If God is all powerful, and all loving, I would think it would be logically reasonable that He would want to convey His message clear enough for humans to receive consistently. And if they do not, due to genuine extenuating circumstances, not create the only alternative realm a place of "eternal torment", via burning? Which, by the way, is the same realm all the confirmed rebellious would reside?
I guess your definition of 'all-loving' is that he should love all people equally, or something along those lines. That he should intend only good for everyone. While there is a sense, I believe, that he does that, it is not quite that notion that comes to mind for me, but maybe something more like, "Super-loving", or "loving in the extreme".
But anyway, no, he does not intend everyone to receive his message with any consistency, unless if 'consistent' with his plans.
As I already stated long ago.... If He exists, He can do whatever He wants. Apparently, He is satisfied knowing that most will not receive His provided messages in a way which will save them from eternal hell fire ---> (the only singular destination for the unchosen).
Again, receiving his provided messages in some particular way is not what saves, but God himself is what saves.
I now ask again, since you did not answer.
How do you know your interpretation is the correct one? I mean, it's only your apparent eternal fate we are speaking about here.
I thought I did answer. I don't know my interpretation is the correct one. It is only, as far as I know, consistent with Scripture, and with good reason, and with experience, and others have not proven so, to me, so far. Further, I have known since I was young, that God is beyond my understanding, so that any conclusions I have drawn, at best, hardly even scratch the surface.
My eternal fate is not drawn on my interpretation, but on God's choice, and God's action --not mine. (The other interlocutor will say that differently, lol)
Please recall what I told you from the jump. You are a breath of fresh air. I'm not here to 'bait' you, or "trap" you. I'm simply trying to speed the conversation along to the main objective(s). If you disagree with something I say, we can hash it out as necessary, when needed
I understand, from your POV, why you feel I may be producing 'loaded' Q's. From my perspective, these Q's are in an attempt to speed things along.
Nevertheless, you do the same thing others, skeptics, atheists and christians do to me, taking something I answered without qualifications, to mean something quite different. I don't think you mean to, but you have done so, if I'm remembering right. (lol, Some people take things I said WITH qualifications to mean something I did not mean, as though I hadn't even given qualifications.) Also, it is unavoidable that some things I have said to one person will be taken by a passerby reading a post out of the context of the larger discussion of many posts, as though I had only written the one post. But I will try to avoid assuming.
If the human objective is to achieve 'salvation', which is to mean, to be with God rather than away from Him for an eternity, can you get there by --- (and please pardon the false dichotomy presented below)?
As a precursor, by 'worship', this would be a blanket term for [belief, submission, repentance, praying to, etc...]
A) Not worshiping Him, but also almost never sinning?
B) Worshiping Him, but still falling short, because you will still remain a sinner until you die?
The answer looks more likely so to be B). This renders 'sin' irrelevant for the objective.
A Christian lie and an atheist lie is still a "sin" to God from either party.
Lol, so finally I get your definition of, or rather, use of, 'worship'! All those (repentance, submission etc) are indeed necessary, but do not cause the salvation. Salvation, in that sense, does not depend on them. But in the sense that if a person does not repent, submit, (and that, regularly or continuously) then that person does not belong to God and is not saved, salvation depends on those things, but only in the sense that those things identify the saved person --they do not save the person.
A. You say, "Not worshiping Him, but also almost never sinning?"
Truth is, if a person is not submitted to Christ, or repentant of their sin (see your definition of worship above) EVERYTHING they do is sin, because they do everything in opposition or defiance or rebellion to God. Therefore, your A is a fiction. Christ called such, the pharisees, 'whitewashed tombs'.
B. You say, "Worshiping Him, but still falling short, because you will still remain a sinner until you die?
The Bible seems to refer to 'sinner' in the same way as the continuous action verb, sin. The sinner is not a person who has the habit of confession to God, repentance and pursuing Christ, but a person who has the habit of sin --a person who lives that way. So no, I would hesitate to call myself or someone I believed belonging to Christ 'a sinner'. But yes, your B is otherwise correct.
