PublicVoidReInit's photo
Thu 05/15/08 10:51 AM

Actually your paradigm is off, that is, your understanding from your sinful human understanding.


I notice you are new here. Welcome.
My name is Jeannie. I am a pantheist.:smile:

If there is any truth to the idea or necessity of a crucified god, the question of the reason for this blood sacrifice to Satan (or to whom ever this sacrifice was made) still remains.


Hi Jeannie, thanks.
But your last is an example of what I am talking about. Your understanding is off just a little in a lot of different areas and its like the trajectory of a spaceship going to the moon. Tiny increments off take it thousands of miles in the other direction missing it completely.

Its not a "crucified god" , It's God in human form, perfect but feeling and had to deal with the same garbage we face all the time in our lives. And the scrifice is not to Satan but for the law that was put in place from the beginning, like a physics law or the laws of a newly created town. That's why He is referred to as THE LAW GIVER. "For without the shedding of blood there is no remission for sins." For Him to break the laws or bend the rules would make Him an UNJUST God. If you want scientifc proof for this , you won't find it obviously , but His word does say that "He is a rewarder of those who dilligently seek him", so that is either a lie or a truth. I have found the latter, even with a very analytical, skeptical mind. Faith is not beyond the realm of the intelligent as some think.


The idea that I am to be held responsible for the sins of Adam and Eve does not seem just or reasonable either.


This is in the Word as well, have you looked for the answer? If not, how can you reason unless you first look at it. Once you find it you have the choice to reject it. The answer to this is in the Bible.


None of these stories make any sense in our modern world and I believe there are important pieces of information missing, which Christianity does not have.


You are getting so warm you are almost hot!!!
The pieces are there but you haven't found them yet is how I would phrase that. Because the more pieces I find, the more fit perfectly, and the more perfect the picture of sin, sacrifice, and redemption becomes.


I have heard the common replies to these questions from Christians, but they don't make logical sense.


You are past getting answers from Christians who don't know their Bible very well imo, you need to confront a theologian and give him your hardest qustions.

Otherwise , if you want to play stump the Christian here at "religion lite" you can do that too.:tongue:


I evaluate information and consider all possibilities. As it stands, this information does not fit, is not complete, etc.

JB


You search, good for you. Many people have been where you are at. I was there once. Kerry Livgren was there once, C.S. Lewis was there once. Finding it is the fun part though.

PublicVoidReInit's photo
Thu 05/15/08 07:16 AM





Having only these two choices is not free will.

Besides, any decision is one that is made under duress and is not valid.

This is not the "accepted definition" of free will. But if you think it is, then think it is, but I am not going to accept it or "stick to it" as you suggest.

You are free to disagree, but I will not accept this assertion.

JB



JB I sure don't agree with you on anything but I think what you say is very interesting, though your logic escapes me.

At what count of choices does it become free will?

Let's say its a computer program (since I know that stuff)

int choices = 0;
choices++; //choices is 1 here
choices++; //choices is 2 here
choices++; //choices is 3 here

if(choices == x)
message("YOU HAVE FREE WILL NOW!");


so according to your logic, what value to you give x so that it becomes free will?




This is very much like "Convert or Die."



JB



Actually your paradigm is off, that is, your understanding from your sinful human understanding.
I'm not sure how much study you have done on redemption, justification, santification, sacrifice, grace , propitiation, reconciliation, and mercy, but I believe if you made the effort you would have a total paradigm shift. It can be very intellectual and yet it is perfect in its simplicity. Otherwise be lazy , ignorant, and rant about it from an uninformed perspective.

You see, it's not "convert or die" it's more like the character Spears said in the movie series Band of Brothers, "you are already dead".

You are on death row, as far as sin is concerned, the Judge who is perfect in his justice has said you are free to go because some one has chosen to taken your penalty for your offence. Now you can live your life and totally disregard this person who was your propitiation for your offence or you can live unto the one who died for you and rose again with all the promises and inheritance that is His.

Likewise you are taking the lie of grace being perverted into an extortion event and believing it. So you are already being lied to.

http://grace-for-today.com/1441.htm


PublicVoidReInit's photo
Wed 05/14/08 11:26 AM



Having only these two choices is not free will.

Besides, any decision is one that is made under duress and is not valid.

This is not the "accepted definition" of free will. But if you think it is, then think it is, but I am not going to accept it or "stick to it" as you suggest.

You are free to disagree, but I will not accept this assertion.

JB



JB I sure don't agree with you on anything but I think what you say is very interesting, though your logic escapes me.

At what count of choices does it become free will?

Let's say its a computer program (since I know that stuff)

int choices = 0;
choices++; //choices is 1 here
choices++; //choices is 2 here
choices++; //choices is 3 here

if(choices == x)
message("YOU HAVE FREE WILL NOW!");


so according to your logic, what value to you give x so that it becomes free will?

PublicVoidReInit's photo
Wed 05/14/08 11:20 AM
Edited by PublicVoidReInit on Wed 05/14/08 11:20 AM



I don't blame you a bit. It is illogical. But no more illogical that Christianity, Heaven and Hell.

JB


I believe that phrase is couched in the framework of humanistic wisdom (which the Bible refers to succinctly) and thereby disqualifies itself.