So you are cleverer than God? You see something He overlooked?
So my quote is meaningless? (not part of Scripture!)
Like I also said, You can read it that way
You problem is that you are reading Scripture as having the same message from front to back. Sorry , again.
The Old Testament prepares for the New. it is necessary, but the actual message changes! It grows. (I might even say it evolves but that might be swearing)
Look around you. meet people. See that they are not corrupt or incapable of goodness. See that what you are reading does not match reality! Then understand why your view is tarnished.
You red, you see, and yo misunderstand. Scripture is the Huan learning curve. It get’s closer as it progresses. But even Paul was not perfect. He saw in a glass dimly/
IIt is a shame that so many "Christians are so selfish about the Gospel. And so fixed on “Salvation” they fail to see that it is out of their control! God saves, not Scripture. We do not do anything, even believe. it happens whether you believe it or not. That is the Good News. Shame you have to make it an obligation or trial.
You are makimg up nonesense there. I quote a massive number of supporting texts, you make a reference that isnt even relevant, then use that to claim my concordance referenced texts are claiming im smarter than God? Youve gone way off the beaten track on an unrelated tangent there amd certainly you are not following scripture…you are interpreting it your own way with a text that clearly does not support your claim.
I have provided two Isaiah references that contradict your interpretation of a text from Isaiah. Given its the same writer, statistically my number is greater than yours…so you are clearly wrong…eapecially given all the other texts ive included.
I do not accept that claim. Scripture explains an unchanging God in normal language…thats the point of it. God isnt learning how to communicate in human language…He isnt learning at all actually (contrary to the beliefs of TEism)
If scripture was a learning exercise, the bible would still be getting added to with more writings…fact is, its not because the apostles were the final chapters of Gods revelation of the fall and plan of salvation to us.
Oh…whilst i think of it, the reformation was not an exercise in new knowledge…it was a rejection of the corruption of the existing Christian church model. Christianity has spent the last 2 millenia since the apostles died trying to get back to what it was that Christ originally set in motion…not gain new knowledge but recover the original. Id suggest you study into why Martin Luther wrote his thesis and started it.
No Isaiah isnt contradicting himself…you are causing that contradiction by incorrectly trying to correlate his writings with your own interpretation. Instead of moral reasoning, just go and actually read the references in their entirety (i know from your responses above you havent actually read them). The bible interpretes itself on this topic…its not complicated.
Not adequitely studied it with the appropriate level of educator knowledge (ie an untrained theologian taught it to you)
Im fortunate enough to have undertaken a few modules of study about the reformation whilst at university via formally trained theologians with doctorate degrees in theology. im also a pastors kid which helps a lot. However, im certainly no theologian and it was 25 years ago, so im a little rusty.
I agree that God decides whom He saves and we should not judge people because we do not know enough of their life or relationship with God.
I also agree that non-Christians can make good deeds, which shows there can be something good in all people.
My interpretation about the peace with God and eternal salvation is that it is offered to us through (in) Christ. Although salvation is a work of God, humans are not merely forced receivers of the gift. God asks from us acceptance and receiving of the gift.
Faith is needed to accept the gift and to stay in the correct position (in Christ) until the end. I include in the word ‘faith’ both meanings of the Greek word ‘pistis’: faith and faithfulness. Good deeds do not save but you can see from the life (acts) what the person truly believes.
I also believe that acceptance of creation (EC, OEC, YEC, etc.) is at least loosely tied to believing in a/the Creator. How could anyone accept an interpretation including the acts of a/the Creator without believing in such an entity? Such a belief is not a proof of being saved - even the demons believe in God.
If you give someone a gift does their acceptance or not change the reason for the gift?
Do we accept for our sake or for God’s?
This is the underlying principle that seems to be overlooked. God does not need us to accept the gift for it to take effect. That is the whole point of it being a gift (grace) not a contract whereby the two parties give something. A gift is one way.
It seems that we need to feel like we have done something. it fits with our view of justice and fairness. But they are human conceptualisations.
That involves a personal understanding of whether the form of creating matches your view of God or Scripture. People here are very hard on YECs but they are only following through on their beliefs and taking faith to encompass no believing all that is seen or diagnosed. As such it is very Scriptural to go with faith and not empiracalism.
It would also appear that people here need everyone else to see things the way they do. It sort of goes with the general scientific approach of there being a right and wrong answer… This applies to everything, be it how you understand Scripture, to how you understand science.
God does not need but for some reason, He has decided to give us some amount of free will and a possibility to receive or not to receive. Sometimes there are situations where people refuse to receive a gift, for example because the value of the gift is so high that it would give the impression that the receiver is somehow in debt to the giver. In many countries, authorities are not allowed to receive gifts if the value of the gift is larger than a given amount for this reason.
One interpretation about the relationship between God and the person who gets mercy is a vassal relationship. Receiving the valuable gift (mercy) binds the receiver to the patron that gave the gift. All do not want to be in that kind of relationship with God.
We interpret our observations through our worldview, which makes our conclusions somewhat subjective. Yet, there is a difference between answers that are strongly subjective (I believe this because I think I am correct) vs. answers that are open to questioning, criticism and testing.
The scientific answers represent the latter type. They are given as the most supported explanations about the observations (facts), not as 100% sure ‘right’ vs. ‘wrong’ claims about the reality, and are open to constructive criticism and testing. Constructive criticism includes the principle that if you criticize, you should provide an alternative explanation and tell why the alternative explanation is better than the explanation you criticize.
That may work within the scientific environment but we are nit in that environment. (Been here before). The point is not to replace one view with another but to admit that more than one view is possible.
I am sorry but you are imposing a view onto God, especially your understanding of freedom. It is almost derogatory or condescending, along the lines of “your choice, but you take the consequences.”.
So we are free to be idiotic, because it would be idiotic to deliberately refuse paradise. Which is all very well if you believe in that option. Anyone who denies the existence of God (a free choice?) Had in fact been given no choice at all. Believe or else! That is not freedom, that is coercion, worse than that it is coercion with all senses removed. Ignorance is fatal.
That does not put God in a good light.
Here is my problem. As far as I understand it freedom means no bias or either adverse or positive consequences. As soon as you add Heaven (carrot) or Hell (stick) you remove that freedom of choice. God could have made it easier by just imposing His will, but by not doing so you are basically claiming that He will punish anyone who doesn’t make the right decision .Which makes that freedom a farce or even a lie…
(I do not wish to go down the rabbit hole of analysing Jesus’ teaching on Heaven and Hell)
Oh man…you are on a science forum, what do you suppose this forums founder is? The people here follow science…full of academics. Your answer there is a suprising acceptance that poor education is a way forward.
I think it highlights a willingess to put ones head in the sand rather than face truth in the historical evidence.
Rigtheousness comes through faith.
Faith is exactly what you claim it isnt there…
Christ said “blessed are those who believe without seeing”
The Old and New Testaments tell us…“Even Abrahams faith was credited to him as righteousness”.
I dont understand how you manage to just make up errant doctrinal statements in the faceof well known texts that discredit those statements?
Actually, yes that is exactly what must happen…God offers a free gift, its up to us to accept and take said gift.
The bible says…
“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved”
Clearly the above passage illustrates that its the indivdual sinner who must take up the offer of salvation.
Christ said, “take up your cross and follow me” (matt 16.24-26)
What you are proposing, “that God decides”, that is predestination which is heresy.
God predestined that all should be saved, however, that doesnt mean all will be saved. The reailty is that not all will be saved because humans have freewill to choose.
Good points. I would just urge that one not stick ones head in the sand because of a fear of wrong answers. God expects us to use our talents
An exerpt from the parable…Matthew 25:14–30
Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art a hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed: And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine. His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed: Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury. Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents. For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him, that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath. And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth
You know this , of course! God told you in person?
Does it say
Do not believe and you won’t be saved?
Or is that just a logical assumption!
I have no idea where you got that from but it wasn’t me.
That is pure Calvinism
How can they know if they have not heard?
So why turn on me?
And I use mine, including my brain.
You on the other hand?
“IF Scripture says it must be right!”
(And you know exactly what Scripture says and means!)
Try again
Again, where on earth do you get that fom what i said?
Oh yes, I contradicted your view of Scripture!
The moment you consider yourself righteous you have lost it, same as humility (Not that I have noticed much of that)
I see to remember that has something to do with believing in the resurrection
Funny, I have shown you that. Still it was not one of your pet quotations.
SO TAKE NOTICE AND STOP INSISTING I BELIEVE WHAT YOU DO!
I stand by my beliefs (as you do yours). They are neither invented nor non Scriptural. I could explain all the scriptural references but I will not bother. You have made your decisions.
And on the subject of using my brain? That is precisely what I am doing when you claim I am “making things up!” because you cannot see where I come from or where I get “these outrageous ideas” from
Stop making it personal, please. Just exchange views without judgement or condemnation.
So you know people who are never selfish, never lie, never exceed the speed limit, are never lazy, etc.?
For those who are in Christ, not for anyone else.
SDAs sort of ignore that verse.
He’s speaking to Israel, and keep in mind that Paul makes it clear (as does Jesus!) that not all those born of Israel are actually Israel. You can’t make a universal where the text is limited.
Cross references are not theology and do not provide interpretation.
Um, no – Christ’s death covers all sin, period, confession or not. It is the application that is limited to those who are in Christ.
It’s a “high” view of God, i.e. that He intended righteousness for all. The alternative is that God wanted/wants people to sin – and that is not just a “dim” view of God, it’s downright dark!
Not according to Paul, or to Jesus.
You excel at contradicting Jesus!
"…whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. "
According to that, the only unrighteousness that there is is a matter of not believing (trusting, giving allegiance).
According to Jesus in all four Gospels He does.
Again you deny free will! If the gift takes effect contrary to or without our will, then there is no grace, there is only compulsion.
Actually, God predestined the church to be saved. Whether one is in or out of the church, i.e. in or out of Christ, is the question.
“…whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”
Not believe (give trust, allegiance) = condemned.
So it’s not “a logical assumption”, it’s a statement from Christ.
And the Resurrection is core to the Gospel.
The Gospel isn’t some fuzzy feeling that God made everything right so there is nothing to do, it is an assertion of allegiance based on things that happened, starting with the eternal existence of the Word, then the Word becoming flesh, being put to death for our sakes, rising on the third day, ascending to take up His place with the Father. Lose any of those and you’ve lost the Gospel.
How does that fit with the truth that scripture is useful for rebuke and correction? and that we as believers are to judge all things?
Is there some immutable law that says God must punish or even judge?
If God decided to forgive someone who did not conform to the standards you are claiming what will you do? Who would you appeal to?
Does God have to abide by your view of Scripture?
If God decided you were inscincere, who would you appeal to?
At the end of John’s Gospel Jesus asks “If Iwant him to live until I return what is it to you?” So why do you care what happens tome or even what I believe? What is it to you?
How dare you lay down the law for God!
How dare you decides for Him who is saved and who is not!
How dare you claim. that your view of Scripture is the definitive one!
Richard
Edit
Last question
If you did not have to conform to your view of Salvation would you still be a Christian?