How long will it take for people to give up on Jesus coming back

[scourge99]

Not destroyed, just shown to be multi-faceted.

That isn't any version of Pascal's Wager I'm familiar with:

p1. Believers and non believers alike, agree that payoff is good, punishment is bad.
p2. if god is real you receive infinite punishment for disbelief or infinite payoff for belief

a. if you believe you go to heaven for eternity.
b. if you do not believe you go to hell for eternity.

p3. if god is not real you don't really lose or gain anything either way.

a. if you believe falsely that god does exist you haven't really lost anything.
b. if you don't believe and it turns out god doesn't exist then you don't really gain anything.

c1. Therefore even if there is strong evidence against god it is still better to believe.

a. the payoff for believing if there is a god, is infinitely better than the benefit for not believing if there's no god.
b. the punishment for not believing if there is a god, is infinitely worse than the loss caused by believing falsely that there is a god.

How do you propose making Pascal's Wager "multifaceted"?

 

[FluffyNinja]

That isn't any version of Pascal's Wager I'm familiar with:


How do you propose making Pascal's Wager "multifaceted"?

The wager can be applied to any religion's "god" or "gods" or to the existence of "Sauron the Dark Lord" for that matter. To a true Christian, the wager is only applicable to our God. But, then, to a true Christian, this is a conscious "life choice" and more than a mere statistical analysis of cost vs. benefit outcome, isn't it? The observations of Blaise Pascal should never be used by a true Christian to prove the existence of God, they're simply by-products of what we already know.

 

[scourge99]

The wager can be applied to any religion's "god" or "gods" or to the existence of "Sauron the Dark Lord" for that matter. To a true Christian, the wager is only applicable to our God.

Which is EXACTLY why it fails. We do NOT live in a world where only a single God is proposed. Pascal's Wager cannot account for the REAL WORLD where thousands of Gods have been proposed, some of which explicitly condemn non-believers to a tormenting afterlife.

But, then, to a true Christian, this is a conscious "life choice" and more than a mere statistical analysis of cost vs. benefit outcome, isn't it?

I leave it to the arrogant and self righteous to fight among themselves about who is a "true" Christian.

From my experience, some Christians do NOT rely on Pascal's Wager for belief. For others such as OscarB63, it appears that they believe their beliefs are justified by it.

The observations of Blaise Pascal should never be used by a true Christian to prove the existence of God, they're simply by-products of what we already know.

Pascal's Wager is a fools wager. Anyone who has ever taken the time to understand the critical flaws recognize this.

 

[FluffyNinja]

Which is EXACTLY why it fails. We do NOT live in a world where only a single God is proposed. Pascal's Wager cannot account for the REAL WORLD where thousands of Gods have been proposed, some of which explicitly condemn non-believers to a tormenting afterlife.

Actually, if you've read Pascal's Pensees you would see that he does indeed account for and address the infinite possibliity of outcomes; however, those who tend to argue on this forum seem to only focus on the simplified 4X4 matrix.
From Pascal:

“if there were an infinity of chances, of which one only would be for you, you would still be right in wagering one [life] ... if there were an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain.”

I leave it to the arrogant and self righteous to fight among themselves about who is a "true" Christian.

Sadly, I agree with you here.

From my experience, some Christians do NOT rely on Pascal's Wager for belief. For others such as OscarB63, their beliefs appear to be justified by it.

Which is why I don't stand "shoulder-to-shoulder" with all who CLAIM to be Christian.

You appear to be avoiding the subject of Pascal's Wager by making this comment.

Not at all, I am simply attempting to reverse the perspective. What I'm saying is that Pascal's Wager does not justify my faith, on the contrary, IT is justified BY my faith. :shock:

Pascal's Wager is a fools wager. Anyone who has ever taken the time to understand the critical flaws recognize this.

Anyone who feels that a simple wager is all that is required for salvation of the soul is indeed a fool!

 

[FluffyNinja]

Well, g'night Scourge ol' pal. I'm really not as "self righteous" as you make me out to be. :mrgreen:

I'll even continue to pray for you, it's just the kind of guy I am. :thumbs:

 

[scourge99]

Actually, if you've read Pascal's Pensees you would see that he does indeed accout for and address the infinite possibliity of outcomes;however, those who tend to argue on this forum seem to only focus on the simplified 4X4 matrix.

From Pascal:

“if there were an infinity of chances, of which one only would be for you, you would still be right in wagering one [life] ... if there were an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain.”

Pascal does nothing to address other outcomes. Pascal believes there is the dichotomy: believe in God and gain infinite happiness; do not believe in god and lose nothing or a finite something. Pascal is not discussing multiple Gods or possibilities. Pascal is talking about making wagers. He was discussing the thought-experiment that even if belief in God did not bring infinite happiness but just double the happiness, then it would still be valid to wager in favor of belief in god.

"That is very fine. Yes, I must wager; but I may perhaps wager too much." Let us see. Since there is an equal risk of gain and of loss, if you had only to gain two lives, instead of one, you might still wager. But if there were three lives to gain, you would have to play (since you are under the necessity of playing), and you would be imprudent, when you are forced to play, not to chance your life to gain three at a game where there is an equal risk of loss and gain. But there is an eternity of life and happiness. And this being so, if there were an infinity of chances, of which one only would be for you, you would still be right in wagering one to win two, and you would act stupidly, being obliged to play, by refusing to stake one life against three at a game in which out of an infinity of chances there is one for you, if there were an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain. But there is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. It is all divided; where-ever the infinite is and there is not an infinity of chances of loss against that of gain, there is no time to hesitate, you must give all. And thus, when one is forced to play, he must renounce reason to preserve his life, rather than risk it for infinite gain, as likely to happen as the loss of nothingness.

It doesn't address the REAL WORLD where thousands of Gods have been proposed, some of which explicitly condemn believers in the wrong god to a tormenting afterlife.

Pascal's Pensees -Table of Contents

Not at all, I am simply attempting to reverse the perspective. What I'm saying is that Pascal's Wager does not justify my faith, on the contrary, IT is justified BY my faith. :shock:

So you do NOT believe because of Pascal's Wager. You believe Pascal's Wager is true BECAUSE you believe in God.

That doesn't even make sense. Pascal's Wager isn't anymore valid if one is a believer or isn't.

 

[cpwill]

I didn't ask for absolute certainty. Such a thing cannot be obtained currently.

So you have no idea what it takes to get into heaven or hell?

I know how to be saved, and I know that part of that includes the ability to spend eternity in the presence of God (heaven, if you will).

but knowing how to recieve salvation is not the same as knowing how to be damned. Jesus only gave us one example of such a method; were one to "blaspheme against the Holy Spirit"; an amorphous comment that seems to have been made as an aside, and which i have yet to see anyone give a fully satisfactory explination of.

No. And I do state this definitively. :shock:

brother, you're not on that committee, and it's not given to you to make such judgements. We are given how to recieve salvation, it's not our job nor our place to determine what God will do with those who do not recieve or cannot recieve. Paul addresses this on a couple of occasions; simply never recieving the Gospel doesn't doom you for eternity. for before they had the law the law was emplaced in their hearts.

A particularly well done impression of this (i think) is seen in CS Lewis' last installment of the Narnia series, where Aslan has returned and is taking those who have held true away from a civil war and destruction to a far better land (heaven), and Emeth, a foriegn soldier who had invaded Narnia and made war against 'the people of Aslan' finds himself called by Aslan to come with them, despite his service to the 'god' Tash, who demanded cruelty of his worshipers.

"...the Glorious One bent down his golden head and touched my forehead with his tongue and said, Son, thou art welcome. But I said, Alas, Lord, I am no son of thine but the servant of Tash. He answered, Child, all the service thou hast done to Tash, I account as service done to me. Then, by reason of my great desire for wisdom and understanding, I overcame my fear and questioned the Glorious One and said, Lord, is it then true, as the Ape said, that thou and Tash are one? The Lion growled so that the earth shook (but his wrath was not against me) and said, It is false. Not because he and I are one, but because we are opposites, I take to me the services which though hast done to him. For I and he are of such different kinds that no service which is vile can be done to me, and none which is not vile can be done to him. Therefore if any man swear by Tash and keep his oath for the oath's sake, it is by me that he has truly sworn, though he know it not, and it is I who reward him. And if any man do a cruelty in my name, then, though he says the name Aslan, it is Tash whom he serves and by Tash his deed is accepted. Doust thou understand, child? I said, Lord, thou knowest how much I understand. But I said also (for the truth constrained me), Yet I have been seeking Tash all my days. Beloved, said the Glorious One, unless thy desire had been for me thou wouldst not have sought so long and so truly. For all find what they truly seek."

 

[cpwill]

Thus, Pascal's Wager is destroyed. That is, believing in God doesn't guarantee preferred seating in the afterlife as the wager would propose.

if pascal's wager is presented as merely "believe in God" then it is doubly problematic. as the New Testament points out: even the demons know God exists.

 

[FluffyNinja]

brother, you're not on that committee, and it's not given to you to make such judgements. We are given how to recieve salvation, it's not our job nor our place to determine what God will do with those who do not recieve or cannot recieve. Paul addresses this on a couple of occasions; simply never recieving the Gospel doesn't doom you for eternity. for before they had the law the law was emplaced in their hearts.

What I do know, definitively, is what God's Holy Word says regarding salvation:

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6

and

"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other." Matthew 6:24

Now, back to the original question:

Do you believe Muslims will go to heaven despite the fact they do NOT believe Jesus died for their sins?

If you truly believe/know that the words of Christ, in the New Testament, are the words of God, then, brother, there is ONLY one way to achieve salvation and that is through the Blood of the Savior. To reiterate, a Muslim who fails to accept Christ as Savior, sadly, is bound for eternal damnation and even more distressing, many "so-called" Christians will share the same fate. I do, however, believe that a Muslim can have a conversion through Christ and the Holy Spirit. But, then, that Muslim would no longer be a Muslim, would he? I believe that would make him a Christian. I'm not trying to come across as self-righteous here, I am just pointing out what any Christian should know, that there is only ONE path to salvation here - no gray area. Sadly, the title "Christian" in the secular times in which we live, has come to have more of a political connotation rather than a spiritual one. To many, it holds no more "power" or "importance" than the terms "evangelical" or "religious person". A "Christian" is a follower of Christ, not merely a "believer". Even the most devout Muslims "believe" in Christ, as do the followers of Judaism, the difference comes in accepting the divinity of Christ as Messiah and following his teachings - this is "The Way" as described by the Apostle Paul.

 

[scourge99]

I know how to be saved, and I know that part of that includes the ability to spend eternity in the presence of God (heaven, if you will).

but knowing how to recieve salvation is not the same as knowing how to be damned. Jesus only gave us one example of such a method; were one to "blaspheme against the Holy Spirit"; an amorphous comment that seems to have been made as an aside, and which i have yet to see anyone give a fully satisfactory explination of.

So if one isn't "saved" in the manner you know how, what occurs to them?
Are they:
1) "saved"
2) "damned"
3) don't know

I'm not asking for absolute certainty. I'm asking what your personal/sects beliefs are.

 

[cpwill]

What I do know, definitively, is what God's Holy Word says regarding salvation

First off, that isn't God's Holy Word, that's the words of God, written by a man who remembered them, who was himself guided by the Holy Spirit. the Bible was not dictated verbatim from Heaven.

and frankly, if you know definitively, what the Bible says and said, then you are the first person in a couple of millenia, and i'm sure whole hosts of Biblical Scholars will be delighted to make your aquaintance.

now let's deal with the current issue:

John 14 states that Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?"

6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."

8Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."

9Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? 10Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?..

18I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. 20On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. 21Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him."

22Then Judas (not Judas Iscariot) said, "But, Lord, why do you intend to show yourself to us and not to the world?"

23Jesus replied, "If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. 24He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.

now, this seems to indicate a 'works' approach to salvation (if taken out of context of the rest of the New Testament). how will we know who is loved by Jesus, as Jesus is in the Father? he will obey the teachings. have you loved your neighbor as yourself? forgiven those who persecute you? (all of them?). have you, once you recieved salvation, "gone and sin[ned] no more"? for If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.

Jesus says that none get to the Father except through Him; and quite right. You cannot come into the presence in a state of original sin; and you can't get rid of that without Jesus. But Jesus did not make clear the process by which this occurs, and there is much to suggest that we ourselves today have at best a dim knowledge of it. the New Testament author struggled with multiple metaphors: Jesus is the high priest, he is the sacrificial lamb, if you believe in your heart and say with your lips that He is lord and risen from the dead, if you do good works to match your faith, if you (your section above) obey Christ's teachings, if you are holy, for you call upon a Father who judges each mans' work impartially, if you merely believe, if you are one of the elect...

Abraham was justified by faith except that Abraham was justified by works. you are saved through faith, except that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

and so on and so forth. i put forth to you that rather than forgetting that God's ways and thoughts are not our own (and we could never hope to encompass them!), we should remember to remain true to Paul's admonition to continue to work out our own salvation in fear and trembling, and perhaps worry less about condemning others. Jesus required that we not condemn others, and showed mercy to those who had given him neither allegiance nor works. Paul (whom you cite) took it a step further when addressing Christians who could be expected to be familiar with this teaching (such as ourselves), stating that [y]ou, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else.


It is not given to you (or me) to determine who enters into the Presence. that is a decision for the Son, and many will say unto him when the heck did i serve you? (paraphrasing ).

no thanks, I think I'll stick with CS Lewis on this one

 

[cpwill]

So if one isn't "saved" in the manner you know how, what occurs to them?
Are they:
1) "saved"
2) "damned"
3) don't know

I'm not asking for absolute certainty. I'm asking what your personal/sects beliefs are.

it would have to be 3; ultimately i don't know. i fervently hope that God will bring them to him; for as He states, He is not willing that any should perish. But I do know that it is a matter of their choice, and there are those who would rather choose Hell. As Lewis (here i am, turning to him again) puts it, the gates of Hell are indeed locked... from the inside. i certainly think that those who choose to reject Him on earth (such as so far yourself) are in grave danger; and i would be a low example of a man indeed if i did not do whatever was in my power to pull you out of that; but i can't pretend to have the power (nor would i want it! yikes) to say definitively what you will be doing for eternity. i only know where i am going, and more critically, i only know Who i know. and He's a great guy, i really wish you would meet him.

but at the end of the day, as far as heaven/hell destinations are concerned, I only know how to be saved. as a follower of Christ and a recipient of the Great Commission, i'm not on the damnation committee, i'm on the membership committee.

 

[scourge99]

it would have to be 3; ultimately i don't know. i fervently hope that God will bring them to him; for as He states, He is not willing that any should perish.

God being all knowing and all powerful is more than capable of providing to every person exactly what they would require to believe. 2000 year old books of unverifiable testimony and extraordinary claims is hardly convincing. One would think that if God was so concerned then he would "talk" to each of us directly and unambiguously.

But I do know that it is a matter of their choice, and there are those who would rather choose Hell.

If I had a choice between not going to hell and going to hell I think most people would obviously choose NOT going. The problem isn't that there is a choice. The problem is believing that there IS a hell, in the first place. I see no reason to believe there exists a hell than to believe that there exists a Neverland. Its not about CHOOSING to believe. I can't CHOOSE to believe such things. Just like you can't CHOOSE to believe there IS a Neverland.

i only know where i am going, and more critically, i only know Who i know. and He's a great guy, i really wish you would meet him.

Many atheists including myself were once believers. Many of us used to and even now TRY to "get to know" the Gods believed by others. When people such as myself perform certain rituals or practices suggested by believers and do NOT "hear" God or "feel" God, theists become indignant, irate or downright hostile. They present all manner of excuses and accusations when we do NOT experience something similar to what they claimed to have experienced.

but at the end of the day, as far as heaven/hell destinations are concerned, I only know how to be saved. as a follower of Christ and a recipient of the Great Commission, i'm not on the damnation committee, i'm on the membership committee.

I never said anything about you judging or damning people. I asked whether you knew how people get into hell. Your answer was "I don't know, but if you don't believe you are in grave danger". Your answers are contradictory. It appears you do know.

 

[cpwill]

God being all knowing and all powerful is more than capable of providing to every person exactly what they would require to believe.

only by crushing our choice and making us no longer what and who we are.

2000 year old books of unverifiable testimony and extraordinary claims is hardly convincing. One would think that if God was so concerned then he would "talk" to each of us directly and unambiguously.

:shrug: i know that i talk directly with Him, i know that He seems to have stated that this means is open for all. frankly, i have no idea what goes into or comes out of your attempts (if any).

If I had a choice between not going to hell and going to hell I think most people would obviously choose NOT going.

were that an all-things-being-equal choice, then yes; but that's not exactly what it is, now is it? willing to surrender your will?

The problem isn't that there is a choice. The problem is believing that there IS a hell, in the first place. I see no reason to believe there exists a hell than to believe that there exists a Neverland. Its not about CHOOSING to believe. I can't CHOOSE to believe such things. Just like you can't CHOOSE to believe there IS a Neverland.

Many atheists including myself were once believers. Many of us used to and even now TRY to "get to know" the Gods believed by others. When people such as myself perform certain rituals or practices suggested by believers and do NOT "hear" God or "feel" God, theists become indignant, irate or downright hostile. They present all manner of excuses and accusations when we do NOT experience something similar to what they claimed to have experienced.

:shrug: again, i can only say i have no idea what goes into or comes out of your attempts; i can only directly attest to mine.

I never said anything about you judging or damning people. I asked whether you knew how people get into hell. Your answer was "I don't know, but if you don't believe you are in grave danger". Your answers are contradictory. It appears you do know.

i don't know; the one thing we have as a 'sure fire way' seems to be to 'blashpeme the Holy Spirit'; which i'm not sure you are even capable of doing (later texts seem to indicate that you would have had to be a saved Christian before you could do this in such a manner to ensure damnation). i would tend to suspect (believe) that if you are given access to Him and choose to reject it that God honors your choice; i have no idea as to the process. Jesus seemed quite clear that some people went to Hell. He also seemed quite clear that this wasn't God's will. It seems logical therefore to place that decision in the other will in this equation; which would be their own.

 

[SingleCellOrganism]

I have studied the Bible over and over, from what I can determine there are only two things that can permanently cost you your life:

a. Sinning against the spirit (I'm not clear on exactly what that is, other than to fight against truth when presented with it [my thoughts])

b. Sign up with the "new world order" which will likely force you to deny God in some way (comes from Revelations discussion about "those whose names are not in the book of life")

Also, there is the "1000 year reign" by Christ, on earth, for all those resurrected (everyone except a./b.)

So, as I understand it, we all get a "2nd" chance during that 1000 year reign; at the end of which is the final judgment where "Satan is let loose for a little while to deceive the nations" - which I see as a final weeding-out of those who aren't committed to righteousness/love and prefer the "old system of things" ruled by money/power/greed and ignores God's moral standard.

 

[scourge99]

God being all knowing and all powerful is more than capable of providing to every person exactly what they would require to believe.

only by crushing our choice and making us no longer what and who we are.

So god doesn't "crush your choice" by clearly and unambiguously talking to you?

How is it you are making a "choice" if his existence is so undeniable?

2000 year old books of unverifiable testimony and extraordinary claims is hardly convincing. One would think that if God was so concerned then he would "talk" to each of us directly and unambiguously.

?i know that i talk directly with Him, i know that He seems to have stated that this means is open for all. frankly, i have no idea what goes into or comes out of your attempts (if any).

As expected, you appear unable or unwilling to accept that others have made honest attempts without success to "contact" your favored deity. The coping mechanism for believers appears to be to blame the non-believer or to deny their attempts as genuine.

If I had a choice between not going to hell and going to hell I think most people would obviously choose NOT going.

were that an all-things-being-equal choice, then yes; but that's not exactly what it is, now is it?

we are talking about your god beliefs. You tell me.

willing to surrender your will?

That depends on the god. Even if I were to believe in the existence of particular gods, it does not mean I would be willing or desire to worship them.

E.G., a god that demanded child sacrifice.

The problem isn't that there is a choice. The problem is believing that there IS a hell, in the first place. I see no reason to believe there exists a hell than to believe that there exists a Neverland. Its not about CHOOSING to believe. I can't CHOOSE to believe such things. Just like you can't CHOOSE to believe there IS a Neverland.

you didn't give a response to this.

Many atheists including myself were once believers. Many of us used to and even now TRY to "get to know" the Gods believed by others. When people such as myself perform certain rituals or practices suggested by believers and do NOT "hear" God or "feel" God, theists become indignant, irate or downright hostile. They present all manner of excuses and accusations when we do NOT experience something similar to what they claimed to have experienced.

?again, i can only say i have no idea what goes into or comes out of your attempts; i can only directly attest to mine.

This is a perfect example of the excuses and (veiled) accusations I mentioned.

I never said anything about you judging or damning people. I asked whether you knew how people get into hell. Your answer was "I don't know, but if you don't believe you are in grave danger". Your answers are contradictory. It appears you do know.

i don't know; the one thing we have as a 'sure fire way' seems to be to 'blashpeme the Holy Spirit'; which i'm not sure you are even capable of doing (later texts seem to indicate that you would have had to be a saved Christian before you could do this in such a manner to ensure damnation). i would tend to suspect (believe) that if you are given access to Him and choose to reject it that God honors your choice; i have no idea as to the process. Jesus seemed quite clear that some people went to Hell.

what is your beliefs/understanding of hell?

Is it a burning pit of fire and suffering? Or, mere "seperation" from god? Something else?

He also seemed quite clear that this wasn't God's will.

It appears God is incompetent or malevolent then (if we assume he exists). He is either unwilling or unable.

It seems logical therefore to place that decision in the other will in this equation; which would be their own.

How is it logical that others should go to hell when even you, a person who claims to regularly converse with your god, does not know HOW one gets into hell?

I think its absolutely absurd that anyone chooses to go to hell when the requirements to get to hell are unknown, even to gods "chosen" people.

 

[FluffyNinja]

First off, that isn't God's Holy Word, that's the words of God, written by a man who remembered them, who was himself guided by the Holy Spirit. the Bible was not dictated verbatim from Heaven.

Then, sadly, my friend, I feel that we have reached an impasse. You state later on in your reply that we should not attempt to rely on our own understanding; I certainly agree. And I believe that God's Word is not "open to interpretation". I must also disagree with you regarding the statement that the Bible was not dictated verbatim. You have definitive proof that God did not reveal himself and his will directly to the authors? On the contrary, there are many cases where God did reveal his will DIRECTLY to his people, Jesus, David, Solomon, Moses and Job to name a few. If you truly feel that God's Words are no longer to be found in the scripture and have been contorted by human transcription, then I have trouble understanding how they still have power for you. It seems that it is you who seems to be leaning on human understanding rather than on Faith that God HAS and WILL reveal his intent through his Holy Word.

and so on and so forth. i put forth to you that rather than forgetting that God's ways and thoughts are not our own (and we could never hope to encompass them!), we should remember to remain true to Paul's admonition to continue to work out our own salvation in fear and trembling, and perhaps worry less about condemning others. Jesus required that we not condemn others, and showed mercy to those who had given him neither allegiance nor works. Paul (whom you cite) took it a step further when addressing Christians who could be expected to be familiar with this teaching (such as ourselves), stating that [y]ou, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else.

Well, I must disagree with you yet again. Paul, in his letters to the Church of Corinth as well as Peter in his First Epistle, tell us to be prepared to defend our faith (paraphrasing, of course) and to be able to defend to others the glory that is in us. In essence, we are called to be both witnesses and apologists for our beliefs. As disciples we were also charged with going forth to spread the message.

It is not given to you (or me) to determine who enters into the Presence. that is a decision for the Son, and many will say unto him when the heck did i serve you? (paraphrasing ).

With this I agree, but as Christians we MUST believe that this whole thing is a zero-sum gain, no gray area. We either KNOW that this is the way to salvation or we doubt it. With how much true conviction may we speak as Christians if we doubt the message ourselves?

 

[cpwill]

So god doesn't "crush your choice" by clearly and unambiguously talking to you?

How is it you are making a "choice" if his existence is so undeniable?

well i guess you just answered your own question; were God to force awareness of His existance upon you, He would be pretty thoroughly destroying your ability to choose to love and follow Him, now wouldn't he?

As expected, you appear unable or unwilling to accept that others have made honest attempts without success to "contact" your favored deity. The coping mechanism for believers appears to be to blame the non-believer or to deny their attempts as genuine... This is a perfect example of the excuses and (veiled) accusations I mentioned.

i paired these together because they speak to the same concept; if I, as a follower of Christ, truly believe Him when He states "behold I stand at the door and knock"; then how to answer those who claim they have thrown open the door only to find no one there? obviously one answer (and the easiest) is simply to state that the individual praying "must have been doing it wrong"; that they must not really have been trying, so on and so forth.

Personally, I think that's irresponsible. It seeks to avoid a problem rather than discuss it, and that desire to avoid (sadly) speaks to a lack of confidence on the part of the believer that he (or she) will be able to "give reason for the hope that is in them". I know for a fact that I wasn't 'givng it my 100%' when first i met God on a personal level; quite the opposite. Paul, who wrote more books than any other author in the Bible, was actively seeking to persecute Christians when he met Christ on the road; so the individuals' state of being seems to not be the only critical matter in the question of whether or not one will 'experience' the presence of God. I confes I have no idea what the determining factor (if there is one) is; the Calvinist would tell you it is predetermined whom shall be saved and who shall not, and thus any prayers on the part of those doomed to be damned are pointless; but frankly ithat doesn't match the Jesus I find in the Gospels nor the one I interact with in RL.

and that's why i don't have a definitive answer for you. I know what has happened in my life, but i can't answer for yours. i know what has gone into and come out of my spiritual life, i can't describe yours (if any). :shrug: this is an infinite being we are talking about here, whose ways are not our ways and thoughts are not our thoughts; i can't pretend to understand all the specifics of how and why He does and does not interact with us.

we are talking about your god beliefs. You tell me.... That depends on the god. Even if I were to believe in the existence of particular gods, it does not mean I would be willing or desire to worship them.

i linked these two together as well, as they were also addressing the same item. perhaps this is a dividing factor? those who are willing to submit their will v those who are not? and incedentally there are not 'particular gods', there is and can be only one Infinite Being (by it's nature). just as multiple competing models of the solar system didn't mean that there were multiple competing solar systems, the question isn't "which god is correct", but rather "which is the best depiction of God".

you didn't give a response to this.

:shrug: i guess i didn't see how one was necessary. i believe in the existance of heaven and hell; this belief flows from my interactions with the Divine. you have no such interactions (that i am aware of), you do not therfore believe in the existance of heaven and hell. you consider the entire thing a fairy tale, i consider that as ridiculous as if i were to convince you that you yourself were, in fact, a fictional character.

what is your beliefs/understanding of hell?

Is it a burning pit of fire and suffering? Or, mere "seperation" from god? Something else?

'damn' good question (rimshot! ) the specifics of hell? it's an experience beyond my ability to describe. those who have sought to describe the experience do describe a constant torment, and use language of burning, corruption, pestilence, and evil to do so; is it an actual sulphuric lake of fire? Dante famously described multiple layers based off a system of 'justice' wherein those who had lived more virtuous lives suffered less; i'm not so sure i buy that, it seems to be a pretty binary question. CS Lewis has an excellent depiction of the choice between the two in The Great Divorce; but disavows at the begining any awareness of the actual conditions in reality; and again, I'll stick with him. I've never been there, and so all I can really tell you is what the Bible itself states.

It appears God is incompetent or malevolent then (if we assume he exists). He is either unwilling or unable.

hmm. i could, if i chose to, have sex with the pretty girl who works in the office next to mine if i were simply willing to assault and rape her. I am stronger than her, and trained in how to restrain / force submission from struggling individuals.

am i therefore, incompetent because i do not do so? or am i merely demonstrating a higher value when i choose instead to woo, to convince her to choose to sleep with me?

God is not willing that any should refuse Him and turn away; but neither is He willing to destroy us in order to see this result.

How is it logical that others should go to hell when even you, a person who claims to regularly converse with your god, does not know HOW one gets into hell?

we know that some do go to Hell. we know that two wills are involved in this action, and that the preference of the first is that no one goes. it is therefore logical to place the decision on the part of the second.

I think its absolutely absurd that anyone chooses to go to hell when the requirements to get to hell are unknown, even to gods "chosen" people.

i think it's entertaining that you on the one hand deny my ability to know anything about your spiritual life, and on the other insist that because i pray i must know all about it .

 

[joe six-pack]

were God to force awareness of His existence upon you, He would be pretty thoroughly destroying your ability to choose to love and follow Him, now wouldn't he?

Not at all. Just because something is proven, doesn't mean people have to love it. Right? Jesus, who's real name was Yeshua, proved his existence and power to people by preforming miracles--a la Moses--and asked people to believe he was the Son of God.

Yet people, even people who witnessed it, didn't "have" to love and believe in him.

Duh.

we know that some do go to Hell. we know that two wills are involved in this action, and that the preference of the first is that no one goes. it is therefore logical to place the decision on the part of the second.

According to Hebrew beliefs, hell is a place just about everyone goes. It's a temporary place where the soul is made aware of all the worldly transgressions of the flesh in the life before.

Nothing in the NT actually contradicts this Hebrew belief system about Hell (Remember that Jesus/Joshua as Jewish). It's actually contrived Catholic Church doctrine which created the vague system of belief about Heave, Hell or Purgatory, that modern Christians belief in today. So don't be so sure you know who will or will not go to "Hell," as you put it.

 

[scourge99]

i paired these together because they speak to the same concept;

Feel free. Replies get too long if we go line by line... something I am guilty of far to often.

So god doesn't "crush your choice" by clearly and unambiguously talking to you?

How is it you are making a "choice" if his existence is so undeniable?

well i guess you just answered your own question; were God to force awareness of His existance upon you, He would be pretty thoroughly destroying your ability to choose to love and follow Him, now wouldn't he?

How does that answer my question? I asked YOU. You responded with a question when I asked a question about your personal beliefs.

1) So god doesn't "crush your choice" by clearly and unambiguously talking to you?

2) How is it you are making a "choice" if his existence is so undeniable?

if I, as a follower of Christ, truly believe Him when He states "behold I stand at the door and knock"; then how to answer those who claim they have thrown open the door only to find no one there? obviously one answer (and the easiest) is simply to state that the individual praying "must have been doing it wrong"; that they must not really have been trying, so on and so forth.

Readers will notice that when non-believers are unsuccessful in "contacting" a believer's favored deity, the believer is unable or unwilling to accept that others efforts were honest and genuine. Excuses and (veiled) accusations often occur to "explain away" or put a positive "spin" on the failure.

I know for a fact that I wasn't 'givng it my 100%' when first i met God on a personal level; quite the opposite.

Another example of an excuse offered by believers.

Believers often project their personal experiences onto others, such as this. Lets not presume merely because you weren't "giving it your best" that others have not.

Another, Paul, who wrote more books than any other author in the Bible, was actively seeking to persecute Christians when he met Christ on the road; so the individuals' state of being seems to not be the only critical matter in the question of whether or not one will 'experience' the presence of God. I confes I have no idea what the determining factor (if there is one) is; the Calvinist would tell you it is predetermined whom shall be saved and who shall not, and thus any prayers on the part of those doomed to be damned are pointless; but frankly ithat doesn't match the Jesus I find in the Gospels nor the one I interact with in RL.

and that's why i don't have a definitive answer for you. I know what has happened in my life, but i can't answer for yours. i know what has gone into and come out of my spiritual life, i can't describe yours (if any). :shrug: this is an infinite being we are talking about here, whose ways are not our ways and thoughts are not our thoughts; i can't pretend to understand all the specifics of how and why He does and does not interact with us.

If a non-believer prays to god and he is not contacted by God then:
1) he is not making an honest effort
OR
2) he is doing it wrong
OR
3) I don't know. God works in mysterious ways.

Thank you for demonstrating the typical "believer" mentality. Readers will notice that this is an unfalsifiable test for "prayer".

Even if I were to believe in the existence of particular gods, it does not mean I would be willing or desire to worship them.

perhaps this is a dividing factor? those who are willing to submit their will v those who are not?

I most definitely would not submit to a god I find unjust or otherwise unworthy of worship. Others can decide for themselves.

and incedentally there are not 'particular gods', there is and can be only one Infinite Being (by it's nature).

Infinity is a concept, not a physical thing. There is no known actual infinity.

And theoretically, you are wrong, multiple infinities can exist.

The nature of infinity is NON-INTUITIVE.

the question isn't "which god is correct", but rather "which is the best depiction of God".

None. There are only the unverifiable, unsupportable god's proposed by man.

There very well may be a God but believers canNOT demonstrate, explain, or show how their beliefs are correct. Gods only exist as a concept within a believer's head.

i believe in the existance of heaven and hell; this belief flows from my interactions with the Divine. you have no such interactions (that i am aware of), you do not therfore believe in the existance of heaven and hell. you consider the entire thing a fairy tale, i consider that as ridiculous as if i were to convince you that you yourself were, in fact, a fictional character.

I most certainly do NOT believe heaven and hell are a "fairy tale". I believe heaven and hell are places fervently believed by the religious to actually exist in this reality or some "ultimate reality". I, however, reject their claims and disbelieve because such claims are unsupported and indistinguishable from many of the gods proposed by men and other unverifiable and unsupported extravagant claims.

If you believe such things do exist then I CHALLENGE you to support it with verifiable evidence. To explain how you KNOW (have KNOWLEDGE of such things or places) as opposed to merely having ideas or concepts in your head. I am unwilling to accept opinion, conjecture, or holy-book tales as "evidence".

what is your beliefs/understanding of hell?

Is it a burning pit of fire and suffering? Or, mere "seperation" from god? Something else?

'damn' good question (rimshot! ) the specifics of hell? it's an experience beyond my ability to describe. those who have sought to describe the experience do describe a constant torment, and use language of burning, corruption, pestilence, and evil to do so; is it an actual sulphuric lake of fire? Dante famously described multiple layers based off a system of 'justice' wherein those who had lived more virtuous lives suffered less; i'm not so sure i buy that, it seems to be a pretty binary question. CS Lewis has an excellent depiction of the choice between the two in The Great Divorce; but disavows at the begining any awareness of the actual conditions in reality; and again, I'll stick with him. I've never been there, and so all I can really tell you is what the Bible itself states.

what is your beliefs/understanding of hell according to what the bible states?

Is it a burning pit of fire and suffering? Or, mere "separation" from god? Something else?

He also seemed quite clear that this wasn't God's will [for people to go to hell]

It appears God is incompetent or malevolent then (if we assume he exists). He is either unwilling or unable to prevent people from going to hell.

hmm. i could, if i chose to, have sex with the pretty girl who works in the office next to mine if i were simply willing to assault and rape her. I am stronger than her, and trained in how to restrain / force submission from struggling individuals.

am i therefore, incompetent because i do not do so? or am i merely demonstrating a higher value when i choose instead to woo, to convince her to choose to sleep with me?[/quote] I fail to see how this analogy answers the question.

I kindly ask that you respond clearly and directly rather than presenting cryptic or crude analogies when replying:
It appears God is incompetent or malevolent then (if we assume he exists). He is either unwilling or unable to prevent people from going to hell.

God is not willing that any should refuse Him and turn away; but neither is He willing to destroy us in order to see this result.

If god is omniscient then how did he not foresee that people would reject him and why did he not provide the necessary evidence or reason for them to believe?


It appears God is incompetent or malevolent.

we know that some do go to Hell. we know that two wills are involved in this action, and that the preference of the first is that no one goes. it is therefore logical to place the decision on the part of the second.

If god is omnipotent and omniscient then the blame rests fully on his shoulders (assuming he even exists).

If god is omniscient and omnipotent then he knows exactly what it would require for each person to believe and is capable of providing that. Thus, if people go to hell god is either:
1) unable to provide what it would require for each person to believe.
2) unwilling provide what it would require for each person to believe despite the fact
----(a) he knows exactly what it would require for them to believe
----(b) he knows they will go to hell if not provided such things
3) unable to know what it would take for each person to believe.

i think it's entertaining that you on the one hand deny my ability to know anything about your spiritual life, and on the other insist that because i pray i must know all about it .

This is known as "being in another's shoes". Sometimes I am accepting your beliefs and criticizing them from "inside your shoes". Other times, I am criticizing your beliefs from "outside your shoes" as a non-believer.

I thought it was obvious when each was occurring. Perhaps I need to make it more explicit?

 

[Catz Part Deux]

Maybe Jesus has already returned, when people follow in his footsteps.

I tend to believe that heaven and hell aren't places, but conditions that we create.

 

[First Thought]

Maybe Jesus has already returned, when people follow in his footsteps.

I tend to believe that heaven and hell aren't places, but conditions that we create.

Absolutely. Heaven and Hell are states of mind that we create with our own actions. The Law of Karma states the same Truth.

 

[hallam]

Maybe Jesus has already returned, when people follow in his footsteps.

I tend to believe that heaven and hell aren't places, but conditions that we create.

I don't think so. Jesus returning would spark some type of movement towards a type of enlightment.

 

[Catz Part Deux]

I don't think so. Jesus returning would spark some type of movement towards a type of enlightment.

Enlightenment is already among us.

 

[SingleCellOrganism]

Anecdotally I find people are less intelligent the farther they get from philosophical/religious belief and study. (not blind faith, which is worse)

Kids don't care about thinking, they care about Halo, and the new generation of parents have nothing to teach their kids about core morality and standards. Sure, an atheist parent can do that, but most don't (in my circle).

In my opinion Atheism inevitably leads to hedonism and the fall of the society in question. The problem isn't "lack of belief in God", the problem is lack of defined morality where nobody can say "that is wrong" or "that is good".

Christianity teaches you about core morality (queue the inevitable posting of crazy OT scriptures), even things people would disagree with like sleeping with women before marriage have dramatic negative effects on society. (please ask why, I will explain)