James: "The Effectual, Fervent Prayer of the Righteous Man..."

[Oncedeceived]

Then why prosthelytize?

Leave as many in the 'dark' as possible. A higher percentage might assent to heaven, as they would not be given the chance or choice to not accept or reject the teaching

He said that in his opinion this seems like something God would do. I know we all have these sort of opinions based on the loving kindness we find in God personally. Christians are not omniscient.

 

[Hammster]

Then why prosthelytize?

Leave as many in the 'dark' as possible. A higher percentage might assent to heaven, as they would not be given the chance or choice to not accept or reject the teaching

I’ve made that point myself.

Something we agree on.

 

[bling]

Then why prosthelytize?

Leave as many in the 'dark' as possible. A higher percentage might assent to heaven, as they would not be given the chance or choice to not accept or reject the teaching

Did you read my saying: "It is sad they never had the opportunity to fulfill their earthly objective" and thus become like God Himself with Godly type Love? There is no way I can see to obtain Godly type Love in heaven, so it must be done on earth.

 

[cvanwey]

He said that in his opinion this seems like something God would do. I know we all have these sort of opinions based on the loving kindness we find in God personally. Christians are not omniscient.

But you have to reconcile such a scenario...

If the goal or objective is to save others... And the ones ignorant to Jesus are guaranteed admission, then it would stand to reason that doing nothing would behoove one much more successful than what is stated, as in Mark 16:15-16 for instance, wouldn't you agree?

 

[cvanwey]

Did you read my saying: "It is sad they never had the opportunity to fulfill their earthly objective" and thus become like God Himself with Godly type Love? There is no way I can see to obtain Godly type Love in heaven, so it must be done on earth.

I did, but it is unfortunately not relevant.

You either go to heaven or hell. If the mode or conclusion rests upon either accepting Christ when known, or getting a free pass, because it was never presented, both parties STILL end up in the same place --> heaven.

And once the 'earthly body' is striped away, you are all equal in heaven anyways, so no preparations needed or required. A murderer whom repents, a practicing Christian, and a tribesman in the remote part of Africa (never hearing of such a story), are all subject to the same utopian arena anew...

 

[Chriliman]

I'm sure you've heard this response before....

It would be like a car maker knowingly creating half the cars with faulty brakes, and also knowing which specific families are going to die as a result. Just saying...

That's only a problem if God has always been all knowing, however, in Genesis God seems very surprised to learn of A/E's sin. He may have known it was possible, but knowing something is possible is not the same as knowing it happened. When you know something's possible, you put measures in place to prevent it, which God did in Genesis, yet they still sinned.

 

[cvanwey]

That's only a problem if God has always been all knowing, however, in Genesis God seems very surprised to learn of A/E's sin. He may have known it was possible, but knowing something is possible is not the same as knowing it happened. When you know something's possible, you put measures in place to prevent it, which God did in Genesis, yet they still sinned.

That's your own 'cross' to bare. For me, until such testable/repeatable revelation is presented, dispelling the myths and legends of all other claimed and asserted opposing God, to instead recognize the one claimed true God; then one is left to instead evaluate all such scenarios, stories, and claims accordingly.

It becomes quite simple, for me anyways... If many such claims are not backed with evidence, and/or the claimed scenario is/are illogical, one has no choice but to concluded their path in the very same way they do with every other facit of their life. To not do so, while retaining or continuing a belief anyways, implies some sort of cognitive dissonance. Sorry, no offense intended...

 

[Chriliman]

That's your own 'cross' to bare. For me, until such testable/repeatable revelation is presented, dispelling the myths and legends of all other claimed and asserted opposing God, to instead recognize the one claimed true God; then one is left to instead evaluate all such scenarios, stories, and claims accordingly.

It becomes quite simple, for me anyways... If many such claims are not backed with evidence, and/or the claimed scenario is/are illogical, one has no choice but to concluded their path in the very same way they do with every other facit of their life. To not do so, while retaining or continuing a belief anyways, implies some sort of cognitive dissonance. Sorry, no offense intended...

None taken because I agree and some of the evidence you're looking for is right there in Scripture.

 

[cvanwey]

None taken because I agree and some of the evidence you're looking for is right there in Scripture.

If the evidence was in scripture, then it would have been provided. I've asked many well educated Christians, only to be met with the 'dear-in-headlights' response

But again, it's one of the many many many situations, which leads me to more-so think this religion is also a man-made invention, just like all the others. So until such time as humans actually receive repeatable and testable revelation from this so-called entity, this is all humans can go upon earnestly.

If you have anything further to add, I'm all ears.

 

[Oncedeceived]

But you have to reconcile such a scenario...

If the goal or objective is to save others... And the ones ignorant to Jesus are guaranteed admission, then it would stand to reason that doing nothing would behoove one much more successful than what is stated, as in Mark 16:15-16 for instance, wouldn't you agree?

First of all, we don't know for certain that even those who have not heard the word are ignorant of Jesus. I know of a case where there was a man on an island with a very small population who was encountered by missionaries and the man knew about Jesus. No one had told him, he said that Jesus appeared to him and told him that he could be saved. So as far as Christian's go, we are suppose to share the gospel. How that turns out with those that haven't is outside of our own knowledge.

 

[cvanwey]

Before this can be answered, “heard” has multiple meanings. Which one are you referring to? And you referring to just one person, or is it being used in a general sense?

And can you explain your understanding of both heaven and hell? I would like to make sure I’m answering correctly.

I could do this all day. Or, I could just take your question at face value.

Which do you think is better?

Nice try buddy...

'Moral' is either what God commands, as in the Bible, or is morality independent of God, which begs the question, what is the need for God in morality?

It does not take all day. I simply wanted clarification. And I also answered your question regardless. God can do whatever, IF He exists. But the question is... Is it moral because God does it?.?.?..?.?.?.?.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Nice try buddy...

'Moral' is either what God commands, as in the Bible, or is morality independent of God, which begs the question, what is the need for God in morality?

It does not take all day. I simply wanted clarification. And I also answered your question regardless. God can do whatever, IF He exists. But the question is... Is it moral because God does it?.?.?..?.?.?.?.

You know, the way some Christians handle these dialogs you'd think they don't actually want to fulfill their commission.

 

[Chriliman]

If the evidence was in scripture, then it would have been provided. I've asked many well educated Christians, only to be met with the 'dear-in-headlights' response

I meant the evidence that suggests God hasn't always been all knowing. A couple examples:
Genesis 3:8-9
"They hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the Lord God called out to the man. “Where are you?” he asked."

Genesis 18:21
"that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."

What other evidence are you looking for, sorry if you've already stated prior.[/QUOTE]

 

[cvanwey]

First of all, we don't know for certain that even those who have not heard the word are ignorant of Jesus. I know of a case where there was a man on an island with a very small population who was encountered by missionaries and the man knew about Jesus. No one had told him, he said that Jesus appeared to him and told him that he could be saved. So as far as Christian's go, we are suppose to share the gospel. How that turns out with those that haven't is outside of our own knowledge.

You have a dichotomy really, with no clarification from 'above'.

Does one prosthelytize as much as possible, in the hopes that at least some will accept the revelation claim?

Or, do nothing in the hopes that all whom never have heard, are awarded the same glorious fate?

Seems like a rather large topic, by an all loving God not to address clearly???? I mean, we are only speaking about eternity and all...

To elaborate upon your point, are you saying that God directly reveals to all whom He knows will never hear of Him by human voice? If not, you have just added yet another element of confusion into the mix

 

[cvanwey]

I meant the evidence that suggests God hasn't always been all knowing. A couple examples:
Genesis 3:8-9
"They hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the Lord God called out to the man. “Where are you?” he asked."

Genesis 18:21
"that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know."

What other evidence are you looking for, sorry if you've already stated prior.

[/QUOTE]

Yea, I'm aware of such verses, in which I also stated that is your 'cross' to bare really.

However, like I also stated, w/o detectable, repeatable, testable revelation, one can only investigate any/all claims. And if all such findings objectively lead one to the lack in such a claim, can you blame them for turning away from what they were indoctrinated within?

 

[Chriliman]

Yea, I'm aware of such verses, in which I also stated that is your 'cross' to bare really.

If I'm called to cary it, I will.

However, like I also stated, w/o detectable, repeatable, testable revelation, one can only investigate any/all claims. And if all such findings objectively lead one to the lack in such a claim, can you blame them for turning away from what they were indoctrinated within?

No, but they should be blamed for throwing out the baby with the bath water. The teachings of Christ can bring much value to people's lives even if there are those who get it wrong and teach others their error.

 

[Tinker Grey]

No, but they should be blamed for throwing out the baby with the bath water. The teachings of Christ can bring much value to people's lives even if there are those who get it wrong and teach others their error.

Same with Buddha.

 

[Oncedeceived]

You have a dichotomy really, with no clarification from 'above'.

Does one prosthelytize as much as possible, in the hopes that at least some will accept the revelation claim?

Or, do nothing in the hopes that all whom never have heard, are awarded the same glorious fate?

Seems like a rather large topic, by an all loving God not to address clearly???? I mean, we are only speaking about eternity and all...

To elaborate upon your point, are you saying that God directly reveals to all whom He knows will never hear of Him by human voice? If not, you have just added yet another element of confusion into the mix

We are not the ones that bring others to salvation. We are to go out and share the gospel. The rest is up to God and the person. The fact is, there are few that are called. Why? I don't know. We try to do our best to articulate what we know according to Scripture, we give opinions and use reason to discuss it all.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

But God would

And to elaborate upon your prior point, I doubt God adheres to a 'specific language' for universal truth. So I could study Greek, Aramaic, or any other really. But even so, it's not like all the fluent Greek speaking theologians agree across the board; so why does your suggestion even matter - (to learn it in Greek)?

Oh, so you think that atheist I was referring to is wrong?

 

[Hammster]

Nice try buddy...

'Moral' is either what God commands, as in the Bible, or is morality independent of God, which begs the question, what is the need for God in morality?

It does not take all day. I simply wanted clarification. And I also answered your question regardless. God can do whatever, IF He exists. But the question is... Is it moral because God does it?.?.?..?.?.?.?.

Since “moral” seems to be such a stumbling block for you, I will simplify the question.

Is it bad for the giver of life to take life?