My Integrity Challenge

[dlamberth]

It basically boils down to that kind of knowledge having a very high - if not absolute - certainty of forever damning all who come to know it.

There is a reason that God requires us to walk by faith in mortality - for that is what mitigates the effects of the Law upon us.

If we come to know God with a surety - meaning that we no longer live by faith - then there would be no justification for us if we were to ever decide to operate contrary to that knowledge.

Unless you are ready to obey every single commandment from God - never wavering - never once violating the Law or committing sin or succumbing to weakness - then you would have no excuse when God takes your accounting.

Any "slip" would cause the full effects of the Law to come upon you and you would be damned forever.

This is why the Lord Jesus Christ suffered and died for us - He took upon Himself the penalties of the Law so we would not have to - if we had faith in Him and repented of our sins.

This is why we are not required to know all things in order to be saved - but rely on the merits and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

This is why there are many things that we will never come to know in this life - for that knowledge would defeat the purpose of mortality and damn us.

Thanks for the explanation.

Personally it's just the opposite for me. I can't imagine my not spiritually opening those doors of knowledge about God. I find it as a way of having Him as a reality in my life. When is comes to God, a person can have knowledge, faith and grace as they open their hearts to the Divine. I've seen how all of that enriches one's spiritual journey.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Thanks for the explanation.

Personally it's just the opposite for me. I can't imagine my not spiritually opening those doors of knowledge about God. I find it as a way of having Him as a reality in my life. When is comes to God, a person can have knowledge, faith and grace as they open their hearts to the Divine. I've seen how all of that enriches one's spiritual journey.

I agree with you completely.

You and I might be able to find all the evidence we need - and more and more as we accept more and more - but the vast majority of God's children reject what has already been revealed.

This is why we will not find any definitive proof of His existence - something that is tangible and can be shared with others - because most of Mankind is not prepared for it.

God is protecting His children - allowing them to receive only what they are able to accept - in order to prevent them from being damned forever.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Ya -- someone in an earlier post mention 20 million.

Sounds good to me!

I would probably start my search in coastal areas. Hawaii, Tahiti, Bahamas, could take years. XD

 

[Belk]

Since one poster here likes to bring up integrity a lot, I thought I would issue a challenge based on it.

Here's my challenge:

If you were offered one million dollars to find evidence of Noah's flood, would you:

A) Take it and go look somewhere?

B) Decline it on the basis that you are convinced scientifically that Noah's flood didn't occur?

B) Decline it on the basis that you are convinced scientifically that Noah's flood didn't occur.

 

[AV1611VET]

B) Decline it on the basis that you are convinced scientifically that Noah's flood didn't occur.

Now there's a man with integrity!

 

[Belk]

Now there's a man with integrity!

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

 

[The Liturgist]

but with respect I would argue that these relics being proof of God would still dwell within the realm of faith.

Respectfully, that’s because you haven’t experienced the supernatural events which occur surrounding them, and also which happen at other Orthodox liturgical events in the Holy Land and elsewhere.

Also I find myself questioning why you apparently agree with our theology. Do Mormons now deny the traditional LDS belief that God came from Kolob and rearranged existing matter as opposed to creating all matter, and everything else, ex nihlo?

Also the Christian model of the Trinity as being an eternal of three persons absolutely precludes the Mormon idea that Lucifer is the brother of Christ.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Respectfully, that’s because you haven’t experienced the supernatural events which occur surrounding them, and also which happen at other Orthodox liturgical events in the Holy Land and elsewhere.

Also I find myself questioning why you apparently agree with our theology. Do Mormons now deny the traditional LDS belief that God came from Kolob and rearranged existing matter as opposed to creating all matter, and everything else, ex nihlo?

Also the Christian model of the Trinity as being an eternal of three persons absolutely precludes the Mormon idea that Lucifer is the brother of Christ.

I wouldn't mind addressing your questions - but I fear that would be off-topic and we could potentially get the thread flagged.

If you sincerely want to talk about it - send me a DM.

As to your claim about the relics - I am not saying that they are not proof of God or that we cannot strengthen our faith by experiencing the events surrounding them - only that they would not be considered as evidence of God by anyone but those who already had faith in Him.

I was originally talking about evidence that no one could deny - like finding the Ark - or that one rock that Adam wrote, "Adam was here" on.

Basically - there is a reason why God does not reveal Himself to the entire world in His glory - and instead chose to condescend to our level and be born as we were as the means of revealing Himself to the world.

One of the reasons He does this is to avoid forever damning those who are not ready to receive the truth.

 

[RileyG]

I would take it, and then use ground radar on Mt. Ararat. If I fail, then, I would give some of the money to other scientists who might do better, donate some, and keep some for my wages of effort.

Well said.

 

[AlexB23]

Well said.

Hey thanks. I am surprised why others did not say this.

 

[The Liturgist]

I wouldn't mind addressing your questions - but I fear that would be off-topic and we could potentially get the thread flagged.

If you sincerely want to talk about it - send me a DM.

As to your claim about the relics - I am not saying that they are not proof of God or that we cannot strengthen our faith by experiencing the events surrounding them - only that they would not be considered as evidence of God by anyone but those who already had faith in Him.

I was originally talking about evidence that no one could deny - like finding the Ark - or that one rock that Adam wrote, "Adam was here" on.

Basically - there is a reason why God does not reveal Himself to the entire world in His glory - and instead chose to condescend to our level and be born as we were as the means of revealing Himself to the world.

One of the reasons He does this is to avoid forever damning those who are not ready to receive the truth.

Please feel free to send me a DM addressing my post, as I would enjoy that greatly.

At any rate, people can and always will challenge evidence of God, but the True Cross has been found, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church does have the Ark of the Covenant, so fragments of Noah’s Ark would experience more of the same.

But clearly Christ our True God did not want His mother, our Glorous Lady Theotokos and Ever Virgin Mary, subjected to this, neither did He want this of the Holy Prophets Enoch, Moses and Elijah, so he ensured that they were taken up into Heaven, either before, at the time of, or following, their death. In this manner, we have no bodily relics of St. Moses or St. Elijah or St. Enoch or the Mother of God to dispute the veracity of (indeed the absence of bodily relics of the Blessed Virgin Mary is unique among high profile saints of the New Testament, considering we even have the head of St. John the Baptist.

John Calvin once falsely claimed that one could build a galleon with the relics of the True Cross venerated in the churches across Europe, but this was a lie: in the 19th century, a French scientist calculated the combined mass of all relics of the Holy Cross known to him, which would not have included, I expect, the wing of the cross the Ethiopians have, nor likelu, a few pieces in Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox possession, but certainly would have been everything Calvin had in mind in Europe, amounted to less than a third of the minimum possible mass for the Cross.

 

[durangodawood]

Now there's a man with integrity!

If youre going to question my integrity, which you have, you should explain precisely where Ive gone wrong. Its the decent thing to do.

 

[AV1611VET]

If youre going to question my integrity, which you have, you should explain precisely where Ive gone wrong. Its the decent thing to do.

If you are scientifically convinced that the Flood didn't happen, and you accept even a penny from someone to go look, then I submit you've compromised your integrity.

In addition, if you are scientifically convinced that the Flood didn't happen, and you accept an offer from someone that, if you find evidence and bring it to them, they'll give you a penny, then I submit you've compromised your integrity.

Anything that would prompt you to go look -- after you've been convinced the Flood wasn't real, taught students that it wasn't real, including grading their papers -- then for you to go look would compromise your integrity.

In my opinion.

I get tired of hearing the Flood wasn't real because all evidence points against it; only to find out later they'd go look for evidence if the price was right.

 

[durangodawood]

If you are scientifically convinced that the Flood didn't happen, and you accept even a penny from someone to go look, then I submit you've compromised your integrity.

In addition, if you are scientifically convinced that the Flood didn't happen, and you accept an offer from someone that, if you find evidence and bring it to them, they'll give you a penny, then I submit you've compromised your integrity.

Anything that would prompt you to go look -- after you've been convinced the Flood wasn't real, taught students that it wasn't real, including grading their papers -- then for you to go look would compromise your integrity.

You fail to say why any of those compromise integrity.

Im scientifically convinced the flood didnt happen. But good evidence the other way would change my mind. So where precisely is the integrity problem if I go look for such possible evidence? Spell it out.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You fail to say why any of those compromise integrity.

Im scientifically convinced the flood didnt happen. But good evidence the other way would change my mind. So where precisely is the integrity problem? Spell it out.

While it's difficult to provide any evidence of a biblical flood, we could at the very least ask why there are various flood myths in the ancient world and among ancient world religions. Where did these all come from? What common experiences among different people groups in the past took place to move them to express imputed religious meanings to 'Great Floods'? [see the Wiki link below for the historical information I'm alluding to].

Flood myth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And then we go from there to today's Geological histories.........

 

[AV1611VET]

You fail to say why any of those compromise integrity.

And you're just confusing yourself by arguing about this challenge.

I'm scientifically convinced the flood didn't happen.

Fair enough.

But good evidence the other way would change my mind.

As it should.

But if you think there's good evidence out there, why would you tell anyone the Flood didn't happen?

Unless you are omniscient and are saturated with facts, why would you even dare say the Flood didn't happen?

So where precisely is the integrity problem?

No comment.

Spell it out.

Sure.

en oh space cee oh em em ee en tee

 

[AV1611VET]

While it's difficult to provide any evidence of a biblical flood,

No.

I'm not buying that.

Don't tell me how difficult it is, while telling others it didn't happen.*

Saying it's "difficult" leaves wiggle room to back down.

* I'm not saying YOU do. But for anyone who does, I'm not buying it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Note:

This challenge is for those who are absolutely convinced scientifically the Flood didn't happen and, if evidence to the contrary were found, would experience a faith crisis in science.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

No.

I'm not buying that.

Don't tell me how difficult it is, while telling others it didn't happen.*

Saying it's "difficult" leaves wiggle room to back down.

* I'm not saying YOU do. But for anyone who does, I'm not buying it.

Well, where science is concerned, it's your word against that of Christian Geologists like Davis A. Young & Ralph F. Stearley.

And while I understand that you wouldn't want to read their scientifically solid book, The Bible, Rocks and Time, if you EVER want me to read your 'Blood' book, then you'll read mine as well as a bilateral exchange.

One more thing, I've never said that NO FLOOD of any kind has ever happened by which ancient writers referred. So, rather than misinterpreting, mischaracterizing and dismissing what I'm attempting to communicate, you might realize that for us to have a mutual understanding as fellow Christians, we'll have to make the effort at ............................ well..............................mutual understanding.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, where science is concerned, it's your word against that of Christian Geologists like Davis A. Young & Ralph F. Stearley.

No, it isn't.

If their integrity is up for sale, that's their problem, not mine.

Don't drag me into this.

What, for example, would you think if later, you saw Davis A. Young & Ralph F. Stearley out looking for evidence of the Flood, because someone offered them money?

And while I understand that you wouldn't want to read their scientifically solid book, The Bible, Rocks and Time, if you EVER want me to read your 'Blood' book, then you'll read mine as well as a bilateral exchange.

Nice try.

Won't work.

One more thing, I've never said that NO FLOOD of any kind has ever happened by which ancient writers referred.

Did you miss the footnote to my post?

Here it is again:

* I'm not saying YOU do. But for anyone who does, I'm not buying it.

So, rather than misinterpreting, mischaracterizing and dismissing what I'm attempting to communicate,

Oh, please.

Have a nice day.