Are You Doing Enough?

[bling]

Now that sounds like strings attached. If God wants to give me some quality that causes me to like being good, have at it. If you're saying that I have to work at being good, then it ain't a gift.

You still have free will, God is not wanting robots to Love.
The gift is yours, you do what you want with it, so if you do not like it you can give it up.

I want God to transform me into a good person through no effort on my part. If he can just make me enjoy being a good person, then great. If I have to do the work, then I'm earning my salvation.

If you really want to be transformed then allow God to do that, God is not going to make you into some kind of robot, you have free will. Allowing God to transform you is effortless on your part, but you can quit allowing God at any time.

 

[Moral Orel]

You still have free will, God is not wanting robots to Love.
The gift is yours, you do what you want with it, so if you do not like it you can give it up.

I never said anything about being a robot, I just said God can make it so that I enjoy being a good person.

So if the gift is mine, I'm going to Heaven, because that's what I want and I ain't saying "no".

If you really want to be transformed then allow God to do that, God is not going to make you into some kind of robot, you have free will. Allowing God to transform you is effortless on your part, but you can quit allowing God at any time.

Again, never said anything about free will. God can start transforming me anytime He chooses, I'm not doing anything, and nothing is happening.

 

[All Becomes New]

Please stay with me here:

1. Under your belief system, the only true requirement for salvation is your love for God. Any/all of your sins and failed works are then covered by God's loving grace. This means that if both you and Stalin professed allegiance and love to YHWH, you are both equally saved, regardless of your sin(s) and work(s) on earth. YES or NO? If yes, this ultimately renders sins and works virtually arbitrary. If no, then please tell me what else, besides loving God, is mandatory and unforgivable - (not covered by God's grace)?

Are you expecting a different answer this time around?

2. We also have people everywhere claiming haunted houses, alien abductions, mediums, psychics, etc. Since we have a lot, all over the place, this must validate them too, right? In your specific case, and applying Occam's Razor, what's more likely of the two given choices [a) or b)]?

You obsession with dichotomies is off putting.

I think in the case of those things, it clearly shows something supernatural is happening there.

Anything besides the feeling of me talking to myself.

Then clearly, you are not asking in faith. How do you expect God to answer you if you are not asking as if He is real? If I was God, and someone was praying to me, but because I know everything and I know how this person is asking something of me, I wouldn't feel obligated to answer them if they were acting like I didn't exist anyways.

 

[All Becomes New]

Sure, and you ought to do both kinds of things, yes? It's great that you do, by the way. And if you do it all-encompassingly, that's all the better. I doubt you even try, but I'm a cynic, so prove me wrong, please. Because if a human can devote their lives to helping others (not just Jesus) then the folks who use Original Sin as an excuse for their failure to do the same are just copping out.

And don't get me wrong, I'm not being self-righteous. I'm extremely selfish. I do not donate and I do not volunteer. But I don't ascribe to a religion that instructs me to do good either.

Perhaps it is because you are selfish that you ask these questions. Like, because you care about yourself so much, it's hard for you to understand that there are actually people out there who do care about other people genuinely. As such this presents problems with a Christian worldview because in your mind, because you are selfish, you can't see how it makes sense to NOT be selfish. But that's what the Bible teaches, so you can't square that because of your own way of thinking. That sounds more like a personal problem rather than a logical one.

I'm actually NOT a selfish person. I can tell you many examples of times where I helped someone just because it's the right thing to do, but you don't seem to think in those terms so of course you are not going to believe me when I say I genuinely care about helping people. Again, this is a personal problem on your part and doesn't actually say anything about me.

 

[Moral Orel]

Perhaps it is because you are selfish that you ask these questions. Like, because you care about yourself so much, it's hard for you to understand that there are actually people out there who do care about other people genuinely. As such this presents problems with a Christian worldview because in your mind, because you are selfish, you can't see how it makes sense to NOT be selfish. But that's what the Bible teaches, so you can't square that because of your own way of thinking. That sounds more like a personal problem rather than a logical one.

I'm actually NOT a selfish person. I can tell you many examples of times where I helped someone just because it's the right thing to do, but you don't seem to think in those terms so of course you are not going to believe me when I say I genuinely care about helping people. Again, this is a personal problem on your part and doesn't actually say anything about me.

Not at all. I know there are a few unselfish folk out there, but they're few and far between. I recognize other people as selfish because they do the same things I do. I'm not encouraging people to be selfish, I'm wondering why folks aren't better than me (or at least not much). For instance, I ordered pizza for me and the fam last week. I could have cooked at home for a fraction of the money I payed Papa John's, and then given that extra money to someone who's going to have to skip a meal because they can't afford it, but I didn't because I'm selfish. Now maybe you're such a great guy you don't ever waste money ordering pizza or going out to eat ever, but you gotta admit, that ain't the norm.

 

[All Becomes New]

Not at all. I know there are a few unselfish folk out there, but they're few and far between. I recognize other people as selfish because they do the same things I do. I'm not encouraging people to be selfish, I'm wondering why folks aren't better than me (or at least not much). For instance, I ordered pizza for me and the fam last week. I could have cooked at home for a fraction of the money I payed Papa John's, and then given that extra money to someone who's going to have to skip a meal because they can't afford it, but I didn't because I'm selfish. Now maybe you're such a great guy you don't ever waste money ordering pizza or going out to eat ever, but you gotta admit, that ain't the norm.

I think you have a valid concern, but it is misplaced. You seem to be viewing things in terms of selfishness in a somewhat perverted way. For example, you could have very well congratulated yourself for buying your family pizza, but instead you viewed it as a selfish thing. I don't know the circumstances of this particular instance. Maybe it was your turn to cook for the family and you took the easy way out. That's a possibility, but I don't know that at all.

I would recommend reading "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis for a good look at Christian ethics.

 

[Moral Orel]

I think you have a valid concern, but it is misplaced. You seem to be viewing things in terms of selfishness in a somewhat perverted way. For example, you could have very well congratulated yourself for buying your family pizza, but instead you viewed it as a selfish thing. I don't know the circumstances of this particular instance. Maybe it was your turn to cook for the family and you took the easy way out. That's a possibility, but I don't know that at all.

I just told you how it was selfish: it was expensive. Wasting money on a comfort like that is selfish when I could be helping someone who actually needs it. Congratulating myself for ignoring real suffering in the world would be perverted. For what possible reason could I congratulate myself for saying, "Screw you poor people! I want cheese in my crust!"?

But I think I get it. It seems perverted in your mind to take selflessness to the extreme I'm talking about. But that's what "with everything in you would be". You do indulge yourself in comfort, and entertainment, and luxury from time to time, and if it isn't what you would call "too much" then it isn't a big deal, amirite?

 

[All Becomes New]

I just told you how it was selfish: it was expensive. Wasting money on a comfort like that is selfish when I could be helping someone who actually needs it. Congratulating myself for ignoring real suffering in the world would be perverted. For what possible reason could I congratulate myself for saying, "Screw you poor people! I want cheese in my crust!"?

But I think I get it. It seems perverted in your mind to take selflessness to the extreme I'm talking about. But that's what "with everything in you would be". You do indulge yourself in comfort, and entertainment, and luxury from time to time, and if it isn't what you would call "too much" then it isn't a big deal, amirite?

Love others as you love yourself. What do you personally think that means?

To me, this doesn't mean neglecting my own self. It is Good to help people, obviously, but, for example, if someone is asking me to help them with something that I am simply not suited to do, would it be wrong of me to not help them? Perhaps I could try and find an alternative person to help them who would be better at that task, but I am not obligated to volunteer someone else to help someone.

Like I said, even Jesus needed a break helping people as sometimes He just needed to be by Himself for a time. That's a valuable lesson for us, regardless of what you believe about Christianity.

So I would suggest a balanced approach. You don't need to spend every single moment of you life helping people. Surely, helping people is valuable as volunteer work helps millions if not billions of people in things. But to say to never take time for yourself isn't good either. For example, in Christianity, we are supposed to take a Sabbath from out work we do one day a week and just rest. That is a Biblical command from God.

So could you have used that money to help some poor person in Africa or something? Sure, there's an endless pit of people to help and to give resources to. I myself was thinking along these same lines for a bit. The question of "am I doing enough?" is something I don't think God wants us to feel guilty about. Now there comes a point where you are not helping anyone with anything, and that is simply selfishness. But there is nothing wrong with me going out to eat once a week as a treat for myself. Balance.

That is why I said what I said when I bought up those Bible passages to you. They were there to illustrate a Christian ethic in helping people. What I said seem to be good solutions to your problem. I'll summarize them, in case you missed them before:

Help people materially and financially who are worse off than yourself. This means you don't have to fund something that isn't hurting for finances if you live on a small budget or something like myself.

Be fair with people. This should be obvious enough. Don't extort from people or get money from people dishonestly.

Further, you don't actually have to go super far out of your way to help people as long as you do help people when a need arises. I commented on this saying even trying to help people when the situation presents itself obviously isn't something I have a 100% success rate on and I know this because I have tried to help everyone who comes in my path who needs help.

Finally, I just wanted to reiterate this, as I think it sorta "solves" your problem you are having in a nutshell.

A more appropriate way to phrase it would be to always be on the lookout for people who you can help in both big and small ways.

But I would add to the above saying at the end, "and help them assuming you have the capacity to do so adequately."

 

[Moral Orel]

But I would add to the above saying at the end, "and help them assuming you have the capacity to do so adequately."

And anyone who has the resources to go out to eat has the capacity to help others adequately. We aren't talking about people who don't have the resources.

Yes, there is something wrong with you treating yourself once a week. In order to do so you have to ignore folks who actually have needs you could fulfill. And as I pointed out earlier, thanks to the internet, it's super easy to find folks with real needs, so you don't have to go that far out of your way. So you putting your "treat" above the needs of others is, by definition, a selfish act.

But like most folks you want to rationalize and justify selfish acts. Why? You could do more, but you willfully choose not to, and you think God's okay with you only being half-hearted about helping others?

 

[All Becomes New]

But like most folks you want to rationalize and justify selfish acts. Why? You could do more, but you willfully choose not to, and you think God's okay with you only being half-hearted about helping others?

How much of my previous response to you did you read and understand?

 

[Moral Orel]

How much of my previous response to you did you read and understand?

All of it. Just because I only quoted the part you called "in a nutshell" doesn't mean I didn't take all of it into account.

 

[All Becomes New]

All of it. Just because I only quoted the part you called "in a nutshell" doesn't mean I didn't take all of it into account.

Okay. Do me a favor and tell me what you think my point was.

 

[cvanwey]

Are you expecting a different answer this time around?

You do not look to have given a clear answer yet? Thus, I'm trying to help you along. So far, you almost concluded 'yes' entirely, but then later you brought up the "Holy Spirit". I'm asking yes/no questions to widdle down the facts alone.

I'll try this again, as I am actually quite curious...

Is your love for God/Christ, which in turn, means you profess your love for Him, repent to Him, and pray to Him enough? Or, is there any other mandatory requirement(s), not then instead completely covered by God's grace?

You obsession with dichotomies is off putting.

I'm sorry you feel that way. However, I'm not even offering a false dichotomy. I'm asking you, of the two provided, what is more likely? I'll help you along...

Usually the answer, which requires the least amount of additional assumption, is to be concluded. Thus, I ask you again. Which of the two below requires less assumption?

a) The one true God manifests to all religious believers, even if they are not praying to Him specifically, and God does not correct any of these incorrect people, and also continues leading them to believe they are speaking to their preferred God for which they profess, and some attribute answers to their prayers - when they are actually 'answered', and also attribute 'unanswered' prayers as "God saying no or not now", etc etc etc?

Or...

b) Many people feel they are receiving contact from a higher power, but really are not.

Then clearly, you are not asking in faith. How do you expect God to answer you if you are not asking as if He is real? If I was God, and someone was praying to me, but because I know everything and I know how this person is asking something of me, I wouldn't feel obligated to answer them if they were acting like I didn't exist anyways.

Answered here @ post #130 Problems with Miracles?

 

[All Becomes New]

You do not look to have given a clear answer yet? Thus, I'm trying to help you along. So far, you almost concluded 'yes' entirely, but then later you brought up the "Holy Spirit". I'm asking yes/no questions to widdle down the facts alone.

I'll try this again, as I am actually quite curious...

Is your love for God/Christ, which in turn, means you profess your love for Him, repent to Him, and pray to Him enough? Or, is there any other mandatory requirement(s), not then instead completely covered by God's grace?

The problem with answering this question, besides the fact that I already answered it, is that I get the feeling you are trying to bait me into saying something just to confirm your own bias.

But if you actually want to know the answer, I will have to partially repeat what I said before. I believe salvation is not up to what I personally do. I believe it is the work of the Holy Spirit that I am saved. The Holy Spirit living in me is what salvation actually is. The result of salvation is loving God, professing my love for Him, repenting to Him, praying to Him, and worshiping Him. So I would say, no, these things are not "enough" to "merit" salvation. Now, the interesting thing here is that you mention God's grace as if this is a secondary rather than primary means of salvation. It is actually quite the opposite. God's grace is what allows the Holy Spirit to live in me and is the saving work of faith. God's grace is actually the primary means of salvation, not a secondary or tertiary add on to salvation.

To be rather blunt about it, there is actually zero "requirement" for me to DO to be saved as it is all a matter of God's grace to allow the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. There is nothing I can actually do to save myself.

Now I remember the whole point in why you were asking me this, which was that sins and good works become arbitrary if it is all a matter of God's grace. But the thing is, if I am saved, then it is based on my Good works that determine what my rewards will be after the final judgement in the new heavens and the new earth. So my Good works are actually not arbitrary at all if I want better rewards for myself in heaven. On the other hand, I personally do not do Good works because of the rewards I will get in heaven, but instead I do them because I want to please God. In short, I have every motivation to do what is right by being a Christian both in the immediate context of wanting to please God, and in a future context of rewards in heaven.

There you are. I have been as truthful with you as I could. If this answer does not square well with your question, perhaps it will give you something more valuable than the immediate needs of this specific question and will instead answer a more valuable question of what it means to be saved.

I'm sorry you feel that way. However, I'm not even offering a false dichotomy. I'm asking you, of the two provided, what is more likely? I'll help you along...

Usually the answer, which requires the least amount of additional assumption, is to be concluded. Thus, I ask you again. Which of the two below requires less assumption?

a) The one true God manifests to all religious believers, even if they are not praying to Him specifically, and God does not correct any of these incorrect people, and also continues leading them to believe they are speaking to their preferred God for which they profess, and some attribute answers to their prayers - when they are actually 'answered', and also attribute 'unanswered' prayers as "God saying no or not now", etc etc etc?

Or...

b) Many people feel they are receiving contact from a higher power, but really are not.

What is the purpose of you asking this question? It sounds like a bait and switch to me because it seems like a false dichotomy I do not feel comfortable answering in the way you have stated this.

Also, I have taken a LOT of personality tests over the years (which I don't do anymore) and what I can say is that dichotomous questions that are subjective are a horrible way to determine if something true or not.

Also, forcing people to choose between two options when neither option is actually fully accurate is basically asking people to compromise between the lesser of two evils. Doing this causes division within the self and is harmful to the psyche.

 

[Moral Orel]

Okay. Do me a favor and tell me what you think my point was.

You wouldn't phrase it this way, but the point of that response was to give a lot of excuses for not helping others.

Should poor folks with no disposable income donate money to charity? No, of course not, we're not talking about them.

Should you donate money to folks that aren't poor? No, of course not, we're not talking about them either.

Should you take some time to yourself to pray like Jesus did? Sure. Should you not work one day a week? Sure, but Jesus still went out and did good works even though he wasn't working a job, so that's no excuse either.

Helping others in need is good, ignoring others in need is bad. I don't know where you get the idea that there should be a balance of good and bad in you. But it most certainly isn't "with everything in you" as you stated before. Now your standard is to just do better than "not helping anyone with anything" and help anyone who happens to cross your path without going out of your way. Pretty low standard. So I'll point you back to the questions in the OP. Are you 100% sure you're trying hard enough?

 

[cvanwey]

The problem with answering this question, besides the fact that I already answered it, is that I get the feeling you are trying to bait me into saying something just to confirm your own bias.

If you would have just reconciled my initial statement, (like you almost did in post #194), way back when, then none of this follow up would have occurred. Now to your response

But if you actually want to know the answer, I will have to partially repeat what I said before. I believe salvation is not up to what I personally do. I believe it is the work of the Holy Spirit that I am saved. The Holy Spirit living in me is what salvation actually is. The result of salvation is loving God, professing my love for Him, repenting to Him, praying to Him, and worshiping Him.

We already agreed here... (Belief, love, repent, and worship) are requirements, and not optional. Moving forward...

So I would say, no, these things are not "enough" to "merit" salvation.

But you mention nothing else, besides the above. So it looks like that's all God requires, without exception/pardon/grace.

Now, the interesting thing here is that you mention God's grace as if this is a secondary rather than primary means of salvation. It is actually quite the opposite. God's grace is what allows the Holy Spirit to live in me and is the saving work of faith. God's grace is actually the primary means of salvation, not a secondary or tertiary add on to salvation.

Let's go all the way back to your dental analogy. As long as you profess love and worship for your dentist, he will then fix your mouth, regardless of whether you have one cavity, or twelve. The number of cavities then become arbitrary. In this scenario (dentist = God), (fix = grace), and (cavities = sin).

To be rather blunt about it, there is actually zero "requirement" for me to DO to be saved as it is all a matter of God's grace to allow the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. There is nothing I can actually do to save myself.

If it's God's decision to allow you to believe, then it's all arbitrary?

So my Good works are actually not arbitrary at all if I want better rewards for myself in heaven.

Heaven has a ranking system?

On the other hand, I personally do not do Good works because of the rewards I will get in heaven, but instead I do them because I want to please God.

According to the Bible, your works are filthy rags to God. The only thing He cares about, is that you love and worship Him, and no one else. But now I'm confused with what you stated above (i.e.) " "God's grace to allow the indwelling of the Holy Spirit?"

In short, I have every motivation to do what is right by being a Christian both in the immediate context of wanting to please God, and in a future context of rewards in heaven.

I believe you But it sounds like God decided to indwell this motivation into you, and it was not your choice at all?

What is the purpose of you asking this question? It sounds like a bait and switch to me because it seems like a false dichotomy I do not feel comfortable answering in the way you have stated this.

No. I'm responding to post #235 "I think the fact there are people of every faith who claim something supernatural happening is pretty good evidence for the supernatural existing, don't you think?"

Is the answer (more likely) the one which requires many additional assumptions, or the one with less assumptions?

 

[All Becomes New]

You wouldn't phrase it this way, but the point of that response was to give a lot of excuses for not helping others.

Should poor folks with no disposable income donate money to charity? No, of course not, we're not talking about them.

Should you donate money to folks that aren't poor? No, of course not, we're not talking about them either.

Should you take some time to yourself to pray like Jesus did? Sure. Should you not work one day a week? Sure, but Jesus still went out and did good works even though he wasn't working a job, so that's no excuse either.

Helping others in need is good, ignoring others in need is bad. I don't know where you get the idea that there should be a balance of good and bad in you. But it most certainly isn't "with everything in you" as you stated before. Now your standard is to just do better than "not helping anyone with anything" and help anyone who happens to cross your path without going out of your way. Pretty low standard. So I'll point you back to the questions in the OP. Are you 100% sure you're trying hard enough?

You are right that my whole point was to take a balanced approach between helping other people and helping yourself. This does not mean that my ideal is to have some good and some bad in you. I tried to ask you what you think it means to love other as you love yourself. You did not answer that question. I think you are focusing entirely on the loving others part without the context of the qualifying statement of how you are actually supposed to do that, namely, as you love yourself.

I am reasonably sure at this point that you care more about the idea it is impossible try hard enough rather than actually wanting to know what level of helping others vs. helping yourself is appropriate.

As far as your closing question is concerned, there is no such thing as trying hard enough in the Christian faith because it is a given that we most certainly are never going to be able to try hard enough. But I don't really like the way this is phrased because it sorta implies that we should feel guilty for not doing enough to earn our salvation. The problem with this is that salvation is not in any way based on doing enough to earn our salvation as salvation is a gift of God and we can't ever do enough to satisfy God for Him to save us. Also, I really take issue with the word "try" here. the word try implies making an attempt at a goal that you do not know if you will be able to successful or not. The problem with "trying" to do "enough" (the question would be "enough for what?") is that it is not a matter of whether or not we will succeed, because the answer is that we most certainly will never be able to succeed at earning our salvation.

Perhaps a better way to phrase it, if I was going to ask this question, would be something like, "How do I know if I am doing enough to please God?"

From there I could probably take an inventory of my general attitude over the past week to see if I had generally been thankful for what I have, faithful to God, loving and kind to others, gentle in disposition, patient when people irritated me, whether or not I was able to control my impulses, and how much satisfaction I had in Christ. This would basically be an inventory of how the fruits of the Spirit impacted my life (Galatians 5:22-23). And from that inventory, I would probably see in every category that I could have done more. So then what would be left for me to do would be to repent of not doing these things as well as I could have and to make an effort to do better next time. Then I would thank God for forgiving me of not measuring up to His standard and I would move on and try and do better next time.

If you are still interested in trying to figure out how much you have to do to earn salvation, I can perhaps try and find some resources for you on the doctrines of grace.

 

[All Becomes New]

If you would have just reconciled my initial statement, (like you almost did in post #194), way back when, then none of this follow up would have occurred. Now to your response

I guess that is what I get for trying to be honest with atheists. So be it.

We already agreed here... (Belief, love, repent, and worship) are requirements, and not optional. Moving forward...

No, I would say those things are implicit in being saved. They are in no way what I would call a "requirement" as the only requirement there is for me to be saved is to exist and receive the Holy Spirit. It's a pretty much an entirely passive thing on my part in terms of requirements.

But you mention nothing else, besides the above. So it looks like that's all God requires, without exception/pardon/grace.

Exception/pardon/grace is salvation. There's virtually zero requirements on my part to be saved at all.

Let's go all the way back to your dental analogy. As long as you profess love and worship for your dentist, he will then fix your mouth, regardless of whether you have one cavity, or twelve. The number of cavities then become arbitrary. In this scenario (dentist = God), (fix = grace), and (cavities = sin).

LOL. I do actually find this somewhat comical. I would correct the analogy and say it like this: let's say I have a really bad toothache. Let's say a concerned third party knows this and offers to pay my bill to take care of my toothache because they know I cannot afford to get it done on my budget. So I accept to have the dentist take care of my tooth so I no longer have to live with such pain in my mouth. Next, the concerned third party offers to buy me a lifetime supply of toothbrushes, toothpaste, and mouthwash at no cost to me for as long as I live
Dentist = God
Concerned third party = Jesus
Dental Supplies = Holy Spirit
Toothache = Sin

If it's God's decision to allow you to believe, then it's all arbitrary?

Why would it be? The question you are not asking here is if I think it is a Good thing I think I am saved and I think it is so it's not arbitrary to me personally.

Heaven has a ranking system?

This is where I'd like to know exactly what kind of Church you used to go to because this is beginner level stuff you are asking me here. Yes, heaven has different rewards for different people depending on how faithful they were based on what was revealed to them.

According to the Bible, your works are filthy rags to God. The only thing He cares about, is that you love and worship Him, and no one else. But now I'm confused with what you stated above (i.e.) " "God's grace to allow the indwelling of the Holy Spirit?"

Yes, by my own volition of will, my Good works do not please God. But in my cooperation with the Holy Spirit, I can please God and do Good Works. That's why Christians give God the glory for their success instead of saying the did it themselves.

Yes, it is not possible for the Holy Spirit to live in me without God allowing the Holy Spirit to enter me by His grace.

I believe you But it sounds like God decided to indwell this motivation into you, and it was not your choice at all?

Exactly. There are other Christians who have a different understanding of soteriology (the study of salvation) but that is what I personally believe.

No. I'm responding to post #235

"I think the fact there are people of every faith who claim something supernatural happening is pretty good evidence for the supernatural existing, don't you think?"

I didn't want to go here because it is going to make me look like a bad guy to you but basically, I believe there are more spiritual forces at work in the universe then just God and "angels". "Demons" and Satan can also have an influence on things in the physical world. I also suspect there may or may not be "neutral" Spiritual forces at work in the universe. What is clear to me is that some things happen that are unexplainable by our current rational understanding of things and I think some of these things are done by Spiritual forces, either good, evil, or possibly neutral (but I am not really sure on this last one. It's just a current pet theory I have).

Is the answer (more likely) the one which requires many additional assumptions, or the one with less assumptions?

The answer is that Spiritual beings are in the workings of supernatural forces in the universe. So it's not a question of "more" or "less" assumptions because it's all one and the same thing.

 

[cvanwey]

I guess that is what I get for trying to be honest with atheists. So be it.

After adding insults, by calling me a fool, and Dan Barker whatever you actually called Him, you can now successfully add [generalizations] to your repertoire.

I ask you again, very simply... Is 'sin' and 'works' virtually arbitrary, under your umbrella of belief? Pardon the "repeat question"... But you say it isn't arbitrary, but then offer no validation to reject this conclusion. See below, and also in your prior responses. For proof, please starting with, post #194...

No, I would say those things are implicit in being saved. They are in no way what I would call a "requirement" as the only requirement there is for me to be saved is to exist and receive the Holy Spirit. It's a pretty much an entirely passive thing on my part in terms of requirements.

If you do not believe in Him, let alone love Him, He will offer His grace anyways? Then I guess everyone is saved. Right?

LOL. I do actually find this somewhat comical. I would correct the analogy and say it like this: let's say I have a really bad toothache. Let's say a concerned third party knows this and offers to pay my bill to take care of my toothache because they know I cannot afford to get it done on my budget. So I accept to have the dentist take care of my tooth so I no longer have to live with such pain in my mouth. Next, the concerned third party offers to buy me a lifetime supply of toothbrushes, toothpaste, and mouthwash at no cost to me for as long as I live
Dentist = God
Concerned third party = Jesus
Dental Supplies = Holy Spirit
Toothache = Sin

You merely repurposed the same ultimately conclusion. Great Job Our cavities/sins are arbitrary. It does not matter how many cavities you have. All that matters is that you love the correct dentist/God.

Why would it be? The question you are not asking here is if I think it is a Good thing I think I am saved and I think it is so it's not arbitrary to me personally.

It does not matter what you think. Only what He thinks... Apparently, He decides whom He is going to indwell or not. I asked for decades. He apparently passed me over. Hence, it is not my choice at all. He indwelled you, and now His indwelling makes you do what He wants. Thus, it's all virtually arbitrary apparently.

This is where I'd like to know exactly what kind of Church you used to go to because this is beginner level stuff you are asking me here. Yes, heaven has different rewards for different people depending on how faithful they were based on what was revealed to them.

I assure you I'm no 'beginner' I've been to many churches in my day

(black) How do you know this?

(red) How does God determine what He reveals to each individual? And how do you know?

Yes, by my own volition of will, my Good works do not please God. But in my cooperation with the Holy Spirit, I can please God and do Good Works. That's why Christians give God the glory for their success instead of saying the did it themselves.

Yes, it is not possible for the Holy Spirit to live in me without God allowing the Holy Spirit to enter me by His grace.

Exactly. There are other Christians who have a different understanding of soteriology (the study of salvation) but that is what I personally believe.

Sounds like God chooses to turn some people into His personal puppets, and chooses to leave others alone.

And speaking of soteriology, seems rather odd God cares not to clearly disclose the way to salvation. And instead, tells his readers they are saved in differing and conflicting ways

Case/point - you verses a Catholic, for instance

I didn't want to go here because it is going to make me look like a bad guy to you but basically, I believe there are more spiritual forces at work in the universe then just God and "angels". "Demons" and Satan can also have an influence on things in the physical world. I also suspect there may or may not be "neutral" Spiritual forces at work in the universe.

Interesting. Please see my response directly below in (green)...

What is clear to me is that some things happen that are unexplainable by our current rational understanding of things

Argument from ignorance

The answer is that Spiritual beings are in the workings of supernatural forces in the universe. So it's not a question of "more" or "less" assumptions because it's all one and the same thing.

My question is pretty straight forward. And you continue to avoid it. You complain that I repeat my questions. This is because you are not answering my questions, but instead answering questions I did not ask. Which answer below is more likely a) or b)? It's a simple question.

Again, you stated "I think the fact there are people of every faith who claim something supernatural happening is pretty good evidence for the supernatural existing, don't you think?":

a) The one true God manifests to all religious believers, even if they are not praying to Him specifically, and God does not correct any of these incorrect people, and also continues leading them to believe they are speaking to their preferred God for which they profess, and some attribute answers to their prayers - when they are actually 'answered', and also attribute 'unanswered' prayers as "God saying no or not now", etc etc etc?

Or...

b) Many people feel they are receiving contact from a higher power, but really are not.

 

[All Becomes New]

After adding insults, by calling me a fool, and Dan Barker whatever you actually called Him, you can now successfully add [generalizations] to your repertoire.

I ask you again, very simply... Is 'sin' and 'works' virtually arbitrary, under your umbrella of belief? Pardon the "repeat question"... But you say it isn't arbitrary, but then offer no validation to reject this conclusion. See below, and also in your prior responses. For proof, please starting with, post #194...



If you do not believe in Him, let alone love Him, He will offer His grace anyways? Then I guess everyone is saved. Right?



You merely repurposed the same ultimately conclusion. Great Job Our cavities/sins are arbitrary. It does not matter how many cavities you have. All that matters is that you love the correct dentist/God.



It does not matter what you think. Only what He thinks... Apparently, He decides whom He is going to indwell or not. I asked for decades. He apparently passed me over. Hence, it is not my choice at all. He indwelled you, and now His indwelling makes you do what He wants. Thus, it's all virtually arbitrary apparently.



I assure you I'm no 'beginner' I've been to many churches in my day

(black) How do you know this?

(red) How does God determine what He reveals to each individual? And how do you know?



Sounds like God chooses to turn some people into His personal puppets, and chooses to leave others alone.

And speaking of soteriology, seems rather odd God cares not to clearly disclose the way to salvation. And instead, tells his readers they are saved in differing and conflicting ways

Case/point - you verses a Catholic, for instance



Interesting. Please see my response directly below in (green)...



Argument from ignorance



My question is pretty straight forward. And you continue to avoid it. You complain that I repeat my questions. This is because you are not answering my questions, but instead answering questions I did not ask. Which answer below is more likely a) or b)? It's a simple question.

Again, you stated "I think the fact there are people of every faith who claim something supernatural happening is pretty good evidence for the supernatural existing, don't you think?":

a) The one true God manifests to all religious believers, even if they are not praying to Him specifically, and God does not correct any of these incorrect people, and also continues leading them to believe they are speaking to their preferred God for which they profess, and some attribute answers to their prayers - when they are actually 'answered', and also attribute 'unanswered' prayers as "God saying no or not now", etc etc etc?

Or...

b) Many people feel they are receiving contact from a higher power, but really are not.

I'm going to give you the opportunity to ask some different questions before blocking you.

You're move.