Came across this in the "Salvation: A Gift To You by The Grace of God" thread...

God also knows in advance who will accept the gift and who will reject it. The ones who accept it are among the chosen, adopted into the ultimate Royal Family.

Well, not everyone is chosen to understand this stuff fully, either. Putting water in the trough doesn't make all the horses thirsty.

So it isn't our choice? I've been reading up on the Christian concept of "free-will" in the Bible and I'm curious; where do you see this concept in the Bible?

I have my own thoughts on what the Bible says...but I want to hear what people think first.

And in the interest of full disclosure (for those that may not know) I am an agnostic (for lack of a better word and the sake of simplicity).

Came across this in the "Salvation: A Gift To You by The Grace of God" thread...

So it isn't our choice? I've been reading up on the Christian concept of "free-will" in the Bible and I'm curious; where do you see this concept in the Bible?

I have my own thoughts on what the Bible says...but I want to hear what people think first.

And in the interest of full disclosure (for those that may not know) I am an agnostic (for lack of a better word and the sake of simplicity).

It is completely your choice. God is omnipresent. Omniscient. He transcends time. He knows all things, past, present, and future. He is time. He is, was, and will be.

Therefore, He knows your choice before you even existed, but that does not alter your decision. You don't know what He knows.

You decide. Only you. Your consequences, and only yours.

Your choice.

It is completely your choice. God is omnipresent. Omniscient. He transcends time. He knows all things, past, present, and future. He is time. He is, was, and will be.

Therefore, He knows your choice before you even existed, but that does not alter your decision. You don't know what He knows.

You decide. Only you. Your consequences, and only yours.

Your choice.

This is what I was taught (and believed) also. The problem I see is that the Bible says we are predestined, God chooses who will have salvation, who will choose him...

"According as [Christ] hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will...."

This is what I was taught (and believed) also. The problem I see is that the Bible says we are predestined, God chooses who will have salvation, who will choose him...



Same thing as I stated previously.

God does not determine who is saved or not. We do. I do. You do.

He knows our personal choice in advance. But that does not mean He determines our choice.

I do. You do. Our responsibility. Not His.

Individual, each of us. Our choice.

I have my own thoughts on what the Bible says...but I want to hear what people think first.

And in the interest of full disclosure (for those that may not know) I am an agnostic (for lack of a better word and the sake of simplicity).

Thanks UNA, good topic. If people do not have free-will, then it seems pointless for God to ask people to make a choice to begin with. Rather, it seems that God does lay out His Plan and allows each individual the opportunity to decide what to choose / what to accept:




(1) God called upon the Jewish people to make a choice:


I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: (Deuteronomy 30:19)



(2) Christ offers Forgiveness of sin and provides Salvation through His Atoning Blood for those who believe Him and accept Him:


He came into the very world he created, but the world didn’t recognize him. He came to his own people, and even they rejected him. But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. They are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God.
(John 1:10-13)



I believe when Paul refers to being "predestinated" he is referring to his role and the role of the other Apostles having been pre-ordained/chosen/predestined to be among the key players that would be given the task of spreading the Gospel Message of Christ to the world, i.e., The Great Commission.

The rest of the world was/is given the choice to hear the Gospel Message of Jesus Christ preached and decide whether they loved the world more than God or whether they loved God more than the world.

There is only one decision that even "fence-sitters" will have to eventually make.

Here Is The Will Of God:

The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)

It's Your Choice.

The other side of the coin is:

Total depravity - Theopedia, an encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity (http://www.theopedia.com/Total_depravity)

Total inability

In John 6 Jesus said that, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him... This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father."

Apart from Christ, man is foolish, dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1-3), enslaved to sin (Romans 6:17), and following the spirit of the power of the air (Ephesians 2:2).

"A natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised" (1 Corinthians 2:14).

His wisdom is demonic and earthly (James 3:15).

He cannot hear the word of Christ and God (John 8:43, 47).

He is not able to subject his flesh to the law of God (Romans 8:7-8).

Just as people cannot change the color of their skin, those who are accustomed to doing evil cannot do good (Jeremiah 13:23).

Every intention of the thoughts of man's heart are only evil continually (Genesis 6:5). The intention of man's heart is evil from his youth (Genesis 8:21).

Surely we were brought forth in iniquity, and in sin were we conceived (Psalms 51:5)!

Contrary to the doctrine of universal prevenient grace, all of these passages show that, apart from being in Christ, our total depravity is actual and not hypothetical.


But ultimately it's an "in-house" discussion within Christianity. What matters is that people get saved through the gospel. Why and how are an internal debate.

You guys are beating all around the bush. UNA simply needs a better understanding of how predestination does NOT affect our free will.

The 2 best ones are in Matthew 23v37 & Revelation 3v20.

37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing".

20 "Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me".

Being "Predestined" in no way stops us from doing what we want to do. We act according to OUR choice to follow God.

A discussion on Predestination and posters are not mentioning Calvin OR Arminius.

I KNOW...that churches have written into their constituions which side of the doctrinal question they are on.

Methodists, Assembly of God (All Pentecostals), and Nazarenes...firmly reject Calvin...

Baptist (Most), Presbyterian, Lutheran, Reformed (most), & Fundamantalist reject Arminius....

I suspect that a stronger BIBLICAL case can be made for Calvin (but my Pentecostal wife would definately disagree!:buttkick:)

So...YES,...this is an "In House" discussion.
I have also heard years ago of an attempted reinterpretation of the issue called "Regency"...but,...I do not recall the fundamental approach.

Believers have a VERY hard time sorting out the "Who-soever-will"...vs..."For those He foreknew, he also predestined."

Carry on....

You guys are beating all around the bush. UNA simply needs a better understanding of how predestination does NOT affect our free will.

The 2 best ones are in Matthew 23v37 & Revelation 3v20.

37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing".
I don't know one Calvinist who believes man is not held responsible for his sins. Do you?


20 "Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me".

Being "Predestined" in no way stops us from doing what we want to do. We act according to OUR choice to follow God.Who can choose without God's enabling though?

Who can come to Father without Him drawing them?

Not me. Not you.

It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?
Romans 9:16-24

Why does God give any of us sinners mercy? We certainly don't deserve it. None of us do.

Yet He gives.

God is a free moral agent. He owes us nothing, not even free-will, as if there is even such a thing from the perspective of an omnipresent God for whom time doesn't actually flow, but rather is eternally visible. Think about it.

Yet still He gives mercy.

Why?

Because we are sinners and incapable. "No one seeks God, not one."

Same thing as I stated previously.

God does not determine who is saved or not. We do. I do. You do.

He knows our personal choice in advance. But that does not mean He determines our choice.

I do. You do. Our responsibility. Not His.

Individual, each of us. Our choice.

Then how does the free will believing Christian interpret this? I just don't understand how this verse (and verses like it) can be reconciled with a belief in free will...

"According as [Christ] hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will...."

Then how does the free will believing Christian interpret this? I just don't understand how this verse (and verses like it) can be reconciled with a belief in free will...



The question that I always think of is regarding Judas Iscariot.

What do those who champion free-will think? Did Judas have a CHOICE?

What about Pilate or Herod? Better yet, what about Jesus himself as he wrestled with anxiety in Gethsemane? Could he have CHOSEN contrary to the Father's predestined plan?

Or was God's plan for Jesus to be betrayed and crucified unstoppable and determined?

Peter (and the Holy Spirit) has some thoughts on it. The Scripture says:

For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.
Acts 4:27-28

Was it ever possible for them to CHOOSE for Christ instead of against him?

Thanks UNA, good topic. If people do not have free-will, then it seems pointless for God to ask people to make a choice to begin with. Rather, it seems that God does lay out His Plan and allows each individual the opportunity to decide what to choose / what to accept:

(1) God called upon the Jewish people to make a choice:

(2) Christ offers Forgiveness of sin and provides Salvation through His Atoning Blood for those who believe Him and accept Him:

I believe when Paul refers to being "predestinated" he is referring to his role and the role of the other Apostles having been pre-ordained/chosen/predestined to be among the key players that would be given the task of spreading the Gospel Message of Christ to the world, i.e., The Great Commission.

The rest of the world was/is given the choice to hear the Gospel Message of Jesus Christ preached and decide whether they loved the world more than God or whether they loved God more than the world.

There is only one decision that even "fence-sitters" will have to eventually make.

Here Is The Will Of God:


It's Your Choice.

As I understand it, if I choose wrong (if I don't believe) I'll suffer in Hell (eternity? another thread LOL)

Isn't that like saying "you can choose whatever you want but if I don't like the decision I've allowed you to make, I'm going to torture you forever" ...how fair is that?! :lol:

So, the verse I referenced is referring to the Apostles? I can see where your interpretation comes from (when the preceding verses are taken into account) But even if it isn't us being 'predestined', isn't it a little unnerving that they were? Their free will was compromised...who's to say He doesn't do it all the time? How would we know?

Slightly off my own topic but...

Doesn't seem to me that God would have had to predetermine the Apostles actions anyways. If Jesus really did preform the miracles attributed to Him in the Bible, and I saw this you better believe I'd bow down! It doesn't take much faith to believe what you can SEE. God expects a lot more from us.

You guys are beating all around the bush. UNA simply needs a better understanding of how predestination does NOT affect our free will.

The 2 best ones are in Matthew 23v37 & Revelation 3v20.

37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing".

20 "Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me".

Being "Predestined" in no way stops us from doing what we want to do. We act according to OUR choice to follow God.

To 'predestine' is to settle beforehand (Webster's). Free will is our freedom to make choices that are not chosen by divine intervention (also Webster's). Do you define these words in another way? Are these not the accepted definitions?

Or was God's plan for Jesus to be betrayed and crucified unstoppable and determined?I think that is pretty easily addressed by one of the Bible's most often quoted lines, John 3:16. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." He gave Jesus [for sacrifice]. Doesn't seem like much of a choice to me.

Isn't that like saying "you can choose whatever you want but if I don't like the decision I've allowed you to make, I'm going to torture you forever" ...how fair is that?!I ask that all the time. :lol: "I'm giving you a brain and the freedom to do anything you want... but if you don't walk this tightrope of rules you don't have a chance of seeing heaven. And even if you do you may not see heaven."


If Jesus really did preform the miracles attributed to Him in the Bible, and I saw this you better believe I'd bow down! It doesn't take much faith to believe what you can SEE.I say that too. :lol:

The question that I always think of is regarding Judas Iscariot.

What do those who champion free-will think? Did Judas have a CHOICE?

What about Pilate or Herod? Better yet, what about Jesus himself as he wrestled with anxiety in Gethsemane? Could he have CHOSEN contrary to the Father's predestined plan?

Or was God's plan for Jesus to be betrayed and crucified unstoppable and determined?

Peter (and the Holy Spirit) has some thoughts on it. The Scripture says:

For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.
Acts 4:27-28

Was it ever possible for them to CHOOSE for Christ instead of against him?

From what I know of the story (and the prophecies that preceded it) and the verse you referenced the answer would seem to be NO. If this is the case, then we don't have free will. Even if we usually have it, if God can take it away at anytime, even against our will...is it really free will?

Further, if Judas et al. was predestined to 'betray' Jesus, can he really be held responsible? Even further, if God made a man insane and this man murdered another, can he really be held responsible (by God...of course he can by us...public safety)? Does God condemn people for being as He made them or for doing what He predestined?

Food for thought

I ask that all the time. :lol: "I'm giving you a brain and the freedom to do anything you want... but if you don't walk this tightrope of rules you don't have a chance of seeing heaven. And even if you do you may not see heaven."


I say that too. :lol:

Well I suppose neither of us will be seeing it at this point :lol:

We are not alone :smile:

As I understand it, if I choose wrong (if I don't believe) I'll suffer in Hell (eternity? another thread LOL)

Isn't that like saying "you can choose whatever you want but if I don't like the decision I've allowed you to make, I'm going to torture you forever" ...how fair is that?! :lol:

So, the verse I referenced is referring to the Apostles? I can see where your interpretation comes from (when the preceding verses are taken into account) But even if it isn't us being 'predestined', isn't it a little unnerving that they were? Their free will was compromised...who's to say He doesn't do it all the time? How would we know?

Slightly off my own topic but...

Doesn't seem to me that God would have had to predetermine the Apostles actions anyways. If Jesus really did preform the miracles attributed to Him in the Bible, and I saw this you better believe I'd bow down! It doesn't take much faith to believe what you can SEE. God expects a lot more from us.

I ask that all the time. :lol: "I'm giving you a brain and the freedom to do anything you want... but if you don't walk this tightrope of rules you don't have a chance of seeing heaven. And even if you do you may not see heaven."


I say that too. :lol:
No rules can get you there. Just grace of a loving God toward sinners whom He chooses to give it to.

John 3:17
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

No rules can get you there. Just grace of a loving God toward sinners whom He chooses to give it to.

John 3:17
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

So may He choose me? Or am I condemned already? :lol:

Does God condemn people for being as He made them or for doing what He predestined?

Food for thoughtRomans 8 & 9 give the answer to this question.

John 3:17
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.That's a rule! :lol:

I don't know one Calvinist who believes man is not held responsible for his sins. Do you?
Who can choose without God's enabling though?
Who can come to Father without Him drawing them?
Not me. Not you.
Actually it was MY choice to say yes to His call but I did say no 3 different times when He first called me. God called Moses & Jonah but they said no, at first, remember?

So again, again: I didn't say anything about Calvinists. If God did all the choosing, then NONE OF US are guilty of sin, people will be forced into Heaven against their will and their love isn't real love. What person on earth, that hates God, wants to be with him forever against their will?

God "foreknew" those of us who would say yes to His call and those are the ones He calls (draws) and justifies and predestines and will glorify one day soon.


It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? Romans 9:16-24
CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT! Stop pulling verses out and trying to make them stand on their own.

God is a free moral agent. He owes us nothing, not even free-will, as if there is even such a thing from the perspective of an omnipresent God for whom time doesn't actually flow, but rather is eternally visible. Think about it.
Yet still He gives mercy. Why? Because we are sinners and incapable. "No one seeks God, not one."
If no one has any choice in the matter of salvation, then no one is guilty of sin. Will everyone be forgiven? You and JPC are in agreement here.
To 'predestine' is to settle beforehand (Webster's). Free will is our freedom to make choices that are not chosen by divine intervention (also Webster's). Do you define these words in another way? Are these not the accepted definitions?
What part of "we're still free to do what we want" did you miss?? Do you and your hubby have an open marriage? Why don't you both date or sleep with other people? Because of your committment to each other. Did you both lose your free will? Not really but you no longer do those "single people things" because you both CHOSE not to. See?

When I decided to become a Christian in 1989, I made a choice to follow Gods rules and, therefore, my behavior had to change drastically. He knew, before time began, that I would decide to follow Him and so He predestined my life. "Predestined" means that God made sure that nothing would happen to me that would interfere with my becoming a Christian in 1989.

I've done a lot of things that God didn't agree with but He didn't stop me. If He did, I wouldn't have free will. The reason I don't do them now is because I'm faithful to the vow I made to Jesus Christ. He doesn't want me to do those sinful things against my own body any longer and, because I CHOSE to do what He wants, I must honor my vow to Him.
I think that is pretty easily addressed by one of the Bible's most often quoted lines, John 3:16. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." He gave Jesus [for sacrifice]. Doesn't seem like much of a choice to me.
Actually it seems like a very clear choice to me. Can't you see it in that verse? How could you miss it? Or is what I've said before, really true?

John said (paraphrased): God gave Jesus to the world as the forgiveness for their sins and WHOEVER believes in Him shall not be sent to Hell... See the part where he says: "whoever believes"? Not everyone will believe in Him and there's the choice.

What person on earth, that hates God, wants to be with him forever against their will?

God "foreknew" those of us who would say yes to His call and those are the ones He calls (draws) and justifies and predestines and will glorify one day soon.Therefore, since we know most of us will end up in hell, you must believe that most people would reject Jesus even if they could witness his miracles first hand, right? You believe most people "hate" god?


John said (paraphrased): God gave Jesus to the world as the forgiveness for their sins and WHOEVER believes in Him shall not be sent to Hell... See the part where he says: "whoever believes"? Not everyone will believe in Him and there's the choice.Zguy's question ("Or was God's plan for Jesus to be betrayed and crucified unstoppable and determined?") was not about us, but about Jesus. Did he have a choice? If he was 'given' to us to be sacrificed, that was his mission, where was his choice? (This is going somewhat off topic because it touches on the legitimacy of the crucifixion, but it is something I have wondered about often.)

Therefore, since we know most of us will end up in hell, you must believe that most people would reject Jesus even if they could witness his miracles first hand, right? You believe most people "hate" god?
Yes, most people will reject Him. Many of those who saw Him and His miracles DID reject Him. Can you imagine denying Him even after seeing Him walking on water, exorcising demons from people and raising people from the dead? :faint:

Maybe hate is too strong a word but their denial of who He is isn't love...

Zguy's question ("Or was God's plan for Jesus to be betrayed and crucified unstoppable and determined?") was not about us, but about Jesus. Did he have a choice? If he was 'given' to us to be sacrificed, that was his mission, where was his choice? (This is going somewhat off topic because it touches on the legitimacy of the crucifixion, but it is something I have wondered about often.)
Actually you're not off topic, IMO. Jesus DID have a choice and His choice was to die for us:

14 “I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me. Just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again". (John 10)

So may He choose me? Or am I condemned already? :lol:He might have, but has not moved you yet to believe.

That's a rule! :lol:No, its not. Condemnation is the default human condition.

Believing on Jesus Christ is throwing yourself at His mercy. How you equate that with following a code of rules is...

Actually it was MY choice to say yes to His call but I did say no 3 different times when He first called me. God called Moses & Jonah but they said no, at first, remember? But what was your ultimate decision? And Moses and Jonah?

So again, again: I didn't say anything about Calvinists. If God did all the choosing, then NONE OF US are guilty of sin, people will be forced into Heaven against their will and their love isn't real love. What person on earth, that hates God, wants to be with him forever against their will?You have a fundamental misunderstanding of predestination.

God "foreknew" those of us who would say yes to His call and those are the ones He calls (draws) and justifies and predestines and will glorify one day soon.I don't think you know what the role of "foreknowledge" is in Election.

Maybe Starman's favorite site can help?

How are predestination and election connected with foreknowledge? (http://www.gotquestions.org/predestination-foreknowledge.html)

Question: "How are predestination and election connected with foreknowledge?"

Answer: Certainly, since God knows everything, it would have been possible for God to base His predestination and election of individuals upon His foreknowledge of the future. In fact, that is the exact position that many Christians believe, as it is the Arminian view of predestination. The problem is that it really is not what the Bible teaches about predestination, election, and foreknowledge. In order to understand why the view that “God made His choice based on merely knowing the future” is not what the Bible teaches, let’s first consider a couple of verses that speak to the reason God elected or predestined people to salvation.

See the link for the rest.


CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT! Stop pulling verses out and trying to make them stand on their own.Oh, you mean like you do constantly? I'm thinking of a blatant MIS-USE of Revelation 3:20 here.

Also, please stop screaming like a little child in ALL CAPS. Were you stomping your foot when you wrote that? LOL. You are not the Alpha-Male here IS.

Seriously though...

I posted almost an entire chapter. If that does not give context, what does?

If no one has any choice in the matter of salvation, then no one is guilty of sin. Will everyone be forgiven? You and JPC are in agreement here.No, I'm not in agreement with JPC. God only "enables" certain people. You are one, so am I.


John said (paraphrased): God gave Jesus to the world as the forgiveness for their sins and WHOEVER believes in Him shall not be sent to Hell... See the part where he says: "whoever believes"? Not everyone will believe in Him and there's the choice.Would you agree with this statement?

"Whoever believes was predestined"

Came across this in the "Salvation: A Gift To You by The Grace of God" thread...

So it isn't our choice? I've been reading up on the Christian concept of "free-will" in the Bible and I'm curious; where do you see this concept in the Bible?

I have my own thoughts on what the Bible says...but I want to hear what people think first.

And in the interest of full disclosure (for those that may not know) I am an agnostic (for lack of a better word and the sake of simplicity).

God has two will's he has a decretive will or sovereign will that when he says it, it's so. He also has a permissive will that works a long with our free will, God doesn’t will the drunk to hit and kill the 3 year old child, but he can and will that situation as tragic as it is to glorify his name. An example is that in grief the family seeks a pastor gets saved and they in turn share Christ with the drunk responsible and he gets save and becomes a pastor working with troubled youth. So here is an example how God uses evil for good. He doesn’t violate the drunks free will to drink, or to get in the car, but he didn’t ordain it either or cause anyone to sin.

This is what I was taught (and believed) also. The problem I see is that the Bible says we are predestined, God chooses who will have salvation, who will choose him...



God’s permissive will is that all will be saved, but man has free will, so how does that work? I desire for my child to be a good kid, go to school and that they become successful, but no matter how I raise them and try to instill my values, they will still do what they want to do.
So than the question is how does salvation work? Is man sick in sin and able to bring this about with his will and the power of the Holy Spirit or is he dead in sin and can do nothing unless God enables him. I believe that latter.
God places an effectual call the Spirit lulls and Woo’s the person for how long or how many times during a life who knows. If man in his free will chooses not to reject this drawing it awakens them to the truth of God and eventually they repent by acknowledging their sin the way God sees it, by asking forgiveness of it, and turning from it and putting their faith and trust in Christ alone for their justification in the sight of God.
Salvation is all of God, as mans nature sets himself up as Lord and would rather dwell in his own muddle puddle of sin rather than venture into the ocean depths of Gods amazing grace.

The question that I always think of is regarding Judas Iscariot.

What do those who champion free-will think? Did Judas have a CHOICE?

What about Pilate or Herod? Better yet, what about Jesus himself as he wrestled with anxiety in Gethsemane? Could he have CHOSEN contrary to the Father's predestined plan?

Or was God's plan for Jesus to be betrayed and crucified unstoppable and determined?

Peter (and the Holy Spirit) has some thoughts on it. The Scripture says:

For truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.
Acts 4:27-28

Was it ever possible for them to CHOOSE for Christ instead of against him?

You mentioned some of the "key players" that God already foreknew would fit into His Plan to bring about the opportunity to present Salvation to a depraved and fallen world. In regard to Judas Iscariot, Jesus already knew that Judas was a "devil" (John 6:70-71) and that Judas' role would be of the one who betrayed Him in order to bring about and fulfill God's Plan of Salvation through the Atoning Blood of Christ.

IOW: God knew that mankind needed a Saviour.

This whole world is in condemnation according to the Holy Bible. There is none righteous. God's Judgment proclaimed upon mankind for acts of disobedience and unbelief is eternal death and curse upon the world as mentioned in the Genesis of mankind's fall from Grace.

Yet, God in His Love and Mercy provided the way for mankind to be Forgiven and reconciled back with Him. While it was determined from the foundation of time that Christ would willingly come to this earth to offer Himself as the Atoning Sacrifice for the sins of mankind, it is still up to each individual to recognize and acknowledge their own inability to live a perfect life as Jesus did and thus, realize that they need a Saviour.

Many people reject God's Plan of Salvation and remain in defiance and unbelief of what The New Testament Jesus taught regarding His being The Way, The Truth and The Life and that no one can come unto God except through Him.

Jesus presented His Message, presented His Life and presented God's way of Salvation to whoever believes in Him and accepts Him as their personal Lord and Saviour.

People are given the choice to either say "Yes" to God's Plan of Salvation through faith in Christ, or, say "No".

People are given the choice to either say "Yes" to God's Plan of Salvation through faith in Christ, or, say "No".Starman, what do you make of this:

Luke 20
When Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them. 37 Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, 38 so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:

“Lord, who has believed what he heard from us,
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”

39 Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said,

40 “He has blinded their eyes
and hardened their heart,
lest they see with their eyes,
and understand with their heart, and turn,
and I would heal them.”

As I understand it, if I choose wrong (if I don't believe) I'll suffer in Hell (eternity? another thread LOL)

Isn't that like saying "you can choose whatever you want but if I don't like the decision I've allowed you to make, I'm going to torture you forever" ...how fair is that?! :lol:



No, you need to study the character and nature of God.

God is Just and if you reject him you will get what you deserve and God will be glorified from it.
That said he would be more glorified if you repented. Either way He gets the glory.
It sounds as if you just can’t grasp that your really not a good person, that you are of your father the devil by nature, we all are, you have been breaking Gods Laws, claiming Lordship of your life, and rejecting so great a salvation. God laid down his life so justice could be served, and yet being merciful, giving you what you don’t deserve, satisfied the law on your behalf and you spit in his face and laugh about it? Till you understand your depravity and to whom you have sinned against you will not fear or have remorse and see a need for a savior. If you did you would run to the cross heartbroken about the pain and suffering that Christ endured on your behalf paying a debt you never could.

From what I know of the story (and the prophecies that preceded it) and the verse you referenced the answer would seem to be NO. If this is the case, then we don't have free will. Even if we usually have it, if God can take it away at anytime, even against our will...is it really free will?

Further, if Judas et al. was predestined to 'betray' Jesus, can he really be held responsible? Even further, if God made a man insane and this man murdered another, can he really be held responsible (by God...of course he can by us...public safety)? Does God condemn people for being as He made them or for doing what He predestined?

Food for thought

How about Judas had a wicked heart and God used what was all ready there? After all scripture tells us he was a thief tipping the till.
The same with Pharaoh he had no desire to truely repent he repented for the conquences of his actions not out of Godly sorrow. After A point God hardend his heart so he would be glorified, but he never caused the sin, only used it.

Starman, what do you make of this:

Luke 20
When Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them. 37 Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, 38 so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:

“Lord, who has believed what he heard from us,
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”

39 Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said,

40 “He has blinded their eyes
and hardened their heart,
lest they see with their eyes,
and understand with their heart, and turn,
and I would heal them.”

If you read about the nature and character of those individuals you will see that they had been aware of and/or offered the opporunity of knowing God but they wanted to continue on their own wayward ways and in defiance. After so much calling, as in the case of those who continually reject God, He will allow them to be taken snare by Satan and imputes upon them even more hardness so that they will end up getting what they deserve which is the wrath of God that comes against an unbelieving and defiant soul.

Is this justice? Indeed it is since people are aware of the decisions they are making and through defiance and refusing to believe God, the eternal consequences will beset them.

Adam and Eve were aware of what God warned about. Yet they chose to defy God's warning and the rest is history.

God still loved mankind enough to have shed His Blood upon the cross as an Atonement for the sins of each individual who would accept His Plan of Salvation.

Adam and Eve failed to believe God and reaped the consequences.

Failure to believe God that He sent His Only Begotten Son (Jesus Christ) to take the punishment for our sins and receive Him as our personal Lord and Saviour will result in the consequences that God has warned about.

This world is still influenced very much by Satan and his minions in a final attempt to deceive and prevent mankind from comprehending the Glorious Gospel that is in Christ.

IOW: It is Satan who is responsible for keeping individuals from coming to the Truth through his various methods of deceptions and unbelief. (This includes false religions) When people choose to believe Satan's lies and remain in their comfort zones of deceptions and unbelief after being warned time and again God allows them to have their way.

The consequences have already been stated.

Yes, most people will reject Him. Many of those who saw Him and His miracles DID reject Him. Can you imagine denying Him even after seeing Him walking on water, exorcising demons from people and raising people from the dead?I have to admit I would be skeptical, especially if I was not able to witness these miracles personally. I would want scientific, and medical, and whatever proof that a miracle had been enacted at will. But is that not how we all should approach such a thing? Investing your faith in the first magician claiming to be a savior you see come along is how people get sucked into cults.


Maybe hate is too strong a word but their denial of who He is isn't love...Maybe it's a matter of degrees wherein some folks have tougher standards of belief than others. What worked to convert you will not work for everyone. Shouldn't god know that? :shrug:


Actually you're not off topic, IMO. Jesus DID have a choice and His choice was to die for us:So what would have happened if Jesus had chosen to not break the law and end up on the cross? Once he was here, was he not obligated to follow through? Seems like a big catch-22 to me.



Believing on Jesus Christ is throwing yourself at His mercy. How you equate that with following a code of rules is...So one can give themselves to Jesus and the process is complete? According to most others you cannot support homosexuality, you cannot gamble, you cannot curse, you may not be able to drink, and a whole book (literally - ha) full of other things you can do and cannot do once becoming Christian. Should you break even a single one of these directives you will be left out of the kingdom.

Having a belief and faith first may be the most important factor, but it's certainly not the only factor to being accepted into the club.

God allows people to fall into their own snares. It is their choice, not God's.

There will come a day when God will say enough, and that will be it.

End of story.

Every individual decides. Not God. He will decide when it is time, and your decision will place you in His or eternity's status......

Don't waste your time. Now is the day of salvation (2 Cor 6:2, Isa 49:8 - now is the key word.

Time's flying past. Eternity is forever..........

If you read about the nature and character of those individuals you will see that they had been aware of and/or offered the opporunity of knowing God but they wanted to continue on their own wayward ways and in defiance. After so much calling, as in the case of those who continually reject God, He will allow them to be taken snare by Satan and imputes upon them even more hardness so that they will end up getting what they deserve which is the wrath of God that comes against an unbelieving and defiant soul.

Is this justice? Indeed it is since people are aware of the decisions they are making and through defiance and refusing to believe God, the eternal consequences will beset them.

Adam and Eve were aware of what God warned about. Yet they chose to defy God's warning and the rest is history.

God still loved mankind enough to have shed His Blood upon the cross as an Atonement for the sins of each individual who would accept His Plan of Salvation.

Adam and Eve failed to believe God and reaped the consequences.

Failure to believe God that He sent His Only Begotten Son (Jesus Christ) to take the punishment for our sins and receive Him as our personal Lord and Saviour will result in the consequences that God has warned about.

This world is still influenced very much by Satan and his minions in a final attempt to deceive and prevent mankind from comprehending the Glorious Gospel that is in Christ.

IOW: It is Satan who is responsible for keeping individuals from coming to the Truth through his various methods of deceptions and unbelief. (This includes false religions) When people choose to believe Satan's lies and remain in their comfort zones of deceptions and unbelief after being warned time and again God allows them to have their way.

The consequences have already been stated.Where in that passage is Satan mentioned?

By the way, I got mixed up a bit, that was from John 12, not Luke 20. I was just seeing if anybody was paying attention. :whistle:

But anyway, this is just turning into a re-hash of previous threads.

It comes down to priorities really. I put the priority on God and His sovereignty and you put the priority on man and his responsibility. I don't think either of us discount both, we just reverse them.

But what was your ultimate decision? And Moses and Jonah?
We eventually said yes to His call but not everyone does: "Many are called but few are chosen ".

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of predestination.
I don't think you know what the role of "foreknowledge" is in Election.
I dont? :shrug: Does this cover it for you: "For those God foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son..." Romans 8

Oh, you mean like you do constantly? I'm thinking of a blatant MIS-USE of Revelation 3:20 here. You are not the Alpha-Male here IS.
Like I do? :duh: Please show me how I've misused Rev 3v20, Mr Alpha male...

Seriously though...
I posted almost an entire chapter. If that does not give context, what does?
Would you agree with this statement? "Whoever believes was predestined"
Your understanding of what you posted showed a contextual error.

If "whoever believes" means they've become true believers then yes, I agree.

I have to admit I would be skeptical, especially if I was not able to witness these miracles personally. I would want scientific, and medical, and whatever proof that a miracle had been enacted at will. But is that not how we all should approach such a thing? Investing your faith in the first magician claiming to be a savior you see come along is how people get sucked into cults.
Today you WOULD be skeptical but things were very different back in Jesus' time. Just like a scientific study, the event is only as good as the person doing it. Jesus proved his divinity through his resurrection. It was the culmination of all that he did. No one else has ever been able to resurrect himself. Back then those people were more accountable because they saw what He did firsthand, so they had no excuse NOT to believe.

Maybe it's a matter of degrees wherein some folks have tougher standards of belief than others. What worked to convert you will not work for everyone. Shouldn't god know that? :shrug:
He does know that and He freely gives people how ever much they need to know about Him...IF they really want to know about Him.

So what would have happened if Jesus had chosen to not break the law and end up on the cross? Once he was here, was he not obligated to follow through? Seems like a big catch-22 to me.
Jesus, being God, wasn't going to change His mind. If He would have, then all bets were off. He did struggle with this in the garden right before He was arrested but God strengthened Him for the task (Matthew 26v42).

So one can give themselves to Jesus and the process is complete? According to most others you cannot support homosexuality, you cannot gamble, you cannot curse, you may not be able to drink, and a whole book (literally - ha) full of other things you can do and cannot do once becoming Christian. Should you break even a single one of these directives you will be left out of the kingdom. Having a belief and faith first may be the most important factor, but it's certainly not the only factor to being accepted into the club.
Not really. Once a person comes to Christ, they need to learn just like we do when we're kids. As we grow up, we learn, we make mistakes, we fall and get back up. As far as that "book full of other things" goes, we TRY not to do those things but, if we do, God will forgive us.

We don't come to Christ and later become lost then later get saved again then lost and saved again. When we get saved we're saved forever. When we sin, our relationship with God is strained just like it is when we disobey our parents. We never stop being our parents kids but that relationship is strained because, since they love us, they now have to discipline us. Same with God...

Where in that passage is Satan mentioned?

By the way, I got mixed up a bit, that was from John 12, not Luke 20. I was just seeing if anybody was paying attention. :whistle:

But anyway, this is just turning into a re-hash of previous threads.

It comes down to priorities really. I put the priority on God and His sovereignty and you put the priority on man and his responsibility. I don't think either of us discount both, we just reverse them.

The context of the Old Testament and New Testament Gospel Message makes it quite clear that there is an opposing spiritual force that prevents people from desiring to come to the knowledge of truth. The Bible points to the truth that people would rather love the world and the things in the world than to turn away from the world and turn to Jesus for Salvation. The Bible indicates which force is at work in this world to try to keep the Truth hidden from mankind.


But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. (2 Corinthians 4:3-5)


However, Jesus came to open the eyes of those who are blind - not just physically during His time of miracles but spiritually blind by the deceptions of Satan. An individual must respond to the effectual calling of the Holy Spirit's testimony of Jesus but an individual can also turn away from and reject that effectual calling out of pride of life and love for the world more than wanting to love God.


The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. (Luke 4:18-20)


This is still the acceptable year (time) of the Lord in which we live today. This will be the day of Salvation for any individual who is willing to trust in God's Plan of Salvation that is Promised and found by inviting Christ to come into their life.

Jesus will not force His way into the life of someone who doesn't want Him in their life. He will accept a personal invitation from anyone who is sincere in the spiritual desire to know God and to know The Truth of who He is.

This is what I was taught (and believed) also. The problem I see is that the Bible says we are predestined, God chooses who will have salvation, who will choose him...



That’s not what this verse says at all. The passage you quoted is Paul talking about ‘us’ as in them the Apostles. You have to read the entire chapter and not parse out snippets that conform to your argument. We know Paul is talking about the Apostles because later he writes this: “In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ” (verses 11 and 12).

Then in verse 13 Paul writes: “And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit…” In other words ‘When you believed”, making the choice.

It’s obvious God CHOSE (predestined) Christ. And it seems pretty obvious God predestined the selection of Jesus’ Apostles. He obviously chose Paul. And through this passage you’ve quoted it seems pretty obvious to me Paul is stating this; AND that we are not predestined. This is supported throughout other passages in the bible stating that we must ACCEPT Christ, open the door, believe. We must DO something in order to believe. We must make a choice.

It makes no sense that He would predestine certain people for salvation and others not, and place a savior in front of us to chose to believe or not believe in. If God has already chosen who is saved there is no need for a savior for us to either accept or deny.

I’d like to believe God is a logical God, of mercy and not a God of tricks and foolery.

Romans 8 & 9 give the answer to this question.

Yes, and Romans 9:14-21 shows the point I'm making here. According to the Bible (or at least this selection) God made us how he made us, some bad, some good, some with mercy and compassion, some without. And what right is it of ours to question?

The impression I've gotten from you is that this is all fine, we are predestined for certain things and we have no (or little) control over it (correct me if I'm wrong). So you already know these verses and accept them. Not saying that's right or wrong. But the other impression I get is that many Christians don't realize these verses exist in the Bible. They believe the Bible supports the concept of free will. They should know...it doesn't.

What part of "we're still free to do what we want" did you miss?? Do you and your hubby have an open marriage? Why don't you both date or sleep with other people? Because of your committment to each other. Did you both lose your free will? Not really but you no longer do those "single people things" because you both CHOSE not to. See?

When I decided to become a Christian in 1989, I made a choice to follow Gods rules and, therefore, my behavior had to change drastically. He knew, before time began, that I would decide to follow Him and so He predestined my life. "Predestined" means that God made sure that nothing would happen to me that would interfere with my becoming a Christian in 1989.

I've done a lot of things that God didn't agree with but He didn't stop me. If He did, I wouldn't have free will. The reason I don't do them now is because I'm faithful to the vow I made to Jesus Christ. He doesn't want me to do those sinful things against my own body any longer and, because I CHOSE to do what He wants, I must honor my vow to Him.


Didn't miss anything...just don't agree with your interpretation, no need to be a smarta$$

We're not really talking about the choice of monogamy, or what to have for dinner for that matter. We're talking about what your Holy Book has to say about predestination and free will. God may foreknow a lot, there's nothing wrong with that. I 'foreknow' that my cat is going to hop onto my lap this evening and bug me to pet her, just because I know doesn't mean she's predestined to do this.

The Bible say's God has PREDETERMINED who will and will not hear the calling, receive mercy, glory. He has already decided who is saved and who isn't and I can't see anything that says otherwise (and if there is, it stands in contradiction which is a whole other issue :lol:)

I know you say individual verses in the Bible can't be taken on their own, but if whoever wrote the Bible (God according to most Christians, or He at least inspired it) didn't mean "It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy." Romans 9:16 then why does the Bible say that? I don't see how that can mean anything other than what it says. :shrug:

Yes, most people will reject Him. Many of those who saw Him and His miracles DID reject Him. Can you imagine denying Him even after seeing Him walking on water, exorcising demons from people and raising people from the dead? :faint:

So do you think that people like me, non-theists, hate God? Or have we not been called yet? Or (back to Romans 9) has God chosen not to call us?

He might have, but has not moved you yet to believe.

What's He waiting for?! :lol:

God has two will's he has a decretive will or sovereign will that when he says it, it's so. He also has a permissive will that works a long with our free will, God doesn’t will the drunk to hit and kill the 3 year old child, but he can and will that situation as tragic as it is to glorify his name. An example is that in grief the family seeks a pastor gets saved and they in turn share Christ with the drunk responsible and he gets save and becomes a pastor working with troubled youth. So here is an example how God uses evil for good. He doesn’t violate the drunks free will to drink, or to get in the car, but he didn’t ordain it either or cause anyone to sin.

So God allows evil things to happen so that He can be glorified.

Would we accept this explanation from anyone else but God. He created evil so that we can be saved. Was that the only way to save us? The all-powerful, all-knowing and all-loving God could only come up with THIS solution? A truly omnipotent God would not have had to create evil in order to receive worship and therefore for us to be saved. IMO

God’s permissive will is that all will be saved, but man has free will, so how does that work? I desire for my child to be a good kid, go to school and that they become successful, but no matter how I raise them and try to instill my values, they will still do what they want to do.
So than the question is how does salvation work? Is man sick in sin and able to bring this about with his will and the power of the Holy Spirit or is he dead in sin and can do nothing unless God enables him. I believe that latter.
God places an effectual call the Spirit lulls and Woo’s the person for how long or how many times during a life who knows. If man in his free will chooses not to reject this drawing it awakens them to the truth of God and eventually they repent by acknowledging their sin the way God sees it, by asking forgiveness of it, and turning from it and putting their faith and trust in Christ alone for their justification in the sight of God.
Salvation is all of God, as mans nature sets himself up as Lord and would rather dwell in his own muddle puddle of sin rather than venture into the ocean depths of Gods amazing grace.

What if God doesn't call him? The sinful man never got the chance to accept God. Or do you believe God calls everyone? I don't see how this could be backed up with scripture.

No, you need to study the character and nature of God.

God is Just and if you reject him you will get what you deserve and God will be glorified from it. That said he would be more glorified if you repented. Either way He gets the glory.

It sounds as if you just can’t grasp that your really not a good person, that you are of your father the devil by nature, we all are, you have been breaking Gods Laws, claiming Lordship of your life, and rejecting so great a salvation. God laid down his life so justice could be served, and yet being merciful, giving you what you don’t deserve, satisfied the law on your behalf and you spit in his face and laugh about it? Till you understand your depravity and to whom you have sinned against you will not fear or have remorse and see a need for a savior. If you did you would run to the cross heartbroken about the pain and suffering that Christ endured on your behalf paying a debt you never could.

Are you speaking in generalities or is this what you think I am doing?

I want to make sure I understand your intent before I respond :smile:

How about Judas had a wicked heart and God used what was all ready there? After all scripture tells us he was a thief tipping the till.


Didn't he kill himself afterward? Sounds like he held a lot of guilt over it which doesn't sound like a man with a truly wicked heart to me :shrug:


The same with Pharaoh he had no desire to truely repent he repented for the conquences of his actions not out of Godly sorrow. After A point God hardend his heart so he would be glorified, but he never caused the sin, only used it.

So God hardened Pharaoh's heart then used Pharaoh so that He could be glorified? Entrapment!! :lol: Again, it doesn't seem to me that an omnipotent God would have to resort to what amounts to brainwashing and torture of Pharaoh!

That’s not what this verse says at all. The passage you quoted is Paul talking about ‘us’ as in them the Apostles. You have to read the entire chapter and not parse out snippets that conform to your argument. We know Paul is talking about the Apostles because later he writes this: “In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ” (verses 11 and 12).

Then in verse 13 Paul writes: “And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit…” In other words ‘When you believed”, making the choice.

It’s obvious God CHOSE (predestined) Christ. And it seems pretty obvious God predestined the selection of Jesus’ Apostles. He obviously chose Paul. And through this passage you’ve quoted it seems pretty obvious to me Paul is stating this; AND that we are not predestined. This is supported throughout other passages in the bible stating that we must ACCEPT Christ, open the door, believe. We must DO something in order to believe. We must make a choice.

It makes no sense that He would predestine certain people for salvation and others not, and place a savior in front of us to chose to believe or not believe in. If God has already chosen who is saved there is no need for a savior for us to either accept or deny.

*sigh*

It doesn't matter who he was talking about. If God EVER predestines ANYTHING our 'free will' is useless. If He may take it away at anytime, how do we ever know if He does? How can we trust our actions are our own rather that God's?

I’d like to believe God is a logical God, of mercy and not a God of tricks and foolery.

:killingme

*phew* All caught up!

:smile:

What if God doesn't call him? The sinful man never got the chance to accept God. Or do you believe God calls everyone? I don't see how this could be backed up with scripture.


Actually, UNA, The Bible documents it quite clearly that the "sinful" are the very reason why Jesus came to earth - to call sinners to repentance:


... Jesus said, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” (Matthew 9:12-13; Mark 2:17; Luke 5:31-32)


God calls every individual:

God is calling Atheists and skeptics and those caught up in false religious doctrines every time the Gospel Message of Christ is brought to their attention. God's Plan of Salvation continues to be presented to all people whether in a gospel tract, prayer at a public gathering, Christian witness by friends and relatives, and even in these posts on somd.

The Bible proclaims that all mankind is sinful and their is none righteous. (Romans 3:10) Therefore, God indeed does call everyone to repent and place faith in His Plan of Salvation through Christ because He is willing that no one perish. (2 Peter 3:9)

Didn't miss anything...
Apparently you did, by your response below.

We're not really talking about the choice of monogamy, or what to have for dinner for that matter. We're talking about what your Holy Book has to say about predestination and free will. God may foreknow a lot, there's nothing wrong with that. I 'foreknow' that my cat is going to hop onto my lap this evening and bug me to pet her, just because I know doesn't mean she's predestined to do this.
Not relevant to the issue here. You completely ignored the analogy. An animals' actions are not even comparable to God's predestining of humans.

The Bible say's God has PREDETERMINED who will and will not hear the calling, receive mercy, glory. He has already decided who is saved and who isn't and I can't see anything that says otherwise (and if there is, it stands in contradiction which is a whole other issue :lol:)
There's your misunderstanding. God did NOT predetermine who would hear and who would not and He did not decide who would be saved or lost. A persons decision to follow God will cause their life's events to be orchestrated (predestined) so that God's will would be carried out by them.

If someone refuses to follow God, He is within His rights to harden their hearts, blind their eyes or deafen their ears at any time because He knows they will not follow Him. It takes two; His choice AND our choice is what makes God act in this matter.

I know you say individual verses in the Bible can't be taken on their own, but if whoever wrote the Bible (God according to most Christians, or He at least inspired it) didn't mean "It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy." Romans 9:16 then why does the Bible say that? I don't see how that can mean anything other than what it says. :shrug:
In context it means that no one is saved by their own efforts or desire and that God has the right to accept or reject anyone. He rejected me 3 different times when I prayed for His forgiveness. Why? He knew I didn't mean it! I wasn't sincere in what I was asking for. If we are serious about being saved, He will have mercy on us and forgive us and we'll become His children forever. On the other hand, if He calls someone and they say no, He will not have mercy on them, nor forgive them and might even harden their heart.

I didn't wake up one morning and simply decide that I wanted to be saved. I heard the story of Jesus and salvation because someone was kind enough to tell it to me. I decided that what I heard was very believable so I said OK to Gods' call. He finally had mercy on me and saved me and now I'm telling others about Him so they can be saved also.

Something to think about: Have you ever heard someone say: God is calling me but I don't want to be saved? Or: I want to be saved but God doesn't want me? These would be the likely cases if God did the choosing and we had no say in the matter. And why then should I waste my time praying, learning, witnessing and sharing this truth with anyone if God makes the choice for us all?
So do you think that people like me, non-theists, hate God? Or have we not been called yet? Or (back to Romans 9) has God chosen not to call us? What's He waiting for?
You have to ask yourself if you hate God. Out of His love for you, in one horrific act, He gave up His life in place of yours so you could get to Heaven and, yet, you choose to ignore/deny that? To follow Him would prove your appreciation to Him. To refuse His love would be................You decide.

You have been called but you haven't responded properly. He's waiting for you to stop the denials and start believing. Tell Him you've been wrong, ask Him to forgive you and open your eyes to the truth. He's been talking to you for months on here. Start your journey now and your questions will get answered as you grow in your faith.

I think maybe a little more emphasis should be placed on the role of time in this discussion, but even with that there would still be a debate going on about free will vs. predestination. There are seemingly contradictory verses which people use routinely to fuel the discussion in seminaries, and I doubt that the issue is ever truly resolved.

God's thoughts are not our thoughts, and His ways are not our ways, and His ways and plans are beyond our comprehension.

He has said that He is the "I AM." In the past, the present and future, "I AM" is God Almighty.

So okay, what came first, the chicken or the egg? It doesn't really matter, does it? But the answer is that God created chickens whose reproductive mechanism includes making and laying eggs.

I've talked this through with physicists and others and the issue of free will vs. predestination seems to get hung up on the way we people think about time. We see time as linear, with a definite past and future (although when the quantum guys get involved there may not actually be an instantaneous present).

I think there might be multiple approaches to reconciling these two conflicting concepts (free will and predestination), but any of them end up being largely conjecture. Here are a few I have thought of, and at various times I lean more toward one than the others, but it varies.

(1) God made each and every one of us; we are purpose-built, and He knows how we're wired because He designed us (See Jeremiah Chapter 1). He knows the decisions we will make because of the way we will react to cause and effect. Thus we make decisions of free will but He already knows what we'll decide. This approach to understanding the issue doesn't consider God's timelessness.

(2) With God there are causes and effects and actions and reactions, but because He exists in all times at once, He already knows the choices we will make. This is a very hard approach to understand because what's in the future for me is in the present (or past?) for Him.

(3) This is all an experiment in which God has induced an intricate and unpredictable sequence of events which will end when He terminates the test. As with (1) above, this doesn't consider God being the Alpha and Omega.

(4) This is a battleground, a war with satan in which the outcome has already been seen by God. In this case there are people who are satan's and people who are God's. The Bible describes the angels who aligned themselves with satan and became fallen angels who are evil, so one wonders if there are people in a similar situation. (I know from personal experience that on this battleground, the attacks come from all directions and they never cease). So although choices are made with eternal implications for the individuals who make them, the outcome of the war is already known.

This is an excellent thread, UNA, good topic.

I believe that the reason for God allowing each individual a "free-will decision" is that it results in God receiving the glory, praise and honor from the person - not because God caused them to be that way (that would be insincere) but because the individual acknowledged their sinfulness, wanted to make changes in life, became aware of the consequences and chose to seek God's Guidance and Salvation through Christ for their personal life.

It would be totally insincere if you manipulated a person to accept you rather than have them accept you out of their sincere and genuine love and respect for you.

Predestination of souls is saying that God manipulates who will eventually repent and accept His Plan of Salvation while at the same time God manipulates who will reject His Plan of Salvation.

Then God imposes His Anger, Wrath and Condemnation to eternal death against those who rejected Him when they had no choice in the matter.
That's what Islam teaches and that's what Calvinism teaches.

The context of The Holy Bible concludes that the eternal fate of each individual is determined by the free-will of each individual.

Obey God or Disobey God; Accept Christ or Reject Christ.
That's what The New Testament Jesus taught.

There are also some who may "Believe in God" but yet they really "Don't Believe God" as is the case with Adam and Eve when they chose to believe a lie.

It is your choice.

I believe that the reason for God allowing each individual a "free-will decision" is that it results in God receiving the glory, praise and honor from the person - not because God caused them to be that way (that would be insincere) but because the individual acknowledged their sinfulness, wanted to make changes in life, became aware of the consequences and chose to seek God's Guidance and Salvation through Christ for their personal life.

It would be totally insincere if you manipulated a person to accept you rather than have them accept you out of their sincere and genuine love and respect for you.

Predestination of souls is saying that God manipulates who will eventually repent and accept His Plan of Salvation while at the same time God manipulates who will reject His Plan of Salvation.

Then God imposes His Anger, Wrath and Condemnation to eternal death against those who rejected Him when they had no choice in the matter.
That's what Islam teaches and that's what Calvinism teaches.

The context of The Holy Bible concludes that the eternal fate of each individual is determined by the free-will of each individual.

Obey God or Disobey God; Accept Christ or Reject Christ.
That's what The New Testament Jesus taught.

There are also some who may "Believe in God" but yet they really "Don't Believe God" as is the case with Adam and Eve when they chose to believe a lie.

It is your choice.

That's a valid argument, Brother. How does it work in view of God already knowing the future? Is His plan an over-arching one that doesn't address individuals and their choices, so the view of the future doesn't go to that level of detail? Did He know in advance what choice you would make when He called you?

(By the way, I can't help but think He might be chuckling a bit while listening to us try to figure this out!)

That's a valid argument, Brother. How does it work in view of God already knowing the future? Is His plan an over-arching one that doesn't address individuals and their choices, so the view of the future doesn't go to that level of detail? Did He know in advance what choice you would make when He called you?

(By the way, I can't help but think He might be chuckling a bit while listening to us try to figure this out!)

I say He knew in advance, even before the foundations were set in place.

Omniscience and omnipresence does that, by definition. By transcending time beyond our comprehension, He can, is, was, in all places and time zones past, present, and future.

We as individuals do not know what He knows, cannot even begin to imagine what He knows.

The Bible preaches salvation as an individual choice, confession and acceptance of Jesus as Savior.

God wrote the Bible, and people need to figure Him in instead of just trying to figure Him out.

I believe this is an issue of personal choice that determines a person's eternity. Just because one thinks they have no chance at salvation because salvation was pre-determined/ordained/destinated, they can solve that by believing in the work of Christ on the cross.

That's a valid argument, Brother. How does it work in view of God already knowing the future? Is His plan an over-arching one that doesn't address individuals and their choices, so the view of the future doesn't go to that level of detail? Did He know in advance what choice you would make when He called you?

(By the way, I can't help but think He might be chuckling a bit while listening to us try to figure this out!)


:howdy:
I have no doubt about the Omniscient (all-knowing) attribute of the Almighty God-Supreme Creator of all that there is. So, yes, I believe that God already knows in advance which decision each individual is going to make. However, that does not mean that God went ahead and made that choice for them at all. Otherwise it goes back to God's manipulation of making someone love and obey Him which would be an insincere form of love and not one of a genuine acceptance.

BTW: God could have created mankind to be like His Heavenly Host of angels who are perfect by His Design and who eternally adore and worship Him. However, God made us a different type of creation just as He also created a different class of angels from where Lucifer became prideful and resentful of God's position of Authority. Well, you know the rest of the story.

Meanwhile, mankind has been instilled with the individual qualities of reasoning and being taught to know right from wrong. We, thus, have the ability to choose to do either (right or wrong) in all sorts of circumstances of life. We are also taught, whether by parents, teachers or through personal experience what kind of consequences to expect when we choose to ignore any kind of warning that had been previously given.

The Bible states that God does not want anyone at all to perish. Meanwhile, God is extra-patient with each individual as He tries to offer them time and again the opportunity and the way to escape His Wrath on the day of His Judgment and that is through placing faith in Christ as Saviour.

Conclusion: (It's Predetermination - Not Predestination)

God has pre-determined that whoever chooses to believe and place faith in His Plan of Salvation will not perish but will have God's Forgiveness and His Promise of receiving everlasting life. It's God's Promise!


For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (John 6:23)

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. (John 3:16-18)

Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh, (Romans 8:1-3)


It's your choice.

:howdy:
I have no doubt about the Omniscient (all-knowing) attribute of the Almighty God-Supreme Creator of all that there is. So, yes, I believe that God already knows in advance which decision each individual is going to make. However, that does not mean that God went ahead and made that choice for them at all. Otherwise it goes back to God's manipulation of making someone love and obey Him which would be an insincere form of love and not one of a genuine acceptance.

BTW: God could have created mankind to be like His Heavenly Host of angels who are perfect by His Design and who eternally adore and worship Him. However, God made us a different type of creation just as He also created a different class of angels from where Lucifer became prideful and resentful of God's position of Authority. Well, you know the rest of the story.

Meanwhile, mankind has been instilled with the individual qualities of reasoning and being taught to know right from wrong. We, thus, have the ability to choose to do either (right or wrong) in all sorts of circumstances of life. We are also taught, whether by parents, teachers or through personal experience what kind of consequences to expect when we choose to ignore any kind of warning that had been previously given.

The Bible states that God does not want anyone at all to perish. Meanwhile, God is extra-patient with each individual as He tries to offer them time and again the opportunity and the way to escape His Wrath on the day of His Judgment and that is through placing faith in Christ as Saviour.

Conclusion: (It's Predetermination - Not Predestination)

God has pre-determined that whoever chooses to believe and place faith in His Plan of Salvation will not perish but will have God's Forgiveness and His Promise of receiving everlasting life. It's God's Promise!



It's your choice.

Good answer! Let me cogitate on that a while.

God wrote the Bible, and people need to figure Him in instead of just trying to figure Him out.

Excellent turn of phrase! I'll have to remember that.

*sigh*

It doesn't matter who he was talking about. If God EVER predestines ANYTHING our 'free will' is useless. If He may take it away at anytime, how do we ever know if He does? How can we trust our actions are our own rather that God's?

You very well could be right. Does this make God any less God? Or is this some sort of intent to prove there is no God? Besides, this is not what defines an agnostic. Someone who is agnostic is open to the possibility. The question to you is… Do you believe you have free will? Do you believe someone/something is pulling your strings? Whatever your answer, as an agnostic, answers your question about free will. Nothing I, or anyone else answers, is going to change your mind.

The one thing I concluded a long time ago is, if there is a God, it doesn’t much matter whether we believe these things or not (things like free will). If it is then it is. If it isn’t then it isn’t. We’ll never really know in this life now will we? I do know that I am living my life and making choices and doing things. I believe they are MY choices. It’s my belief that God did choose certain people for fulfill His will. It’s my belief that He gave us choices, and this is clear in the bible.

“Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed…” – John 3:18

THAT is a choice. As I stated, it makes no sense for God to have predetermined things and also tell us to make a choice.



I’d like to believe God is a logical God, of mercy and not a God of tricks and foolery.

:killingme

Care to elaborate?

:howdy:
I have no doubt about the Omniscient (all-knowing) attribute of the Almighty God-Supreme Creator of all that there is. So, yes, I believe that God already knows in advance which decision each individual is going to make. However, that does not mean that God went ahead and made that choice for them at all. Otherwise it goes back to God's manipulation of making someone love and obey Him which would be an insincere form of love and not one of a genuine acceptance..Why do you lack confidence in an omnipotent God's sovereignty over HIS creation?

Man is broken, unable to choose God. God shows mercy on some and enables them to choose Him. Why? No idea. I'm not arrogant enough to assume I know better than Him.

I'm sure you will claim "according to foreknowledge" or something similar. That only means it happens as He has foreseen it would happen. Nothing in the Scripture says Foreknowledge is prior to action on God's part, only that it is consistent with it. It speaks again to His sovereignty, even over us, His creatures.

Why do you lack confidence in an omnipotent God's sovereignty over HIS creation?

Man is broken, unable to choose God. God shows mercy on some and enables them to choose Him. Why? No idea. I'm not arrogant enough to assume I know better than Him.

I'm sure you will claim "according to foreknowledge" or something similar. That only means it happens as He has foreseen it would happen. Nothing in the Scripture says Foreknowledge is prior to action on God's part, only that it is consistent with it. It speaks again to His sovereignty, even over us, His creatures.

What lack of confidence in God is there on my part Zguy28? :shrug:

The Bible declares that all mankind is under condemnation to begin with. There is none righteous.

The Bible declares that God sent His Son Jesus Christ to be the propitiation for our sins and that whoever believes in Him by faith will not perish but will receive God's Grace of Forgiveness, become a new creation, be born again of the spirit as a new creation, become a Child of God through faith in Christ and have everlasting life with God when He creates the New Heaven and the New Earth.

The Bible gives hope and confidence to the depraved, sinful individual that God is able to save his/her soul even when they have lost all hope in life and are in despair.

Sorry to say this, friend, but it appears that you are placing more confidence in the teaching of one, John Calvin, rather than placing faith and confidence that The New Testament Jesus came to call sinners to repentance and to save all who believe upon His name - those who choose the Light of The World rather then those who choose to love the darkness of the world.

People have a choice.

What lack of confidence in God is there on my part Zguy28? :shrug:

The Bible declares that all mankind is under condemnation to begin with. There is none righteous.

The Bible declares that God sent His Son Jesus Christ to be the propitiation for our sins and that whoever believes in Him by faith will not perish but will receive God's Grace of Forgiveness, become a new creation, be born again of the spirit as a new creation, become a Child of God through faith in Christ and have everlasting life with God when He creates the New Heaven and the New Earth.

The Bible gives hope and confidence to the depraved, sinful individual that God is able to save his/her soul even when they have lost all hope in life and are in despair.

Sorry to say this, friend, but it appears that you are placing more confidence in the teaching of one, John Calvin, rather than placing faith and confidence that The New Testament Jesus came to call sinners to repentance and to save all who believe upon His name - those who choose the Light of The World rather then those who choose to love the darkness of the world.

People have a choice.I told a friend of mine that it was only a matter of time before you or IS accused me of either not following Jesus or following a different Jesus. Looks like I called it. Congratulations.

Calvinism by the way is just a label for a similar framework of beliefs. There is a lot of Calvin's beliefs I disagree with quite strongly.

Is Calvinism heresy?

I told a friend of mine that it was only a matter of time before you or IS accused me of either not following Jesus or following a different Jesus. Looks like I called it. Congratulations.

Calvinism by the way is just a label for a similar framework of beliefs. There is a lot of Calvin's beliefs I disagree with quite strongly.

Is Calvinism heresy?

Calvin's interpretation of "predestination of souls" counters the Gospel Message of Jesus Christ (The Great Commission) unto the world.

Calvin's interpretation of predestination versus Salvation through faith in The Atoning Blood of Christ that is offered to the whole world becomes a "limited Atonement" - not for everyone just for some.

Calvin's claim that God is the one responsible for sending people to hell and eternal death takes away the blame of Satan being the deceiver of the world who holds souls captive through unbelief and following false gods/religions.

Calvin's claim negates the Biblical warning that Satan is the one who blinds people to God's Truth and basically scoffs at the concept that Satan had anything to do with the fall of mankind. It is God's fault that people don't want to repent and God chooses for people not to believe in Him at all - according to Calvin.

Calvin has introduced a theological interpretation similar to Islam that is not in agreement with the Gospel Message of Salvation through faith in Jesus Christ that is proclaimed by the context of the Holy Bible.

If there already is "a lot of Calvin's beliefs" that you disagree with "quite strongly", then that should already give you some kind of hint that Calvin's interpretation of blaming God for deliberately predestinating the sending of souls to Hell as questionable.

Calvin's interpretation of "predestination of souls" counters the Gospel Message of Jesus Christ (The Great Commission) unto the world.He believed, as do I, that God has ordained the gospel to preached to all nations, and that is the means of bringing the Elect out of the nations.

Calvin's interpretation of predestination versus Salvation through faith in The Atoning Blood of Christ that is offered to the whole world becomes a "limited Atonement" - not for everyone just for some.Potential is universal, effect is limited to those who believe.

Calvin's claim that God is the one responsible for sending people to hell and eternal death takes away the blame of Satan being the deceiver of the world who holds souls captive through unbelief and following false gods/religions.All are destined for wrath because of Adam's sin. God is not to blame for our sin and damnation, nor is Satan. We are.

God leaves some to justice, but gives mercy to others. All is for His glory, nothing else.

Calvin's claim negates the Biblical warning that Satan is the one who blinds people to God's Truth and basically scoffs at the concept that Satan had anything to do with the fall of mankind.I'd like to see this substantiated.

It is God's fault that people don't want to repent and God chooses for people not to believe in Him at all - according to Calvin.See above. Nobody seeks God. He opens the spiritual eyes of the Elect.

Calvin has introduced a theological interpretation similar to Islam that is not in agreement with the Gospel Message of Salvation through faith in Jesus Christ that is proclaimed by the context of the Holy Bible.
You don't know Calvin or Calvinism. That much is apparent.


If there already is "a lot of Calvin's beliefs" that you disagree with "quite strongly", then that should already give you some kind of hint that Calvin's interpretation of blaming God for deliberately predestinating the sending of souls to Hell as questionable.There is more that I disagree strongly with of yours. I guess that is an even bigger hint. :howdy:

Calvinism blatantly blames God for wanting people to (pardon the expression) go to Hell!

So, in essence, Calvinism is taking the blame off of Satan and shifting the blame to God. Are you, therefore, blaming God as well Zguy28?

The Bible declares that Satan (the god of this world) is responsible for blinding the minds of unbelievers in an attempt to keep them from comprehending the Gospel Message of Christ:


And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake.
(2 Corinthians 4:3-5)

The Bible proclaims that Christ did not come to condemn the world but that the world through Him could be saved. Salvation is offered to all mankind, however, many people choose to remain in darkness by desiring to remain in their sin and evil deeds and they knowingly turn away from the Gospel Message of Christ when they are confronted with it:


For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.
(John 3:16-21)

The Bible states that there would be perversions of God's Truth by false teachers and that people will follow those false teachers that preach what they want to hear instead of the Truth that God wants them to hear:


I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
(2 Timothy 4:1-4)

It Still Turns Out To Be The People's Choice.

Calvinism blatantly blames God for wanting people to (pardon the expression) go to Hell!

So, in essence, Calvinism is taking the blame off of Satan and shifting the blame to God. Are you, therefore, blaming God as well Zguy28?Do you blame Satan for your sins?

The Bible declares that Satan (the god of this world) is responsible for blinding the minds of unbelievers in an attempt to keep them from comprehending the Gospel Message of Christ:

2 Thess 2:9-12 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Notice the bolded verse. Oh wait, could it be that even Satan can only do what God allows him to do? Maybe so...

Hmm... I'm thinking of David's census of Israel, Job's suffering, and Jesus's temptation here. What do you think?



The Bible proclaims that Christ did not come to condemn the world but that the world through Him could be saved. Salvation is offered to all mankind, however, many people choose to remain in darkness by desiring to remain in their sin and evil deeds and they knowingly turn away from the Gospel Message of Christ when they are confronted with it:
I think we all agree on that.


The Bible states that there would be perversions of God's Truth by false teachers and that people will follow those false teachers that preach what they want to hear instead of the Truth that God wants them to hear:



It Still Turns Out To Be The People's Choice.So stop with the falsehoods already.

John 6:37 - All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

If the Father gives some to Jesus, by necessity the Father does NOT give some as well.

You see, your position is irrational. You believe in choice for salvation, but also perserverence of the saints (the P in the Calvinist TULIP). It's untenable.

If you can choose for God, you must be able to choose to leave God and be lost. At least the Wesleyans and Methodists are consistent in their logic. You are not.

If you believe Unconditional Election is determinism, you must believe Perseverance is as well. No way around it.

Is Calvinism heresy?

I know you believe it to be so since you basically called Calvin and Calvinists false teachers. So you might as well just say it already.

Why do you lack confidence in an omnipotent God's sovereignty over HIS creation?

Man is broken, unable to choose God. God shows mercy on some and enables them to choose Him. Why? No idea. I'm not arrogant enough to assume I know better than Him.

I'm sure you will claim "according to foreknowledge" or something similar. That only means it happens as He has foreseen it would happen. Nothing in the Scripture says Foreknowledge is prior to action on God's part, only that it is consistent with it. It speaks again to His sovereignty, even over us, His creatures.

You’ve put yourself into a corner with this… If man is ‘broken’ and God preordained everything, then God preordained man to be broken. If God never does anything wrong, and God preordained us to be broken, then we really aren’t broken. We are part of that predetermined plan. I mean if God is planning our every move and God is perfect, then our every move (as flawed as it may appear to you and me) is perfect; according to God’s will. And since we don't have free will and God predetermined us to be sinner and God's plan is perfect, then we really aren't sinners. And the bible would have to be wrong.

The part you seemed to have forgotten is God created us in HIS image. God has free will. If we are in His image, why wouldn’t WE have free will?

I’ve mentioned this before… When you drop a rock from a tree what happens? It falls to the ground. How do you know what’s going to happen? Because you have that knowledge does that mean you MADE it happen? What made the rock drop to the ground are the laws of nature; not because you predetermined it. All you did was set an event in motion. Nature predetermined the results. We know certain things around us will happen based our knowledge of nature; those things will happen not because we made them happen but because it’s just how the laws of nature works. God’s knowledge, being far deeper than ours, knows what’s going to happen because He understands the depth of the nature in which He created. It’s just that simple. And because God also gave us choices tells me He wants US to decide. Because He understands or can predicted the outcome doesn’t mean He made it happen. He just has that depth of knowledge of our nature to know the outcome.

There is a difference between predetermining something and knowing what’s going to happen based on knowledge.

EDIT: And I want to take this a step further… Since God preordains our every move, I am going to steal your wallet. Since God preordained this to happen the money was really never yours and you never really earned it because God made you do it and it wasn’t your own choice to get the job you have and earn the money you’ve supposedly ‘earned’. You can’t claimed you’ve earned something like money since God already determined the outcome. And if it makes you angry that I took your money, money needed to feed your family, be angry at God for predetermining that this would happen to you. It wasn't my choice that I stole it from you.

:ohwell:

This is ridiculous.

It is a choice!

A lot people on this Earth don't, and don't want to, make decisions for themselves. This has nothing to do with biblical text. All the scripture in the world won't convince people to make decisions and then stick to them. The bible scholars and fanatics fall for this hook, line, and sinker. You use this opportunity to display your advanced knowledge, and perception of language and text, to the world, and it blots out your spirit - every time.

There are two freaking pages of biblical citations and yet you may wonder why people are still just as relunctant to accept the truth as they were before they came here.

Are you folks moved by God to spout out biblical texts, in and out of context, in an attempt to bring people closer to God? Because that is you have made it to be.

You’ve put yourself into a corner with this… If man is ‘broken’ and God preordained everything, then God preordained man to be broken. Paul (an Apostle of Christ!) also wrestled with this in Romans.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

It should be noted also that culturally the Jews of that time viewed YHWH as absolutely sovereign over all creation, including people. Paul and Peter reflect this in their preaching recorded in the New Testament.

Paul: 24 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, 25 nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. 26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place.

Peter: 27 for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, 28 to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.

What? God predestined Pilate and Herod to crucify the Lord Jesus?

I'm also reminded of the Parable of the Laborers in the vineyard.

Matthew 20
“For the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. 2 After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard. 3 And going out about the third hour he saw others standing idle in the marketplace, 4 and to them he said, ‘You go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right I will give you.’ 5 So they went. Going out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour, he did the same. 6 And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing. And he said to them, ‘Why do you stand here idle all day?’ 7 They said to him, ‘Because no one has hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You go into the vineyard too.’ 8 And when evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last, up to the first.’ 9 And when those hired about the eleventh hour came, each of them received a denarius. 10 Now when those hired first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received a denarius. 11 And on receiving it they grumbled at the master of the house, 12 saying, ‘These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.’ 13 But he replied to one of them, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? 14 Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you. 15 Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?’ 16 So the last will be first, and the first last.”

Now I fully admit that this is about believers. However, building on the logic of verse 15, does not God "own" everything as sovereign Lord and King over creation?

So is it unjust for Him to have mercy on some by plucking them from the fire through His grace and leave others to the wrath they so rightfully deserve?

Just thinking out loud on this one... :coffee:

I'm also reminded of the Parable of the Laborers in the vineyard.

Matthew 20
“For the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. 2 After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard. 3 And going out about the third hour he saw others standing idle in the marketplace, 4 and to them he said, ‘You go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right I will give you.’ 5 So they went. Going out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour, he did the same. 6 And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing. And he said to them, ‘Why do you stand here idle all day?’ 7 They said to him, ‘Because no one has hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You go into the vineyard too.’ 8 And when evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last, up to the first.’ 9 And when those hired about the eleventh hour came, each of them received a denarius. 10 Now when those hired first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received a denarius. 11 And on receiving it they grumbled at the master of the house, 12 saying, ‘These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.’ 13 But he replied to one of them, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? 14 Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you. 15 Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?’ 16 So the last will be first, and the first last.”

Now I fully admit that this is about believers. However, building on the logic of verse 15, does not God "own" everything as sovereign Lord and King over creation?

So is it unjust for Him to have mercy on some by plucking them from the fire through His grace and leave others to the wrath they so rightfully deserve?

Just thinking out loud on this one... :coffee:

The context of that entire parable deals with some hired workers who expressed complaints of disatisfaction to The Boss because they had worked the entire day while other workers who were hired on at various hours and some finally at the last hour of the work-day all got paid exactly the same wage.

Those who worked all day complained that it didn't seem fair. The point was that they had agreed to work all day for the set wage so there was no reason to complain no matter if others only worked a fraction of the time and were paid the same amount. The "Boss" was within his right to be equally generous to those who labored one hour.

I don't see anything that infers anyone receiving "wrath they so rightfully deserve". Everyone got what they agreed upon.

Actually, UNA, The Bible documents it quite clearly that the "sinful" are the very reason why Jesus came to earth - to call sinners to repentance:



God calls every individual:

God is calling Atheists and skeptics and those caught up in false religious doctrines every time the Gospel Message of Christ is brought to their attention. God's Plan of Salvation continues to be presented to all people whether in a gospel tract, prayer at a public gathering, Christian witness by friends and relatives, and even in these posts on somd.

The Bible proclaims that all mankind is sinful and their is none righteous. (Romans 3:10) Therefore, God indeed does call everyone to repent and place faith in His Plan of Salvation through Christ because He is willing that no one perish. (2 Peter 3:9)

Well he's being very quiet about it.

An all-knowing God knows why I don't believe, if He loved me so much I would think He'd make it a little more obvious...like He did for OT prophets and the Apostles.

Apparently you did, by your response below.

Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm missing something. I could say the same thing to you.

Not relevant to the issue here. You completely ignored the analogy. An animals' actions are not even comparable to God's predestining of humans.

We're talking about predestination in the Bible...I'm trying to distinguish between God's foreknowing and God's predestination our actions.

There's your misunderstanding. God did NOT predetermine who would hear and who would not and He did not decide who would be saved or lost. A persons decision to follow God will cause their life's events to be orchestrated (predestined) so that God's will would be carried out by them.

If someone refuses to follow God, He is within His rights to harden their hearts, blind their eyes or deafen their ears at any time because He knows they will not follow Him. It takes two; His choice AND our choice is what makes God act in this matter.

But it SAYS

For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves.

You're saying that even if I choose, if God doesn't then I'm not saved. That doesn't seem loving. He predestines us, it says He does.

In context it means that no one is saved by their own efforts or desire and that God has the right to accept or reject anyone. He rejected me 3 different times when I prayed for His forgiveness. Why? He knew I didn't mean it! I wasn't sincere in what I was asking for. If we are serious about being saved, He will have mercy on us and forgive us and we'll become His children forever. On the other hand, if He calls someone and they say no, He will not have mercy on them, nor forgive them and might even harden their heart.

I didn't wake up one morning and simply decide that I wanted to be saved. I heard the story of Jesus and salvation because someone was kind enough to tell it to me. I decided that what I heard was very believable so I said OK to Gods' call. He finally had mercy on me and saved me and now I'm telling others about Him so they can be saved also.

Something to think about: Have you ever heard someone say: God is calling me but I don't want to be saved? Or: I want to be saved but God doesn't want me? These would be the likely cases if God did the choosing and we had no say in the matter. And why then should I waste my time praying, learning, witnessing and sharing this truth with anyone if God makes the choice for us all?

But it doesn't say 'It does not, therefore, depend on just human saying it, they have to mean it and then God will have mercy'...it says:

It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy."


You have to ask yourself if you hate God. Out of His love for you, in one horrific act, He gave up His life in place of yours so you could get to Heaven and, yet, you choose to ignore/deny that? To follow Him would prove your appreciation to Him. To refuse His love would be................You decide.

How exactly can an atheist or even an agnostic hate God? :confused:

You have been called but you haven't responded properly. He's waiting for you to stop the denials and start believing. Tell Him you've been wrong, ask Him to forgive you and open your eyes to the truth. He's been talking to you for months on here. Start your journey now and your questions will get answered as you grow in your faith.

He is all-powerful, maybe He should prove me wrong, then I'll believe.

God's thoughts are not our thoughts, and His ways are not our ways, and His ways and plans are beyond our comprehension.

If His ways are beyond out comprehension, on what grounds can anyone say God is good? Or bad?

(1) God made each and every one of us; we are purpose-built, and He knows how we're wired because He designed us (See Jeremiah Chapter 1). He knows the decisions we will make because of the way we will react to cause and effect. Thus we make decisions of free will but He already knows what we'll decide. This approach to understanding the issue doesn't consider God's timelessness.

(2) With God there are causes and effects and actions and reactions, but because He exists in all times at once, He already knows the choices we will make. This is a very hard approach to understand because what's in the future for me is in the present (or past?) for Him.

...

(4) This is a battleground, a war with satan in which the outcome has already been seen by God. In this case there are people who are satan's and people who are God's. The Bible describes the angels who aligned themselves with satan and became fallen angels who are evil, so one wonders if there are people in a similar situation. (I know from personal experience that on this battleground, the attacks come from all directions and they never cease). So although choices are made with eternal implications for the individuals who make them, the outcome of the war is already known.

Foreknowing. Still jives with popular free will philosophies of modern Christianity.

(3) This is all an experiment in which God has induced an intricate and unpredictable sequence of events which will end when He terminates the test. As with (1) above, this doesn't consider God being the Alpha and Omega.

Then God needs to review the scientific method :lol: He's tampering with the results!



The Bible says God predetermines our actions in addition to foreknowing them.



This is an excellent thread, UNA, good topic.

Thank you! :smile:

You very well could be right. Does this make God any less God? Or is this some sort of intent to prove there is no God? Besides, this is not what defines an agnostic. Someone who is agnostic is open to the possibility.

No, my intent is to show that (in my reading) the Bible does not support the belief in free will many Christians have.

The question to you is… Do you believe you have free will? Do you believe someone/something is pulling your strings? Whatever your answer, as an agnostic, answers your question about free will. Nothing I, or anyone else answers, is going to change your mind.

I personally do not believe in God, I generally stand between a weak atheist and a strong atheist on the spectrum (a 6.5 on Dawkins' scale). I SAY I'm an agnostic because when one says atheist, people assume I think I have proof. There is no proof either way so even if I personally believe I have free will, I can't prove it so I can't say it.

I'm not trying to change anyone's minds, just making sure they take everything into account.

The one thing I concluded a long time ago is, if there is a God, it doesn’t much matter whether we believe these things or not (things like free will). If it is then it is. If it isn’t then it isn’t. We’ll never really know in this life now will we? I do know that I am living my life and making choices and doing things. I believe they are MY choices. It’s my belief that God did choose certain people for fulfill His will. It’s my belief that He gave us choices, and this is clear in the bible.

“Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed…” – John 3:18

THAT is a choice. As I stated, it makes no sense for God to have predetermined things and also tell us to make a choice.

You're right, it doesn't. That's kind of where I'm coming from. The Bible says that He has already predetermined who will be saved, who will fulfill His will. This does not jive with the concept of free will.

Care to elaborate?

I've just never heard anyone describe God as logical!

You're saying that even if I choose, if God doesn't then I'm not saved. That doesn't seem loving. He predestines us, it says He does.
Never said that. God wants everyone to be saved but not everyone wants to be. If you choose to follow Him right now, He will save you, but YOU have to be sincere about it. He will not save you today if He knows you'll want out tomorrow. If He did, that would be against your will. He wants you but He won't force you.

But it doesn't say 'It does not, therefore, depend on just human saying it, they have to mean it and then God will have mercy'...it says: "Romans 9:16
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy."
Sure looks that way doesn't it? You have to consider the entire chapter to get the correct meaning. What Paul says makes it LOOK like we have no say in the matter but that's out of context with the rest of the Bible. Paul is implying that when God chooses someone, He doesn't choose them against their will. Nowhere does it say that God's "choosing" forced any of them to follow Him.

I had no desire and made no effort to follow God but He knew that I would say yes to His call one day so He "chose me" and prepared the way for me to begin to follow Him. That's what Paul meant when he said it doesn't depend on human desire or effort. I didn't know when or where it would happen but God selected a day for me to begin following Him. If God knows you'll say yes to His call, He will prepare a lifetime of things for you to do for Him. That's part of the predestination.

How exactly can an atheist or even an agnostic hate God? :confused:
By denying His existence. It's really hard to honestly deny the existence of God. It takes more faith to be an atheist than it does to be a Christian because you'd have to ignore all the signs of the existence of God.

He is all-powerful, maybe He should prove me wrong, then I'll believe.
Aahhhh see the problem there? That would be forcing you against your free will. When you're sincerely ready, He will be waiting with open arms for you!

Jesus came down to earth in the form of a man, did a bunch of miracles, was murdered on a cross, came back from the dead and STILL many who saw Him denied who He was. You would probably do the same thing...

No, my intent is to show that (in my reading) the Bible does not support the belief in free will many Christians have.

I can tell you, as a Christian (which you admittedly are not), I am making my own choices. If I want to hop in my car and drive like a mad man causing havoc on the roads, that’s my decision. If I want to sit in my bedroom and look at porn, that is my decision not God’s.

If you consider the God in the Christian bible, He is without sin; which means He would not make you do things that are sinful. To do so would be committing sin. He also would not give us a choice, express that choice to us, then say “Psych! It’s all a joke. I’ve been pulling all the strings from the beginning.”

You're right, it doesn't. That's kind of where I'm coming from. The Bible says that He has already predetermined who will be saved, who will fulfill His will. This does not jive with the concept of free will.

And as I tried to point out to you, that’s not what the bible says at all; you’ve just rejected my points. If God is making all of our decisions then why does he tell us to ACCEPT and BELIEVE in Jesus? Why does Jesus tell us we have to take up the cross and follow Him? Why would God tell us to DO any of this if He’s already decided for us?

I've just never heard anyone describe God as logical!

I’m not saying God is logical in terms of our existence and creation. I’ve always argued that our very existence has no logical explanation. If we are here due to a creator, this isn't logical to me. If we are here from a random set of circumstances; this isn't logical to me. There is nothing logical about a universe that is so vast, yet here we are – little human intelligent beings planted in this tiny particular spot in space. It's not logical to me is why God chose to do things this way.

What I’m saying is there is an argument to stating there is no logic to why God would place all these choices in front of us, even tell us to choose, then yank the rug from under us by telling us we never really had the choice at all. IF you even consider the bible as a fable (which you obviously do) you still have to consider this God as having love and mercy for His creation and that playing such tricks serves no logical purpose.

If you consider the God in the Christian bible, He is without sin; which means He would not make you do things that are sinful. To do so would be committing sin.But he can [and did] make the beings who sin. He pushed the proverbial reset button on civilization several times, yet we continue to sin. That indicates something short of perfection, some inherent flaw in the system. Seems illogical to me that god would keep expecting perfection from an obviously broken system.


IF you even consider the bible as a fable (which you obviously do) you still have to consider this God as having love and mercy for His creation and that playing such tricks serves no logical purpose.Not necessarily. For all I know, god has created billions of different universes and we are no more than board game pieces to him. :shrug:

But he can [and did] make the beings who sin. He pushed the proverbial reset button on civilization several times, yet we continue to sin. That indicates something short of perfection, some inherent flaw in the system. Seems illogical to me that god would keep expecting perfection from an obviously broken system.

If you try to look at God’s larger purpose I believe our sinful nature is part of that plan; in that, it is not flawed. It is just this way by design. It’s the consequence of giving us free will. I don’t think God ever expected perfection; I just think He demands that we strive towards it. I believe God wanted life to be a bit of an unpredictable adventure for us, not some boring “I know what happens next” scenario. I mean if we knew what was going to happen life would be very uninteresting.

Not necessarily. For all I know, god has created billions of different universes and we are no more than board game pieces to him. :shrug:

I’m not sure what this has to do with what you quoted but, consider that God would have a plan for those civilizations. I’m never restricted to the belief that we are God’s only ‘intelligent’ creation in the universe. Just because God didn’t tell us about something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Trying to figure out why God decided to create us is moot. If it were for His sheer entertainment or a fun game for Him, does that still make Him any less God? Because He doesn’t fit into our prism of what defines God, does that mean God is less? God created us in His image. We are creatures that demand our minds be occupied by things that entertain us and challenge our intelligence.

Never said that. God wants everyone to be saved but not everyone wants to be. If you choose to follow Him right now, He will save you, but YOU have to be sincere about it. He will not save you today if He knows you'll want out tomorrow. If He did, that would be against your will. He wants you but He won't force you.

So when the Bible says that things (our individual salvation) are predetermined by God, it means that our lives are predetermined in such a way that we will continue to follow Him after we accept the calling. And if we don't accept the calling He will predetermine our lives so that our heart will be hardened. Am I getting this right yet?

Sure looks that way doesn't it? You have to consider the entire chapter to get the correct meaning. What Paul says makes it LOOK like we have no say in the matter but that's out of context with the rest of the Bible. Paul is implying that when God chooses someone, He doesn't choose them against their will. Nowhere does it say that God's "choosing" forced any of them to follow Him.

Where is your context from the rest of the Bible to back up your interpretation?

I had no desire and made no effort to follow God but He knew that I would say yes to His call one day so He "chose me" and prepared the way for me to begin to follow Him. That's what Paul meant when he said it doesn't depend on human desire or effort. I didn't know when or where it would happen but God selected a day for me to begin following Him. If God knows you'll say yes to His call, He will prepare a lifetime of things for you to do for Him. That's part of the predestination.

Slightly unrelated question...why would you have no desire to follow God? You seem pretty sure that He exists, if I recall correctly, you claim to even have proof! Why would you have ever not had the desire to follow God?

My question comes from this: it cannot be said that I do not have the desire to follow God. I (by definition) cannot have nor lack desire to follow God. I don't believe He exists. You do. Maybe I'm just putting too much into the words you're choosing :shrug:

By denying His existence. It's really hard to honestly deny the existence of God. It takes more faith to be an atheist than it does to be a Christian because you'd have to ignore all the signs of the existence of God.

But how can I hate something for which I deny existence? Do I hate unicorns because I deny their existence? :lol: I'm assuming you don't believe in unicorns either...UNICORN HATER!!!

Aahhhh see the problem there? That would be forcing you against your free will. When you're sincerely ready, He will be waiting with open arms for you!

Showing me the facts, proving God's existence does not go against my free will. I say now "God, if you're up there please come prove that you are. I will have to my knees in praise and repent for my ways!" There would be no logical way for me to deny He exists if He came down here!

Jesus came down to earth in the form of a man, did a bunch of miracles, was murdered on a cross, came back from the dead and STILL many who saw Him denied who He was. You would probably do the same thing...

How would you know that? If I saw what the Apostles saw, if I saw the miracles attributed to Him in the Bible there would be no logical way to continue to deny Him.

But this line of reasoning doesn't work here does it? Because all you have to say to counter me is to assume that because God has not done this, I must not really want it...and there is no way for me to prove to you otherwise.

Given the choice between eternal nothingness and eternal glory in Heaven; I'd pick Heaven. Most atheists/agnostics I know would much prefer their consciousness NOT to cease to exist upon death. Just show us the proof :smile:

I can tell you, as a Christian (which you admittedly are not), I am making my own choices. If I want to hop in my car and drive like a mad man causing havoc on the roads, that’s my decision. If I want to sit in my bedroom and look at porn, that is my decision not God’s.

How can you know this? God certainly has the ability to intervene in our lives through predestination right? How can you know He isn't? I know my actions are of my own free will but I don't believe in God.

If you consider the God in the Christian bible, He is without sin; which means He would not make you do things that are sinful. To do so would be committing sin. He also would not give us a choice, express that choice to us, then say “Psych! It’s all a joke. I’ve been pulling all the strings from the beginning.”

If the God of the Christian Bible is without sin then why did He destroy the Canaanites? He commanded the Israelites to do this. Either God commanded them to commit a sin (mass murder/genocide) or it wasn't a sin and genocide is OK.

And as I tried to point out to you, that’s not what the bible says at all; you’ve just rejected my points. If God is making all of our decisions then why does he tell us to ACCEPT and BELIEVE in Jesus? Why does Jesus tell us we have to take up the cross and follow Him? Why would God tell us to DO any of this if He’s already decided for us?

I don't know. :lol:

The Bible refers to predestination numerous times, most notable in Romans and Ephesians. I didn't reject the point you made (I'm assuming you mean WRT the Apostles being predestined rather than us). I just noted that if God has the ability to do it, and He did once, how can we ever be sure He's not doing it now. Free will is one of those things that if broken once (trough even a single act of predestination) it is broken forever (IMO). What keeps Him from doing it now?

I’m not saying God is logical in terms of our existence and creation. I’ve always argued that our very existence has no logical explanation. If we are here due to a creator, this isn't logical to me. If we are here from a random set of circumstances; this isn't logical to me. There is nothing logical about a universe that is so vast, yet here we are – little human intelligent beings planted in this tiny particular spot in space. It's not logical to me is why God chose to do things this way.

What I’m saying is there is an argument to stating there is no logic to why God would place all these choices in front of us, even tell us to choose, then yank the rug from under us by telling us we never really had the choice at all. IF you even consider the bible as a fable (which you obviously do) you still have to consider this God as having love and mercy for His creation and that playing such tricks serves no logical purpose.

It indeed serves no logical purpose.

Of course, many things in the Bible don't serve a logical purpose.

So when the Bible says that things (our individual salvation) are predetermined by God, it means that our lives are predetermined in such a way that we will continue to follow Him after we accept the calling. And if we don't accept the calling He will predetermine our lives so that our heart will be hardened. Am I getting this right yet?
"Pre-determined" might not be the correct word regarding our salvation. Our salvation is determined by our responding to God's call but yes, after that, God predestines (or predetermines) much of our lives. We still have our free will because God does allow us to do things that He doesn't approve of. The difference is that He can take those things and turn them into a good outcome for us.

And yes again, "we will continue to follow Him after accepting the call" because WE chose to. He doesn't force us to continue. The Bible talks about people wanting to follow Christ then, later, changing their mind and walking away forever. If you'd like to read it, it's in Matthew 13 v 1-24.

Where is your context from the rest of the Bible to back up your interpretation?
Actually the entire Bible shows God trying to get humanity to follow Him so as not to have to spend eternity apart from Him. There's too many to list but here are a few:

Genesis 3
Deuteronomy 30 v 17-20
Matthew 23 v 37
Rev 3v20

Slightly unrelated question...why would you have no desire to follow God? You seem pretty sure that He exists, if I recall correctly, you claim to even have proof! Why would you have ever not had the desire to follow God? My question comes from this: it cannot be said that I do not have the desire to follow God. I (by definition) cannot have nor lack desire to follow God. I don't believe He exists. You do. Maybe I'm just putting too much into the words you're choosing :shrug:
People change over time. Although I believed there was a God, I was just having too much fun in life to go to church or read the Bible. As I got older, I started wondering what life was really about. I had everything going for me that life could offer but I felt like something was still missing. God was missing and He had been trying to tell me that but I didn't listen (for real) until I was 34 years old.

But how can I hate something for which I deny existence? Do I hate unicorns because I deny their existence? :lol: I'm assuming you don't believe in unicorns either...UNICORN HATER!!!
Not me! I like some green alligators and long necked geese, some humpty backed camels and some chimpanzees, some cats & rats & elephants but sure as you're born, NOAH FORGOT THE UNICORNS!!! :killingme

Showing me the facts, proving God's existence does not go against my free will. I say now "God, if you're up there please come prove that you are. I will have to my knees in praise and repent for my ways!" There would be no logical way for me to deny He exists if He came down here! How would you know that? If I saw what the Apostles saw, if I saw the miracles attributed to Him in the Bible there would be no logical way to continue to deny Him.
If God thought that would work, He just might appear to you in a dream or vision but many of those people who saw Jesus in person still didn't believe. This is why God said that His people must believe in Him by faith. He's not coming back again until the end of the world so don't expect Him to magically appear to you. One thing I know: He's sent you a LOT of caring people right here on this forum who are trying to convince you about Him but you're not listening...

If you really want to believe in Him, He WILL give you the same evidence He's given all of us Christians. If you don't want to believe in Him, He WILL grant you that wish too. Just remember this: Either way, it's forever. You're forever with Him or forever without Him. You can't change your destination once you die...

But this line of reasoning doesn't work here does it? Because all you have to say to counter me is to assume that because God has not done this, I must not really want it...and there is no way for me to prove to you otherwise.
Given the choice between eternal nothingness and eternal glory in Heaven; I'd pick Heaven. Most atheists/agnostics I know would much prefer their consciousness NOT to cease to exist upon death. Just show us the proof :smile:
Our faith is in the evidence that points to God. I can't take you to a place and say: Here's God. If that was how it could be done, He would have to appear to everyone throughout history. He did it once and won't do it again until the end.

I don't know where you live but did you see the devastation that the hurricane of 2002 caused in LaPlata? I saw it 20 minutes after the funnel crossed 301. There was no wondering about what caused that kind of destruction. Everyone knew! It's the same with God. Our faith comes from believing in what we cannot see because of the evidence in the things we can see. See? :howdy:

If you really want to believe in Him, He WILL give you the same evidence He's given all of us Christians. If you don't want to believe in Him, He WILL grant you that wish too. Just remember this: Either way, it's forever. You're forever with Him or forever without Him. You can't change your destination once you die...

:yeahthat:

Hi UNA,

Jesus left a lot of evidence in His teachings that have been recorded in the Holy Bible. His disciples were there with Him and documented first-hand experiences that point to Jesus being the Messiah and Saviour of mankind as He proclaimed.

This is where faith and trust becomes the essence of coming to the spiritual understanding about God and about His Plan of Salvation that is offered through Jesus for eternal life in Heaven. He freely offers it to you, your friends, your family - the whole world! As ItalianScallion said, it's up to you whether you want to believe Him or not. If you invite Jesus to be your Saviour, He will not turn you away.



I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. They will come in and go out, and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. (John 10:9-11)

Then you will call on me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.
(Jeremiah 29:12-13)

How can you know this? God certainly has the ability to intervene in our lives through predestination right? How can you know He isn't? I know my actions are of my own free will but I don't believe in God.

From a rhetorical argument standpoint, I don’t. I can’t prove anything anymore than you. What I can say is, IF you believe what the bible says, God gave us a choice. From a logical standpoint it makes no sense for God to give us a choice and beneath the surface the whole thing be a lie. What purpose would that really serve?

If the God of the Christian Bible is without sin then why did He destroy the Canaanites? He commanded the Israelites to do this. Either God commanded them to commit a sin (mass murder/genocide) or it wasn't a sin and genocide is OK.

One of the premises of believing in this God is to accept that He is our creator and has a will. You can either argue against it or accept that this is what it is. Part of that will is He decided to create this universe. He decided to put our lives in it. It is HIS creation. I view it – my life – as a gift; not some incidental chemical phenomenon. Without Him I don’t exist to sit here and discuss these things with you. So, what God gives us, it is HIS to take away as He sees fit. Arguing against that assumes you know better than God how to handle His creation.

The Bible refers to predestination numerous times, most notable in Romans and Ephesians. I didn't reject the point you made (I'm assuming you mean WRT the Apostles being predestined rather than us). I just noted that if God has the ability to do it, and He did once, how can we ever be sure He's not doing it now. Free will is one of those things that if broken once (trough even a single act of predestination) it is broken forever (IMO). What keeps Him from doing it now?

You can’t extrapolate those few passages and say ‘this is how it is’ when you’re ignoring other passages that define things differently. God gave Adam and Eve a choice. THEY chose. God did, through history choose certain people (Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Jesus, Jesus’ disciples…) to fulfill His purpose. I would certainly support the argument that God predestined these individuals’ purposes.

It indeed serves no logical purpose.

Of course, many things in the Bible don't serve a logical purpose.

Our existence, devoid of God serves no purpose. For life to even exist in a world without God has absolutely no meaning at all. We’re incidental travelers through time then *poof* we’re gone. What grand purpose did that serve? Nothing. The universe will simply move on to the next event without a blink. If this is true, why do we go through so much effort trying to define a purpose in our lives, in our civilization, when in the near future – in the cosmic definition of ‘future’ – we’re gone?

"Pre-determined" might not be the correct word regarding our salvation. Our salvation is determined by our responding to God's call but yes, after that, God predestines (or predetermines) much of our lives. Hey guys, I hope you understand these questions.

You believe that predestination is real, but that it is based on Foreknowledge, right?

So, God Foresees you will be saved, then Predestines it to come to pass, according to you.

Is God bound or limited in any way by His Foreknowledge?

If yes, then is how does He not lose His omnipotence and free will?

If no, then doesn't He have the free will to change His mind and invalidate His Foreknowledge?

And if He invalidates His Foreknowledge due to His free choice, then how does He not lose His omniscience?

It seems to me that basing Predestination on Foreknowledge limits God and effectively removes His free will.

By denying His existence. It's really hard to honestly deny the existence of God. It takes more faith to be an atheist than it does to be a Christian because you'd have to ignore all the signs of the existence of God.

Really, I see no signs of the existence of your God anymore than there are of anyone else's (which to say is exactly none). How do you figure it takes more faith to say "prove it and I'll believe it, but until there is demonstrable evidence it doesn't exist" than to say "I believe without proof"?

Perhaps these doctrinal arguments where we seem to try to condemn each other, are the reason Jesus said we should have faith as a little child. Simply believing without getting all wrapped around the axle.

Perhaps these doctrinal arguments where we seem to try to condemn each other, are the reason Jesus said we should have faith as a little child. Simply believing without getting all wrapped around the axle.

You mean "simply believing", as in not thinking critically? Would you say that to a Muslim extremist? Just believing something because it's been said to you is dangerous and damaging to you as a person and society as a whole.

Also, isn't doing ANYTHING "as a little child" the very definition of "childish"?

Really, I see no signs of the existence of your God anymore than there are of anyone else's (which to say is exactly none). How do you figure it takes more faith to say "prove it and I'll believe it, but until there is demonstrable evidence it doesn't exist" than to say "I believe without proof"?

Here we go again.

Where are those black holes? I mean show me. Give me concrete proof. Don't give me "I saw the behavior of objects 100 million light years away acting a certain way and it's because of a black hole". I see some humans acting a certain way right here on earth, which tells me there is a God. So show me a back hole.

:tap:

Here we go again.

Where are those black holes? I mean show me. Give me concrete proof. Don't give me "I saw the behavior of objects 100 million light years away acting a certain way and it's because of a black hole". I see some humans acting a certain way right here on earth, which tells me there is a God. So show me a back hole.

:tap::dingding:

At least when we were arguing about Predestination, it was on topic. :buddies:

Here we go again.

Where are those black holes? I mean show me. Give me concrete proof. Don't give me "I saw the behavior of objects 100 million light years away acting a certain way and it's because of a black hole". I see some humans acting a certain way right here on earth, which tells me there is a God. So show me a back hole.

:tap:

I see <del>some humans</del> particles in space acting a certain way <del>right here on earth</del> all over the universe, which tells me there <del>is a God</del> are black holes.

QOW-NYPEp84

While it's hard to get access to telescopes powerful enough to observe the phenomenon you can see all kinds of other cool stuff here (http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/tours-events/tour-information).

:dingding:

At least when we were arguing about Predestination, it was on topic. :buddies:

If you want to challenge science, try keeping up with it then you might actually have an idea about the things science can't explain....yet.

I see <del>some humans</del> particles in space acting a certain way <del>right here on earth</del> all over the universe, which tells me there <del>is a God</del> are black holes.

QOW-NYPEp84

While it's hard to get access to telescopes powerful enough to observe the phenomenon you can see all kinds of other cool stuff here (http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/tours-events/tour-information).

Prove to me this is a black hole.

Prove to me this is a black hole.

ok, following Newton's law of universal gravity we can calculate the mass of the object, we also know that it gives of no form of radiation that can be detected on any spectrum and has a radius that if it were a star would have caused the gravitational force to have kick started the fusion process. Therefore, the very definition of a black hole.

In otherwords:

F=G m1m2/r2

...It seems to me that basing Predestination on Foreknowledge limits God and effectively removes His free will.

On the contrary, God's foreknowledge takes into account all the variable situations that happen in between where He is able to use His free-will - from the beginning of time until the final point when He establishes The new Heaven and the new earth and those who are His Children reign with Him forever.

The Old Testament has many accounts where God was able to change His mind about how He was interacting with the people - if they would only call upon Him. The outcome that He foreknows remains the same but getting there can take various ways and different courses of action that will involve Him along the way. (Yes, I'm sure He foreknew those as well) Here is just one account:


If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. (2 Chronicles 7:14)



In the New Testament, Jesus also mentioned that God would be able to hear prayers and respond accordingly. That's the neat thing about having a personal relationship and fellowship with Almighty God. He does hear our prayers and will respond to make changes for us along the way. Yes, God has the foreknowledge of all things including how much we will call upon Him for help. He also knows how many times we will turn to Him just to praise and worship Him for being the Great Almighty God of Creation that He is and the Hope of our Salvation through the Atoning Blood of His Only Son, Jesus Christ, Yeshua HaMashiach.



And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him? (Luke 11:9-13)



God is always willing to interact in our lives and He is able to exercise His Free-Will in response each time we call upon Him. God will respond in the best way for our lives and through this we give Him the honor and glory.

As one preacher stated: "God is still on The Throne and prayer changes things."

God can change a person's life from one of hopelessness and despair to one of Hope, Faith, Peace and Love through His Gift of Love and Salvation that is found in trusting The New Testament Jesus Christ.

ok, following Newton's law of universal gravity we can calculate the mass of the object, we also know that it gives of no form of radiation that can be detected on any spectrum and has a radius that if it were a star would have caused the gravitational force to have kick started the fusion process. Therefore, the very definition of a black hole.

In otherwords:

F=G m1m2/r2

Prove to me these laws and calculations apply to objects billions of light years away. These calculations PROVE nothing. It's an assertion; a theory. I want hard evidence, not some ambiguous math that applies to our little corner of the universe that may not apply somewhere else in the universe. I don't want what YOU BELIEVE.

FAIL!

Is God bound or limited in any way by His Foreknowledge?
If yes, then is how does He not lose His omnipotence and free will?
If no, then doesn't He have the free will to change His mind and invalidate His Foreknowledge?
And if He invalidates His Foreknowledge due to His free choice, then how does He not lose His omniscience?
It seems to me that basing Predestination on Foreknowledge limits God and effectively removes His free will.
:duh: Only in your mind Zguy. I wish you would stop putting human limits on God. God knows everything so how in the heck could He "invalidate His foreknowledge"? Foreknowledge is simply: God knowing everything that's going to happen before it happens. He's even free to work outside of the laws of nature if He so chooses. This craziness is as bad as: "can God make a rock that is too big for Him to lift"? :jameo:
Really, I see no signs of the existence of your God anymore than there are of anyone else's (which to say is exactly none). How do you figure it takes more faith to say "prove it and I'll believe it, but until there is demonstrable evidence it doesn't exist" than to say "I believe without proof"?
:duh: Over & over again I said there is plenty of evidence for the existence of God. I've never said I believe w/o proof. The reason you see nothing is because you've chosen not to and God isn't going to show you anything just to have you ridicule it more. He's NOT going to appear in person in front of you either so you need to get on board with this faith thing or...

With all the evidence out there, it would take more faith to deny all of it than it would to simply see Gods' creation and say: I see the handy work of a supreme being.

Prove to me these laws and calculations apply to objects billions of light years away. These calculations PROVE nothing. It's an assertion; a theory. I want hard evidence, not some ambiguous math that applies to our little corner of the universe that may not apply somewhere else in the universe. I don't want what YOU BELIEVE.

FAIL!

1) My example is from our galaxy not some far off corner of the universe. It is (astronomically speaking) in our back yard.

2) How do we know physics works everywhere and in the same way? Simple, the fundamental goal of all science, predictably. How do we know that we have proven how tides work (no matter what Bill O'Riley says)? Because we've been predicting the times tides would come in and out for about 300 years. Likewise, how do we know our models of astrophysics work? Because even the Romans were able to predict the placement of the stars on any given day, any given year. Since we know that stars that we can see and millions of light years away (if fact some are even farther and aren't stars at all, they are galaxies that are so far away they look to us to be stars when viewed by the naked eye). Since we use the laws of physics to predict the location of bodies in space and have been correct 100% of the time for the last few hundred years we know that even in far off galaxies, so far away some of the stars we can see don't even exist anymore because of the amount of time it took the light from that start to get here, we know that physics works everywhere.

Now, if you want to challenge that, you are making a claim that the laws of physics, as proven by experimentation and observation are not true then the burden of proof lies with you.

Over & over again I said there is plenty of evidence for the existence of God. I've never said I believe w/o proof. The reason you see nothing is because you've chosen not to and God isn't going to show you anything just to have you ridicule it more. He's NOT going to appear in person in front of you either so you need to get on board with this faith thing or...

With all the evidence out there, it would take more faith to deny all of it than it would to simply see Gods' creation and say: I see the handy work of a supreme being.

Maybe you've said there is proof, maybe you've tried to provide it, but you haven't given me any. So here's your chance.

FAIL!

see how handy it is to wait until someone can actually answer the question before you use that word...

Perhaps these doctrinal arguments where we seem to try to condemn each other, are the reason Jesus said we should have faith as a little child. Simply believing without getting all wrapped around the axle.

So many just can't do that, RR. You know, the old pride thing, the thing that got Lucifer and his kicked out heaven.

So many men/women just to try and figure God out (impossible, despite overwhelming evidence against there not being a Creator), rather than just look at the universe, nature, our hands, our eyes, and just figure God in.

All will believe in time. Unfortunately for billions, that will only be when they are judged and sent into a lost eternity.

So sad for those that simply reject the Good News.

"Pre-determined" might not be the correct word regarding our salvation. Our salvation is determined by our responding to God's call but yes, after that, God predestines (or predetermines) much of our lives. We still have our free will because God does allow us to do things that He doesn't approve of. The difference is that He can take those things and turn them into a good outcome for us.

And yes again, "we will continue to follow Him after accepting the call" because WE chose to. He doesn't force us to continue. The Bible talks about people wanting to follow Christ then, later, changing their mind and walking away forever. If you'd like to read it, it's in Matthew 13 v 1-24.

What would be the correct word then? "Predestination" is the word used in the Bible, so did the Bible use the wrong word?

Actually the entire Bible shows God trying to get humanity to follow Him so as not to have to spend eternity apart from Him. There's too many to list but here are a few:

Genesis 3
Deuteronomy 30 v 17-20
Matthew 23 v 37
Rev 3v20

God trying to get us to follow him is not what is being discussed here. You said the correct interpretation of Romans 9:16 was that Paul was implying that God never chose a person against there will (and so it would follow that God would also not not choose us against our will). What is your context for this interpretation over mine?

People change over time. Although I believed there was a God, I was just having too much fun in life to go to church or read the Bible. As I got older, I started wondering what life was really about. I had everything going for me that life could offer but I felt like something was still missing. God was missing and He had been trying to tell me that but I didn't listen (for real) until I was 34 years old.

IDK, seems pretty dumb to believe in God but then refuse to follow him especially if you also believe eternal salvation is on the line. Not saying you're dumb, just trying to understand where you're coming from.

Not me! I like some green alligators and long necked geese, some humpty backed camels and some chimpanzees, some cats & rats & elephants but sure as you're born, NOAH FORGOT THE UNICORNS!!! :killingme

But they were the loveliest of them all!! :lol:

Do you see what I was saying though?

If God thought that would work, He just might appear to you in a dream or vision but many of those people who saw Jesus in person still didn't believe. This is why God said that His people must believe in Him by faith. He's not coming back again until the end of the world so don't expect Him to magically appear to you. One thing I know: He's sent you a LOT of caring people right here on this forum who are trying to convince you about Him but you're not listening...

If you really want to believe in Him, He WILL give you the same evidence He's given all of us Christians. If you don't want to believe in Him, He WILL grant you that wish too. Just remember this: Either way, it's forever. You're forever with Him or forever without Him. You can't change your destination once you die...

Again, you seem to be assuming that atheists/agnostics would not rather things work like you believe. I'd much rather my consciousness go on but there is no evidence that it does.

Our faith is in the evidence that points to God. I can't take you to a place and say: Here's God. If that was how it could be done, He would have to appear to everyone throughout history. He did it once and won't do it again until the end.

I don't know where you live but did you see the devastation that the hurricane of 2002 caused in LaPlata? I saw it 20 minutes after the funnel crossed 301. There was no wondering about what caused that kind of destruction. Everyone knew! It's the same with God. Our faith comes from believing in what we cannot see because of the evidence in the things we can see. See? :howdy:

:confused:

So a tornado is proof of God? But we can explain it (pretty well) empirically, there is no need for God here...

:yeahthat:

Hi UNA,

Jesus left a lot of evidence in His teachings that have been recorded in the Holy Bible. His disciples were there with Him and documented first-hand experiences that point to Jesus being the Messiah and Saviour of mankind as He proclaimed.

This is where faith and trust becomes the essence of coming to the spiritual understanding about God and about His Plan of Salvation that is offered through Jesus for eternal life in Heaven. He freely offers it to you, your friends, your family - the whole world! As ItalianScallion said, it's up to you whether you want to believe Him or not. If you invite Jesus to be your Saviour, He will not turn you away.

The word of men that lived thousands of years ago just isn't enough to convince me, especially since no one bothered to write it down at the time.

From a rhetorical argument standpoint, I don’t. I can’t prove anything anymore than you. What I can say is, IF you believe what the bible says, God gave us a choice. From a logical standpoint it makes no sense for God to give us a choice and beneath the surface the whole thing be a lie. What purpose would that really serve?

It is this type of conundrum that leads many away from the Bible and to reason. This is a Biblical contradiction, the Bible says what it says and no interpretation of it can be sound because we just don't know. The Bible...#1 deconverter of Christians.

One of the premises of believing in this God is to accept that He is our creator and has a will. You can either argue against it or accept that this is what it is. Part of that will is He decided to create this universe. He decided to put our lives in it. It is HIS creation. I view it – my life – as a gift; not some incidental chemical phenomenon. Without Him I don’t exist to sit here and discuss these things with you. So, what God gives us, it is HIS to take away as He sees fit. Arguing against that assumes you know better than God how to handle His creation.

Why should we accept that?!

Wait a second...if God can do whatever He want with/to us whenever He wants for whatever reason...then how can you count of free will? The mere ability to take it away negates the concept. Assuming He wont is NOT a safe not a valid assumption.

You can’t extrapolate those few passages and say ‘this is how it is’ when you’re ignoring other passages that define things differently. God gave Adam and Eve a choice. THEY chose. God did, through history choose certain people (Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Jesus, Jesus’ disciples…) to fulfill His purpose. I would certainly support the argument that God predestined these individuals’ purposes.

OK, so He predestined them which means He can do it to anyone. By definition, this effects free will.

Our existence, devoid of God serves no purpose. For life to even exist in a world without God has absolutely no meaning at all. We’re incidental travelers through time then *poof* we’re gone. What grand purpose did that serve? Nothing. The universe will simply move on to the next event without a blink. If this is true, why do we go through so much effort trying to define a purpose in our lives, in our civilization, when in the near future – in the cosmic definition of ‘future’ – we’re gone?

This is a difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. My life (all out lives) doesn't have purpose because an imaginary creature gave it one rather my life has purpose because I have hopes, dreams, goals, happiness, sadness and a will to leave the world a better place.

Maybe you've said there is proof, maybe you've tried to provide it, but you haven't given me any. So here's your chance.
You didn't believe me the last time I gave you proof or evidence (The Creation, historical documents, archaeology, etc) so...
What would be the correct word then? "Predestination" is the word used in the Bible, so did the Bible use the wrong word?
Predestines is a good enough word for what happens. God knows what will happen to each of us, all the time. He doesn't have to change everything that happens unless He feels that it might cause us mortal harm. He let's a lot of things happen just as they would during the normal course of our lives. He sometimes intervenes, just like our parents would do, to protect us.

IDK, seems pretty dumb to believe in God but then refuse to follow him especially if you also believe eternal salvation is on the line. Not saying you're dumb, just trying to understand where you're coming from.
Not really. It's the difference between knowing about someone vs becoming close with them. I thought I was "cool with God" but I really wasn't until I really got to know Him.

But they were the loveliest of them all!! :lol: Do you see what I was saying though?
Yes.

...I'd much rather my consciousness go on but there is no evidence that it does.
Jesus said there is...

:confused:
So a tornado is proof of God? But we can explain it (pretty well) empirically, there is no need for God here...
No, it was just an analogy.

You didn't believe me the last time I gave you proof or evidence (The Creation, historical documents, archaeology, etc) so...


No, I provided this proof:

If: Creation = Creator
Then: No creator = No Creation

Therefore: God has no creator = God doesn't exist

The word of men that lived thousands of years ago just isn't enough to convince me, especially since no one bothered to write it down at the time.

But they did UNA! The Old Testament writings of Judaism (Tanakh) were at first passed along through oral teaching but then they were written down by the scribes. Jewish High Priests unrolled the scrolls and taught from them - the teachings of Moses and the Prophets whose words were documented and told the accounts about God's guidance, God's Laws and the coming day of a Messiah who would bring True Peace on earth. Jesus even read from them as noted in Luke 4:17-19:

And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord...


The Disciples of Jesus wrote letters to one another on parchment and their writings were passed along in the preaching ministry of the early 1st-century church. Those are the eye-witness accounts that are reliable and tell about the events happening during the time of Jesus. The writings comprise The New Testament teachings in the Holy Bible.

So, yes, men did "bother to write it down at the time."

No, I provided this proof:

If: Creation = Creator
Then: No creator = No Creation

Therefore: God has no creator = God doesn't exist
That is completely wrong because God doesn't always follow logical paths. You're trying to put limits on that which is limitless. IOW: You're trying to understand an infinite being with your finite mind.

You put science ahead of God when it should be the other way around. God made all the laws of science & nature and He didn't make them so that people would use them to disprove His existence.

Until you're willing to accept spiritual things by faith (and they're not imaginary) their understanding will always elude you.

That is completely wrong because God doesn't always follow logical paths. You're trying to put limits on that which is limitless. IOW: You're trying to understand an infinite being with your finite mind.

You put science ahead of God when it should be the other way around. God made all the laws of science & nature and He didn't make them so that people would use them to disprove His existence.

Until you're willing to accept spiritual things by faith (and they're not imaginary) their understanding will always elude you.

And we are done as the circle talk begins.

Final thoughts, the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, since nothing moves faster than the speed of light the universe is infinite. Yet my finite mind does a pretty good job at understanding that (that's not to say I or anyone knows everything about the universe yet). The number line is infinite and I understand math. I can grasp 4 spacial dimensions even though I only experience 3.

The fundamental problem I have with religion is that it assumes it knows everything (the answer being god) while science looks at how much we have left to discover. You don't have faith, you've just given up on looking for the answers. Thankfully we live in a world where you are the minority. We live in a world where most people won't say "we just aren't able to figure that out". 100 years ago lighting was the wrath of god and we would never understand it, lucky for us some people studied it and figured out electricity by abandoning the notion that "god just did it and we can't understand god" and made this conversation possible. Go ahead, keep following your god that exists in the gaps of science and watch him shrink away as those gaps are filled by those willing to keep looking for answers.

1) My example is from our galaxy not some far off corner of the universe. It is (astronomically speaking) in our back yard.

2) How do we know physics works everywhere and in the same way? Simple, the fundamental goal of all science, predictably. How do we know that we have proven how tides work (no matter what Bill O'Riley says)? Because we've been predicting the times tides would come in and out for about 300 years. Likewise, how do we know our models of astrophysics work? Because even the Romans were able to predict the placement of the stars on any given day, any given year. Since we know that stars that we can see and millions of light years away (if fact some are even farther and aren't stars at all, they are galaxies that are so far away they look to us to be stars when viewed by the naked eye). Since we use the laws of physics to predict the location of bodies in space and have been correct 100% of the time for the last few hundred years we know that even in far off galaxies, so far away some of the stars we can see don't even exist anymore because of the amount of time it took the light from that start to get here, we know that physics works everywhere.

Now, if you want to challenge that, you are making a claim that the laws of physics, as proven by experimentation and observation are not true then the burden of proof lies with you.

1) So what. This still does not prove any math we used here, based on the confines of where have travelled thus far, in any ways applies to objects in objects of places we have never been.

2) Oh, so the GOAL OF SCIENCE makes it true. Well, the goal of Christianity is to use God’s words to help bring people to God. LOOK IT’S WORKED! :jet: Billions over the millennia have become Christians. Because you can predict something is going to be in a certain place because of certain scientific laws doesn’t prove that object out there is a black hole. You’ve never been to one, you’ve never touched one, you’ve certainly never SEEN one (since they are conveniently invisible). The same evidence you are demanding to prove God is the same evidence that is lacking in proving certain scientific conclusions. The bottom line is, YOU BELIEVE THESE THINGS ARE TRUE because you believe the math. What if the math is wrong? And you believe science has been correct 100% of time in predicting where objects are going to be, what does that have to do with claiming that object out there is a black hole?

Let me make myself clear here, as I have tried to do on multiple occasions with you… I’m not trying to prove you wrong. I’m using your demands to prove the existence of God against you to prove the existence of certain things you’re convinced exist; but can’t prove it except through math and distance observations. The central core of what defines your trust in science is not all that different in what defines a Christian’s trust in the information that leads them to believe in God. FAITH. BELIEF.

Science may prove a lot of things, but it has yet to prove that God DOESN’T exist. In the end it boils down to what you chose to believe.

see how handy it is to wait until someone can actually answer the question before you use that word...

I asked you to prove black holes exist and you threw and bunch of rhetorical argument and Newton's Law, none of which proves black holes exist. That is a FAIL. :shrug:

It is this type of conundrum that leads many away from the Bible and to reason. This is a Biblical contradiction, the Bible says what it says and no interpretation of it can be sound because we just don't know. The Bible...#1 deconverter of Christians.

Perhaps you need to look at demographics to see where peoples’ beliefs lie. I suspect if I throw these stats in front of you, you will reject them. But the fact is people of faith (any faith) make up the vast majority of the world’s population. Of those Christians are the largest population. This doesn’t even account for the billions (or maybe eve trillions) over the millennia that have believed. Now, for people that like to use numbers to prove things, you can’t reject these facts. Claiming all these people are unreasonable while you – in the VAST MINORITY – claim you own reason is nothing more than arrogance in the face of overwhelming numbers.

Why should we accept that?!

Wait a second...if God can do whatever He want with/to us whenever He wants for whatever reason...then how can you count of free will? The mere ability to take it away negates the concept. Assuming He wont is NOT a safe not a valid assumption.

You obviously don’t have to. Guess what? YOU JUST EXERCISED FREE WILL!

But you’re purposely glazing over my point… God is doing what He wants, exercising His will over us, by giving us free will. Your assertion is false. If you have a child and give him an Xbox, you allow him to play with it any time he wants. However, you CAN take it away any time you want. But you don’t. Because you have the power to do something, yet don’t use it, doesn’t mean it negates the premise of ‘the gift’.

OK, so He predestined them which means He can do it to anyone. By definition, this effects free will.

Ok. :shrug: I didn’t say it didn’t. He is God and CAN do with His creation as He sees fit. Just as the universe turns and moves in its own way. We can't change it and we can't manipulate it to what we want it to be. I am saying that God is not pulling every single human’s strings at His own will. He is not picking and choosing every single person for their salvation. He has, however, used certain people to carry out His purpose. I understand this about as much you understand what REALLY causes mass to attract in space.

This is a difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. My life (all out lives) doesn't have purpose because an imaginary creature gave it one rather my life has purpose because I have hopes, dreams, goals, happiness, sadness and a will to leave the world a better place.

Hopes and dreams for what? Leave the world a better place for what? Why? If we’re just here and *poof* we’re gone. What grand purpose did you really serve other than just exist at this particular point in time? The difference is your hopes and dreams are over when you die. There is no hope beyond that. My hopes and dreams are promised forever.

No, I provided this proof:

If: Creation = Creator
Then: No creator = No Creation

Therefore: God has no creator = God doesn't exist

This cyclical thinking can be applied to your world of thinking.

How did all this stuff get here?

1) So what. This still does not prove any math we used here, based on the confines of where have travelled thus far, in any ways applies to objects in objects of places we have never been.

2) Oh, so the GOAL OF SCIENCE makes it true. Well, the goal of Christianity is to use God’s words to help bring people to God. LOOK IT’S WORKED! :jet: Billions over the millennia have become Christians. Because you can predict something is going to be in a certain place because of certain scientific laws doesn’t prove that object out there is a black hole. You’ve never been to one, you’ve never touched one, you’ve certainly never SEEN one (since they are conveniently invisible). The same evidence you are demanding to prove God is the same evidence that is lacking in proving certain scientific conclusions. The bottom line is, YOU BELIEVE THESE THINGS ARE TRUE because you believe the math. What if the math is wrong? And you believe science has been correct 100% of time in predicting where objects are going to be, what does that have to do with claiming that object out there is a black hole?

Let me make myself clear here, as I have tried to do on multiple occasions with you… I’m not trying to prove you wrong. I’m using your demands to prove the existence of God against you to prove the existence of certain things you’re convinced exist; but can’t prove it except through math and distance observations. The central core of what defines your trust in science is not all that different in what defines a Christian’s trust in the information that leads them to believe in God. FAITH. BELIEF.

Apparently you don't know how observation works. If you apply the same logic I used to Christianity then I (and many others) was raised in a Christian home, with Christian teachings and provided the same access to Christian information as you and yet I am not a Christian. Using the scientific method since there is no way to predict the outcome based upon the same circumstances therefore, your hypothesis is incorrect. If you try to apply the scientific method to this one, and truly understand how it works you will lose.

And no, you are not putting the same demands on me because you are changing the definition of science. You said "prove black holes exist", I did based on observation. You said "prove it's a black hole" I did based on another observation. You said "prove the laws of physics work everywhere", I did based on still more observations. After all that you just reject observation with no evidence to refute them. I'm not asking you to provide evidence then nonsensically rejecting it based on literally nothing.

Let me make myself clear here, as I have tried to do on multiple occasions with you… I’m not trying to prove you wrong.

Good, because you haven't.

Science may prove a lot of things, but it has yet to prove that God DOESN’T exist. In the end it boils down to what you chose to believe.

Science doesn't have to prove God doesn't exist any more than it has to prove that big foot doesn't exist. Are you accepting that unicorns, the tooth fairy and Santa Clause exist because science hasn't dis-proven them? By your logic I can list and unending list of things that you and everyone else would have to accept as existing based only on the grounds that science hasn't dis-proven them. To put it simply, that's just not how science, logic or any semblance of a working society work.

This is long, but could be helpful, I suggest watching:
KayBys8gaJY

I asked you to prove black holes exist and you threw and bunch of rhetorical argument and Newton's Law, none of which proves black holes exist. That is a FAIL. :shrug:

Because you're not a scientist, and have no desire to understand how science actually works. I didn't use a "rhetorical argument" I used actual observations taken in multiple places, at multiple times, by multiple people. That is the trifecta of provable evidence.

You, on the other hand used a subjective observation (people are Christians without defining the criteria of what makes a Christian) with no consideration of the method of one becoming a Christian.

Since you seem to want to apply scientific method to your hypothesis (which seems to be the ridiculous claim that because people believe in god there must be one) here goes. My sister and I are a mere 13 months apart in age. We were raised in the same home, with the same parents at the same time. We both received the same exposure to religion. My sister is a faithful follower, I am an Atheist. According to the scientific method, when 2 experiments (my sister and I) are conducted in the same manner (we were raised at the same time in the same conditions) and yield different results the hypothesis must be adjusted or rejected. There for, since you want to use science, I did, and have dis-proven your hypothesis based upon observable phenomena.

This cyclical thinking can be applied to your world of thinking.

How did all this stuff get here?

How did the world, the universe get here? If that's what you're asking then the answer is simple. We're looking, there are currently some great experiments going on but currently we aren't sure. Unlike religion, science is still looking.

Apparently you don't know how observation works. If you apply the same logic I used to Christianity then I (and many others) was raised in a Christian home, with Christian teachings and provided the same access to Christian information as you and yet I am not a Christian. Using the scientific method since there is no way to predict the outcome based upon the same circumstances therefore, your hypothesis is incorrect. If you try to apply the scientific method to this one, and truly understand how it works you will lose.

In other words; when you can’t convince me (FAIL), you throw the ‘FAIL’ card, but word it differently. :lol:

There is no win or lose here. These things boil down to what you believe. Period! Look, I’ve told you this before, I mostly agree with what our science have revealed. I have told you before that science has convinced me there are black holes. I am using a rhetorical argument to show that you can’t prove – beyond doubt – that anything you believe is true anymore than I can prove my God exists. There is enough evidence for me to BELIEVE black holes exist. There is also enough evidence for me to BELIEVE the God I believe in exists. I was raised in a home where my dad was an atheist and science was the evidence for all things that exist. My neighbor was John Mather (look him up). He frequently came to our house for these discussions. Devoid of any Christian influence in my house, I still became a Christian. So did my brother. :shrug:

The one compelling thing, if nothing else, that has convinced me about God is all these billions of people, passed on from one generation to the next are wrong? I think not. And this doesn’t even consider documented evidence of God as well as archeological evidence. All of which you reject. You refuse to accept that not everything has to have some equation to substantiate. You refuse to accept that perhaps math can’t explain everything; and it doesn’t need to.

And no, you are not putting the same demands on me because you are changing the definition of science. You said "prove black holes exist", I did based on observation. You said "prove it's a black hole" I did based on another observation. You said "prove the laws of physics work everywhere", I did based on still more observations. After all that you just reject observation with no evidence to refute them. I'm not asking you to provide evidence then nonsensically rejecting it based on literally nothing.

(Not sure why this is showing up in your post)

How can you claim something exists based on observation yet deny a Christian’s contention that God exists based on the same factors (observation)? You didn’t prove anything except post a video that shows me nothing. I am demanding that you actually SHOW me a black hole. Don’t give me math or ‘observations’; physically show me. Until you can do this, I can place doubt on it.

Science doesn't have to prove God doesn't exist any more than it has to prove that big foot doesn't exist. Are you accepting that unicorns, the tooth fairy and Santa Clause exist because science hasn't dis-proven them? By your logic I can list and unending list of things that you and everyone else would have to accept as existing based only on the grounds that science hasn't dis-proven them. To put it simply, that's just not how science, logic or any semblance of a working society work.

But you use science as a means to be convinced that God doesn’t exist. By proxy, it is the same thing. Because it can’t prove God exists, therefore God must not exist. But since you inserted logic into this… What sort of logic goes into suggesting that the vast majority of humans on this earth, over several millenia, are wrong? That somehow, you atheists, because you have math and science, you’ve got it right? I live in a place where both worlds can be right. One does not disprove the other in any way.

I can’t watch your video right now.

Because you're not a scientist, and have no desire to understand how science actually works. I didn't use a "rhetorical argument" I used actual observations taken in multiple places, at multiple times, by multiple people. That is the trifecta of provable evidence.

You, on the other hand used a subjective observation (people are Christians without defining the criteria of what makes a Christian) with no consideration of the method of one becoming a Christian.

Since you seem to want to apply scientific method to your hypothesis (which seems to be the ridiculous claim that because people believe in god there must be one) here goes. My sister and I are a mere 13 months apart in age. We were raised in the same home, with the same parents at the same time. We both received the same exposure to religion. My sister is a faithful follower, I am an Atheist. According to the scientific method, when 2 experiments (my sister and I) are conducted in the same manner (we were raised at the same time in the same conditions) and yield different results the hypothesis must be adjusted or rejected. There for, since you want to use science, I did, and have dis-proven your hypothesis based upon observable phenomena.

I like your reasoning, I really do; but you really don’t pay good attention.

Since we’ve been down this road a few times, I assumed you knew my arguments are rhetorical. Please stop assuming I don’t have a desire to understand, or even understand science. You really know nothing about me. Attacking my knowledge level does not make your argument stronger.

I gave you my example of my parents (atheists) and my brother and me; same scenario on the opposite end of your spectrum. So what? Try to apply your scientific method here. :shrug:

How did the world, the universe get here? If that's what you're asking then the answer is simple. We're looking, there are currently some great experiments going on but currently we aren't sure. Unlike religion, science is still looking.

No... not "How did the universe get here". How did all the stuff (matter) get here. Where did it come from? With every answer (theory) you try to come up with the question "why" can always be asked.

For instance... why does mass have gravity in space? Throw me all of your calcutions and theories and I can still ask "Okay, but why does it happen that way?" There is no real definitive way of explaining WHY these things happen.

In other words; when you can’t convince me (FAIL), you throw the ‘FAIL’ card, but word it differently. :lol:

When you unreasonable reject a proven concept you fail.

There is no win or lose here. These things boil down to what you believe. Period! Look, I’ve told you this before, I mostly agree with what our science have revealed. I have told you before that science has convinced me there are black holes. I am using a rhetorical argument to show that you can’t prove – beyond doubt – that anything you believe is true anymore than I can prove my God exists. There is enough evidence for me to BELIEVE black holes exist. There is also enough evidence for me to BELIEVE the God I believe in exists. I was raised in a home where my dad was an atheist and science was the evidence for all things that exist. My neighbor was John Mather (look him up). He frequently came to our house for these discussions. Devoid of any Christian influence in my house, I still became a Christian. So did my brother. :shrug:

Can, and have proven without a reasonable doubt. Sure anyone can say they don't think something exists but that just makes them wrong. As Neil Degrass Tyson says, "Facts are true weather or not you believe them."

The one compelling thing, if nothing else, that has convinced me about God is all these billions of people, passed on from one generation to the next are wrong? I think not. And this doesn’t even consider documented evidence of God as well as archeological evidence. All of which you reject. You refuse to accept that not everything has to have some equation to substantiate. You refuse to accept that perhaps math can’t explain everything; and it doesn’t need to.

So I supposed you also believe in Allah, the Yeti and any number of long standing myths that have been passed down. Some for even longer than Christianity. People believe a lot of stupid things and the fact alone that people believe them not one doesn't prove they are true, it's not even evidence that it's true.

There is no (that is none, zero, not a speck) of archaeological evidence for the existence of god. There is archaeological evidence that some of the events of the Bible took place (mostly the battles of the old testament). The evidence of a battle or that a building once stood somewhere at best only proves (assuming said building was a holy place or the battle was fought for religious reasons) that people believed there was a god, not that there actually was. This argument then is the exact same as the first one, basically "people have believed in god for a long time".

No, I don't say math or science "knows everything". That what religion does, the answer is "god did it". Science is still looking for answers to a lot of questions, but when it comes to black holes, the age of the Earth, how tides work, ect. yes, we do know. There are still more questions than answers and we are still looking but like I've said, if you leave your faith in the god that lives in the gaps of science you'll be forced to either 1) become irrelevant as you reject proven facts of the universe or 2) watch your god shrink away to nothing. Of course the other option is to accept science and find a way to reconcile your religion with the scientific facts as many others have.



How can you claim something exists based on observation yet deny a Christian’s contention that God exists based on the same factors (observation)? You didn’t prove anything except post a video that shows me nothing. I am demanding that you actually SHOW me a black hole. Don’t give me math or ‘observations’; physically show me. Until you can do this, I can place doubt on it.

All you've or anyone else has ever provided is observations that people believe in god, a fact I'm not contesting. Yes, plenty of people believe in god. An observation that people believe in god is not that same as observing god or a work of god.

The only evidence presented is a 2000 year old book, of questionable authorship, questionable authenticity, edited by people with questionable motives. And beyond that, followers of the book don't even agree on which parts are literal and which are poetic.



But you use science as a means to be convinced that God doesn’t exist. By proxy, it is the same thing. Because it can’t prove God exists, therefore God must not exist. But since you inserted logic into this… What sort of logic goes into suggesting that the vast majority of humans on this earth, over several millenia, are wrong? That somehow, you atheists, because you have math and science, you’ve got it right? I live in a place where both worlds can be right. One does not disprove the other in any way.

People are wrong all the time and science is not a democratic process. I'm going to go on a limb and assume you did not vote for Obama for president. If you did replace Obama with Bush. The majority of American citizens voted for Obama, does that mean it is infallible that he is a good president? By your logic Christianity is wrong and Islam is right because world wide there are more Muslims than Christians. There are also more Communists in the world than those who believe in Democracy. Does that make Democracy wrong? Are we just going to take it as fact that just because the majority believes in something that makes it valid? Was the Earth flat before it became the prevalent theory that it was round? Did believing in the roundness of the Earth magically make it round?

You simply can't prove something by saying "a lot of people believe in it." A lot of people think Justin Beiber is a great artist, but he still sucks.:drummer:

No... not "How did the universe get here". How did all the stuff (matter) get here. Where did it come from? With every answer (theory) you try to come up with the question "why" can always be asked.

For instance... why does mass have gravity in space? Throw me all of your calcutions and theories and I can still ask "Okay, but why does it happen that way?" There is no real definitive way of explaining WHY these things happen.

Please see the definitions of science and philosophy, compare the differences and you'll arrive very easily at your answer.

I like your reasoning, I really do; but you really don’t pay good attention.

Since we’ve been down this road a few times, I assumed you knew my arguments are rhetorical. Please stop assuming I don’t have a desire to understand, or even understand science. You really know nothing about me. Attacking my knowledge level does not make your argument stronger.

I gave you my example of my parents (atheists) and my brother and me; same scenario on the opposite end of your spectrum. So what? Try to apply your scientific method here. :shrug:

Hypothesis: Personal beliefs are based upon unique personal experiences.

Experiment: See mine and your examples.

Results: Hypothesis supported.

Conclusion: Belief in a deity is base on personal experiences and not any provable evidence beyond the interpretation of experiences and emotions. There is no valid way of predicting who will and will not hold a belief in a deity. Belief in a deity is therefore based upon subjective experience rather than demonstration of physical evidence.

Done.

Hypothesis: Personal beliefs are based upon unique personal experiences.

Experiment: See mine and your examples.

Results: Hypothesis supported.

Conclusion: Belief in a deity is base on personal experiences and not any provable evidence beyond the interpretation of experiences and emotions. There is no valid way of predicting who will and will not hold a belief in a deity. Belief in a deity is therefore based upon subjective experience rather than demonstration of physical evidence.

Done.

How is a FACT that billions have believed in this diety based on my personal experiences? My personal experiences do not change that fact. Your disbelieve in this God does not change that fact.

How does historical documentation and archeological evidence become personal experiences?

When you unreasonable reject a proven concept you fail.

What have you proved; that you can quote laws of nature and equations? You have still yet to show me a black hole.

Can, and have proven without a reasonable doubt. Sure anyone can say they don't think something exists but that just makes them wrong. As Neil Degrass Tyson says, "Facts are true weather or not you believe them."

No you have not. You have asserted a theory which you support.

So I supposed you also believe in Allah, the Yeti and any number of long standing myths that have been passed down. Some for even longer than Christianity. People believe a lot of stupid things and the fact alone that people believe them not one doesn't prove they are true, it's not even evidence that it's true.

And I suppose you believe in man-made global warming, and alien life, and alternate universes, parallel universes, and that matter breaks down in a black hole, and that it doesn't, and that the universe did not begin with a single big bang but with millions of big bangs?

There is no (that is none, zero, not a speck) of archaeological evidence for the existence of god. There is archaeological evidence that some of the events of the Bible took place (mostly the battles of the old testament). The evidence of a battle or that a building once stood somewhere at best only proves (assuming said building was a holy place or the battle was fought for religious reasons) that people believed there was a god, not that there actually was. This argument then is the exact same as the first one, basically "people have believed in god for a long time".

And there is no absolute scientific proof that black holes exist. You only have math and observations of objects never visited by humans, and your belief this is true. :shrug:

You simply can't prove something by saying "a lot of people believe in it." A lot of people think Justin Beiber is a great artist, but he still sucks.:drummer:

It is one piece of evidence; not proof alone.

I’m not even going to try to disagree with the Beiber point. :lmao:

Please see the definitions of science and philosophy, compare the differences and you'll arrive very easily at your answer.

What? What's philosphical about proving how matter came to exist?

Predestines is a good enough word for what happens. God knows what will happen to each of us, all the time. He doesn't have to change everything that happens unless He feels that it might cause us mortal harm. He let's a lot of things happen just as they would during the normal course of our lives. He sometimes intervenes, just like our parents would do, to protect us.

...but only sometimes...

Again, He has the ability to intervene (we agree the Bible says this). If He can and has then how can we say we have free will? Parents who intervene to protect does not compare; a parent would not allow mortal harm to come to their children, a parent does not predetermine whether they will love and have mercy on their child (good ones anyways - of course God does this ).

Also, I've noticed that when I say "God does (a) which is bad, if a human did it it would be bad" Christians come back with "God works in mysterious ways", "God doesn't operate like we do" and so on. According to Christians, God's actions cannot be compared to those of a human. So the parent analogy cannot apply.

Not really. It's the difference between knowing about someone vs becoming close with them. I thought I was "cool with God" but I really wasn't until I really got to know Him.

I see

Jesus said there is...

So it must be true! Someone said that someone said that someone hear that someone else said something and 70+ years after he died someone else wrote it down! TRUTH! :killingme

No, it was just an analogy.

So faith is God is like having faith that a tornado went trough LaPlata even if I didn't personally see it. OK. So taking the word of a first-hand eyewitness is just as good as the 200th-hand "eyewitness"? Seeing the devastation cause by a natural disaster as evidence of the event is significantly more substantial.

But they did UNA! The Old Testament writings of Judaism (Tanakh) were at first passed along through oral teaching but then they were written down by the scribes. Jewish High Priests unrolled the scrolls and taught from them - the teachings of Moses and the Prophets whose words were documented and told the accounts about God's guidance, God's Laws and the coming day of a Messiah who would bring True Peace on earth. Jesus even read from them as noted in Luke 4:17-19:

The Disciples of Jesus wrote letters to one another on parchment and their writings were passed along in the preaching ministry of the early 1st-century church. Those are the eye-witness accounts that are reliable and tell about the events happening during the time of Jesus. The writings comprise The New Testament teachings in the Holy Bible.

So, yes, men did "bother to write it down at the time."

Ever played telephone? :lol:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CHkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reasons.org%2F&ei=aUCkT5qWCsy3twfn-9WZDQ&usg=AFQjCNEygJpolkXphGFbfERoSn_18Md5Qw&sig2=D5zZRjgV4BMb60iMYL1ZaQ

Perhaps you need to look at demographics to see where peoples’ beliefs lie. I suspect if I throw these stats in front of you, you will reject them. But the fact is people of faith (any faith) make up the vast majority of the world’s population. Of those Christians are the largest population. This doesn’t even account for the billions (or maybe eve trillions) over the millennia that have believed. Now, for people that like to use numbers to prove things, you can’t reject these facts. Claiming all these people are unreasonable while you – in the VAST MINORITY – claim you own reason is nothing more than arrogance in the face of overwhelming numbers.

Didn't you just get upset with McGinn for making assumptions about you?

I never said the non-theists are a majority, or even a large minority! Where did you get that? I also never said that "all (Christians) people are unreasonable".

Of course, falling back on the whole "But lots of people agree" argument is baseless. Throughout history many (often a majority) of people have believed many things that were wrong.

Besides, the Muslims are catching up. By your logic, maybe I should convert!

You obviously don’t have to. Guess what? YOU JUST EXERCISED FREE WILL!

But you’re purposely glazing over my point… God is doing what He wants, exercising His will over us, by giving us free will. Your assertion is false. If you have a child and give him an Xbox, you allow him to play with it any time he wants. However, you CAN take it away any time you want. But you don’t. Because you have the power to do something, yet don’t use it, doesn’t mean it negates the premise of ‘the gift’.

I don't think comparing eternal salvation and mercy to an Xbox is really fair here...

I'm sorry, I must have missed your point since you seem to be under the impression that I am " purposely glazing over" it. :sarcasm: Or maybe I'm just disagreeing with you? My refusal to immediately leap to your side is not indicative of a refusal to address your point. I'm trying to understand from where you interpretation is coming and how it is stronger than a literal one.

Ok. :shrug: I didn’t say it didn’t. He is God and CAN do with His creation as He sees fit. Just as the universe turns and moves in its own way. We can't change it and we can't manipulate it to what we want it to be. I am saying that God is not pulling every single human’s strings at His own will. He is not picking and choosing every single person for their salvation. He has, however, used certain people to carry out His purpose. I understand this about as much you understand what REALLY causes mass to attract in space.

OK. And I'm saying that this negates true free will as defined by a majority of (American) Christians today.

Hopes and dreams for what? Leave the world a better place for what? Why? If we’re just here and *poof* we’re gone. What grand purpose did you really serve other than just exist at this particular point in time? The difference is your hopes and dreams are over when you die. There is no hope beyond that. My hopes and dreams are promised forever.

My hopes and dreams do not rely on the HOPE and DREAM that there is a higher power waiting to take me away to my eternal salvation. My hopes and dreams are in the here and now, they will live on in the people I touch throughout my lifetime. For many it lives on in their children. I don't expect my legacy to be a great and world changing one, but if I can make one little corner better for someone then I've accomplished something.

By your logic there is no point, no reason to live a good life other than to have a better one after death. Why do anything?! Sell all your possessions, quit your job, stop voting, stop learning, stop discovering, stop talking, stop donating time or money to charities that make the world a better place in the here and now. Go be a hermit in a cave because according to you there is no point to this life except to get to the next one.

I sure hope for your sake that your hopes and dreams are forever because if they're not you sure as hell wasted this life.

UNA, please check out the link I posted for you. Also, please think about the Higgs Boson and other things that seem to point to our Creator. This is not a pride thing, but an honest search for the truth. If you still disagree, I'm cool with that and will "duel" with you in a nice way until the last.

And I suppose you believe in man-made global warming, and alien life, and alternate universes, parallel universes, and that matter breaks down in a black hole, and that it doesn't, and that the universe did not begin with a single big bang but with millions of big bangs?:

Why do you keep accusing him of believing in theories?

For the sake of it, lets say that I say "Alien life exists and they've been here". I can't prove it and I understand that, I've just seen some evidence and I think it pretty compelling BUT I STILL KNOW IT'S JUST A THEORY and I don't try to convince people that it is a FACT and that I have proof because the Great Pyramid exists!***

Figuring that a THEORY might be true and insisting that the existence of God is a FACT are not comparable. Non-theists are OK with not knowing everything (in fact its more fun that way) and don't insist on inserting something into every gap.

***I do NOT believe in ancient aliens :lol:

<a href="http://narwhaler.com/ill-tell-you-why-ancient-aliens-Rtv9cb"><img src="http://narwhaler.com/img/rt/v/ill-tell-you-why-ancient-aliens-Rtv9cb.jpg" alt="Ill tell you why Ancient Aliens" title="Ill tell you why Ancient Aliens" /></a><br>View more <a href="http://narwhaler.com/ancient-aliens">ancient aliens images</a>

What? What's philosphical about proving how matter came to exist?

(Sorry, I just can't keep my mouth shut) ...weren't you asking for "why's"? Not "how's"?

UNA, please check out the link I posted for you. Also, please think about the Higgs Boson and other things that seem to point to our Creator. This is not a pride thing, but an honest search for the truth. If you still disagree, I'm cool with that and will "duel" with you in a nice way until the last.


Please do look at the suggested site. It will take a while because there is a lot there to be studied.

Didn't you just get upset with McGinn for making assumptions about you?

I think there’s a little bit of a difference between questioning someone’s level of knowledge (a personal attack), and assuming how someone will answer a question. And, for the record, I didn't get upset; I was setting him straight.

The rest of your post is getting redundant; on both our parts. Agree to disagree. :buddies:

(Sorry, I just can't keep my mouth shut) ...weren't you asking for "why's"? Not "how's"?

Yes... because when he answered, my follow up would have been 'why'. You have to give my line dialectics a chance.

Why do you keep accusing him of believing in theories?

Because he does? :shrug: Believing the phenomena occurring in certain points of space are black holes is completely based on theory. McGinn believes they are black holes. He believes in a theory. That was easy. :biggrin:

Ever played telephone? :lol:

Ever played post office? * lol

As mentioned about Judaism, the Oral Laws and historical accounts of God dealing with the Jewish people were eventually written down by the scribes and became the verifiable references to turn to for the continued teaching of their faith.

However, unlike the scenario of a gathering of people passing along info where facts change and the story ends up totally different with the last person giving the account, the accuracy of the Word of God was revealed by the Holy Spirit to the Prophets who did not change the message at all. God's Truth to mankind remained as reliable teachings that could be trusted since the Prophets were sent and led by God.


Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:20-21)

* Now, about playing post office: After the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead and His Ascension to Heaven, His disciples documented their experiences on parchments and even sent letters back and forth among themselves and to the early churches with the Gospel Message that Christ was indeed the Son of God and Jewish Messiah. They shared the accounts of their personal experiences through these letters (epistles). However, as in the case with the Old Testament Prophets, the Holy Spirit of God gave the inspiration to Jesus' disciples of what to write and the accuracy of the accounts of their experiences was brought into their remembrance by God's Holy Spirit, as Jesus said would happen.
The New Testament accounts are the reliable and trustworthy teachings of Jesus Christ that were documented by those who had first-hand experiences and whose writings were led by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. In order to keep the record straight and true, Jesus told His disciples that the Holy Spirit would be sent to remind them of His teachings that they should write about:


“All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid. (John 14:25-27)


The Holy Bible contains all the information necessary for mankind to know about God and His Plan of Salvation for mankind through the Atoning Blood of Christ.


All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (2 Timothy 3:16)

And as the Holy Spirit gave that inspiration to the Prophets and Jesus' disciples of what to write, so too does the Holy Spirit open up the understanding to those who read from The Word of God:


As for you, see that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. And this is what he promised us—eternal life.
I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him. (1 John 2:24-27)

The New Testament accounts of Jesus' birth, life and ministry are the proof that God is and that God is willing to interact in the personal life of each individual who seeks Him with a genuine and sincere desire to know the Truth - and, yes, There is Only One Truth. (John 14:6)

UNA, please check out the link I posted for you. Also, please think about the Higgs Boson and other things that seem to point to our Creator. This is not a pride thing, but an honest search for the truth. If you still disagree, I'm cool with that and will "duel" with you in a nice way until the last.

The Higgs Boson remains unobserved. It will neither prove nor disprove the existence of God (if it exists). It would merely prove the Standard Model correct (which isn't really mere is it :lol:)

Interestingly Peter Higgs (for which the particle is named) is also an atheist and is therefore not pleased with the Higgs Boson being referred to the "God Particle"

I think there’s a little bit of a difference between questioning someone’s level of knowledge (a personal attack), and assuming how someone will answer a question. And, for the record, I didn't get upset; I was setting him straight.

OK, then "Please stop assuming I don’t have a desire to --take all the evidence into account--. You really know nothing about me. Attacking my --ability to reason--does not make your argument stronger."

The rest of your post is getting redundant; on both our parts. Agree to disagree. :buddies:

Seriously? That quickly? :lol:

OK, I'll just copy this to be sure you read it clearly as I don't appreciate being told my life is pointless because I don't believe like you...it's a lot like having one's knowledge or ability to reason attacked...

My hopes and dreams do not rely on the HOPE and DREAM that there is a higher power waiting to take me away to my eternal salvation. My hopes and dreams are in the here and now, they will live on in the people I touch throughout my lifetime. For many it lives on in their children. I don't expect my legacy to be a great and world changing one, but if I can make one little corner better for someone then I've accomplished something.

By your logic there is no point, no reason to live a good life other than to have a better one after death. Why do anything?! Sell all your possessions, quit your job, stop voting, stop learning, stop discovering, stop talking, stop donating time or money to charities that make the world a better place in the here and now. Go be a hermit in a cave because according to you there is no point to this life except to get to the next one.

I sure hope for your sake that your hopes and dreams are forever because if they're not you sure as hell wasted this life.

Yes... because when he answered, my follow up would have been 'why'. You have to give my line dialectics a chance.

You differentiated between the "how's" and the "why's" insisting that the "why" questions be answered with science...then asked...again...a "how" question. The "why's" are philosophical (and/or religious by proxy), the "how's" are scientific.

Because he does? :shrug: Believing the phenomena occurring in certain points of space are black holes is completely based on theory. McGinn believes they are black holes. He believes in a theory. That was easy. :biggrin:

Didn't you watch the video? Stars circle tightly around an unseen central point, no radiation...we have defined that to be a black hole. You saw it with your own eyes! Do you propose a different explanation? I'd love to hear it and look forward to seeing your evidence. :smile:

Ever played post office? * lol

As mentioned about Judaism, the Oral Laws and historical accounts of God dealing with the Jewish people were eventually written down by the scribes and became the verifiable references to turn to for the continued teaching of their faith.

However, unlike the scenario of a gathering of people passing along info where facts change and the story ends up totally different with the last person giving the account, the accuracy of the Word of God was revealed by the Holy Spirit to the Prophets who did not change the message at all. God's Truth to mankind remained as reliable teachings that could be trusted since the Prophets were sent and led by God.

OK, God did it. Then why does everyone read it differently?

I honestly understand why people have such strong faith in religion, it's MUCH easier to move through life explaining all the unexplaned, everything that challenges a belief, with "because God did it", "God fixed it", "God made sure that wouldn't happen", "You just don't have God because you don't believe right/enough"...



* Now, about playing post office: After the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead and His Ascension to Heaven, His disciples documented their experiences on parchments and even sent letters back and forth among themselves and to the early churches with the Gospel Message that Christ was indeed the Son of God and Jewish Messiah. They shared the accounts of their personal experiences through these letters (epistles). However, as in the case with the Old Testament Prophets, the Holy Spirit of God gave the inspiration to Jesus' disciples of what to write and the accuracy of the accounts of their experiences was brought into their remembrance by God's Holy Spirit, as Jesus said would happen.
The New Testament accounts are the reliable and trustworthy teachings of Jesus Christ that were documented by those who had first-hand experiences and whose writings were led by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. In order to keep the record straight and true, Jesus told His disciples that the Holy Spirit would be sent to remind them of His teachings that they should write about:

The Holy Bible contains all the information necessary for mankind to know about God and His Plan of Salvation for mankind through the Atoning Blood of Christ.

And as the Holy Spirit gave that inspiration to the Prophets and Jesus' disciples of what to write, so too does the Holy Spirit open up the understanding to those who read from The Word of God:

The New Testament accounts of Jesus' birth, life and ministry are the proof that God is and that God is willing to interact in the personal life of each individual who seeks Him with a genuine and sincere desire to know the Truth - and, yes, There is Only One Truth. (John 14:6)

Then why are there discrepancies between the Gospels WRT Jesus? Sounds like God may have let things get a 'little' confused...

How is a FACT that billions have believed in this diety based on my personal experiences? My personal experiences do not change that fact. Your disbelieve in this God does not change that fact.

I said personal experience, not your personal experience. Each individual's personal experience.

I'm also not arguing the fact that people believe in god. Of course they do, many people for a long time. People believed in go even before the Jewish faith. But just because people believe something doesn't make it true.

How does historical documentation and archeological evidence become personal experiences?

I already addressed the "historical documentation" and "archaeological evidence" and you didn't address it. Again, the only proof available is that people believe there is a god, not that there is a god.

OK, God did it. Then why does everyone read it differently?

Because humans become divisive through indoctrinations in the various denominations which then follow erroneous teachings of a fallible man. They trust a human to lead them rather than trust in God to lead them.

OTOH: When individuals let go and let God guide them through the help of His Holy Spirit then they will be "on the same page" by placing faith together in the same Jesus of The New Testament and not "another Jesus" as various other religions preach.


I honestly understand why people have such strong faith in religion, it's MUCH easier to move through life explaining all the unexplaned, everything that challenges a belief, with "because God did it", "God fixed it", "God made sure that wouldn't happen", "You just don't have God because you don't believe right/enough"...


Well...yes, Una! When God is involved in the life of a believer there is no doubt that circumstances can and will happen where they can definitely say, "God did it," "God fixed it," "God made sure that wouldn't happen".

BTW: God's Word indicates that He can be found by the individual who seeks Him with a sincere desire to know Him. However, that requires you opening the door to placing faith in the existence and Deity of Jesus Christ and asking Him to reveal Truth to you.


Then why are there discrepancies between the Gospels WRT Jesus? Sounds like God may have let things get a 'little' confused...

Please list the examples that you are referring to where there are "discrepancies" regarding Jesus. Then we can address your question.

What have you proved; that you can quote laws of nature and equations? You have still yet to show me a black hole.

Yes, I did. And not an artist rendering an actual, photographic, black hole at the center of our galaxy the only way it can be viewed. What you're doing is the exact same thing as walking in a dark room, bumping into a couch and saying the couch isn't there because it's too dark to see it.

No you have not. You have asserted a theory which you support.

Yes, I have. I've displayed that math and the physical laws are the same everywhere.

And I suppose you believe in man-made global warming, and alien life, and alternate universes, parallel universes, and that matter breaks down in a black hole, and that it doesn't, and that the universe did not begin with a single big bang but with millions of big bangs?

Guess I'll take these one at a time:

The Earth is getting hotter - Yes. Man is causing it - dubious. Man can fix it - doubtful

Alien life - yes. Alien life that has visited Earth - no.

Alternate/parallel universes (any iteration of the multiverse concept) - not unless some evidence is produced

Matter breaks down in a black hole (aka the Hawking or Black hole information paradox) - absolutely not, though you seem to since this is the only thing that challenges the fact that the laws of physics work everywhere

Multiple big bangs - this is tied to the multiverse, unless you are talking about an oscillating universe. in either case no, I like the idea, but I can like it and still not think it's true

Of course, you should believe in at least the global warming thing, since a whole lot of other people do.

What? What's philosphical about proving how matter came to exist?

you didn't say "how", you said "why". "How" for science. "Why" which in this context means something like "for what reason" or "to what end" is for philosophy.

If you mean how, and truly how, not why, just the function that created matter then at current I can simply say "we don't know" but there are a lot of people far smarter than me working on just that question.

Incidentally, saying "god created matter" still doesn't answer "how" it answers "who", just food for thought.

Because he does? :shrug: Believing the phenomena occurring in certain points of space are black holes is completely based on theory. McGinn believes they are black holes. He believes in a theory. That was easy. :biggrin:

I don't believe there is a black hole. There is a region in space that behaves as a black hole is described. That's like saying I believe that bird over there is a duck because it fits every definition of a duck, which by the way, we defined. That's how vocabulary works.

I think there’s a little bit of a difference between questioning someone’s level of knowledge (a personal attack), and assuming how someone will answer a question. And, for the record, I didn't get upset; I was setting him straight.

The rest of your post is getting redundant; on both our parts. Agree to disagree. :buddies:

You are either not getting it, or playing dumb, either way it's your failing not mine.

And by the way, hop on my myths about atheism thread and ask J.P. Cusick what a "personal attack" from me looks like.

Yes, I did. And not an artist rendering an actual, photographic, black hole at the center of our galaxy the only way it can be viewed. What you're doing is the exact same thing as walking in a dark room, bumping into a couch and saying the couch isn't there because it's too dark to see it.

That’s absurd. If I bump into a couch in a dark room, I can reach out and touch it and tell by touch that it’s a couch. You show me videos of something – very blurry – in ‘the center of our galaxy’ that show a lot of dark space and claim it’s a black hole, that’s akin to showing me a dark photo of a landscape and tell me it’s trees, then when I actually get there to check out the trees I find out it’s fog. Until you can actually GO THERE you’re assuming it’s a black hole. Your video proves nothing.

And you can’t even prove it’s the center of the galaxy. Perhaps space causes such distortions that creates the illusion that you’re looking at the center of the galaxy. You really don’t know with absolute FACT because you can’t go there and experience it in your face.

Yes, I have. I've displayed that math and the physical laws are the same everywhere.

You BELIEVE that’s true. But as I keep saying, unless you can actually go there, you are making an assumption.

Guess I'll take these one at a time:

The Earth is getting hotter - Yes. Man is causing it - dubious. Man can fix it – doubtful

The scientific and meteorological communities don’t agree on this. Until they do, you are choosing what to believe. I haven't taken sides.

Alien life - yes. Alien life that has visited Earth - no.

There is no proof there is alien life. Again, your belief.

Alternate/parallel universes (any iteration of the multiverse concept) - not unless some evidence is produced

:yay:

Matter breaks down in a black hole (aka the Hawking or Black hole information paradox) - absolutely not, though you seem to since this is the only thing that challenges the fact that the laws of physics work everywhere

Since no one has actually gone there to experience it and prove it; it’s a theory and no one really knows. The only thing scientists agree on is the laws of physics change in a black hole. Imagine that.

Multiple big bangs - this is tied to the multiverse, unless you are talking about an oscillating universe. in either case no, I like the idea, but I can like it and still not think it's true

In other words, our scientific community is really interesting and creative in coming up with wild theories, but not really all that factual.

Of course, you should believe in at least the global warming thing, since a whole lot of other people do.

I didn’t say I didn’t believe in global warming. I don’t know. No one has convinced me one way or the other.

How did the world, the universe get here? If that's what you're asking then the answer is simple. We're looking, there are currently some great experiments going on but currently we aren't sure. Unlike religion, science is still looking.
But it's not simple according to you. You make everything soo complicated. The answer is simple but you won't believe it unless you conduct a year long scientific study of it. IOW: You insist on ignoring Gods' answers so you can wait for the scientific answers you want. Religion has all the answers necessary for life while science is STILL trying to figure out which came first, the chicken or the egg.

Why hasn't science created their own world by making their own "everything"? Because, unlike God, they can't create something out of nothing. Science will NEVER answer the main question about the origin of the universe because they leave the most important element out: The Creator...

Again, He has the ability to intervene (we agree the Bible says this). If He can and has then how can we say we have free will? Parents who intervene to protect does not compare; a parent would not allow mortal harm to come to their children, a parent does not predetermine whether they will love and have mercy on their child (good ones anyways - of course God does this).

Also, I've noticed that when I say "God does (a) which is bad, if a human did it it would be bad" Christians come back with "God works in mysterious ways", "God doesn't operate like we do" and so on. According to Christians, God's actions cannot be compared to those of a human. So the parent analogy cannot apply.
Sure it can apply. The difference is that Gods' intervention is perfect because He's perfect. He doesn't have to stay within the laws of science or human understanding. Jesus compared many earthly things to spiritual things in the Gospels to describe places & things that people couldn't, otherwise, understand.

Parents do their best with what they know but they don't always know what is best for their kids like God does. While God would allow someone to be killed, a parent might give their life up to protect their kids from death. The point here is that God sees & knows all things, so He makes the right decision every time.

My choice to follow God DID cause me to "readjust" my free will choices but it was MY choice to do it. God may stop me but I can still go out and do whatever I want no matter how heinous it might be...(but of course I no longer want to).

So it must be true! Someone said that someone said that someone hear that someone else said something and 70+ years after he died someone else wrote it down! TRUTH! :killingme
This is why you have to know (and accept) that God controlled what the writers wrote so that the "he said, she said" wouldn't apply.The timeline in which the Gospels & NT were written was between 17 and 38 years after Christ. This is a very important fact about the NT writings:

"All of the New Testament was written between A.D. 47 and 70. There simply was not enough time for myths about Christ to be created and propagated. And the multitudes of eyewitnesses who were alive when the New Testament books began to be circulated would have challenged blatant historical fabrications about the life of Christ."

So faith is God is like having faith that a tornado went trough LaPlata even if I didn't personally see it. OK. So taking the word of a first-hand eyewitness is just as good as the 200th-hand "eyewitness"? Seeing the devastation cause by a natural disaster as evidence of the event is significantly more substantial.
More substantial than God?? No way, but that would make a good modern day parable... It's just an analogy to say I have faith in something/someone that I didn't personally see. I believed because I saw the evidence of it. That LaPlata event was also witnessed by people who were right there. So it was with some of the Bible writers. They didn't blindly believe.

Drop it. What a waste. Go to church or give it up.

Drop it. What a waste. Go to church or give it up.
I really hope you're not talking to me.........but anyhow, why is it a waste?

I don't believe there is a black hole. There is a region in space that behaves as a black hole is described. That's like saying I believe that bird over there is a duck because it fits every definition of a duck, which by the way, we defined. That's how vocabulary works.

In your duck analogy, the problem is... We've seen a duck. We've heard a duck. We've touched ducks. Therefore we know for certain, without any doubts what a duck is. We've never seen, heard, or touched a black hole. How can anyone know how anything 'behaves' around something we've never experienced as we have a duck?

That’s absurd. If I bump into a couch in a dark room, I can reach out and touch it and tell by touch that it’s a couch....

Answering this one in your next response. Trying to keep the 2 different points separated so it's a bit easier to read.

The scientific and meteorological communities don’t agree on this. Until they do, you are choosing what to believe. I haven't taken sides.

No, it is observable fact that the average global temperature of the planet is going up and has been for several decades. Not buy much but it doesn't take much to make a big difference. What is not agreed upon is what is causing it. That would be why in my post I marked "man is causing it" as "dubious" (defined (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dubious)).

We need to stop denying that it's happening (it is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.svg)) and start working on how it's happening, can we change it, and perhaps most importantly (if we find it's a natural process) should we change it.

I'm not believing anything on this because I'm non-committal on what is causing it until there is more research done.


There is no proof there is alien life. Again, your belief.

There is some evidence (http://news.discovery.com/space/mars-methane-mystery.html), but not proof. Of course I don't go around saying "there is Alien life, I have proof and anyone who denies it is going to a place they will be tortured forever". Matter of fact, like most un-provable things should be handled, I didn't say a word about it until asked.

Since no one has actually gone there to experience it and prove it; it’s a theory and no one really knows. The only thing scientists agree on is the laws of physics change in a black hole. Imagine that.

So I supposed the entire universe is Venus, Earth, Mars, the Moon, Titan, Jupiter and a few asteroids since that's the only places we've been (including probes that actually landed as "been there"). No Sun either.

Black holes were predicted by math (e-mc²) and then observed using actual telescopes. Because math predicted a behavior, and we found the behavior, we have labeled that a black hole. And since the important part of that sentence is "we have labeled", just like we call it a dog, so it's a dog, it IS a black hole. Now, maybe what you should be arguing is "How a Black Hole works".

In your duck analogy, the problem is... We've seen a duck. We've heard a duck. We've touched ducks. Therefore we know for certain, without any doubts what a duck is. We've never seen, heard, or touched a black hole. How can anyone know how anything 'behaves' around something we've never experienced as we have a duck?

No, it works with ANYTHING. Because Duck is a word, a name, and Black Hole is a word, a name. And WE decided what that words means. And the thing, at the center of our galaxy is a Black Hole.

Just like the term "Planetary Nebula" that when first found they thought was a "ghost planet" (which is what planetary nebula literally means) then we found out they are gas emissions and not planets at all, but guess what they are still called? So yes, it is a black hole, as predicted by relativity. No, we do know for sure how they work. Yes, if we find they work differently they will still be called black holes.

No, it works with ANYTHING. Because Duck is a word, a name, and Black Hole is a word, a name. And WE decided what that words means. And the thing, at the center of our galaxy is a Black Hole.

Just like the term "Planetary Nebula" that when first found they thought was a "ghost planet" (which is what planetary nebula literally means) then we found out they are gas emissions and not planets at all, but guess what they are still called? So yes, it is a black hole, as predicted by relativity. No, we do know for sure how they work. Yes, if we find they work differently they will still be called black holes.

No, a duck is a fowl; a species of bird. We gave it the name duck and can associate the actual animal with the name we gave it. A black hole, according to theory is a collapsed star. The collapsing causing such massive gravity that anything around it gets pulled into it; even light. I can prove to you what a duck is. I can go to one and point it out and say “there’s a duck”. If it lets me, I can reach out and touch it, smell it, and even kill it and cook it for dinner. You cannot do this with a ‘black hole’. You can only theorize that what you are observing from millions of light years away that a black hole (the name science has given this event) is a collapsed star and that it’s actually pulling everything in to it.

I can observe human behavior and deduce from that behavior that there is – theoretically – a God. From written documents, to people erecting massive structures, to archeological evidence I have deduced (just as you have with black holes) that there is a God. Although I can’t actually show you this God, you can’t touch it, smell it, or kill it and cook it for dinner, the behavior around it indicates to me that it exists.

Because humans become divisive through indoctrinations in the various denominations which then follow erroneous teachings of a fallible man. They trust a human to lead them rather than trust in God to lead them.

OTOH: When individuals let go and let God guide them through the help of His Holy Spirit then they will be "on the same page" by placing faith together in the same Jesus of The New Testament and not "another Jesus" as various other religions preach.

Still, takes the reliability out of it. YOU say you have it right, but so does Bob down the street and he disagrees with you. You're both sure you have the truth. There is NO way of showing one of you right or wrong, you could both be wrong and Sure has it right.

Well...yes, Una! When God is involved in the life of a believer there is no doubt that circumstances can and will happen where they can definitely say, "God did it," "God fixed it," "God made sure that wouldn't happen".

BTW: God's Word indicates that He can be found by the individual who seeks Him with a sincere desire to know Him. However, that requires you opening the door to placing faith in the existence and Deity of Jesus Christ and asking Him to reveal Truth to you.

"God did it"

He did everything...

Everything means the evil too.

Please list the examples that you are referring to where there are "discrepancies" regarding Jesus. Then we can address your question.

Matthew and Luke give contradictory genealogies for Jesus
ONLY Matthew and Luke bother to mention the virgin birth
Matthew and Luke don't agree on when Jesus was born
They don't agree on why Mary and Joseph were in Bethlehem

There are also discrepancies WRT history and the OT prophesies

Sure it can apply. The difference is that Gods' intervention is perfect because He's perfect. He doesn't have to stay within the laws of science or human understanding. Jesus compared many earthly things to spiritual things in the Gospels to describe places & things that people couldn't, otherwise, understand.

Parents do their best with what they know but they don't always know what is best for their kids like God does. While God would allow someone to be killed, a parent might give their life up to protect their kids from death. The point here is that God sees & knows all things, so He makes the right decision every time.

My choice to follow God DID cause me to "readjust" my free will choices but it was MY choice to do it. God may stop me but I can still go out and do whatever I want no matter how heinous it might be...(but of course I no longer want to).

1) This (bolded above) is the problem. He may stop you, if He may (and does at any point, which He has) then you don't have TRUE free will.

2) The assumption that God is perfect is a big one, it amazes me how easily some people jump to it. If you're comparing God's intervention to that of a parent, then I will compare God's commands in the OT to that of a corrupt world leader. God commanded the mass murder of numerous people's namely the Canaanites. There have been corrupt world leaders throughout history who have also commanded the mass murder of people's. We call that genocide and we view this a one of the greatest atrocities ever committed. A human committed genocide and it was bad. God committed genocide and it was...?

This is why you have to know (and accept) that God controlled what the writers wrote so that the "he said, she said" wouldn't apply.The timeline in which the Gospels & NT were written was between 17 and 38 years after Christ. This is a very important fact about the NT writings:

"All of the New Testament was written between A.D. 47 and 70. There simply was not enough time for myths about Christ to be created and propagated. And the multitudes of eyewitnesses who were alive when the New Testament books began to be circulated would have challenged blatant historical fabrications about the life of Christ."

He said, she said...Matthew said, Luke said, Paul said...

More substantial than God?? No way, but that would make a good modern day parable... It's just an analogy to say I have faith in something/someone that I didn't personally see. I believed because I saw the evidence of it. That LaPlata event was also witnessed by people who were right there. So it was with some of the Bible writers. They didn't blindly believe.

No, not more substantial than God, more substantial than the word of someone 200+ generations removed from me.

Still, takes the reliability out of it. YOU say you have it right, but so does Bob down the street and he disagrees with you. You're both sure you have the truth. There is NO way of showing one of you right or wrong, you could both be wrong and Sure has it right.

Matthew and Luke give contradictory genealogies for Jesus
ONLY Matthew and Luke bother to mention the virgin birth
Matthew and Luke don't agree on when Jesus was born
They don't agree on why Mary and Joseph were in Bethlehem

There are also discrepancies WRT history and the OT prophesies

Sounds a lot like the scientific community.

"God did it"

He did everything...

Everything means the evil too.

Because Smith and Wesson make firearms, and firearms are used to murder people, does this mean Smith and Wesson are evil?

If ‘hot’ didn’t exist, how would you know something is ‘cold’? If ‘left’ didn’t exist what reference would you have for ‘right’? If there was no ‘up’ which way would be ‘down’? Things have their opposites so we have a reference for each. It’s not so much that God created evil, God created the nature of things that have their opposites.

Sounds a lot like the scientific community.

Ya lost me...how is people randomly asserting interpretation without anything more than a feeling the same as people preforming decades of research and making conclusions based on evidence, putting the conclusions up to scrutiny, reevaluating upon the discovery of new knowledge...the same thing?

Because Smith and Wesson make firearms, and firearms are used to murder people, does this mean Smith and Wesson are evil?

Smith and Wesson does not posses the same powers as your God. They are not all-knowing (to know exactly when/where someone is about to be murdered by one of their weapons). They are not all-loving (maybe they thing that person deserves to die :shrug:). They are not all-powerful (even if they know when/where its happening and love the potential victim, they do not necessarily posses the power to stop it).

Again, if the Christians are going to compare God to humans, why can't I?

If ‘hot’ didn’t exist, how would you know something is ‘cold’? If ‘left’ didn’t exist what reference would you have for ‘right’? If there was no ‘up’ which way would be ‘down’? Things have their opposites so we have a reference for each. It’s not so much that God created evil, God created the nature of things that have their opposites.

So God created (or allowed) evil in order to more clearly show Hid goodness. How can He be considered good if He did this (no matter the reason)? How could you judge a cop as good if he's the one running the drug cartel? He's running it (allowing evil) so that he can stop the mules later (to show his goodness) but of course, he ONLY stopped some of them. We don't judge this individual as good rather he is evil and certainly does not deserve our worship. A being who does this is either A) evil himself or B) a contradiction and therefor does not exist. An All-powerful God doesn't need to show His goodness this way, couldn't He have just instilled this knowledge in us? Without causing great suffering?

Ya lost me...how is people randomly asserting interpretation without anything more than a feeling the same as people preforming decades of research and making conclusions based on evidence, putting the conclusions up to scrutiny, reevaluating upon the discovery of new knowledge...the same thing?

Oh, I dunno… String theory, global warming, multiverses, parallel universes… Ya got me? :shrug:

Smith and Wesson does not posses the same powers as your God. They are not all-knowing (to know exactly when/where someone is about to be murdered by one of their weapons). They are not all-loving (maybe they thing that person deserves to die ). They are not all-powerful (even if they know when/where its happening and love the potential victim, they do not necessarily posses the power to stop it).

Again, if the Christians are going to compare God to humans, why can't I?

It’s about appropriately holding someone/something accountable for something they ‘created’ placed into the wrong hands. You dismiss free will. In this discussion, you discount any possibility of free will with God in the picture. Having power and not using it = God!

So God created (or allowed) evil in order to more clearly show Hid goodness. How can He be considered good if He did this (no matter the reason)? How could you judge a cop as good if he's the one running the drug cartel? He's running it (allowing evil) so that he can stop the mules later (to show his goodness) but of course, he ONLY stopped some of them. We don't judge this individual as good rather he is evil and certainly does not deserve our worship. A being who does this is either A) evil himself or B) a contradiction and therefor does not exist. An All-powerful God doesn't need to show His goodness this way, couldn't He have just instilled this knowledge in us? Without causing great suffering?

If you want to call it ‘allowed’ so be it. I call it His nature. It’s just how things are. You want to place God in this little box that He created everything so you can say “see, He did this and made that happen”. In a world with God, you refuse to accept that things still, by nature, have their opposites.

His Goodness is not defined, or constrained, by the things you purport He did through extension of what we do. His goodness is defined by His holiness, without sin. How can you or I or anyone try to comprehend infinite purity? His goodness is defined by creating a world where we have choices. Because we make a certain choice, because God placed it in front of us, does not mean God is flawed. Just because God knew what we were going to do doesn’t mean He MADE us do it. I used the analogy before… Just because I knew when I dropped a rock from a tree that it would hit the ground doesn’t mean I MADE it hit the ground. I had knowledge of gravity. God has a certain knowledge of things that we can’t understand. Because we don’t understand it doesn’t mean it isn’t so.

No, a duck is a fowl; a species of bird. We gave it the name duck and can associate the actual animal with the name we gave it. A black hole, according to theory is a collapsed star. The collapsing causing such massive gravity that anything around it gets pulled into it; even light. I can prove to you what a duck is. I can go to one and point it out and say “there’s a duck”. If it lets me, I can reach out and touch it, smell it, and even kill it and cook it for dinner. You cannot do this with a ‘black hole’. You can only theorize that what you are observing from millions of light years away that a black hole (the name science has given this event) is a collapsed star and that it’s actually pulling everything in to it.

No, a black hole is a region of space time where gravity is so strong that nothing, not even light can escape. Gravitational collapse (what you're talking about with the star) is one of at least 4 theories on how they form. So now, ask me the question on how black holes form. The answer we aren't sure yet.

I can observe human behavior and deduce from that behavior that there is – theoretically – a God. From written documents, to people erecting massive structures, to archeological evidence I have deduced (just as you have with black holes) that there is a God. Although I can’t actually show you this God, you can’t touch it, smell it, or kill it and cook it for dinner, the behavior around it indicates to me that it exists.

Then I contend that Mickey Mouse is god. He has countless followers who wear his image on clothing and put them up in their homes. Books, film and other media too numerous to mention are dedicated to him. People live by the principals and morals described in those works (friendship, fairness, forgiveness). And roughly 120 million people per year attend his 5 "temples" world wide. Entire channels on television are dedicated to him. And let's not forget that in a national poll, Mickey Mouse was more recognizable than Jesus to young children.

No, a black hole is a region of space time where gravity is so strong that nothing, not even light can escape. Gravitational collapse (what you're talking about with the star) is one of at least 4 theories on how they form. So now, ask me the question on how black holes form. The answer we aren't sure yet.

That’s what you’re told it is. Did you actually go there and see it, touch it, here it quack? Just because you can apply Newton’s law to OBSERVATIONS of objects around this event doesn’t mean it’s what you say it is. Yet, you’re not even sure how black holes are formed, yet you’re sure what you’re seeing is a black hole.

Then I contend that Mickey Mouse is god. He has countless followers who wear his image on clothing and put them up in their homes. Books, film and other media too numerous to mention are dedicated to him. People live by the principals and morals described in those works (friendship, fairness, forgiveness). And roughly 120 million people per year attend his 5 "temples" world wide. Entire channels on television are dedicated to him. And let's not forget that in a national poll, Mickey Mouse was more recognizable than Jesus to young children.

Well, I would counter that Mickey Mouse does not have the following of worship and recognition of God as the Christian God (Yahweh). There are no documents to this effect. There is no historical or archeological data to back this up. Mickey Mouse has followers as a cartoon character. FAIL again; and silly comparison!

Oh, I dunno… String theory, global warming, multiverses, parallel universes… Ya got me? :shrug:

String theory is a theory, no one is claiming that you are wrong if you don't view it as valid NOR is anyone condemning you to Hell NOR is anyone fighting any wars over it.

Global warning IS happening, that isn't nor was it ever the question. The question is whether humans are causing it and whether can/should do anything about it. Again, no one is claiming that you are wrong if you don't view it as valid NOR is anyone condemning you to Hell NOR is anyone fighting any wars over it.

Multiverses/parallel universes is (again) a theory, and again (again) no one is claiming that you are wrong if you don't view it as valid NOR is anyone condemning you to Hell NOR is anyone fighting any wars over it.

THEORY =/= FACT

Proposing a theory is in no way equal nor even comparable to religion. What is your hang up on this? Science is not claiming to have all the answers, religion is.

It’s about appropriately holding someone/something accountable for something they ‘created’ placed into the wrong hands. You dismiss free will. In this discussion, you discount any possibility of free will with God in the picture. Having power and not using it = God!

I AM A GOD!!! ...and so are you (I assume) and everyone else probably. We have power and we don't use it, I have the power to kill another human, I don't Q.E.D. (according to you) I am God! :yay:

Seriously though, He does use it, He HAS used it. That's all I'm saying. If He used it once, who is to say He doesn't use it now?

Furthermore, if what you're saying is true (that He has the power and doesn't use it) then the Bible cannot be the infallible word of God. He didn't tell/guide/influence what Paul wrote, Paul wrote what he wanted which means he inserted his own opinions/interpretations/prejudices.

Either God interferes (no true free will) or He doesn't (Bible is fallible).

If you want to call it ‘allowed’ so be it. I call it His nature. It’s just how things are. You want to place God in this little box that He created everything so you can say “see, He did this and made that happen”. In a world with God, you refuse to accept that things still, by nature, have their opposites.

So He isn't perfect (since evil is in His nature)? Or how He didn't create everything? Even if God had a more limited hand in it all (i.e. didn't directly allow nor create evil) and evil is just natural, then why didn't he create a world in which this was possible? He's all-powerful, He had the power to create it differently.

His Goodness is not defined, or constrained, by the things you purport He did through extension of what we do. His goodness is defined by His holiness, without sin. How can you or I or anyone try to comprehend infinite purity? His goodness is defined by creating a world where we have choices. Because we make a certain choice, because God placed it in front of us, does not mean God is flawed. Just because God knew what we were going to do doesn’t mean He MADE us do it. I used the analogy before… Just because I knew when I dropped a rock from a tree that it would hit the ground doesn’t mean I MADE it hit the ground. I had knowledge of gravity. God has a certain knowledge of things that we can’t understand. Because we don’t understand it doesn’t mean it isn’t so.

I'm not contending that He has knowledge of things and whether or not that is good or bad. He commands and influences the lives of people in the Bible. That removes (even if just for one act) the individual's free will and so a free will believing Christian cannot be sure they're acting on theirs. He guided Paul's writings, maybe He's guiding yours. Just because you might be OK with that doesn't mean you're still acting on free will.

That’s what you’re told it is. Did you actually go there and see it, touch it, here it quack? Just because you can apply Newton’s law to OBSERVATIONS of objects around this event doesn’t mean it’s what you say it is. Yet, you’re not even sure how black holes are formed, yet you’re sure what you’re seeing is a black hole.

No, that IS what it is. What causes orbits. GRAVITY. If several bodies are orbiting what looks like blank space it is caused by GRAVITY. Something is causing that to happen, that something we call a black hole.

Well, I would counter that Mickey Mouse does not have the following of worship and recognition of God as the Christian God (Yahweh). There are no documents to this effect. There is no historical or archeological data to back this up. Mickey Mouse has followers as a cartoon character. FAIL again; and silly comparison!

And your counter would be wrong. There are thousands of amusement parks in the US, for adults most of them would be more fun than Disney World, yet they are willing to spend well over $1000 per person to go to Disney instead. Not because it's an amusement park, because they could have gone to almost any park for cheaper, but because it's Disney World. That's a awful lot of worship and recognition. People don't like mice, they are viewed as a pest, a dirty, disease carrying rodent. But people LOVE Mickey Mouse. People get tattoos of Mickey Mouse. Are you telling me, the willingness to have a corporate logo permanently stamped on your skin isn't worship?

And, as we've been over before, show me the historical or archaeological data that supports god existence as being a fact. Not that people believe in god, no argument there, but actually data that points to the existence of god.

No, that IS what it is. What causes orbits. GRAVITY. If several bodies are orbiting what looks like blank space it is caused by GRAVITY. Something is causing that to happen, that something we call a black hole.

“What looks like”. There you have it. You can’t see it, yet you try to tell us that’s what it is. Maybe what’s causing it to happen is……………………….. wait for it…………………………………… GOD!

And your counter would be wrong. There are thousands of amusement parks in the US, for adults most of them would be more fun than Disney World, yet they are willing to spend well over $1000 per person to go to Disney instead. Not because it's an amusement park, because they could have gone to almost any park for cheaper, but because it's Disney World. That's a awful lot of worship and recognition. People don't like mice, they are viewed as a pest, a dirty, disease carrying rodent. But people LOVE Mickey Mouse. People get tattoos of Mickey Mouse. Are you telling me, the willingness to have a corporate logo permanently stamped on your skin isn't worship?

And, as we've been over before, show me the historical or archaeological data that supports god existence as being a fact. Not that people believe in god, no argument there, but actually data that points to the existence of god.

Oh for crying out loud… I’m not even going to go down this silly road, except to say you're being purposely obtuse about the definition of ‘worship’.

You really need the historical and archeology data that supports God? Here is some info:

Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources - Probe Ministries (http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4223639/k.567/Ancient_Evidence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm)

http://christianthinktank.com/jesusref.html

Has Archaeological Evidence for Jesus Been Discovered? (http://www.icr.org/article/531/)

Surprising Archaeological Find: Proof of Jesus' Existence? - Good News Magazine | United Church of God (http://www.ucg.org/science/surprising-archaeological-find-proof-jesus-existence/)

Archeology and the Bible (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/archeology.html)

Archaeological evidence for YHWH Elohim in the Torah of the Bible - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY9AFcjKq-A)

Archaeology Proves The Bible - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1f_2ahPWBc)

Then there’s the pesky little thing called the bible.

Regarding Discrepancies:


Matthew and Luke give contradictory genealogies for Jesus...


Hi UNA: The genealogy of Jesus is a very key and important issue regarding Jesus being the descendant to David's Throne. In fact, the Jewish people are very meticulous about making sure that the correct descendancy is recorded which is a determining factor for being a High Priest - and, in this case, The Jewish Messiah.

What appears to be a "discrepancy" is that the genealogy of Jesus was recorded from both His mother's side and Joseph's side. Keeping in mind that Joseph is Jesus' adopted father (not paternal) since Jesus was born of the Holy Spirit through the virgin birth by Mary, as recorded in the Bible.

This may help:

1: Are you aware that Jewish lineage/descendancy is based upon the bloodline from the mother's side - not the father's? A child born to a Jewish mother is "Jewish". However, if a Jewish man marries a non-Jewish wife, their children are not considered "Jewish" lineage.

2: Mary's descendancy from Nathan is the bloodline that ties in to the Davidic lineage. So, by this direct blood line, Jesus qualifies for being the Jewish Messiah that had been prophesied by being a descendant from King David. Since Joseph is not the "father" then Jesus' direct genealogy to David is through Mary's bloodline.

3: If a Jewish husband adopts a child then the child becomes an heir to the step-father's privileges as if he had been a natural born child of that father.

3.5: BTW: The Bible states that non-Jewish people (Gentiles) are considered as "adopted sons and daughters" of God when they place faith in Jesus as being the Son of God/Jewish Messiah/Saviour of mankind. They become Children of God through adoption.

4. Thus, through the combined genealogies of both Joseph and Mary Jesus is more than qualified to be the heir to David's Throne, assume the position of Jewish High Priest and, most importantly, have the qualifications for being the Jewish Messiah whom the Othrodox Jews still await. The "seeming discrepancy" of Jesus' genealogies that you cited is because one was tracked through Joseph's genealogy and the other from Mary's genealogy.

BTW: Here is a site that will give a bit more of the explanation:
Why are Jesus' genealogies in Matthew and Luke so different? (http://www.gotquestions.org/jesus-genealogy.html)



God's Promises to the Born-Again Believer in The New Testament Jesus Christ:

For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
(Romans 8:15-17)

You too can be an adopted Child of God into His Family through placing faith and trust in Jesus Christ as mentioned in the Bible. Ask.

Regarding Discrepancies:



Hi UNA: The genealogy of Jesus is a very key and important issue regarding Jesus being the descendant to David's Throne. In fact, the Jewish people are very meticulous about making sure that the correct descendancy is recorded which is a determining factor for being a High Priest. What appears to be a discrepancy is that the genealogy of Jesus was recorded from both His mother's side and Joseph's side. Keeping in mind that Joseph is Jesus' adopted father (not paternal) since Jesus was born of the Holy Spirit through the virgin birth by Mary, as recorded in the Bible.

This may help:

1: Are you aware that Jewish lineage/descendancy is based upon the bloodline from the mother's side - not the father's? A child born to a Jewish mother is "Jewish". However, if a Jewish man marries a non-Jewish wife, their children are not considered "Jewish" lineage.

2: Mary's descendancy from Nathan is the bloodline that ties in to the Davidic lineage. So, by this direct blood line, Jesus qualifies for being the Jewish Messiah that had been prophesied by being a descendant from King David. Since Joseph is not the "father" then Jesus' direct genealogy to David is through Mary's bloodline.

3: If a Jewish husband adopts a child then the child becomes an heir to the step-father's privileges as if he had been a natural born child of that father.

3.5: BTW: The Bible states that non-Jewish people (Gentiles) are considered as "adopted sons and daughters" of God when they place faith in Jesus as being the Son of God/Jewish Messiah/Saviour of mankind. They become Children of God through adoption.

4. Thus, through the combined genealogies of both Joseph and Mary Jesus is more than qualified to be the heir to David's Throne, assume the position of Jewish High Priest and, most importantly, have the qualifications for being the Jewish Messiah whom the Othrodox Jews still await. The "seeming discrepancy" of Jesus' genealogies that you cited is because one was tracked through Joseph's genealogy and the other from Mary's genealogy.

BTW: Here is a site that will give a bit more of the explanation:
Why are Jesus' genealogies in Matthew and Luke so different? (http://www.gotquestions.org/jesus-genealogy.html)

Your link concludes that Luke is following the line of Mary except that Luke explicitly says:

Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli, ...

What about the other things I listed?

Your link concludes that Luke is following the line of Mary except that Luke explicitly says:



What about the other things I listed?

"As supposed" means that people "believed" Joseph was the father. He wasn't.

I'll get to the others a bit later this evening. :smile:

“What looks like”. There you have it. You can’t see it, yet you try to tell us that’s what it is. Maybe what’s causing it to happen is……………………….. wait for it…………………………………… GOD!

You do realize, by saying that god made black holes, you're still conceding that black holes do exist right?

Oh for crying out loud… I’m not even going to go down this silly road, except to say you're being purposely obtuse about the definition of ‘worship’.

Pay attention to definition 4 (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/worship).

You really need the historical and archeology data that supports God? Here is some info:

Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources - Probe Ministries (http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4223639/k.567/Ancient_Evidence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm)

http://christianthinktank.com/jesusref.html

Has Archaeological Evidence for Jesus Been Discovered? (http://www.icr.org/article/531/)

Surprising Archaeological Find: Proof of Jesus' Existence? - Good News Magazine | United Church of God (http://www.ucg.org/science/surprising-archaeological-find-proof-jesus-existence/)

Archeology and the Bible (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/archeology.html)

Archaeological evidence for YHWH Elohim in the Torah of the Bible - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY9AFcjKq-A)

Archaeology Proves The Bible - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1f_2ahPWBc)

First, my favorite excerpt:

the evidence and arguments from science stack up overwhelmingly against a literal interpretation of the Flood story.
link (http://www.uhcg.org/news/is-bible-true.html)

Now on to my other point. Apparently you forgot this:


There is no (that is none, zero, not a speck) of archaeological evidence for the existence of god. There is archaeological evidence that some of the events of the Bible took place (mostly the battles of the old testament). The evidence of a battle or that a building once stood somewhere at best only proves (assuming said building was a holy place or the battle was fought for religious reasons) that people believed there was a god, not that there actually was. This argument then is the exact same as the first one, basically "people have believed in god for a long time".

The only other thing was to seem to prove that Jesus was a real person. I'm not now, nor have I ever questioned that Jesus was a real person. But proving that Jesus lived no more proves god exists than proving Mohammad lived.

Of course, now that you mention it, not one of the writings that are even claimed to be written by anyone who might have known Jesus personally (The Epistles of Peter) offer no biographical information for Jesus. Paul for his part never met Jesus and never once quotes him to says really anything about his life. The Gospels do mention biographical information, but diverge greatly on the details and we know were not written until at least 65 CE because of dated contemporary events mentioned in the gospels.

Also, Josephus (who people always like to point as the extra biblical evidence) was born in 37 CE. Yeah, right around the time Jesus DIED. His first work was published in 75 CE, meaning the Gospels are out and available to influence his work.


Then there’s the pesky little thing called the bible.

You do realize, by saying that god made black holes, you're still conceding that black holes do exist right?



Pay attention to definition 4 (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/worship).



First, my favorite excerpt:



Now on to my other point. Apparently you forgot this:



The only other thing was to seem to prove that Jesus was a real person. I'm not now, nor have I ever questioned that Jesus was a real person. But proving that Jesus lived no more proves god exists than proving Mohammad lived.

Of course, now that you mention it, not one of the writings that are even claimed to be written by anyone who might have known Jesus personally (The Epistles of Peter) offer no biographical information for Jesus. Paul for his part never met Jesus and never once quotes him to says really anything about his life. The Gospels do mention biographical information, but diverge greatly on the details and we know were not written until at least 65 CE because of dated contemporary events mentioned in the gospels.

Also, Josephus (who people always like to point as the extra biblical evidence) was born in 37 CE. Yeah, right around the time Jesus DIED. His first work was published in 75 CE, meaning the Gospels are out and available to influence his work.

DUDE, DUDETTE, whatever, you are an atheist, right?

Yo are what we are. We, as Christians, are what we are.

Go for it. You will lose. There is coming a day when you will see God, and believe.

But in your current mindset, it will be too late.

You, and you alone,will have to deal with eternity. You will not see your friends. Family. Total alone-ness. Forever.

You will have to deal with it.

Alone.

Other than that, have a nice day.:1bdz:

:deadhorse

ONLY Matthew and Luke bother to mention the virgin birth:

That's actually enough to establish the prophetic birth of Jesus, born of the seed of a woman (Genesis 3:15) with the documented genealogy that points to Jesus being Heir to the Throne of King David and valid qualifications for being the Jewish Messiah. However, what also must be considered is that all of the New Testament accounts mention Jesus Christ as being The Son of God, Lamb of God, Messiah, Saviour of mankind, etc.

That could only have been possible by Jesus being born of a virgin lest His Blood would have been tainted by the corrupt seed of Adam. The Bible mentions that sin is passed down from "one man", Adam. (Romans 5:12) If Jesus would have had an "earthly father" His Blood would have been tainted with the sin-seed of Adam which would have then negated Christ's pure Atoning Blood.



Matthew and Luke don't agree on when Jesus was born
They don't agree on why Mary and Joseph were in Bethlehem

Not to worry. Even my mother forgot my birth date and couldn't remember when or where I was born at times! There were so many kids in my family she would even forget my name and call me by another. lol

Okay, to answer your question about this, here is a site where you can find your answer that is of "Biblical" proportions:
Why do Matthew and Luke have DIFFERENT accounts of the birth of Jesus? (http://www.biblestudy.org/question/why-is-matthew-different-than-luke-about-birth-of-jesus.html)


There are also discrepancies WRT history and the OT prophesies:

For example????

DUDE, DUDETTE, whatever, you are an atheist, right?

Yo are what we are. We, as Christians, are what we are.

Go for it. You will lose. There is coming a day when you will see God, and believe.

But in your current mindset, it will be too late.

You, and you alone,will have to deal with eternity. You will not see your friends. Family. Total alone-ness. Forever.

You will have to deal with it.

Alone.

Other than that, have a nice day.:1bdz:

One wonders why someone who doesn't care would take the time to chime in at all....

:deadhorse

It's standard operating practice on here.

1) This (bolded above) is the problem. He may stop you, if He may (and does at any point, which He has) then you don't have TRUE free will.
Do you have total free will? You might not think God would stop you from doing something but I can guarantee you He has w/o you knowing (or admitting) it.

2) The assumption that God is perfect is a big one, it amazes me how easily some people jump to it. If you're comparing God's intervention to that of a parent, then I will compare God's commands in the OT to that of a corrupt world leader. God commanded the mass murder of numerous people's namely the Canaanites. There have been corrupt world leaders throughout history who have also commanded the mass murder of people's. We call that genocide and we view this a one of the greatest atrocities ever committed. A human committed genocide and it was bad. God committed genocide and it was...?
Justified. Since God is the author of all life He is justified if He does that and even if He tells His people to do it (as He did many times before).

You do realize, by saying that god made black holes, you're still conceding that black holes do exist right?

Need I remind you again that I never said black holes don’t exist? Need I remind you, again, that I am using the same criteria that you use against God to challenge something’s existence; that it requires a level of faith that it exists?

My point about what you’re seeing in deep space may just be God swirling stuff around to make you think it’s some sucking vortex of massive gravity. I mean if God is playing games with free will, why not also play games in fooling us to believe space works a certain way? No, I don't believe that's what's happening. I'm just trying to make a point.

Pay attention to definition 4 (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/worship).

Well, it’s a good thing we’re not talking about that definition. There is no church of Mickey Mouse. There is no God called Mickey Mouse. You do not have the Gospel of Mickey Mouse. I’m not sure why someone with your intelligence is using such a lame comparison.

Now on to my other point. Apparently you forgot this:

There is no (that is none, zero, not a speck) of archaeological evidence for the existence of god. There is archaeological evidence that some of the events of the Bible took place (mostly the battles of the old testament). The evidence of a battle or that a building once stood somewhere at best only proves (assuming said building was a holy place or the battle was fought for religious reasons) that people believed there was a god, not that there actually was. This argument then is the exact same as the first one, basically "people have believed in god for a long time".

I gave you just a tad of info on ‘evidence’. Even with the massive numbers of believers over the millennia, nothing is going to be convincing to you. So, it’s not that there isn’t evidence; you just reject the evidence provided. And I wouldn’t expect anything different from you.

The only other thing was to seem to prove that Jesus was a real person. I'm not now, nor have I ever questioned that Jesus was a real person. But proving that Jesus lived no more proves god exists than proving Mohammad lived.

We can’t really prove that Socrates was a real person either; yet I’m sure we agree he was. But, proving God… this just gets us back to our old debate; I can no more prove God exists than you can prove black holes exist. You can throw all the scientific equations, videos and photos of space, etc… but you’re still left with something way out there in space that you can’t really see, you can’t go to and touch, smell, experience firsthand. You have the same evidence I have; you have things around it behaving a certain way that tells you it exists. That’s good enough for you. I’m with you on that.

But there is a part of this discussion I’ve decided to not even deal with because we’ll never get past the physical justifications you’re looking for; and that’s faith. THAT is my evidence. Remember my assertion that no matter what you try to explain to me about how something in our universe works (like gravity) I can always ask ‘why’? Well, there are parts of our universe that we just can’t explain. No matter what explanation you try to give, the question ‘why’ can always be thrown in there. The same is true about the belief in a God. There is something in the human psyche that causes people to have ‘faith’ in things: God, science, etc… Your belief that things that appear to exist is nothing more than placing your faith in certain elements (like numbers, and observations) to convince you they are true. Not one bit of it goes into the depth of explaining why these things happen the way they do. Why does mass attract so that pieces cling together in space to make objects like moons and planets, and those objects having enough mass to attract, or hold, other objects to it? We can explain how these things happen; but we can’t explain why. Well, from that aspect, I can’t explain why I believe there is a God.

It's standard operating practice on here.

You're kidding right? You are as engaged in this dead horse as can be. Look in the mirror dude.

And if Railroad has a problem with dead horses, then why does he feel he has to keep reminding us of them? There are plenty other places for him to go.

You're kidding right? You are as engaged in this dead horse as can be. Look in the mirror dude.

And if Railroad has a problem with dead horses, then why does he feel he has to keep reminding us of them? There are plenty other places for him to go.

The Bible states that "There is nothing new under sun." (Ecclesiastes 1:9)

That means that everything we have been posting and discussing in these threads has been hashed and rehashed many times over throughout the past centuries. There will always be old subjects that are revived for discussion - hey, that's human nature! I agree, PsyOps, that if anyone has a problem with "dead horses" then it is time to move on because the philosophical/religious discussions/debates and contentions will go on as long as people have questions and are searching for answers.

Some things, like scientific theories may never be settled or proven until one comes to the knowldedge of what is Truth. And, yes, There Is Only One Truth to everything even about the existence of God and the Deity of The New Testament Jesus Christ as Messiah and Saviour of mankind for those who place faith in Him.

BTW: McGinn, dearest UNA actually resurrected this "dead horse" 178 posts ago. so... :whistle: LOL

You're kidding right? You are as engaged in this dead horse as can be. Look in the mirror dude.

And if Railroad has a problem with dead horses, then why does he feel he has to keep reminding us of them? There are plenty other places for him to go.

I'm fully aware that I'm doing it. That would be why I did say "they like to do that" or "these other people".

BTW: McGinn, dearest UNA actually resurrected this "dead horse" 178 posts ago. so... :whistle: LOL

Not complaining about it. If I had a problem with it I'd just stop posting and do something else. Just warning Railroad so he/she knows if the thinks it's happening in this thread to be ready for it to happen in every thread.

Especially with the 4 of us involved in this one (and a few others) because done of us want to give up :duel:.

Not complaining about it. If I had a problem with it I'd just stop posting and do something else. Just warning Railroad so he/she knows if the thinks it's happening in this thread to be ready for it to happen in every thread.

Especially with the 4 of us involved in this one (and a few others) because done of us want to give up :duel:.

Amen!
(or, in the case when addressing an Atheist) RIGHT ON!
:buddies:

You're kidding right? You are as engaged in this dead horse as can be. Look in the mirror dude.

And if Railroad has a problem with dead horses, then why does he feel he has to keep reminding us of them? There are plenty other places for him to go.

:cds:

I'm fully aware that I'm doing it. That would be why I did say "they like to do that" or "these other people".

Perhaps you would have been more accurate and FAIR if you had stated "WE".

Okay, McGinn, since UNA brought up the subject about the concept of "free-will and religion" this is another one of those discussions that can be endlessly debated back and forth. However, let's consider your computer analogy on this one as well.

If you were a "Calvinist Computer-Engineer Creator" you would have designed some of your computers to work properly (with some tweaking here and there) but then you also would have purposely created others to totally malfunction and not work well enough to suit your needs and you knew you were eventually going to get rid of them.

Therefore, all of the computers that you designed to work well are saved for your eternal use and interaction while the computers that you deliberately designed to fail (through no fault of their own) are on the list of inventory that will be sent to the destruction bins where they will be melted, pulverized and erased from your memory forever.

Just sayin...

Okay, McGinn, since UNA brought up the subject about the concept of "free-will and religion" this is another one of those discussions that can be endlessly debated back and forth. However, let's consider your computer analogy on this one as well.

If you were a "Calvinist Computer-Engineer Creator" you would have designed some of your computers to work properly (with some tweaking here and there) but then you also would have purposely created others to totally malfunction and not work well enough to suit your needs and you knew you were eventually going to get rid of them.

Therefore, all of the computers that you designed to work well are saved for your eternal use and interaction while the computers that you deliberately designed to fail (through no fault of their own) are on the list of inventory that will be sent to the destruction bins where they will be melted, pulverized and erased from your memory forever.

Just sayin...

Which is what I’ve been trying to point out, on a couple of different levels, why this has a logical explanation. It makes no sense that God would purposely predestine some for salvation and others for destruction. If God created us in His image, it serves no purpose.

One wonders why someone who doesn't care would take the time to chime in at all....

Just curious, but how did you deduce the "doesn't care" part of your reply to my post? I do notice a typo in my second sentence that should have read "You are what you are". My bad there.

I do like the beating the dead horse part. You will have eternity to deal with it, MG77. You can change that, though. Up to you.

Just curious, but how did you deduce the "doesn't care" part of your reply to my post? I do notice a typo in my second sentence that should have read "You are what you are". My bad there.

I do like the beating the dead horse part. You will have eternity to deal with it, MG77. You can change that, though. Up to you.

oh, I dunno, your little smiley with the "I don't care" sign may have been a hint.:1bdz:

Need I remind you again that I never said black holes don’t exist? Need I remind you, again, that I am using the same criteria that you use against God to challenge something’s existence; that it requires a level of faith that it exists?

But something that you can see happening doesn't require faith. Saying you know how it's happening would require a type of leap that would be similar to faith but of course I never claimed to know how black holes work, just that they are there.

My point about what you’re seeing in deep space may just be God swirling stuff around to make you think it’s some sucking vortex of massive gravity. I mean if God is playing games with free will, why not also play games in fooling us to believe space works a certain way? No, I don't believe that's what's happening. I'm just trying to make a point.

Let's get back on the topic of the thread.

Let's drop the existence of black holes argument since we aren't going to see eye-to-eye on that. Let's just, for the sake of an example, say for a moment that black holes do exist since it's an easy example. And so that it's even, we will also say that God does exist as well.

Black holes exert a force (gravity) on particles causing them to move in a specific way. Now we don't say that effects the free will of those particles because they aren't thinking, living beings and therefor have no will (free or otherwise). So there is no problem when a particle crosses the even horizon and sucked into the black hole for (as near as we can tell) forever.

God, we are told, does not exert a force on the living (a violation of free will). So if God were to, let's say, kill someone directly and with intent he would be violating free will. You can say death is required or else the world would be over-populated. But death, through disease or aging or some other natural process is very different from God actively selecting a victim and killing them. As a matter of fact, since saying God does not effect free will we can only conclude that murder is a sin because you are effecting someone else's free will (it can't be because you've effected "God's Plan" since having a plan would mean he is actively effecting the lives of people). So if killing someone is a violation of their free will and go does it, he has violated the idea of free will.

This is what the LORD says: 'About midnight I will go throughout Egypt. Every firstborn in Egypt will die, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the firstborn of the slave girl, who is at her hand mill, and all the firstborn of the cattle as well. There will be loud wailing throughout Egypt—worse than there has ever been or ever will be again.'

It wasn't disease. A virus can't tell if there is lambs blood on the door. God didn't send some animal to do the killing (which would still be murder anyway, the method doesn't matter as much as the intent and outcome) since when animals were used (frogs and locusts) it was specifically noted. And it's not repayment for sins since slaves, people on equal footing with the Jews in the story are also punished. God showed up and killed children, in their homes. He violated their will to live.

Now, if some disease had killed them, no problem, that's just nature. Even if God asked some of the Jews to kill them, he's still letting them make a choice. But by divinely interfering with the natural cycle of life and death he has violated the notion of free will. Especially since he never gave the first born the chance to convert. You could make an argument then that by denying god they had made their choice but that didn't happen. He just killed children because of who their parents were, and as we all know, we don't choose our parents.


Well, it’s a good thing we’re not talking about that definition. There is no church of Mickey Mouse. There is no God called Mickey Mouse. You do not have the Gospel of Mickey Mouse. I’m not sure why someone with your intelligence is using such a lame comparison.

Fanatical devotion is fanatical devotion. I believe this is what's called a "graven image" in the Bible.

I gave you just a tad of info on ‘evidence’. Even with the massive numbers of believers over the millennia, nothing is going to be convincing to you. So, it’s not that there isn’t evidence; you just reject the evidence provided. And I wouldn’t expect anything different from you.

No, I just don't find "a lot of people believe it to be compelling evidence. The same why you don't when it come to any topic besides the christian god. And it's good that you do that. You shouldn't believe in big foot, or alien abductions, or Greek/Roman gods just because other people do/did. You are even rejecting that the amount of time matters because by the time Rome went Christian (kind of) the old Roman religion had existed for over 1000 years. By our logic, nobody should have become Christian because almost the entire world believed in the Roman Gods and had done so for generations.

I'm not the one changing the criteria of what constitutes valid evidence.

My evidence:
The existence of black holes is a provable, demonstrable phenomena. The formation of black holes is not.
Therefore:
Yes, black holes exist. We cannot say with certainty what causes black holes and do so is at best an educated guess until more study is done and more observations are conducted.

Your evidence:
Historical and archaeological evidence supports anecdotal stories of a strong believe in deities throughout human history. There is no archaeological evidence of the preforming of miracles or human interaction with a deity. Archaeological evidence is limited to the existence of temples and the aftermath of battles (this applies to all world religions with some of the best preserved temples dedicated to the Greek gods).
Therefore:
Yes, people do, and have for a long time, believe in god. We cannot say with certainty that god exists and to do so is a matter of faith alone.

Okay, McGinn, since UNA brought up the subject about the concept of "free-will and religion" this is another one of those discussions that can be endlessly debated back and forth. However, let's consider your computer analogy on this one as well.

If you were a "Calvinist Computer-Engineer Creator" you would have designed some of your computers to work properly (with some tweaking here and there) but then you also would have purposely created others to totally malfunction and not work well enough to suit your needs and you knew you were eventually going to get rid of them.

Therefore, all of the computers that you designed to work well are saved for your eternal use and interaction while the computers that you deliberately designed to fail (through no fault of their own) are on the list of inventory that will be sent to the destruction bins where they will be melted, pulverized and erased from your memory forever.

Just sayin...

You're right, that doesn't make any sense at all. So why, in the Bible, are there miricles and other instances where it seems God has violated this? And if he didn't, how can we trust the Bible at all since the people who wrote it had the choice of what to write? You can say the Bible is a perfect book if God is perfect and he directly wrote it but he didn't. Followers did. And since one of the tenants of Christianity is that people are not perfect, we can't, safely assume that the Bible is.

oh, I dunno, your little smiley with the "I don't care" sign may have been a hint.:1bdz:

Well, it seems you have me on that one. Obviously, I hit the wrong icon. My bad.

OK. Scratch that icon, sincerely, and you know where I stand on your stance.
Nothing else changes.

But something that you can see happening doesn't require faith. Saying you know how it's happening would require a type of leap that would be similar to faith but of course I never claimed to know how black holes work, just that they are there.

What you THINK you see. You’re looking at something millions of light years away, through who-knows-how-much distortions through space that happened millions of years ago.

Let's get back on the topic of the thread.

Let's drop the existence of black holes argument since we aren't going to see eye-to-eye on that. Let's just, for the sake of an example, say for a moment that black holes do exist since it's an easy example. And so that it's even, we will also say that God does exist as well.

Black holes exert a force (gravity) on particles causing them to move in a specific way. Now we don't say that effects the free will of those particles because they aren't thinking, living beings and therefor have no will (free or otherwise). So there is no problem when a particle crosses the even horizon and sucked into the black hole for (as near as we can tell) forever.

You don’t want to talk about the existence of black holes then go on to talk about the existence of black holes? :confused:

Black holes, as we know them don’t have a conscience. I don’t get your comparison in this light. But actually, even as non-conscience objects I’d say black holes do affect the ‘free will’ of objects; objects that would have otherwise floated off into space elsewhere. But since you’re comparing objects that have no intelligence or conscience to something that does (humans and Gods), I fail to see where this is going.

God, we are told, does not exert a force on the living (a violation of free will). So if God were to, let's say, kill someone directly and with intent he would be violating free will. You can say death is required or else the world would be over-populated. But death, through disease or aging or some other natural process is very different from God actively selecting a victim and killing them. As a matter of fact, since saying God does not effect free will we can only conclude that murder is a sin because you are effecting someone else's free will (it can't be because you've effected "God's Plan" since having a plan would mean he is actively effecting the lives of people). So if killing someone is a violation of their free will and go does it, he has violated the idea of free will.

This dismisses the fact that God created the nature of things; and part of that nature is that living things die. One way or another; either through aging, getting ill, or someone else taking their life, people die. Your really using a loose definition of ‘free will’. We’re talking about whether God makes every decision for people. I decided to have 3 cups of coffee today. That was my decision not God’s. You could say that God setting things in motion led to this choice; if you believe that if God intervening in free will, then I wont argue that; and it’s really kind of a moot point. Whether it’s nature devoid of God or nature with a God, things set in motion – FATE – can be inferred. No argument there.

The rest of your thread is too long to reply to. If you want me to respond to something more specific I ask we try to shorten these things up a little.

What you THINK you see. You’re looking at something millions of light years away, through who-knows-how-much distortions through space that happened millions of years ago.

Actually, since it's in the middle of our galaxy it's only about 40-50,000 light years away.

You don’t want to talk about the existence of black holes then go on to talk about the existence of black holes? :confused:

I'm not talking about the existence of black holes, I'm setting up a hypothetical situation.

Black holes, as we know them don’t have a conscience. I don’t get your comparison in this light. But actually, even as non-conscience objects I’d say black holes do affect the ‘free will’ of objects; objects that would have otherwise floated off into space elsewhere. But since you’re comparing objects that have no intelligence or conscience to something that does (humans and Gods), I fail to see where this is going.

The whole point is that they don't have a conscience but God and humans do. As such, the same activity is treated differently. Since you said "I’d say black holes do affect the ‘free will’ of objects" if God were to do the same thing, he would be effecting free will. Which brought me to my examples of God doing that same thing and thus effecting free will.

This dismisses the fact that God created the nature of things; and part of that nature is that living things die. One way or another; either through aging, getting ill, or someone else taking their life, people die. Your really using a loose definition of ‘free will’.

My point, by saying :
You can say death is required or else the world would be over-populated. But death, through disease or aging or some other natural process is very different from God actively selecting a victim and killing them.

Is that in at least this instance God acted outside of the natural process. The natural processes he's said to have created. Changing those natural processes changes free will. Even if it only happens once, since we can no longer count on there being a natural order, as set of rules we can count on, our free will is at least limited because free will is dependent on knowing the possible outcomes of your choices. If you have no way of knowing what the outcome is, you can't really make a decision.

It would be like me saying, pick one of three doors, behind one is a prize and there is nothing behind the others, or you can walk away and pick none. You figure "may as well, the worst thing that could happen is I get nothing". Then you pick a door and when you open it, it's the wrong door and someone shoots you. If you had known that was a possibility you would have just walked away. You can't say you took the risk of dying by your own free will because you didn't even know that was an option.

We’re talking about whether God makes every decision for people. I decided to have 3 cups of coffee today. That was my decision not God’s. You could say that God setting things in motion led to this choice; if you believe that if God intervening in free will, then I wont argue that; and it’s really kind of a moot point. Whether it’s nature devoid of God or nature with a God, things set in motion – FATE – can be inferred. No argument there.

God doesn't have to make every decision to effect free will. As with my example above, the mere ability of God to effect free will takes it away because if God can interfere and do whatever he wants we can never know the possible outcomes of our decisions.

The rest of your thread is too long to reply to. If you want me to respond to something more specific I ask we try to shorten these things up a little.

Funny, that was one of my shorter responses and not reliant on reading half a dozen links provided (by you) and trying to decipher which of them had the information you said you were providing...


You really need the historical and archeology data that supports God? Here is some info:

Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources - Probe Ministries (http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4223639/k.567/Ancient_Evidence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm)

http://christianthinktank.com/jesusref.html

Has Archaeological Evidence for Jesus Been Discovered? (http://www.icr.org/article/531/)

Surprising Archaeological Find: Proof of Jesus' Existence? - Good News Magazine | United Church of God (http://www.ucg.org/science/surprising-archaeological-find-proof-jesus-existence/)

Archeology and the Bible (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/archeology.html)

Archaeological evidence for YHWH Elohim in the Torah of the Bible - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY9AFcjKq-A)

Archaeology Proves The Bible - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1f_2ahPWBc)

Then there’s the pesky little thing called the bible.

"As supposed" means that people "believed" Joseph was the father. He wasn't.

I know he wasn't, Luke was referring to that but he still followed His lineage through Joseph. He goes on

Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli, the son of Matthat,[a] the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Janna, ........

never saying "OK, but here is the lineage through Mary".

There isn't really any point in tracing His lineage back through Joseph at all (as you said, He wasn't Joseph's son). Paul actually says that Jesus is of the seed of David. Seed as in of his sperma (the Greek) used later in other verses to mean "offspring" or "descendant". If Jesus isn't of Joseph then He isn't of David. Big problem here.

I'll get to the others a bit later this evening. :smile:

Take your time :smile:

You're right, that doesn't make any sense at all. So why, in the Bible, are there miricles and other instances where it seems God has violated this? And if he didn't, how can we trust the Bible at all since the people who wrote it had the choice of what to write? You can say the Bible is a perfect book if God is perfect and he directly wrote it but he didn't. Followers did. And since one of the tenants of Christianity is that people are not perfect, we can't, safely assume that the Bible is.

Hmmm... where are the examples you are referring to where it "seems" that God violated "free-will" ? :shrug:

In all the accounts of miracles, God (in the Old Testament) and Jesus (in the New Testament) performed them so that He could prove His presence and ability to make necessary changes / adjustments so that people would stand in awe and know that God is and that He is a Helper of those who trust in Him.

The parting of the Red Sea that allowed the children of Israel to escape Pharoah's pursuing army - was a miracle. The Children of Israel were spared but guess what? They went back to being rebellious again and came under the consequences of punishments again that they had been warned would happen. The Old Testament is full of see-saw events where God helps the Israelites out of the trouble they get into but also sends problems upon them as a consequence of their being wayward, disobedient and rebellious. Many times when God helped the Children of Israel out of trouble things would be fine but then they would take it for granted and forget about God. As a Loving Father, God continually warns mankind, helps mankind and is also going to do everything to help guide people in the right path. However, as with an unruly child, people forget to turn to God or just plain don't want to have anything to do with Him - so He let's them find out the hard way about consequences. At other times, troubling things may happen as a result of our just being part of this world that has incurred a fallen nature because of sin and we become affected in one way or another.

As far as the writings of the Bible, again, as I explained to UNA on another posting it is through the Holy Spirit of God that the OT Prophets and Christ's disciples were guided for what to write and the messages can be trusted. They are the first-hand experiences and documented accounts of God's intervention with mankind from the time of Adam and Eve in the Garden through the events in Jesus' life. Those are the messages that God wants mankind to know so that we can be reconciled with Him and become adopted Children of God through the Salvation provided for us.

The writings of the Holy Bible are inspired by God's Spirit to mankind and it is on the spiritual level where we are to come to meet God and seek His Guidance. You do have the free-will to decide if you really want God in your life and in the life of your family. However, only you can decide that as it is an individual one-on-one invitation to meet with our Creator.

:buddies:

That's actually enough to establish the prophetic birth of Jesus, born of the seed of a woman (Genesis 3:15) with the documented genealogy that points to Jesus being Heir to the Throne of King David and valid qualifications for being the Jewish Messiah. However, what also must be considered is that all of the New Testament accounts mention Jesus Christ as being The Son of God, Lamb of God, Messiah, Saviour of mankind, etc.

That could only have been possible by Jesus being born of a virgin lest His Blood would have been tainted by the corrupt seed of Adam. The Bible mentions that sin is passed down from "one man", Adam. (Romans 5:12) If Jesus would have had an "earthly father" His Blood would have been tainted with the sin-seed of Adam which would have then negated Christ's pure Atoning Blood.

I would have thought Paul would have mentioned it. Instead he refers to Jesus as of the seed of David. The original prophesy of Isaiah says that the messiah will be born of a "young women" and wasn't until the original Hebrew was mistranslated into Greek that she became a virgin.

Not to worry. Even my mother forgot my birth date and couldn't remember when or where I was born at times! There were so many kids in my family she would even forget my name and call me by another. lol

Okay, to answer your question about this, here is a site where you can find your answer that is of "Biblical" proportions:
Why do Matthew and Luke have DIFFERENT accounts of the birth of Jesus? (http://www.biblestudy.org/question/why-is-matthew-different-than-luke-about-birth-of-jesus.html)

If I had a messiah, and I knew him, I bother to remember when He was born and why He was where He was.

So if you kind of put the stories together you get the whole picture. But I thought God guided the writing down of the stories in the Bible...why didn't He guide them to write the same account?

Additionally, Matthew says Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great, Luke says He was born during the first census of Israel when Quirinius was governor. But Herod died in March of 4 BC and the census took place in 6 and 7 AD, 10 years after Herod's death. So which one is it? You can't really put those together, the historical time lines do not match up.

For example????

I've address some of the historical and prophetical issues above. Here are a few more:

Josephus never mentions Herod's Slaughter of the Innocents though Josephus certainly didn't shy away from mentioning numerous other atrocities of Herod. Why is this?

The original prophecy in Zecharian 9:9 says that Jesus was "mounted on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey" when Jesus returns to Jerusalem. Luke (and Mark and John) note that Jesus rode on A donkey. Matthew says that Jesus was sat on them, a donkey AND a colt, he does it three different verses. How would that even work? :lol: Did Matthew misread the prophesy?

I know he wasn't, Luke was referring to that but he still followed His lineage through Joseph. He goes on



never saying "OK, but here is the lineage through Mary".

There isn't really any point in tracing His lineage back through Joseph at all (as you said, He wasn't Joseph's son). Paul actually says that Jesus is of the seed of David. Seed as in of his sperma (the Greek) used later in other verses to mean "offspring" or "descendant". If Jesus isn't of Joseph then He isn't of David. Big problem here.

Where's the problem? The inheritance to the Throne of David is through Mary's bloodline whereby Jewish validity for descendancy is established. In addition, Joseph, being the step-father of Jesus, also passes along any inheritance to his estate and tribal status to Jesus through adoption - according to Jewish tradtion.



Take your time :smile:

Yo, UNA - I already responded to those other questions my peace-nik friend!
(see Post #172 from last evenng at the following link) :smile:


...answers

Do you have total free will? You might not think God would stop you from doing something but I can guarantee you He has w/o you knowing (or admitting) it.

Of course I do...that whole "lack of belief" thing. I can put no stock in what you say, you can no more guarantee that as I can guarantee I will be President on day! :lol:

Justified. Since God is the author of all life He is justified if He does that and even if He tells His people to do it (as He did many times before).

So you're not only defending genocide and are calling it a good thing (justified) but you're also calling it part of perfection?!

Perfection is a subjective adjective, my subjective opinion of perfection does NOT include genocide. It, quite frankly, amazes me that genocide encompasses perfection to you. :twitch:

Okay, McGinn, since UNA brought up the subject about the concept of "free-will and religion" this is another one of those discussions that can be endlessly debated back and forth. However, let's consider your computer analogy on this one as well.

If you were a "Calvinist Computer-Engineer Creator" you would have designed some of your computers to work properly (with some tweaking here and there) but then you also would have purposely created others to totally malfunction and not work well enough to suit your needs and you knew you were eventually going to get rid of them.

Therefore, all of the computers that you designed to work well are saved for your eternal use and interaction while the computers that you deliberately designed to fail (through no fault of their own) are on the list of inventory that will be sent to the destruction bins where they will be melted, pulverized and erased from your memory forever.

Just sayin...

We need a Calvinist in here! I'd like to see them debate this topic. CALLING ALL CALVINISTS! :lol:

Which is what I’ve been trying to point out, on a couple of different levels, why this has a logical explanation. It makes no sense that God would purposely predestine some for salvation and others for destruction. If God created us in His image, it serves no purpose.

Again...never said it made sense. Even if we accept that God created everything, there are certainly things in this universe that serve no purpose and make no sense...like Michael Moore.

I would have thought Paul would have mentioned it. Instead he refers to Jesus as of the seed of David. The original prophesy of Isaiah says that the messiah will be born of a "young women" and wasn't until the original Hebrew was mistranslated into Greek that she became a virgin.

Well, to be factual about it: In those Judaic days, a "young woman" was a virgin. :whistle:

Where's the problem? The inheritance to the Throne of David is through Mary's bloodline whereby Jewish validity for descendancy is established. In addition, Joseph, being the step-father of Jesus, also passes along any inheritance to his estate and tribal status to Jesus through adoption - according to Jewish tradition.

The women (Mary) in a man's lineage do not count in tracing it back, only in providing a Jewish heritage, not a right to a throne. In Jesus' time, it was thought that the whole "man" was contained in the father's seed (again, sperma) so the women were unnecessary. Women were just the soil in which the seed was planted. Hence a women unable to produce children was barren as a field can be barren.

Since we can agree that Matthew was tracing Joseph's line what would be the point? They were not of relation.

Yo, UNA - I already responded to those other questions my peace-nik friend!
(see Post #172 from last evenng at the following link) :smile:

Yeah, I saw that after I made that post. :blushing:

Well, to be factual about it: In those Judaic days, a "young woman" was a virgin. :whistle:

I've never heard this. Do you have a reference?

I've never heard this. Do you have a reference?

Ever watch Fiddler on The Roof? :popcorn: lol

Actually, UNA, the family lifestyle of the devout Jewish household is one of true obedience to the Hebrew God. Young Jewish women whose heart is set on being pleasing to The Lord and genuinely serious of being obedient to God would also be obedient to their parents and to their religious customs of keeping themselves pure (virgin) for their marriage. It is a sacred rite that a devout young Jewish woman would take seriously in honor of her God, her family, and her future husband.

Of course I do...that whole "lack of belief" thing. I can put no stock in what you say, you can no more guarantee that as I can guarantee I will be President on day! :lol:
I can absolutely guarantee it but nothing I could tell you would cause you to believe it, so... The fact that you're alive is from God, but...

So you're not only defending genocide and are calling it a good thing (justified) but you're also calling it part of perfection?! Perfection is a subjective adjective, my subjective opinion of perfection does NOT include genocide. It, quite frankly, amazes me that genocide encompasses perfection to you. :twitch:
Sure it does; It's called purification. God cleansed the earth from time to time by eliminating those whom He saw as "uber" evil. It's exactly what He will do at the end of the world when He separates good from evil forever.

Even if we accept that God created everything, there are certainly things in this universe that serve no purpose and make no sense...like Michael Moore.
Everything does have a purpose but Michael Moore??? You absolutely deserve a :high5: for that one! :roflmao:
I've never heard this. Do you have a reference?
How about:

13 "If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” then the girl’s father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. The girl’s father will say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. Now he has slandered her and said, ‘I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.’

But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.” Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, and the elders shall take the man and punish him. They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the girl’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.

If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you". (Deuteronomy 22 v 13-21)
Notice that last line: "purge evil from among you"? It wasn't pretty back then but it was Gods' will for the people.

Is that in at least this instance God acted outside of the natural process. The natural processes he's said to have created. Changing those natural processes changes free will. Even if it only happens once, since we can no longer count on there being a natural order, as set of rules we can count on, our free will is at least limited because free will is dependent on knowing the possible outcomes of your choices. If you have no way of knowing what the outcome is, you can't really make a decision.

It would be like me saying, pick one of three doors, behind one is a prize and there is nothing behind the others, or you can walk away and pick none. You figure "may as well, the worst thing that could happen is I get nothing". Then you pick a door and when you open it, it's the wrong door and someone shoots you. If you had known that was a possibility you would have just walked away. You can't say you took the risk of dying by your own free will because you didn't even know that was an option.

Interesting! God acted outside of His own nature. That would be like saying gravity decided it wasn’t going to attract anymore; it was going to repel. I would argue that everything God does is within His nature. Just because we can’t explain or understand it doesn’t mean it’s not so. Just like we don’t completely understand black holes, we don’t understand the will of God. The effect this has on free will is not confined to our limited understanding.

You’ve placed this discussion in a neat box of absolutes. Either there is absolute free will or, because God causes certain things to happen, there is no free will. The OP was about whether we really choose to be saved or if God predetermined it from the beginning; if we made that choice or if God made that choice.

Certainly God has done things that have intervened in what we would consider the normal process of life on earth; but you’re assuming this is God changing His nature. I contend that what He does, everything He does, is within His nature; and is not limited to your definition of what this ‘natural process’ is.

Funny, that was one of my shorter responses and not reliant on reading half a dozen links provided (by you) and trying to decipher which of them had the information you said you were providing...

I wasn’t criticizing the length of your posts. I just don’t have the time to respond to it all. And they get longer as we go along; from both of us.

You asked for historical information. I provided some. It’s up to you to take the time to get into it. Although, I knew it was pretty much a waste of time. There isn’t really anything out there that is going to convince you anyway. But you did asked.

Ever watch Fiddler on The Roof? :popcorn: lol

Actually, UNA, the family lifestyle of the devout Jewish household is one of true obedience to the Hebrew God. Young Jewish women whose heart is set on being pleasing to The Lord and genuinely serious of being obedient to God would also be obedient to their parents and to their religious customs of keeping themselves pure (virgin) for their marriage. It is a sacred rite that a devout young Jewish woman would take seriously in honor of her God, her family, and her future husband.

All that implies is that "young woman" should equate to "virgin".

The original Hebrew writings of the Immanuel Prophecy used the word almah. You are correct in saying this word can mean "young woman" OR "virgin", in fact the origianl Greek translations use parthenos which specifically means "virgin". This is the word Matthew chose to use. However, the Hebrew word bethulah very clearly and specifically means "virgin". At the very least, this would have been a better choice of words.

The Immanuel Prophecy states:

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

The bolded can very simply be interpreted to mean Mary conceived the first time. She was a virgin at the time. This would still fulfill the prophecy. Not a conclusion, just an observation. :smile:

And shouldn't Jesus' name have been Immanuel ("and will call him Immanuel")? :shrug:

I can absolutely guarantee it but nothing I could tell you would cause you to believe it, so... The fact that you're alive is from God, but...

We've been down this road before. :lol:

That is your opinion, you're welcome to it and I respect it but it has no merit. Until there is proof, you cannot assert it as fact. Without proof, I will not believe you.

Sure it does; It's called purification. God cleansed the earth from time to time by eliminating those whom He saw as "uber" evil. It's exactly what He will do at the end of the world when He separates good from evil forever.

Isn't that what Hitler did?

Everything does have a purpose but Michael Moore??? You absolutely deserve a :high5: for that one! :roflmao:

:yay:

How about:
(Deuteronomy 22 v 13-21)
Notice that last line: "purge evil from among you"? It wasn't pretty back then but it was Gods' will for the people.

This isn't proof that all young women were virgins, just that the consequences were severe.

There isn’t really anything out there that is going to convince you anyway. But you did asked.

This should tell you something. Shouldn't the evidence be solid? Undeniable? In order to come to the conclusions concerning God that you've some to, the evidence should be able to prove it. This kind of evidence only stands up to people to already believe, who are understandable biased.

We've been down this road before. :lol: That is your opinion, you're welcome to it and I respect it but it has no merit. Until there is proof, you cannot assert it as fact. Without proof, I will not believe you.
Just because you don't believe me doesn't mean it isn't true. He will show you how He has guided you one day in the future.

Isn't that what Hitler did?
Hitler did it out of his hatred for the Jews. God did it out of His love for that which is good.

This isn't proof that all young women were virgins, just that the consequences were severe.
It's proof that they were soo serious about a womans' virginity that failing to adhere to it, resulted in the death penalty. :duh: :shrug: :cheers:

This should tell you something. Shouldn't the evidence be solid? Undeniable? In order to come to the conclusions concerning God that you've some to, the evidence should be able to prove it. This kind of evidence only stands up to people to already believe, who are understandable biased.

I’m not arguing that any evidence I provide is solid enough to convince anyone there is a God. In fact, I’m not even trying to convince you, or McGinn, or anyone else there IS a God. I’m simply using the same argument, the same constraints you place on proving there is a God to proving certain things in science are have any real proof. I’m also stating there is just as much proof there is a God than there is for black holes, or global warming, or parallel universes, or dark matter… There is no SOLID EVIDENCE for any of it.

Just because you don't believe me doesn't mean it isn't true. He will show you how He has guided you one day in the future.

True, but just because you do believe doesn't mean it is either.

Hitler did it out of his hatred for the Jews. God did it out of His love for that which is good.

Odd definition of love you have there...

It's proof that they were soo serious about a womans' virginity that failing to adhere to it, resulted in the death penalty. :duh: :shrug: :cheers:

Yes it is, which is not the same as proof that they all adhered. Obviously they didn't or there would be a 'law' concerning the issue.

I’m not arguing that any evidence I provide is solid enough to convince anyone there is a God. In fact, I’m not even trying to convince you, or McGinn, or anyone else there IS a God. I’m simply using the same argument, the same constraints you place on proving there is a God to proving certain things in science are have any real proof. I’m also stating there is just as much proof there is a God than there is for black holes, or global warming, or parallel universes, or dark matter… There is no SOLID EVIDENCE for any of it.

OK, let me try an example. I'm walking through the jungle and I see a new bug, one that no one has ever seen before. It's not been identified, explained, defined...nothing. I'm going to call it a Whatsit Bug. I surmise that it behaves in a certain way. Now, other people now see the Whatsit Bug as well, they study it and may discover that my conjectures about its behavior are wrong. It's still a Whatsit Bug isn't it? Yes, because I found it and I got naming rights. I named it a Whatsit Bug and that's what it is no matter what we discover about it. Whether it behaves exactly as I first thought is irrelevant. From now all, all bugs that have these certain physical characteristics are Whatsit Bugs.

Why do you continue to bring up black holes anyways? Because you're right on (the causes and solution for) glodal warming, parallel universes and dark matter. They're theories (though with more evidence than exists for a specific god definition). You've brought them up before and no on is arguing these latter points.

OK, let me try an example. I'm walking through the jungle and I see a new bug, one that no one has ever seen before. It's not been identified, explained, defined...nothing. I'm going to call it a Whatsit Bug. I surmise that it behaves in a certain way. Now, other people now see the Whatsit Bug as well, they study it and may discover that my conjectures about its behavior are wrong. It's still a Whatsit Bug isn't it? Yes, because I found it and I got naming rights. I named it a Whatsit Bug and that's what it is no matter what we discover about it. Whether it behaves exactly as I first thought is irrelevant. From now all, all bugs that have these certain physical characteristics are Whatsit Bugs.

Why do you continue to bring up black holes anyways? Because you're right on (the causes and solution for) glodal warming, parallel universes and dark matter. They're theories (though with more evidence than exists for a specific god definition). You've brought them up before and no on is arguing these latter points.

Again, you’ve given me an example of something you have observed first-hand: can touch, smell, even cook up and eat. You can, without any doubt, stipulate this bug exists because of those absolute provable facts. What you are doing with black holes is claiming it’s this specific kind of phenomenon through nothing more than distant observations of OTHER objects and math. You haven’t actually SEEN this object; you can only see the behavior around it, thus claiming ‘this is what it is’.

This evidence for black holes is not much more than the evidence for God. The reason I talk about black holes is because physicists talk about them as if they are absolutely real and the science PROVES it. Supposedly black holes hold the keys to unlocking the mysteries of the universe. The only thing science has proven here is that they can see objects dancing around out there and claim it’s because of black holes (a massive vortex of gravity). They can’t see these black holes, but they’re really certain that’s what it is. The same level of doubt you cast on religion is the same I cast on what science claims is real.

You’ve chosen your target. It’s religion. You come in here and cast all sorts of doubt on my faith. You debate the validity of my God. I have absolutely no problem with that at all. I really enjoy it. But you better expect that if you are going to play that game, expect the same back. And I’m not wasting my time proving the existence of my God. You have enough ‘evidence’ (or lack thereof) to direct your decision on that. It’s far more productive for me to cast doubt on the things you claim are true and real; in other words play your own game against you. Science is a very flawed practice in my opinion. Scientists claim the tools they use apply everywhere. Scientists claim they can explain things that happened ‘millions of years ago’ and convince laymen that this is truth and fact. They claim they know what things are doing in deep space by pointing a telescope from little ole Earth in that direction and applying a little math, and convince you and me this is what’s really happening. The same evidence you demand from me to prove my God is the same evidence I demand of you… show me, first hand that this is true. Don’t tell me black holes exist because of Newton’s laws and the way objects around this ‘black hole’ are behaving; in other words ‘observable evidence’, yet deny that there is observable evidence right here on earth (peoples’ behavior, documentation, and archeological evidence) to support the existence of a God; a God you can’t see but can observe behavior around it. I mean if you leave out certain details I would swear a black hole is God. You can’t see it, but you sure are convinced it’s there.

True, but just because you do believe doesn't mean it is either. Yes it is, which is not the same as proof that they all adhered. Obviously they didn't or there would be a 'law' concerning the issue.
This is why I said that it takes more faith to NOT believe in God than it does to believe in Him. It would be soo much easier to simply believe than to argue about the Supreme Creator of all things that science won't accept because it can't prove Him in a lab...

This is why I said that it takes more faith to NOT believe in God than it does to believe in Him.For you. :lol:

For you. :lol:
Soitainly not for me. I've believed the evidence. She's ignoring the very things that speak of a Creator. AKA: Missing the forest because of the trees...:howdy:

Soitainly not for me. I've believed the evidence. She's ignoring the very things that speak of a Creator. AKA: Missing the forest because of the trees...You have believed what you see as evidence.

She does not see it as such strong evidence.

I do not see it as such strong evidence. I am astounded by nature on a daily basis, but that doesn't mean I am any closer to placing a deity above it to explain it all.

Again, you’ve given me an example of something you have observed first-hand: can touch, smell, even cook up and eat. You can, without any doubt, stipulate this bug exists because of those absolute provable facts. What you are doing with black holes is claiming it’s this specific kind of phenomenon through nothing more than distant observations of OTHER objects and math. You haven’t actually SEEN this object; you can only see the behavior around it, thus claiming ‘this is what it is’.

Then do you believe the earth is round(-ish)? I mean, you've never personally seen this, you've only seen pictures from space...

This evidence for black holes is not much more than the evidence for God. The reason I talk about black holes is because physicists talk about them as if they are absolutely real and the science PROVES it. Supposedly black holes hold the keys to unlocking the mysteries of the universe. The only thing science has proven here is that they can see objects dancing around out there and claim it’s because of black holes (a massive vortex of gravity). They can’t see these black holes, but they’re really certain that’s what it is. The same level of doubt you cast on religion is the same I cast on what science claims is real.

But we've defined black holes to be the thing at the center of this activity. We speculate as to the nature of said black hole, about how it works but that's it. Science saw an event in space (object swirling around some kind of invisible object) and said "something is causing this event". Science has named this invisible something a black hole. The idea of God does not equate, believers see events happening and say that it was God without ever looking for any other explanation (some believers, of course not all).

You’ve chosen your target. It’s religion. You come in here and cast all sorts of doubt on my faith. You debate the validity of my God. I have absolutely no problem with that at all. I really enjoy it. But you better expect that if you are going to play that game, expect the same back. And I’m not wasting my time proving the existence of my God. You have enough ‘evidence’ (or lack thereof) to direct your decision on that. It’s far more productive for me to cast doubt on the things you claim are true and real; in other words play your own game against you. Science is a very flawed practice in my opinion. Scientists claim the tools they use apply everywhere. Scientists claim they can explain things that happened ‘millions of years ago’ and convince laymen that this is truth and fact. They claim they know what things are doing in deep space by pointing a telescope from little ole Earth in that direction and applying a little math, and convince you and me this is what’s really happening. The same evidence you demand from me to prove my God is the same evidence I demand of you… show me, first hand that this is true. Don’t tell me black holes exist because of Newton’s laws and the way objects around this ‘black hole’ are behaving; in other words ‘observable evidence’, yet deny that there is observable evidence right here on earth (peoples’ behavior, documentation, and archeological evidence) to support the existence of a God; a God you can’t see but can observe behavior around it. I mean if you leave out certain details I would swear a black hole is God. You can’t see it, but you sure are convinced it’s there.

Have I given the impression that I didn't expect to get "the same back"?

The flaws in science are the point, the goal is to mitigate these flaws, seek the answers, gain knowledge.

You have every right to demand evidence (especially of science), that's the point! No one is expecting you to accept ANYTHING without evidence and if you're presented with evidence and still aren't convinced then fine. What I want people to do is to demand this same level of evidence for God!

Remember, I've never said that I know for a fact there is no higher power (your God nor anyone else's). I'm not trying to claim evidence of "no god". Just that there isn't any for him/her/it. Where evidence is lacking, I cannot believe. If I claimed a giant otter to be living on Pluto you would rightly demand evidence! Without it, you wouldn't believe. The burden of proof would be on ME to show evidence of the otter on Pluto.

This is why I said that it takes more faith to NOT believe in God than it does to believe in Him. It would be soo much easier to simply believe than to argue about the Supreme Creator of all things that science won't accept because it can't prove Him in a lab...

By definition, I have no faith therefore I cannot have more faith in something than you.

Besides, you do the exact same thing I'm doing. I don't believe in ANY higher power. You believe in ONE higher power. Why don't you believe in all the other gods out there? Probably for very similar reasons as me, I just don't believe in one more than you.

You have believed what you see as evidence.
She does not see it as such strong evidence. I do not see it as such strong evidence. I am astounded by nature on a daily basis, but that doesn't mean I am any closer to placing a deity above it to explain it all.
It's because you refuse to see it. It's all very plain to see but you'd rather deny it and that takes more work (faith) than to simply believe. Most people's questions would get answered soo easily and wouldn't require a rocket scientist to interpret it.

The complexity of the human body should be evidence enough. The intricate nature of the ecosystem and the universe could NEVER be self made things. The theory of global warming comes from a lack of belief in the power of God to sustain all things. Al Gore? :killingme
By definition, I have no faith therefore I cannot have more faith in something than you. Besides, you do the exact same thing I'm doing. I don't believe in ANY higher power. You believe in ONE higher power. Why don't you believe in all the other gods out there? Probably for very similar reasons as me, I just don't believe in one more than you.
You have some faith, it's just misplaced.

It's because you refuse to see it.Of course that's your impression because you are predisposed to belief. I am not of the same perspective; I have always wanted to ask too many questions about god, and as we all know, he doesn't like that. We have gone over this before - and likely will again :lol: - but if it makes things easier for you to think all non-believers are actively resisting the evidence for a man in the sky then so be it.


The theory of global warming comes from a lack of belief in the power of God to sustain all things. Al Gore?:confused: Alrighty...

Of course that's your impression because you are predisposed to belief. I am not of the same perspective; I have always wanted to ask too many questions about god, and as we all know, he doesn't like that. We have gone over this before - and likely will again :lol: - but if it makes things easier for you to think all non-believers are actively resisting the evidence for a man in the sky then so be it.
God does NOT hate it when people ask questions about Him. He hates it when they don't want to learn about Him...

God does NOT hate it when people ask questions about Him. He hates it when they don't want to learn about Him...

How narcissistic! You speak for God? Too funny! :lmao:

The theory of global warming comes from a lack of belief in the power of God to sustain all things. Al Gore? :killingme

You wonder why folks refuse to be convinced and believe the same as you?

Condescending statements like these demonstrate why. :ohwell:

How narcissistic! You speak for God? Too funny! :lmao:
Of course! I'm absolutely commanded to, by God. How did you miss that?
You wonder why folks refuse to be convinced and believe the same as you? Condescending statements like these demonstrate why. :ohwell:
What have you been smoking lately Zguy? You've been a bit off track for a while now and it makes me wonder... :shrug: What is condescending about my statement? The earth is completely taken care of by God but Al Gore doesn't think so; so? The earth cools and the earth warms. If you think it's because of mankind...

Of course! I'm absolutely commanded to, by God. How did you miss that?

What have you been smoking lately Zguy? You've been a bit off track for a while now and it makes me wonder... :shrug:
Politics ≠ religion. Something that may be considered a liberal political issue doesn't always mean it is also a theologically liberal issue.

We may not believe in a welfare state government like political liberals, but the church is charged with being a welfare organization. The Gospels and the book of Acts gives clear evidence of this.

What is condescending about my statement? The earth is completely taken care of by God but Al Gore doesn't think so; so? The earth cools and the earth warms. If you think it's because of mankind...It's condescending in the delivery. You might as well say "well, you're stupid and an ignoramus, because you don't believe like I do."

The earth was created by God and man was given dominion over it. Don't you think you should be a good steward of what God created and gifted us with?

It's like Starman saying that striving for peace in the world is a waste of time because the world will continue down a road of apostasy. I wonder why he even preaches the gospel? The world will get worse anyway right? So, why bother?

Because the Scripture commands such things as preaching the gospel. And being peacemakers. And being a faithful steward of God's gifts. And on and on.

So, take care of the earth. Our ancestors already made enough of a mess of it, what with bringing sin and death into the world and all.

... It's like Starman saying that striving for peace in the world is a waste of time because the world will continue down a road of apostasy. I wonder why he even preaches the gospel? The world will get worse anyway right? So, why bother? ...

:nono: Never said that at all Zguy28. That was UNA's "take" on my comments.

Jesus is the one who stated that things would get worse in this world and for His followers to be aware of the time when they hear people calling for "peace and safety".

Sure believers are to live peaceably in this world and to warn about the impending "false peace" that a One World Government/One World Religion will try to establish. I thought you were aware of this prophecy Zguy.

Does this mean that you are for joining the ecumenical council of churches who believe they will be able to bring "peace" to this world apart from the Peace that will only come when Christ returns? :shrug:

It's condescending in the delivery. You might as well say "well, you're stupid and an ignoramus, because you don't believe like I do." The earth was created by God and man was given dominion over it. Don't you think you should be a good steward of what God created and gifted us with?
Did I use those words or are you being dramatic? My "delivery" is the same all the time. Don't you think God can sustain this planets climate w/o our involvement? I'm sure you do but Al Gore is implying that He can't and boat loads of his sheeple believe him.

It wouldn't be an issue if Gore just pushed recycling and reducing our wastefulness but he isn't. He saying it's our fault and we're changing that which can't be changed by humans. I didn't say anything about us NOT being responsible with our resources so how/why do you read so much extra into my statements?

It's like Starman saying that striving for peace in the world is a waste of time because the world will continue down a road of apostasy. I wonder why he even preaches the gospel? The world will get worse anyway right? So, why bother? Because the Scripture commands such things as preaching the gospel. And being peacemakers. And being a faithful steward of God's gifts. And on and on. So take care of the earth.
Yes BUT all we can do here is "maintain". We cannot make the world go on any longer than God says it will AND we know that it will NOT get better. The signs are out there that the end times are upon us (like it or not). So, while we still try to change things for the better, we cannot stop the wave of unbelief that is coming over the world...

:nono: Never said that at all Zguy28. That was UNA's "take" on my comments.

Jesus is the one who stated that things would get worse in this world and for His followers to be aware of the time when they hear people calling for "peace and safety".Been happening since the day He said it.

Sure believers are to live peaceably in this world and to warn about the impending "false peace" that a One World Government/One World Religion will try to establish. I thought you were aware of this prophecy Zguy. Believe it or not, there are literally millions of evangelical Christians who do not hold to the same interpretation of said Scriptures as you do.

That in itself doesn't make you more right than them or vice versa.

But surely you don't think you are the only one illuminated by the Holy Spirit to understand and interpret Scripture?

Does this mean that you are for joining the ecumenical council of churches who believe they will be able to bring "peace" to this world apart from the Peace that will only come when Christ returns? :shrug:


And what kind of red herring is that anyway? I was (and still am) opposed to the Manhattan Declaration. Do you really think somebody as "Reformed" as I am would join something like that? I liked Chuck Colson (RIP), but he was wrong on that.

Now, let me ask you a question, since you get so wrapped up on this whole "world is going in the toilet" mindset as if it was some sort of primary ecclesiastical doctrine.

If I am saved by grace, through faith in Christ, and am therefore doing the work of the gospel and the kingdom (cf. Matthew 25) and I really don't give "End Times" prophecy any more attention than the rest of Scripture and Jesus comes in His glory...do you think He's going to chastise or discipline me for that? Or will He say "Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me."?

Then do you believe the earth is round(-ish)? I mean, you've never personally seen this, you've only seen pictures from space...

Since you failed on the bug analogy you delve into the ridiculous. But I guess I’ll entertain it just for the sake of… who knows what?

We’ve had people go into orbit, even at fair distances from earth take photos and return to earth. They have seen it, touched it, and orbited around it. They were able to experience it firsthand.

No one has gone to a black hole, no one has touched it, no one has orbited around one. You’ve only gotten faint photos of objects they claim are reacting to it. Oh, and math to support what those objects are doing. Math that may turn out to be false (mentioned later in this response).

But we've defined black holes to be the thing at the center of this activity. We speculate as to the nature of said black hole, about how it works but that's it. Science saw an event in space (object swirling around some kind of invisible object) and said "something is causing this event". Science has named this invisible something a black hole. The idea of God does not equate, believers see events happening and say that it was God without ever looking for any other explanation (some believers, of course not all).

The one thing physicists and astronomers BELIEVE a black is, is a place in space with massive gravity pulling everything into. So, it’s not something that is merely a name of some undefined event. They believe they KNOW what a black hole is doing.

Just like you atheists like to throw the Flying Spaghetti Monster as a means to show how ridiculous it is to believe in a God, I can easily say that's what you’re seeing way out there is that very same thing… there are thousands, maybe millions of Flying Spaghetti Monsters running around the universe devouring galaxies. I mean we’ve never seen this monster, but devoid of a better explanation, that’s what it HAS to be.

Have I given the impression that I didn't expect to get "the same back"?

The flaws in science are the point, the goal is to mitigate these flaws, seek the answers, gain knowledge.

You have every right to demand evidence (especially of science), that's the point! No one is expecting you to accept ANYTHING without evidence and if you're presented with evidence and still aren't convinced then fine. What I want people to do is to demand this same level of evidence for God!

Remember, I've never said that I know for a fact there is no higher power (your God nor anyone else's). I'm not trying to claim evidence of "no god". Just that there isn't any for him/her/it. Where evidence is lacking, I cannot believe. If I claimed a giant otter to be living on Pluto you would rightly demand evidence! Without it, you wouldn't believe. The burden of proof would be on ME to show evidence of the otter on Pluto.

You asked why I continue to go after black holes as a counter. I ask, why do you continue to go after Christianity (or any other religion) as your target for debate? Why is it so important that you spend so much time trying to discredit it? You chose my faith, I chose certain aspects of science that most people like you believe are absolutely true.

The biggest flaw in science right now is physicists like Michio Kaku talk about black holes as if they not only are absolutely what they claim they are, but they are the key to unlocking the ‘mysteries’ of the universe. Real? So humans find one particular phenomenon in space and believe THIS is IT; the big cheese that will reveal everything. As vast and probably billions of corners of the universe not even discovered and we humans think we figured it out?

Now they are discovering – MAYBE – that neutrinos travel faster than light. This ‘discovery’ aims to blow all of Einstein’s theories out of the water. Theories the scientific community has placed all their efforts on. Everything he claimed could potentially be wrong. And this discovery – as I have tried to point out multiple times – only found here on earth. Who knows what might be discovered in some distant galaxy a few trillion light years away; that there are particles that travel 20X the speed of light. That the dynamics for physics that we have learned here, don’t even come close to applying somewhere else in the universe.

We’re so narcissistic to believe we can unlock the mysteries of things we can’t even come close to calculating in our limited confines.

You have some faith, it's just misplaced.

I suppose one could say that I have faith in humanity...things like that. When I hear the word "faith" I associate it with faith in a supernatural thing. I have no faith in any supernatural concepts. Faith implies a lack of proof (otherwise faith is not necessary), it is this type of faith which I lack...by definition. So to which type are you referring?

I suppose one could say that I have faith in humanity...things like that. When I hear the word "faith" I associate it with faith in a supernatural thing. I have no faith in any supernatural concepts. Faith implies a lack of proof (otherwise faith is not necessary), it is this type of faith which I lack...by definition. So to which type are you referring?

Well you have faith that a big bang somehow created this entire universe, including the LIFE in it; through random chemical reactions. I think that requires more faith than a faith in a God. That all this stuff can come from a singular blob of gasses (that no one really know what it was made up of or what it even looked like) and somehow randomly combine together and create EVERYTHING, especially life. THAT requires great faith.

I suppose one could say that I have faith in humanity...things like that. When I hear the word "faith" I associate it with faith in a supernatural thing. I have no faith in any supernatural concepts. Faith implies a lack of proof (otherwise faith is not necessary), it is this type of faith which I lack...by definition. So to which type are you referring?
You have faith in a lot of things. Many of them you just don't think about. You have faith that, when you sit on your couch or chair or walk up your steps, they won't collapse under you.

You and your hubby apparently had faith in God for a while. You say that you believed but now you don't because you can't get answers (proof) to your questions when, in actuality, you can but refuse to believe them. A lot of things in life cannot be touched or seen to prove they exist (as PsyOps very logically showed you). Many people believe what scientists say BUT they wouldn't bet their life on it...

The most important belief is one that you must believe in through faith. If you wait until you see Him it will be too late. All I'm saying is I HOPE you find the faith that you both once had because it's the only way. You really don't want to spend eternity kicking yourself for something that was evident to us all. IOW, don't lose your soul over some personal "beef" that you'll never be able to win an argument over anyway...

Since you failed on the bug analogy you delve into the ridiculous. But I guess I’ll entertain it just for the sake of… who knows what?

We’ve had people go into orbit, even at fair distances from earth take photos and return to earth. They have seen it, touched it, and orbited around it. They were able to experience it firsthand.

No one has gone to a black hole, no one has touched it, no one has orbited around one. You’ve only gotten faint photos of objects they claim are reacting to it. Oh, and math to support what those objects are doing. Math that may turn out to be false (mentioned later in this response).

Photos? Those don't count. Photos are two dimensional, God just made it look like the planet was round. Our imperfect perception of the world around us tricked people into thinking it was round. YOU haven't seen it! :sarcasm:

BTW, the evidence we have for what black holes do preclude our visiting one let alone touching or orbiting it. Again, we see objects moving in space, around something we can't see. That something has been named a black hole. No matter what we learn about it later, no matter how wrong our current perceptions of it may turn out to be, it will still be a black hole. We have naming rights.

The one thing physicists and astronomers BELIEVE a black is, is a place in space with massive gravity pulling everything into. So, it’s not something that is merely a name of some undefined event. They believe they KNOW what a black hole is doing.

Just like you atheists like to throw the Flying Spaghetti Monster as a means to show how ridiculous it is to believe in a God, I can easily say that's what you’re seeing way out there is that very same thing… there are thousands, maybe millions of Flying Spaghetti Monsters running around the universe devouring galaxies. I mean we’ve never seen this monster, but devoid of a better explanation, that’s what it HAS to be.

Who believes they know again?

They have theories and don't presume said theories to be anything more. We've speculated as to it's nature and that's it. No one is stating anything about the nature of black holes then REFUSING to call their statement wrong in the face of new evidence.

:doh: maybe it is, who knows?! If someone provides evidence for what we call a black hole actually having characteristics consistent with a satirical character then I suppose we'll have to re-name it. Whatever it is, whatever we call it, there is still something out there sucking up matter and energy. We're currently calling it a black hole and using the theory general relativity to presume that the force is gravity. What science is trying to do is to define it's nature, to learn more about it. There is SOMETHING out there doing SOMETHING because we can see things moving and can't figure out why, that's why we came up with the theory.

And just in case you missed it...theory...THEORY.

Read the wiki article on black holes, the word theory (and other forms of the word) is used 45 times, predict is used 13 times, consider is used 3 times. The word fact is used twice and neither time used to describe a black hole rather once WRT the fact that gravitational force of an object does not depend on it size (surface area and gravitational force are not directly proportional) and once WRT a direct, observed measure of entropy increasing.

You asked why I continue to go after black holes as a counter. I ask, why do you continue to go after Christianity (or any other religion) as your target for debate? Why is it so important that you spend so much time trying to discredit it? You chose my faith, I chose certain aspects of science that most people like you believe are absolutely true.

Because I'm in a religious forum? I think...is this a trick question? :lol:

I had no idea there had been a survey done...most people "like me" believe we know exactly how black holes work?

(I'm being facetious, I know :smile:)

I did not choose your faith, you did. We could very well be having this debate if you were a Jew, a Muslim or a Hindu. Makes no difference to me :shrug:

The biggest flaw in science right now is physicists like Michio Kaku talk about black holes as if they not only are absolutely what they claim they are, but they are the key to unlocking the ‘mysteries’ of the universe. Real? So humans find one particular phenomenon in space and believe THIS is IT; the big cheese that will reveal everything. As vast and probably billions of corners of the universe not even discovered and we humans think we figured it out?

I don't recall hearing him say that. Maybe he did. And maybe he really does believe that. That doesn't make it true. Nice thing about the scientific community, there isn't a single spokesperson!

(Kaku is a Christian-Buddhist BTW, in case you care to note the irony of you choosing him for your example. He's also a futurist, bit of a different class there, much more philosophical. I'd have gone with Hawking if I were you...you know, the guys to claimed to have figured out black holes and was proven wrong? The guy who is desperately trying to figure the darn things out? The guy who CLAIMED TO DISPROVE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD?! :lol:)


Wait...you said that Kaku "...talk(s) about black holes as if they ... are absolutely what they claim they are..." AND that "...{black hoels) are the key to unlocking the ‘mysteries’ of the universe..."? But if he thought we understood it all already, then they mysteries would already be explained...:confused:

Now they are discovering – MAYBE – that neutrinos travel faster than light. This ‘discovery’ aims to blow all of Einstein’s theories out of the water. Theories the scientific community has placed all their efforts on. Everything he claimed could potentially be wrong. And this discovery – as I have tried to point out multiple times – only found here on earth. Who knows what might be discovered in some distant galaxy a few trillion light years away; that there are particles that travel 20X the speed of light. That the dynamics for physics that we have learned here, don’t even come close to applying somewhere else in the universe.

We’re so narcissistic to believe we can unlock the mysteries of things we can’t even come close to calculating in our limited confines.

:doh:

See, that's what makes science different. It take more than ONE experiment, more than ONE occurrence and more than ONE location. It happened and now they're all trying to figure it out. But seriously, what do you think is more likely...that they goofed the experiment? Or that EVERYTHING IS WRONG?!

Kaku actually spoke on this, you should watch it!

Transcript (http://bigthink.com/ideas/41888)

What If Einstein Is Wrong? | Michio Kaku | Big Think (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XjS4I4oQDY)

I like what he point out at the end:
So here's the rub. Why should we believe this CERN experiment over a distance of 454 miles when over a distance of tens of thousands of light years neutrinos and light beams hit the earth at the same time? That’s why many physicists believe that they must have made a systematic error someplace and the weak link, the weak link in this whole chain of reasoning is the GPS system, and the GPS system itself is a relativistic system. So in some sense they’re using relativity to defeat relativity and I think there is something circular about that.

Well you have faith that a big bang somehow created this entire universe, including the LIFE in it; through random chemical reactions. I think that requires more faith than a faith in a God. That all this stuff can come from a singular blob of gasses (that no one really know what it was made up of or what it even looked like) and somehow randomly combine together and create EVERYTHING, especially life. THAT requires great faith.

You're not reading what I'm saying are you?

Can you find the post where I said that I "...have faith that a big bang somehow created this entire universe, including the LIFE in it; through random chemical reactions"? Why do you presume to know what I may or may not "believe" in?

There's that pesky little word again...THEORY

I consider it a leading theory, but not once have I ever claimed it to be fact. It's a theory with evidence, that's it. No more, no less.

You have faith in a lot of things. Many of them you just don't think about. You have faith that, when you sit on your couch or chair or walk up your steps, they won't collapse under you.

You caught me! I have faith that I'm not going to fall through my stairs. What exactly does this prove? I didn't know you ranked that sort of "faith" with faith in a supernatural deity...

You and your hubby apparently had faith in God for a while. You say that you believed but now you don't because you can't get answers (proof) to your questions when, in actuality, you can but refuse to believe them. A lot of things in life cannot be touched or seen to prove they exist (as PsyOps very logically showed you). Many people believe what scientists say BUT they wouldn't bet their life on it...

I wouldn't bet my life on the word of any individual nor any book.

The most important belief is one that you must believe in through faith. If you wait until you see Him it will be too late. All I'm saying is I HOPE you find the faith that you both once had because it's the only way. You really don't want to spend eternity kicking yourself for something that was evident to us all. IOW, don't lose your soul over some personal "beef" that you'll never be able to win an argument over anyway...

And what "beef" is that again?

I'm not trying to win anything BTW, just talking :smile:

You caught me! I have faith that I'm not going to fall through my stairs. What exactly does this prove? I didn't know you ranked that sort of "faith" with faith in a supernatural deity...
There are different ways to use faith and it shows that you can have faith. Faith in what is seen can lead to faith in God who isn't seen.

I wouldn't bet my life on the word of any individual nor any book.
Ahh but you have. You're betting your life on yourself and on what YOU can see, feel, touch, taste or smell and much of what science tells you. That's why I called it misplaced faith.

And what "beef" is that again? I'm not trying to win anything BTW, just talking :smile:
It's not "what beef", it's "Where's the beef"...:razz: Actually the beef is what you have with God for not showing Himself to you personally.

You're not reading what I'm saying are you?

Can you find the post where I said that I "...have faith that a big bang somehow created this entire universe, including the LIFE in it; through random chemical reactions"? Why do you presume to know what I may or may not "believe" in?

There's that pesky little word again...THEORY

I consider it a leading theory, but not once have I ever claimed it to be fact. It's a theory with evidence, that's it. No more, no less.

Okay, thanks for clarifying. You don't believe there was a big bang. :buddies:

A discussion on Predestination and posters are not mentioning Calvin OR Arminius.

I KNOW...that churches have written into their constituions which side of the doctrinal question they are on.

Methodists, Assembly of God (All Pentecostals), and Nazarenes...firmly reject Calvin...

Baptist (Most), Presbyterian, Lutheran, Reformed (most), & Fundamantalist reject Arminius....

I suspect that a stronger BIBLICAL case can be made for Calvin (but my Pentecostal wife would definately disagree!:buttkick:)

So...YES,...this is an "In House" discussion.
I have also heard years ago of an attempted reinterpretation of the issue called "Regency"...but,...I do not recall the fundamental approach.

Believers have a VERY hard time sorting out the "Who-soever-will"...vs..."For those He foreknew, he also predestined."

Carry on....

At our baptist church we looked at these two views. Most in the class came closer to Arminius in most positions. Both men have their view. Neither should have the last say and maybe neither is correct totally.

At our baptist church we looked at these two views. Most in the class came closer to Arminius in most positions. Both men have their view. Neither should have the last say and maybe neither is correct totally.


Some info about both men: Arminius and Calvin



Jacobus Arminius

Considered a man of mild temperament, Arminius was forced into controversy against his own choice. He had earlier affirmed the Calvinist view of predestination, which held that those elected for salvation were so chosen prior to Adam’s fall, but he gradually came to have doubts about this teaching. To him predestination seemed too harsh a position, because it did not provide a place for the exercise of human free will in the process of salvation. Hence, Arminius came to assert a conditional election, according to which God elects to eternal life those who will respond in faith to the divine offer of salvation. In so doing, he meant to place greater emphasis on God’s mercy.

After his death some of his followers gave support to his views by signing the Remonstrance, a theological document written by Johannes Uyttenbogaert, a minister from Utrecht, in 1610. Remonstrant Arminianism was debated in 1618–19 at the Synod of Dort (Dordrecht), an assembly of the Dutch Reformed Church. The synod included delegates from Reformed churches in England, Germany, and Switzerland, as well as delegates from the Dutch church, all of whom were supporters of Gomarus. Arminianism was discredited and condemned by the synod, the Arminians present were expelled, and many others suffered persecution.

Jacobus Arminius (Dutch theologian) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/35399/Jacobus-Arminius)


John Calvin

John Calvin had no love, compassion, patience or tolerance for those who did not believe his Institutes. Criticism of Calvin's Institutes was considered heresy for which the sentence was death by burning at the stake. ..

John Calvin's murder of people who held different doctrinal views, his failure to acknowledge or repent from his sins, his incomplete gospel, his placing of his own writings above the Bible, his distortion of God and the Scriptures, and his dependence upon infant baptism places into question his salvation. In all of his writings is not found a clear declaration of his salvation by faith in the birth, life, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. Calvin was a cruel, murderous tyrant who considered himself to be the pope of Geneva. The Bible never advocates harming an individual due to his unbelief or lack of understanding. Jesus taught to "turn the other cheek" instead. None of the Apostles taught action against unbelievers but instead taught the believer to seek them out and present the gospel in love.
Calvinism False Doctrines, Depravity, Election, Atonement, Irresistible Grace. (http://www.biblelife.org/calvinism.htm)

Some info about both men: Arminius and Calvin

Did both summaries come from the same source? Name the source.

Did both summaries come from the same source? Name the source.

:howdy:

The links below each excerpt cited are individual sources where you can read more info about Calvin and Arminius. Best bet is to do some personal research into as much history about each man from various sources and verifiable accounts. Since both men lived during the time period when documentation of their activities was reported, it should be easy to find out what is truth in regard to the character of each one.

Did both summaries come from the same source? Name the source.
Of course he didn't. Calvinism is heresy to Starman and he'll do whatever it takes to make sure everybody knows he thinks so. :/

What I don't get is how he can, in one breath, assert semi-Pelagian freewill and in the next breath affirm in Perserverance of the Saints (the "P" in the Calvinist TULIP).

Sure seems irrational to me. If I can choose to follow Him, why can't I choose to for a while and then choose again not to?

Why not, that's what Mennonites and Methodists believe. It's called Conditional Preservation. As long as I have enough faith and continue in said faith, I'll make it. But God help me if I have a crisis of faith and die during it.

Conditional Preservation is a core tenant of Jacob Arminius's theology. But it's ok, because the theology is not on trial here, but rather the personal character of the men the theologies are named after. So, it's all good, since Arminius was such a swell guy and Calvin did some pretty messed up things (Yes, I said it). :)

Of course he didn't. Calvinism is heresy to Starman and he'll do whatever it takes to make sure everybody knows he thinks so. :/

What I don't get is how he can, in one breath, assert semi-Pelagian freewill and in the next breath affirm in Perserverance of the Saints (the "P" in the Calvinist TULIP).

Sure seems irrational to me. If I can choose to follow Him, why can't I choose to for a while and then choose again not to?

Why not, that's what Mennonites and Methodists believe. It's called Conditional Preservation. As long as I have enough faith and continue in said faith, I'll make it. But God help me if I have a crisis of faith and die during it.

Conditional Preservation is a core tenant of Jacob Arminius's theology. But it's ok, because the theology is not on trial here, but rather the personal character of the men the theologies are named after. So, it's all good, since Arminius was such a swell guy and Calvin did some pretty messed up things (Yes, I said it). :)

C'mon Zguy - let's give credit where credit is due. "Perseverance of the Saints" is what the Holy Spirit of God gives to strengthen believers throughout life. It is a Biblical principle that should not be credited to Calvin.

In regard to having a "crisis of faith", please explain what you mean. Do you mean that when a believer has a crisis of faith he/she rejects that Jesus is the Son of God and Saviour of mankind and perhaps God does not exist?

What, in your opinion, constitutes having a "crisis of faith" ?

What I don't get is how he can, in one breath, assert semi-Pelagian freewill and in the next breath affirm in Perserverance of the Saints (the "P" in the Calvinist TULIP). Sure seems irrational to me. If I can choose to follow Him, why can't I choose to for a while and then choose again not to?
Yes, the problem is that YOU can't see it. You should work on that. Stop denying God's omniscience. If you choose to follow Him for a while and then not to, don't you really think God would know that too?

The "P" in calvinism is simply the once saved always saved doctrine. Listen to what you're saying bro...:howdy:

Yes, the problem is that YOU can't see it. You should work on that. Stop denying God's omniscience. If you choose to follow Him for a while and then not to, don't you really think God would know that too?I'd hate to see you think rationally. Instead you throw a smoke bomb about me denying God's omniscience, which I have never done.



Let's look again at Election shall we?

Does the bible call people to repent and believe the Gospel? Absolutely.

Are people held responsible for not believing the Gospel? Absolutely.

I think we all agree on those. I know I do.

However, we have a difference when it comes to what God's role is and what kind of sovereign action He takes in our salvation.

The Arminian (you and Starman), believe that our "predestination" or "election" is totally based on God "foreknowing" who would believe and then making that come to pass as He saw it. You hang your entire belief on this on Romans 8:29.
"For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son."

You make the assumption that "foreknew" entails God knowing who would choose Him or a fact about the person. Quite a leap from one word in the text.

Explain to me why it DOESN'T mean "God knew from eternity who He has chosen".

Maybe respected theologian Wayne Grudem (yes, he's a Calvinist too) can explain it better than me?


But this verse can hardly be used to demonstrate that God based his predestination on foreknowledge of the fact that a person would believe. The passage speaks rather of the fact that God knew persons ("those whom he foreknew"), not that he knew some fact about them, such as the fact that they would believe. It is a personal, relational knowledge that is spoken of here: God, looking into the future, thought of certain people in saving relationship to him, and in that sense he "knew them" long ago. This is the sense in which Paul can talk about God's "knowing" someone, for example, in 1 Corinthians 8:3: "But if one loves God, one is known by him." Similarly, he says, "but now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God ..." (Gal. 4:9). When people know God in Scripture, or when God knows them, it is personal knowledge that involves a saving relationship. therefore in Romans 8:29, "those whom he foreknew" is best understood to mean, "those whom he long ago thought of in a saving relationship to himself." The text actually says nothing about God foreknowing or foreseeing that certain people would believe, nor is that idea mentioned in any other text of Scripture.


I urge you to read the entire article with a heart and mind open to what the Scripture says, without presupposition. It's not long, and Grudem is no stranger to the Scripture, he was one of the lead editors on the ESV translation of the bible. I have found him honest in his interpretations, even before I came to share similar beliefs (yes, I use to be Arminian and a Left Behind rapture believer).

Misunderstandings of the Doctrine of Election by Wayne Grudem (http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/misunderstandings.html)



The "P" in calvinism is simply the once saved always saved doctrine. Listen to what you're saying bro...:howdy:I know what I am saying, what are you saying? :howdy:

You say people "choose" to go to Jesus, but it is impossible for them to then "choose" to leave Jesus.

Is this free-will? NO. Otherwise we could leave Him and choose to lose our salvation.

You say that God conditionally chooses people to go to Jesus based on the fact that they would choose Him, but that He unconditionally prevents them from leaving based on His sovereignty.

Is this free-will? NO. Otherwise we could leave Him and the "P" is now conditional and you can lose salvation.

Not only is it NOT free-will, it's illogical as well and not a valid critical argument because the conclusion is not supported by the premises.

Basing salvation/election on foreknowledge makes us coming to Christ a concrete fact. It can't be changed. It MUST happen. We must choose Christ. Otherwise God would know that too.

How is that free-will again if it is, in reality, impossible for me to choose contrary to God's predestinating foreknowledge?

C'mon Zguy - let's give credit where credit is due. "Perseverance of the Saints" is what the Holy Spirit of God gives to strengthen believers throughout life. It is a Biblical principle that should not be credited to Calvin. Perseverance of the Saints means that all believers will finish the race "in Christ."

I'm not crediting Calvin with inventing it. He merely pulled it from the Scriptures accurately.


In regard to having a "crisis of faith", please explain what you mean. Do you mean that when a believer has a crisis of faith he/she rejects that Jesus is the Son of God and Saviour of mankind and perhaps God does not exist?

What, in your opinion, constitutes having a "crisis of faith" ?I mean somebody who goes through the "dark nights of the soul" or something similar where they may doubt God's existence or power or that He cares.

The apostle Peter is a good example. He confessed Jesus as the Son of God in Matt 16, Mark 8, and Luke 9. Yet he later denied Him.

What if he died on the same night Jesus was arrested?

Are people held responsible for not believing the Gospel? Absolutely.

But this defeats any possibility of predetermination. How can one be held accountable for something they didn’t decide to do?

But this defeats any possibility of predetermination. How can one be held accountable for something they didn’t decide to do?

Here is the apostle Paul's answer to this question. Accept it if you can my friend.

One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?”
But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”
Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

It's not hard to imagine when you realize that we are unable to choose Christ without God's enabling and unconditional grace and mercy. Somewhere along the line (probably a result of the Fall of man) we humans came to believe that if God shows mercy and grace to one person, we are all entitled to it. Quite the opposite, none are entitled to grace. It is totally God's to dispense as He sees fit. Nothing unfair about how He chooses to do it. He is God afterall.

...It's not hard to imagine when you realize that we are unable to choose Christ without God's enabling and unconditional grace and mercy. Somewhere along the line (probably a result of the Fall of man) we humans came to believe that if God shows mercy and grace to one person, we are all entitled to it. Quite the opposite, none are entitled to grace. It is totally God's to dispense as He sees fit. Nothing unfair about how He chooses to do it. He is God afterall.

So what is the purpose of the Great White Throne Judgment in Revelation Chapters 20 & 21?

So what is the purpose of the Great White Throne Judgment in Revelation Chapters 20 & 21?

Seems pretty straight forward to me. God is just in His comdemnation of sinful humans. So He gives them a trial. This is part of the root of Paul's view of Justification as a legal reckoning.

11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. 13 And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.