will is "worth it" or is logically necessary within Gods defined goals.
Is free will worth it? Let's think about all that comes as a result of free will. The first thing that comes to mind is love. Love to me seems to be worth free will, love is worth dying for IMO.

C.S. Lewis, who was a pretty intelligent Christian, said this about the subject in his book Mere Christianity,

Quote:

Why, then, did God give them free will? Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. A world of automata-of creatures that worked like machines-would hardly be worth creating. The happiness which God designs for His higher creatures is the happiness of being freely, voluntarily united to Him and to each other in an ecstasy of love and delight compared with which the most rapturous love between a man and a woman on this earth is mere milk
and water. And for that they must be free.
Of course God knew what would happen if they used their freedom the wrong way: apparently He thought it worth the risk. Perhaps we feel inclined to disagree with Him. But there is a difficulty about disagreeing with God. He is the source from which all your reasoning power comes: you could not be right and He wrong any more than a stream can rise higher than its own source. When you are arguing against Him you are arguing against the very power that makes you able to argue at all: it is like cutting off the branch you are sitting on. If God thinks this state of war in the universe a price worth paying for free will-that is, for making a live world in which creatures can do real good or harm and something of real importance can happen, instead of a toy world which only moves when He pulls the strings-then we may take it it is worth paying.
When we have understood about free will, we shall see how silly it is to ask, as somebody once asked me: "Why did God make a creature of such rotten stuff that it went wrong?" The better stuff a creature is made of-the cleverer and stronger and freer it is-then the better it will be if it goes right, but also the worse it will be if it goes wrong. A cow cannot be very good or very bad; a dog can be both better and worse; a child better and worse still; an ordinary man, still more so; a man of genius, still more so; a superhuman spirit best-or worst-of all.

To which I wholeheartedly agree. So it is my contention that it is overwhelmingly evident that free will is better than no free will.

1 Reply

@sometime sun,

sometime sun;130619 wrote:

I cant see what you are seeing, show me your picture please so i can see your further. And do you still hold at least that any whole picture needs to accept love is all that is needed for life to thrive? Even tough love is necessary.

It's bigger than something I can give in a single dose or shot. So what you are asking me here is something I am not capable of in just a few lines that you would care to sit here digesting. Is this a cop out, you can call it that, but I'll just say I am saving you from a long boring read.

sometime sun;130619 wrote:

Again what is not truth? Or does your truth only count? sounds alot like what is better for you is better for everyone. Is this what you are saying, your truth is the only one?

There is only one truth though. Either aliens did crash, or they didn't crash in New Mexico desert. Both of those can not be true. I am saying there must be a truth, and the truth you are offering me does not hold to what I see as evidence. Therefore the truth must be revisited and that is what I am doing.

sometime sun;130619 wrote:

Got to die for something, i would rather defend than attack.

Actually I will applaud you for that statement. I agree, is it a fundamental truth?

sometime sun;130619 wrote:

But you are right sometimes in life you must be prepared to attack.

Is it necessary? I wonder.

sometime sun;130619 wrote:

Now this is interesting, and will grant you a thanks for this perspective, but will leave you with, what do you think 'humanism' was before Christ?
You must reason that Christ was the very first concept of true Sacrifice.
If you can find me a 'story' that describes and realises the first Sacrifice the first Salvation comparable to this i would be grateful. Very.
The very first last human Sacrifice.

I am not sure what you are actually requesting from me here. That you want an alternative salvation? If you are asking for that, I can not provide it, but not because I don't have one to offer, but instead I don't feel one is necessary in the first place. I am not evil by birth, nor are the wrongs of my ancestors my fault, therefore I am not to blame for what they have done or not done. Therefore I have nothing to apologize for or atone for.

sometime sun;130619 wrote:

You have to look deeper into what rescue means, there are some things God must not do? There are some things God cant do?
But i agree if he were 'rescued' he would have become a 'victim'.
Victim another word you use with negative connotation.
Victims are not bad things. They are good things that bad things have happened to.

I still see him as a victim. If he knew what he was about to do, that he was going to be the reliever of all humanity, why would he at the last few minutes leading up to it, request council? He asks god why he has been forsaken. This does not mesh with him sacrificing himself in a positive tone. If I knew that I could relieve this world's suffering by my death I would gladly go through with the worse and most painful of deaths if necessary for that to happen. I wouldn't be seeking council before it, I'd gladly step to it, but he doesn't and that is telling.

sometime sun;130619 wrote:

No one question this? what do you think you just did? You dont think just because someone believes in Christ put there faith in more than just a 'story' they dont question the it, they dont question their God, they dont question themselves?

Some doubts dont matter. (said like a true blind Christian)(I hope)

[/COLOR]When I make a statement like no one questions something, I do not mean it isn't questioned. I am implying that to those who give it merit or credit have not questioned it. Like I have mentioned before, only ten percent of actual proclaimed Christians have actually read the bible. That fact points out something else, that they do not investigate their faith, they instead just accept what ever is handed to them.

sometime sun;130619 wrote:

Depends on what gremlins are.
I dont not belive in them because i am told not to if that is what you are driving at.

A little bit of a double negative here. Can I cancel out both negatives? Will you allow me to do that? Because that is what double negatives do. So if I do that and rewrite your sentence it becomes;

"I believe in them because i am told not to if that is what you are driving at."

I think you might want to rephrase the statement or else I am left in confusion for what you meant by not believing in gremlins. Or should I just assume that you believe they could exist even though you have never seen one?

sometime sun;130619 wrote:

Quick reply; belief will do things for you,
whether those things are done depends upon your beliefs validity.
A truth to be proved does not mean your doubt shall win.
A truth to be proved does not need to move the mountains or boil the seas, just needs to change one heart.
Our surroundings are only our limits until we question them.
The world is yours, it will bend to your will. Dont break it. Will or the world.

I don't have that ability because I have tried to utilize it and it did not do as you profess is possible.

sometime sun;130619 wrote:

I said i didn't doubt your conviction.
Me too, i dont doubt anything other than me, and if i do it is all because of me, what i have learned and what i have seen.
I believe you believe what you believe is correct.
I wouldn't have my own if i believed what you did now would i?
Bother asking you? What a horrible thing to say, I am bothered because you are bothered and you express it rather well i might add.
And just for good measure it bothers me also.

Can I admit I laughed a little from what you said here? Although not laughing at you, just how you said it.

I understand the power of belief. I understand that it can be useful in positive ways, but also it can be used in negative ways. My only concern is that we utilize understanding within reality to function within reality, so why is it necessary to use something outside reality to effect reality? When those who believe in something outside reality, to use against me, to impose their guilt onto me, it becomes something harmful to me. This is what I feel causes devastation onto the world just like if someone were polluting a stream with motor oil. I of course want them to stop and will say something to point out the harm they are causing.

1 Reply

@Pyrrho,

Pyrrho;130005 wrote:

The majority of the world is not Christian, so the majority does not believe what you say, so you are factually wrong about that. If the majority is to be believed, Jesus was not so very special.

The majority of the world believes Jesus was more than a man, and the rest of the most believe he was a man, both and most would be correct.

Jesus was such an idiot that most of the world have learned nothing but idiocy?. Lunacy even?

You need to back this up with yourself, not Bertrand Russell.
You cant (but you can, maybe must) call Jesus Christ an idiot and stupid and not tell me why 'YOU' think this is so.
I am more likely to listen to you than I would something you heard from somewhere else.
I would be interested to hear this in your words not someone else speaking for you.
The fig tree and stupid child reference was not enough for me.
Please try again:)

---------- Post added 02-21-2010 at 10:32 AM ----------

Krumple;130649 wrote:

It's bigger than something I can give in a single dose or shot. So what you are asking me here is something I am not capable of in just a few lines that you would care to sit here digesting. Is this a cop out, you can call it that, but I'll just say I am saving you from a long boring read.

Hello have you met me? I'm sometime sun the example of exaggeration, (urination:)) of taking the long way home, the long haul, the undigestible. The hick-ups i must give you people.

I have all the time you are willing to give me.

0 Replies

@Amperage,

Amperage;130642 wrote:

It seems fate that every time you and I engage in debate our thoughts get separated into 50 different subsets which necessitate individual subset responses which perpetually get more and more divergent to the point that neither of us can ever consolidate our posts.

I'm pretty good at keeping track. Unless you are finding it tedious or pointless?

Amperage;130642 wrote:

The determining factor, IMO, was not born out of choice but necessity of nature. The only things unavoidable for God are those things which are logically necessary, therefore it would seem to follow that a logical necessity exists such that God and sin must be separated.

But he ultimately decides what sin is. He makes the law, and that makes him give rise to the existence of it. If he doesn't set any rules or any law what-so-ever, there can be no sin at all. So he is the creater because he put the rule into place.

Amperage;130642 wrote:

Now you may try to raise the point, 'well if God created everything, then God created sin.' To which I will say to this point that there is a fundamental difference between allotting for sin(acting apart from the will of God) and sinning. God through His infinite wisdom saw fit to grant us free will which means God created within us the ability to do things that He Himself would have us not do. However, he does not compel us to ever actually sin. God created us capable of sinning but did not introduce sin.

We only have the ability to sin because he defined what sin is. If he didn't define it, then sin would not exist, even with free will.

Amperage;130642 wrote:

While you seem to want to pass the blame onto God instead of taking responsibility for your own actions.

That's the irony here, I do take responsibility for my actions. I do not try to impose a situation where I can do bad things and ask an invisible being for forgiveness and get a reward for it. I only have myself to blame, I have only myself to account to, and I have to live with my actions. I do not pass the blame onto anyone other than myself when they are my actions. So I am not sure where you are getting this idea from. I don't even believe in god, so why would I pass the blame onto something that doesn't even exist?

Amperage;130642 wrote:

IMHO this is an unintelligible answer since one cannot understand non-existence. I don't believe a human mind can fathom what it means to not be. I can easily fathom reincarnation but I can't nor can I see how anyone can fathom non-existence. We be!

Although this for the most part is true, you can fathom non-existence. You just have to take all that we experience and cancel it. That would be non-existence. You wouldn't see anything, hear anything, taste anything, feel anything, smell anything or think anything. You wouldn't even be aware of non-existence. There I just did it.

Amperage;130642 wrote:

No (non contradictory)ability is beyond Him, however, God does, IMO, seem to have priorities. In other words there are things within His own job description(nature) that require that He not use His power.
For example, it is my opinion that it is within God's power to make me in such a way that I will never sin. However I maintain that God cannot do this without infringing upon my own free will. Now the only reason God does not infringe upon my free will must be because He is obligated to maintain it(perhaps through His own will and knowledge).
So, if an overriding priority for God is maintenance of our free will then it follows that He(by His own doing) is rendered powerless to stop us from dooming ourselves. So God's goal should not be in preventing the doom but rescuing us from the doom.

Alright, then he can not have a divine plan nor could prayer be useful. If he can not infringe on free will then he would not be able to have a plan for your life because that plan would dictate how your life unfolded. Then on top of that prayer would be useless as well because it would infringe on free will.

Amperage;130642 wrote:

Simply because "he makes the rules" does not mean that He can defy contradictions. What I mean to say is, it may be the case that sin and God are contradictory to one another such that, they must exist separated. With that being the case it is not by rule that such a place exist but by necessity. Combining this fact with the fact that God "seemingly" has the overriding priority to maintain our free will, we see that His only option was not to not create Hell but somehow reconcile us from Hell. Which is exactly what He has done.

It would be as simple as not setting any rules at all. If there are no rules then by that very definition there can be no punishment for anything done. So by creating rules as you have stated he would have inadvertently created the punishment. His rescue attempt is silly, just like if I dug a hole and then tried to tell people walking by to watch their step. If I had never dug the hole in the first place there would be no danger of falling in to begin with.

Amperage;130642 wrote:

If I told you to go right and you went left would that make me a bad instructor? Neigh, it would make you a bad student. For you had been instructed to go right. Without the option of forcing your hand I cannot do more than that. Free will is not the problem as evidenced by the life of Jesus. Granted we are not Jesus, however, the point still stands that he was a man and he did no wrong before God. I agree that had God not given us free will, there would be no way to make the wrong choice. Therefore it must be concluded that free will is "worth it" or is logically necessary within Gods defined goals.

Okay, but if you are the teacher telling me left, why are you telling me to go left? Is it for me, or for you? If there was no need to turn at all, then going left or right wouldn't matter. Therefore there is nothing be taught here at all. It is a dictation of expected behavior. Do this or else.

Amperage;130642 wrote:

Is free will worth it? Let's think about all that comes as a result of free will. The first thing that comes to mind is love. Love to me seems to be worth free will, love is worth dying for IMO.

I don't hold your idea here myself. I do not think love is worth dying for. I also don't think free will is required for love to arise. You can actually get it without free choice. How do I know, and you will refuse to believe me until I say it. When you fall in love, it is not something you can prevent, it just happens without you willing it to happen. Therefore it is beyond free will. Hate me now? Because I'll ruin love for you.

Amperage;130642 wrote:

C.S. Lewis, who was a pretty intelligent Christian, said this about the subject in his book Mere Christianity, To which I wholeheartedly agree. So it is my contention that it is overwhelmingly evident that free will is better than no free will.

I do not believe in free will. It is a construct, and does not reveal itself in reality, at least in no way that I can see.

0 Replies

The words of Jesus compared to that of the Old Testament

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know