Board index ‹ Jesus

[Book Mitten]

> Because it's unattainable. If goodness is what is required, no one would enter. And if goodness were required, where would you draw the line (and would that be a fair place to draw it)?

This is why a world of degrees without hard-line this or that would be the more reasonable option.

> If some guy commits a crime, I don't care if you argue that punishment isn't preventative or rehabilitative, he still has to pay for his crime. Justice demands that.

This seems out of step with Jesus saying turn the other cheek. More importantly, you may not personally care about why someone pays for a crime, but these things are important. I don't see why God should punish someone when they could simply be convinced not to commit the crime in the first place.

> The text says they were deceived. They were tricked by a liar.

> Their incompleteness was accounted for, and a way was made plain to find a path despite it.

These two statements seem contradictory. If the way was made clear, how could they be deceived by a liar?

> No, God loves people. Evil is not a substance, nor did God create it. It's the absence of good. Darkness is the absence of light, not something in and of itself. God doesn't love what evil is, and he doesn't approve of people indulging in it.

Even if this were true, (philosophers like Schopenhauer would argue differently, that misery is the more real and powerful force) that doesn't change the experience of evil.

> God dying for them gives them the possibility of escape from it; otherwise there is no hope.

Couldn't he find a better way to help them escape? It also seems like a wishful idea... praying for escape. Moreover, my position is potentially less so in that I don't put forward escape, or hope. I believe life is a near constant struggle, without end. It is our responsibility to keep the torch going in the struggle.

There will be more to come. But I'll leave you with that for now.

[jimwalton]

> This is why a world of degrees without hard-line this or that would be the more reasonable option.

Oh, it is definitely a world of degrees, but Christianity is an issue of relationship, and that does create a line. Just like marriage. If it's all about never-ending relationship based in love and commitment, that point of commitment is an essential part of the picture.

> This seems out of step with Jesus saying turn the other cheek

Jesus's statement had nothing to do with judicial practice, but rather with personal relationships. We are certainly to be people of justice (jurisprudence), but not a people of revenge (you strike me on the cheek, I should not just assault you in return). Jesus's statement has nothing to do with crime; it has to do with personal insult.

> These two statements seem contradictory. If the way was made clear, how could they be deceived by a liar?

They're not contradictory. You may have a clear choice about what to major in, what job to take, or who to marry, but for some reason (your intuitions and feelings, generally) you go in a different direction of your own choosing. Sometimes we choose against the obvious benefit for something we feel strongly about, knowing that it is a detrimental decision. We often decide with our guts far more than with our heads.

> hat doesn't change the experience of evil.

You weren't talking about the experience of evil (which is legitimate), but rather that "God loves evil," which is totally false.

> Couldn't he find a better way to help them escape?

When someone is enslaved to a lethal nature, the only possible route is some kind of escape. Giving them a cookie, a round of applause, a vision—none of that is worth anything. The only thing they truly need is an escape.

[Book Mitten]

> If we have no free will, but are determined only by consciousness and an unavoidable sequence of neuron firings, then we aren't really able to think. Reasoning is an illusion. Let me put it this way:

> If you have decided that you are determined, then you can't possibly be determined. If you believe you are determined, you don't believe it for rational reasons. You believe it only because only you were determined to believe it.

I believe something for a reason. My ability to think is guided by my own nature and that of the world and its inhabitants (and the combination and relation of both). That doesn't mean my ability to think (or indeed not think) is freely willed. It either has a cause or is spontaneous (and thus still unfree, as spasms and the rolling of dice are random and in a sense chaotic, having little to do with free will).

> Fine, believe it, but if you're right, then your position is no better or any different than the opposite, rationally, because you believe people believe things aside from any rational basis.

I believe people believe things for a number of reasons. They do in some cases believe something rationally, they might have some other factor forming it.

> If you don't have free will, you can't believe the truth of anything for rational reasons; you can only believe it because it is an effect working in me.

What if the effect is your own experience and reasoning?

[jimwalton]

> My ability to think is guided by my own nature

But if your thinking is determined, then it's not really thinking (meaning it's just data processing and not true reasoning). You can only believe something for a reason if you are using rational processes of reasoning. Otherwise, you are neither reasoning nor believing, but only processing. In other words, you can't truly believe if you have no choice, and it can't possibly be "for a reason"—it's just a "spasm" or a biological effect.

> What if the effect is your own experience and reasoning?

The effect of my own reasoning is true reasoning: I am actually thinking. Without free will, reasoning and science are not possible. I cannot truly evaluate data, weigh the various evidences, or consider various conclusions. I can only follow a set-cause-and-effect sequence. Without free will, there is no such thing as true thought, reasoning, science, or human attributes like love, kindness, forgiveness, or grace. There is only biological cause and effect.

But I think biological cause and effect cannot fully explain what we see and experience. It's like saying Picasso's Guernica is only pain on canvas, or Beethoven's 9th Symphony is just physics. It's not. There's more than just biology going on when I reason, when I love, or when I do science. That is the effect of my own experience and reasoning.

[Book Mitten]

> Being with God isn't a matter of being religious or being good, it's being in relationship with Him.

I can't have a good relationship with a God who I don't recognize contact with. Some people say they know of a connection. I've not really sure that I've recognised a sign from him. I don't know how to recognize. Even more so for people who have never heard of Christianity.

[jimwalton]

By the way, thank you for all the time you spend in conversation with me.

> I can't have a good relationship with a God who I don't recognize contact with.

Right. Understood and agreed. God could never expect people to enter into a relationship with Him if they don't know Him or don't recognize contact with him. There's no sense in that. If God's nature were concealed, obscured, or distorted, an honest relationship would be impossible. That's why God has taken upon Himself the program of self-revelation. He *wants* people to know Him. The tool God used in the Old Testament was the covenant. In the NT He came Himself, as Jesus. We have the record of all of that in the Bible, along with things like nature and science that point to an intelligent, powerful, personal, moral source of what we see.

> Some people say they know of a connection. I've not really sure that I've recognised a sign from him.

It's not so much recognizing a sign as it is recognizing the truth. I've never seen writing on the wall, heard a voice, or seen a miracle. It's just a matter of being convinced by the evidence.

> Even more so for people who have never heard of Christianity.

God will deal with people who haven't heard in whatever way is fair. For us who have heard, however, it's a different approach.

[Scape211]

> Being an alien has no clear objective.

The actions of an alien don't have to make sense. It's actions can seem strange to us because they are just that; alien.

> God being the creator makes way more sense to bring Jesus as a sacrifice.

A creator God however that is both omnipotent and benevolent is more needing of an explanation, as it is both interested in us and it has certain characteristics that will manifest themselves in the world in one way and not another. That is why I put in the problem of evil. It doesn't sit well with a good God that knows the sorrows of humanity. Just as you think that the alien explanation is "Fishy", I say the same of God.

Your logic used for the alien of not making sense to us can be used in the exact same way for God. I understand the problem of evil is hard to see from a human perspective as fair or just when we have an all powerful God who claims to love us. But the current notions of good and evil come from our lives, government, society; our defined human knowledge. But when you have an all powerful and more importantly an all knowing God, wouldn't He be the better being to define good and evil? While we see immediate ramifications of an evil act within our circle, an all knowing God can see its ripples on a universal scale and over an infinite amount of time. Doesn't that allow him to have a better judge of what is good and evil?

And on top of that, I have to agree with Jim in that good cannot exist or be defined as good without evil. Its like dark and light. They both need to exist in some form. It also doesn't mean that God inherently created evil. Ultimately I believe we are to blame for evil itself due to our sinful nature.

edit: sorry i see i may have responded kind of late and youve both moved on in the conversation. Feel free to overlook this and keep on moving. I'm finding your conversation interesting

[Scape211]

> Some people say they know of a connection. I've not really sure that I've recognised a sign from him.

It's not so much recognizing a sign as it is recognizing the truth. I've never seen writing on the wall, heard a voice, or seen a miracle. It's just a matter of being convinced by the evidence.

I tend to see God through the way he works. The things he does in my life to help me. To those who are not Christians, they may just take it as coincidence or a random happening. However, I believe God is working in my life and also around it. Let me share an example with you.

A few months back my wife had congestive heart failure. She is in her late 30s and it came out of nowhere. She's also been quite healthy and doesn't have a family history of heart-related issues. The doctors said it was a result of a less-than-common virus. If you know anything about congestive heart failure, it's quite serious. Depending on your age, it can really shorten your lifespan. In her case, it happened younger, and since it was due to a virus it was not as life-threatening. She did have to see multiple doctors, go through testing, and take meds for months before her heart was back to full. Overall, it was very scary, felt random, and it wasn't based on her doing a single thing wrong.

My response was not one of anger or resentment towards God when it was happening, it was one of—What is he trying to show me? This sounds foreign to most, as they immediately would ask God why this is happening to them and their family ('I dont deserve this!"). But it more so caused me to look for a reason: what was his purpose? To teach me something, to help someone else? To strengthen my faith?

After my wife healed, less then a month ago we were visiting my parents. We were having a good time and just hanging out. However, my wife had a close eye on my father. She noticed clear signs of what she went through during congestive heart failure. She knew what he was going through and called his doctor to verify signs and get him medication immediately. She even had some of her meds leftover that the doctor cleared for him to use until he got new meds at the pharmacy. No one else noticed this happening to my dad. Including my mother who usually watches him like a hawk with medical issues since he's getting up there in age. For him, this was definitely life-threatening, and I believe he possibly wouldn't be around right now had my wife not noticed and acted immediately.

I immediately related this back to what my wife went through months ago. As a human and her husband I would've never wanted her to go through that. But as a Christian I now see how it rippled through the life of my father. This is an example of how I see God working in and around my life. I'm am often wary or people who claim to have 'seen a sign' or 'heard God's voice.' It sounds like the TV preachers who would also lay hands on people. It's very showy and seems contrary to how God reveals himself even when going back to the Bible. God often reveals himself personally and differently to everyone (it's what helps us know that it's Him doing the work), but it only becomes more clear as you grow in your experience with him. Just like you pick up cues or know how your spouse will respond/act, you can start to see this with God as you grow in your relationship with him.

[Book Mitten]

> By the way, thank you for all the time you spend in conversation with me.

Likewise

> It's not so much recognizing a sign as it is recognizing the truth. I've never seen writing on the wall, heard a voice, or seen a miracle. It's just a matter of being convinced by the evidence.

I look for truth. What I recognise to be the truth however points me away from a relationship with the Christian God.

> He wants people to know Him.

Again, there are people who have never known him. You say that God will deal with them fairly. One question I have regarding that is why God would keep himself hidden during their lifetime. Surely if they are sinners he would be better off revealing his nature? I'm aware that you said that God keeping himself at a distance was a more sure way of communion considering fallen angels, but in which case, why seek relationship? Let alone heaven.

[jimwalton]

> I look for truth.

Me, too. Truth is what counts. And there has to be evidence. Without evidence, it's just opinion or blind bias.

> What I recognise to be the truth however points me away from a relationship with the Christian God.

Ironically, my examination of the evidence and quest for truth points me right toward a relationship with God. I always find it interesting that two people can look at the same data and information and draw completely different conclusions (as we see going on in our government right now as the Republicans and Democrats are examining Trump's interaction with the Ukraine. Astounding!).

> there are people who have never known him.

This is correct.

> why God would keep himself hidden during their lifetime.

God is continually making himself known in nature. Nature shows order, regularity, complexity, balance, purpose, and beauty. It shows power and even many elements that seem as if they were designed. There are many aspects of our natural world that point to the existence of a divine supernatural Creator.

> why seek relationship? Let alone heaven.

We seek relationship for several reasons. (1) My search for the truth leads me in that direction; (2) Relationship with God is where we find our true purpose and significance in life; (3) We were made for relationship with God. It's the only way to be truly whole.