Purveyor of Confusion

John Helpher · Apr 22, 2020

thomas_t said:
The important thing is: once you convert, you are saved. Why bother about the rest?
[/USER].

Why bother with the rest? By the rest, do you mean the teachings of Jesus? Like, when Jesus said we should not swear for any reason (Matthew 5:34) , or that we should keep our prayers, fasting, and charity-giving secret (Matthew 6:1-8), why bother with any of that?

That's not legalism; that is foolishness.

thomas_t · Apr 22, 2020

John Helpher said:
That's not legalism; that is foolishness.

why bother with how you are not saved, I mean.

Loversofjesus_2018 · Apr 22, 2020

dcalling said:
Don't Yiks God, He is the creator and He is smarter than all of us (this is to your other post)

People will never need to second guess the truly important questions, as God promised eternal destiny in clear messages.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life
Romans 10:9 Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Eph2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

The reason as did yikes is more to people and how we may choose to understand God. So when Jesus says be perfect as your father is perfect(not sure if I got it right), when he said obey my commands, when he says love your neighbor as yourself, forsake all you have etc... we will make up reasons why his words need to be kept in context in which he doesnt mean exactly what he is saying, but when we read the scripture about how he chose who will be saved and who will be destroyed before hand we stick to a very literal interpretation. That to me is yikes! Because clearly (according people)we have the ability to use our own judgment where We think scripture is and is malt literal so why would someone not choose to do it the area where they believe God predetermines people to hell.

dcalling · Apr 22, 2020

Loversofjesus_2018 said:
The reason as did yikes is more to people and how we may choose to understand God. So when Jesus says be perfect as your father is perfect(not sure if I got it right), when he said obey my commands, when he says love your neighbor as yourself, forsake all you have etc... we will make up reasons why his words need to be kept in context in which he doesnt mean exactly what he is saying, but when we read the scripture about how he chose who will be saved and who will be destroyed before hand we stick to a very literal interpretation. That to me is yikes! Because clearly (according people)we have the ability to use our own judgment where We think scripture is and is malt literal so why would someone not choose to do it the area where they believe God predetermines people to hell.

Well, when God said obey my commands, love your neighbor as yourself etc, there is NO CONTEXT!
God even made an example, that to love your neighbor is as a Sumerian to love a Jew(they were not on good terms), to show that there is no context for "neighbor".

So you got it in reverse, God's commandments are literal (unless God give a special place and time, then it is under a context). God's actions (i.e. how he created the world) and attributes needs to be put in a context (because we don't understand those at the present time). Also predetermines is what I derived from my understanding, so it is definitely under context (and might not be true).

Loversofjesus_2018 · Apr 22, 2020

dcalling said:
Well, when God said obey my commands, love your neighbor as yourself etc, there is NO CONTEXT!
God even made an example, that to love your neighbor is as a Sumerian to love a Jew(they were not on good terms), to show that there is no context for "neighbor".

So you got it in reverse, God's commandments are literal (unless God give a special place and time, then it is under a context). God's actions (i.e. how he created the world) and attributes needs to be put in a context (because we don't understand those at the present time). Also predetermines is what I derived from my understanding, so it is definitely under context (and might not be true).

I’m just having a hard time understanding how can you put something in context that you don’t understand?... I guess I’m starting to ask the sane questions over and over now. There’s just a lot I don’t understand and maybe that’s because I really try to add my own opinion to in the areas where scripture is unclear. I would rather just say I don’t know if I don’t know. But thanks for trying to help me out anyway. Much appreciated

cvanwey · Apr 22, 2020

thomas_t said:
first off, let me thank you for reactin peacefully to all the insinuations and personal attacks against you.
You shoulod be an example for us how to deal with these sorts of fouls.
You are enriching this section. Definitively.

Thank you. It seems to be a frustrating topic for some. I think @Loversofjesus_2018 has nailed it on the head. "Everyone thinks their interpretation is right." Where as I openly admit, I'm confused. Why? Because there looks to be direct discrepancies, which appear irreconcilable. Seems we have direct opposing assertions? See below...

thomas_t said:
But on the subject level, I agree with the posters on the Christian side here, @dcalling had a great point explaining that, apparently, it doesn't take evidence for you to be convinced that life first formed spontaniously in the wild? With no evidence at all.

To stay on topic, let's all just concede, for sake in brevity, that an all-mighty creator agent does exist somewhere... You will soon find, this no further resolves the matter at hand. See below....

thomas_t said:
These are the goal posts for how many bits of evidence God will be giving you for his own existence, I think.
If you believe this story then you could also believe in Him, even if you don't see evidence for Him either.

Even IF everyone believed Jesus was the gateway to heaven, we still have problems. See below...

thomas_t said:
I agree with the other posters from the Christian side that faith alone is enough. The moment salvation is granted, this is called grace.

Then you must reconcile that a mass murdering child rapist, whom also believes Jesus died for his sins, can make an earnest death bed confession and possibly be saved. Remember, according to God, all humans are sinners. All sins are 'bad'. However, rape did not even make the top 10 list, within the Commandments. Regardless of how 'good' you try to be, after invoking 'faith', you will still fall short, and continue to sin, no matter what. Let me guess? A christian, whom lies, is better to God, than a Hindu whom lies? Please! God hates all sin. Hence, according to your model, 'morality' is virtually irrelevant. Unless you wish to argue that belief, in and of itself, is a moral construct?

Now contrast Romans 10:9-10 against Matthew 25:31-46. God is pretty clear here, that He judges by how much you help others in Matthew. Never once, does He refer to faith, in the entire narrative. Seems as though God is almost being negligent, by not also mentioning the requirement for faith..?. Especially when we are speaking about your eternal destination here

thomas_t said:
I also agree with dcalling, that rich means what it means in society - there is no hidden talk in the Bible like "rich" meaning "poor" in reality and other twisted meanings maybe. God wrote his Bible to be understood.

If God is clear, then how do you know whom He deems rich? And furthermore, if you are rich, and do not give away all to follow God, is faith still enough? If so, then you have a conflict with Scripture.

And we haven't even yet discussed blasphemy. Does using God's name in vein, negate faith? Like I told another, Christians can have a bad day, and use His name in direct vein. Do you ignore these 'blasphemy' verses, or rationalize them, other?

cvanwey · Apr 22, 2020

dcalling said:
Repentance is a 1 or 0 question, not a degree question. You either repented or not.

And God's grace extend to all he wants to extend to.

And you are right, sin has nothing to do with actions, but in the heart, as Jesus said if you hate your brother, that is murder.

dcalling said:
And I have said again and again, no one can keep the commandments. It is just a ruler that show how we are all sinners.

Okay, so you too reconcile that repentance is irrelevant, as we then agree that you cannot repent of all sin. Great. Moving forward....

Now what about 'love'? Jesus measures one's love by keeping the Commandments, as in John 14:15. And yet, you state, we cannot keep the Commandments?

I guess the next question becomes, how many Commandments can one break, and still claim to love Jesus? Again, if you admit that God judges your heart, or your intent, then keeping the Commandments appear arbitrary as well. Why? Because they will also be broken, regardless of how much you try to follow.

So now, we have repentance, and the Commandments off the table thus far...?.?.?.?.........

Which begs the question...

What do we then do with the verses which state repentance is necessary? Because again, how much repentance is enough repentance? (i.e.) Luke 5:31-32 or Acts 3:19

What do we do with the Commandments off the table as well; as they are not required to keep, if you claim you love Him? (again John 14:15)...

dcalling said:
What's the contradiction? You need to use your word correctly. Is it contradiction or just you are not sure or me fall short of my explaining? Did my answers above (part 1) make it clear?

Sounds as though you stated that God determines, and it is not the choice of the human to either follow or reject Jesus? Meaning, humans have no free will. If this is the case, then you can pretty much just slam the entire Book shut, and move on and await God's decision being made for you??? God already 'pre-willed' your destination without your free will to choose?

dcalling said:
1. Need you to explain what you mean by nothing can separate.

dcalling said:
2. Humans don't need to repent for each and ever sin, as some sin they will not even know are sins. They only need to repent, that knows they are sinners and know they need to repent, and repent for all possible sins in their heart.

1. For instance, if 'nothing can separate' His chosen humans, then it would not matter what the human did, from that moment forward. These humans could blaspheme God, later think God doesn't exist, etc, and this human is still a-okay?

2. Already addressed above. We both agree, repentance is off the table, in spite of the verses which state you need to do this... (i.e.) Luke 5:31-32, Acts 3:19, etc... And if you are going to state you do need to repent, I then again refer back to the prior question... How much repentance is enough repentance? And where does the grace start, and the repentance end?

dcalling said:
Show me the conflict.

If faith and your 'heart' is enough, then don't also mention how you will be judged on how much you help others (Matthew 25:31-46)

You can worship and love a deity, without always helping other humans in need.

And to the contrary, you can always helps others, and believe in another god, no god., or have some doubt in Jesus - (on the fence even).

dcalling said:
They are equally important. They do apply to me. After you are touched by God, the holy spirit will compulse you to do what ever God commanded. If God give you the chance to do that is another matter. Remember from our discussion from above, God judges you by your heart, so if you have not repented, and just doing those things to get in heaven, you will be rejected. It is not what you do, but what's in your heart that matters.

This does not answer my observation...

You can love and admire someone, still have a bad day, and call them a name. Again, how do you reconcile Mark 3:28, Matthew 12:31-32, and Luke 12:10????

According to these axiomatic verses, once the Lord's name is taken in vein, game over; Christian or no Christian. Hence, this would negate your prior claims that belief, faith, love, etc are enough. Furthermore, again, Jesus stated to keep the Commandments. And even though we may agree that we don't need to keep them, because we can't anyways, we still have conflict, as the above verses also highlight the 2nd Commandment.

So again, if all that matters is what's in your heart, then how do you ignore the 2nd Commandment and the 3 verses, which likely tell believers what NOT to do?

cvanwey · Apr 22, 2020

John Helpher said:
Most are not. The question will always be, why are they not obeying. When Jesus told his followers that they cannot work for God and money at the same time without cheating on one or the other, he said it would be a lack of faith that would stop people from working for love.

The same question then gets posed to you, yet again. Maybe you can partake in answering; this time around?

Maybe it is you, whom is 'putting on a show'? Meaning, maybe God deems you as 'rich.' Maybe God wants you to give away all possessions to follow Him. Otherwise, maybe talk is cheap, and you are not really a follower? Have you done this? If not? Why not? How do you know God is not referring to you? Do you know the meaning of 'rich'? Do you know why such a passage does not refer directly to you?

And furthermore, I've touched on this already.... You state that "they cannot work for God and money at the same time without cheating on one or the other". Even if you own pictures of your family, which you cherish, maybe Jesus views this seemingly remedial possession/keepsake as 'cheating'?

Thoughts?

cvanwey · Apr 22, 2020

John Helpher said:
It doesn't leave out faith. This is the problem with both cvanwey's approach and your approach; it's a legalistic interpretation. If the verse doesn't include the word "faith" then you become confused or think that faith is somehow left out. .

Faith and works are two sides of the same coin; you cannot find one without the other. There are examples of people who make a big show of their charity-giving, but we would not say that this work is a reflection of faith because the motivation is wrong.

In the Matthew 25 parable the sheep were only saved because they showed love. The goats were cursed because they did not show love; very simple.

This is why Jesus' comment that he is the way, the truth, and the life is so often misinterpreted to mean that saying the name "Jesus" acts like a kind of membership card; just say the name and you're all good. But that's not what he was saying at all, because Jesus is more than just a name or a free ticket to heaven. He is a way of life. He and his teachings are one and the same and his teachings are a set of principles and values which we are meant to practice and live by day-to-day.

For example, Jesus said that we should love our neighbor. This is the way of Jesus. If there is a person who has never heard of the name Jesus, yet still shows love to his neighbor, then he is still following "the way" of Jesus. His behavior demonstrates his faith without any need to make bold claims about it.

How different it is for most professing Christians today who have twisted God's grace into an excuse to not practice the teachings of Jesus. Jesus says, "If you love me, you will obey me" and the professing Christians of today say, "No, it is because God loves us that we do not need to obey". It's a disgusting distortion of grace, that you could use God's love as a justification for rebellion against obedience to Jesus.

No, just, no

Faith and works do not necessary only go hand and hand. I could believe in a particular deity, have trust in this claimed asserted grace/salvation of this deity, worship this deity, and repent to this particular deity. But this is essentially where 'faith' begins and ends....

'Works', or helping others in this case, as exclaimed in Matthew 25:31-46, can be mutually exclusive from 'faith', as mentioned. And furthermore, the passage does not elude to the necessity for 'faith'. You are shoe-horning this in there, to make it work for you.

Alternately, I could be on the fence, or have great doubt Jesus rose from the dead, or maybe only a mustard's seed's worth of faith, but work for the Peace Corp, volunteer my time at homeless shelters, give much of my money to the less fortunate, help family when needed, pull over on the side of the road to help people in distress, etc etc etc...

Faith and works can certainly be independent to one another. I need you to show me why Jesus spoke of faith in the given passage, when it looks clear that He did not. Again, with something as important as telling humans what it takes for salvation, seems odd that Jesus remains soooo ambiguous with the 'faith' portion here?

John Helpher · Apr 22, 2020

cvanwey said:
Meaning, maybe God deems you as 'rich.' Maybe God wants you to give away all possessions to follow Him. Otherwise, maybe talk is cheap, and you are not really a follower? Have you done this? If not? Why not? How do you know God is not referring to you? Do you know the meaning of 'rich'? Do you know why such a passage does not refer directly to you?

The problem with trying to give you an answer to these questions is that it would not be enough, not because of any conflict or problem on my part, but because you're not really looking for a clear understanding of Jesus' teachings; you're a nitpicker. The presumption is that if you can find some problem in me, then that will somehow invalidate the teachings of Jesus. Even if there were no person on the planet who obeyed Jesus' teachings (or at least tried to obey them) you would still have no cause to defame them.

You're behavior is quite similar to a different skeptic who recently posted on this forum about creating a "bible massacre" game. The idea was to shock people by all the horrific violence that God meted out on the people, so they'd understand just how horrible he really is. When I suggested the game should include context and an explanation of the motivations behind the various actions God takes in such situations, I was told that such details were not necessary. Why ruin a shocking massacre with troublesome details like context and motive? This is what nitpickers excel at; look for the shocking, the contradictory, the absurd and ignore any sincere exploration of those details which may provide genuine answers.

Here's another example of nitpicking from you:

cvanwey said:
I guess the next question becomes, how many Commandments can one break, and still claim to love Jesus?

We show our love for Jesus by at least trying to apply the values of his Kingdom. Yes, we'll fail along the way, but God offers grace so that we may try again. It's not a haggle with God, forging some kind of contractual obligation with him (though I recognize that even professing Christians tend to get in to this kind of thing). Grace, faith, and obedience work together. Learning how to appreciate each of them is part of what it means to become spiritually mature and to move closer to the kind of people God created us to be.

Some of us get tripped up along the way, focusing on one to the exclusion of the others and this leads to problems. But, a wise person will learn to recognize the necessity of all three and balance them in harmony and wisdom will come from a persistent attempt to at least try to obey Jesus.

But you don't see that because you're too busy enjoying what you perceive to be gotcha moments of contradiction between these concepts. You niggle at people who demonstrate any hint of imbalance and it's almost certain you do this to address some dissatisfaction in your own spirit. Either you're deliberately misunderstanding the way these concepts work, or you're blinded by the bitterness of some past hurt that you can't see past.

Here's another example to illustrate this point:

cvanwey said:
1. For instance, if 'nothing can separate' His chosen humans, then it would not matter what the human did, from that moment forward. These humans could blaspheme God, later think God doesn't exist, etc, and this human is still a-okay?

The context of the reference is that nothing (outside of our own free will) can force us away from God. Even with a gun to your head, you still have a choice. And yet, you do not reply with the obvious lesson. Instead, you see an opportunity to cause more confusion by ignoring the context and egging the other person on as though the verse really may mean that one could intentionally blaspheme God and God would be powerless to deal with it. It's an absurd notion but, you respond as though you believe the notion merits more exploration. Yes, you phrase the last comment of the paragraph as a question, which, as a nitpicker is wont to do, you'll point out to me, because that's the technicality which disguises the trouble-making in your spirit (i.e. hey, I'm only asking a question).

Nearly all of your comments are like this.

cvanwey · Apr 22, 2020

John Helpher said:
The problem with trying to give you an answer to these questions is that it would not be enough, not because of any conflict or problem on my part, but because you're not really looking for a clear understanding of Jesus' teachings; you're a nitpicker. The presumption is that if you can find some problem in me, then that will somehow invalidate the teachings of Jesus. Even if there were no person on the planet who obeyed Jesus' teachings (or at least tried to obey them) you would still have no cause to defame them.

You're behavior is quite similar to a different skeptic who recently posted on this forum about creating a "bible massacre" game. The idea was to shock people by all the horrific violence that God meted out on the people, so they'd understand just how horrible he really is. When I suggested the game should include context and an explanation of the motivations behind the various actions God takes in such situations, I was told that such details were not necessary. Why ruin a shocking massacre with troublesome details like context and motive? This is what nitpickers excel at; look for the shocking, the contradictory, the absurd and ignore any sincere exploration of those details which may provide genuine answers.

Here's another example of nitpicking from you:

We show our love for Jesus by at least trying to apply the values of his Kingdom. Yes, we'll fail along the way, but God offers grace so that we may try again. It's not a haggle with God, forging some kind of contractual obligation with him (though I recognize that even professing Christians tend to get in to this kind of thing). Grace, faith, and obedience work together. Learning how to appreciate each of them is part of what it means to become spiritually mature and to move closer to the kind of people God created us to be.

Some of us get tripped up along the way, focusing on one to the exclusion of the others and this leads to problems. But, a wise person will learn to recognize the necessity of all three and balance them in harmony and wisdom will come from a persistent attempt to at least try to obey Jesus.

But you don't see that because you're too busy enjoying what you perceive to be gotcha moments of contradiction between these concepts. You niggle at people who demonstrate any hint of imbalance and it's almost certain you do this to address some dissatisfaction in your own spirit. Either you're deliberately misunderstanding the way these concepts work, or you're blinded by the bitterness of some past hurt that you can't see past.

Here's another example to illustrate this point:

The context of the reference is that nothing (outside of our own free will) can force us away from God. Even with a gun to your head, you still have a choice. And yet, you do not reply with the obvious lesson. Instead, you see an opportunity to cause more confusion by ignoring the context and egging the other person on as though the verse really may mean that one could intentionally blaspheme God and God would be powerless to deal with it. It's an absurd notion but, you respond as though you believe the notion merits more exploration. Yes, you phrase the last comment of the paragraph as a question, which, as a nitpicker is wont to do, you'll point out to me, because that's the technicality which disguises the trouble-making in your spirit (i.e. hey, I'm only asking a question).

Nearly all of your comments are like this.

Going to have to ask again (below in red)..... You have avoided this question far too long. And yes, it is a "gotcha moment" -- (one of many). The series of questions demonstrates a point. You claim you know what God wants, but have absolutely no intention of explaining to me why such verse does not apply to you, or explain why you are exempt?

I will ask again.. And if you do not answer this time, then we can all just start to make our assumptions, as to why

The same question then gets posed to you, yet again. Maybe you can partake in answering; this time around? Maybe it is you, whom is 'putting on a show'? Meaning, maybe God deems you as 'rich.' Maybe God wants you to give away all possessions to follow Him. Otherwise, maybe talk is cheap, and you are not really a follower? Have you done this? If not? Why not? How do you know God is not referring to you? Do you know the meaning of 'rich'? Do you know why such a passage does not refer directly to you?

And furthermore, I've touched on this already.... You state that "they cannot work for God and money at the same time without cheating on one or the other". Even if you own pictures of your family, which you cherish, maybe Jesus views this seemingly remedial possession/keepsake as 'cheating'?

Thoughts?

cvanwey · Apr 22, 2020

In the mean time, while awaiting answers to pertinent questions, I will address your response...

John Helpher said:
The problem with trying to give you an answer to these questions is that it would not be enough, not because of any conflict or problem on my part, but because you're not really looking for a clear understanding of Jesus' teachings; you're a nitpicker.

Negative. I'm demonstrating conflict. Please continue. The point is, no matter what position you decide to adhere to, a conflict awaits. @Loversofjesus_2018 had it right, to begin with...

He states He does not know. In part, I reckon because maybe he sees conflict too? And maybe also in part, maybe we cannot understand 'God's ways'?

But you seem to claim you know? So I will continue to point out conflicts, as they arise.

John Helpher said:
The presumption is that if you can find some problem in me, then that will somehow invalidate the teachings of Jesus. Even if there were no person on the planet who obeyed Jesus' teachings (or at least tried to obey them) you would still have no cause to defame them.

My point prior is/was simple. Jesus seems to have contempt for the rich. Furthermore, He seems to state that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter heaven. You, not only do not know if Jesus deems you rich, but have likely made no effort to give away all possession. So my question is again... How are you so sure God does not deem you as such? And further, how are you so sure God does not want you to give it all up?

John Helpher said:
You're behavior is quite similar to a different skeptic who recently posted on this forum about creating a "bible massacre" game. The idea was to shock people by all the horrific violence that God meted out on the people, so they'd understand just how horrible he really is. When I suggested the game should include context and an explanation of the motivations behind the various actions God takes in such situations, I was told that such details were not necessary. Why ruin a shocking massacre with troublesome details like context and motive? This is what nitpickers excel at; look for the shocking, the contradictory, the absurd and ignore any sincere exploration of those details which may provide genuine answers.

Here's another example of nitpicking from you:

My posed questions are appropriate, to that of the context of this forum arena - (apologetics). If they weren't, the moderators would through them out

As stated prior, if you 'can't stand the heat, get outta da kitchen'

John Helpher said:
We show our love for Jesus by at least trying to apply the values of his Kingdom. Yes, we'll fail along the way,

Again, have you even made an effort to give away all possessions? If not, then maybe your 'efforts' fall short? Unless you think God's grace extends to the ones whom do not make such an effort???

John Helpher said:
But you don't see that because you're too busy enjoying what you perceive to be gotcha moments of contradiction between these concepts. You niggle at people who demonstrate any hint of imbalance and it's almost certain you do this to address some dissatisfaction in your own spirit. Either you're deliberately misunderstanding the way these concepts work, or you're blinded by the bitterness of some past hurt that you can't see past.

No. I'm patiently awaiting an answer to the question.. How do you know God is not referring to you as rich? How do you know God does not want you to give away your possessions? I remain patient...

dcalling · Apr 22, 2020

Loversofjesus_2018 said:
I’m just having a hard time understanding how can you put something in context that you don’t understand?... I guess I’m starting to ask the sane questions over and over now. There’s just a lot I don’t understand and maybe that’s because I really try to add my own opinion to in the areas where scripture is unclear. I would rather just say I don’t know if I don’t know. But thanks for trying to help me out anyway. Much appreciated

No worries, in context to me means "there might be something that can make it mean something else", so for some thing that I don't understand, I will say maybe there are some context behind it. i.e. God created heaven and earth in 7 days, I will put a context that I don't know what that 'day' is, so I will caution to interpret the day as literal 24 hour day.

that veses "Love your neighbor", which is a command to be obeyed at all times (even if you can't). there is no context here.

dcalling · Apr 22, 2020

cvanwey said:
Okay, so you too reconcile that repentance is irrelevant, as we then agree that you cannot repent of all sin. Great. Moving forward....

Where did I say that? I said repentance is a 1 and 0 thing. You either have repented or not. If you have not repented you are not saved. If you have been saved you will repent your sins. Can you show me why is it irrelevant?

Let's just focus on this one as all your other questions became irrelevant if you can't get over this one.

cvanwey said:
Now what about 'love'? Jesus measures one's love by keeping the Commandments, as in John 14:15. And yet, you state, we cannot keep the Commandments?

I guess the next question becomes, how many Commandments can one break, and still claim to love Jesus? Again, if you admit that God judges your heart, or your intent, then keeping the Commandments appear arbitrary as well. Why? Because they will also be broken, regardless of how much you try to follow.

So now, we have repentance, and the Commandments off the table thus far...?.?.?.?.........

Which begs the question...

What do we then do with the verses which state repentance is necessary? Because again, how much repentance is enough repentance? (i.e.) Luke 5:31-32 or Acts 3:19

What do we do with the Commandments off the table as well; as they are not required to keep, if you claim you love Him? (again John 14:15)...

cvanwey said:
Sounds as though you stated that God determines, and it is not the choice of the human to either follow or reject Jesus? Meaning, humans have no free will. If this is the case, then you can pretty much just slam the entire Book shut, and move on and await God's decision being made for you??? God already 'pre-willed' your destination without your free will to choose?

1. For instance, if 'nothing can separate' His chosen humans, then it would not matter what the human did, from that moment forward. These humans could blaspheme God, later think God doesn't exist, etc, and this human is still a-okay?

2. Already addressed above. We both agree, repentance is off the table, in spite of the verses which state you need to do this... (i.e.) Luke 5:31-32, Acts 3:19, etc... And if you are going to state you do need to repent, I then again refer back to the prior question... How much repentance is enough repentance? And where does the grace start, and the repentance end?

If faith and your 'heart' is enough, then don't also mention how you will be judged on how much you help others (Matthew 25:31-46) You can worship and love a deity, without always helping other humans in need.

And to the contrary, you can always helps others, and believe in another god, no god., or have some doubt in Jesus - (on the fence even).

This does not answer my observation...

You can love and admire someone, still have a bad day, and call them a name. Again, how do you reconcile Mark 3:28, Matthew 12:31-32, and Luke 12:10????

According to these axiomatic verses, once the Lord's name is taken in vein, game over; Christian or no Christian. Hence, this would negate your prior claims that belief, faith, love, etc are enough. Furthermore, again, Jesus stated to keep the Commandments. And even though we may agree that we don't need to keep them, because we can't anyways, we still have conflict, as the above verses also highlight the 2nd Commandment.

So again, if all that matters is what's in your heart, then how do you ignore the 2nd Commandment and the 3 verses, which likely tell believers what NOT to do?

John Helpher · Apr 22, 2020

cvanwey said:
The point is, no matter what position you decide to adhere to, a conflict awaits.

This is the essence of just about all your comments to me and others I've seen you responding to. It really does not matter what I (or we) say; you will find some conflict. While people fall over themselves trying to justify themselves to you, and even if they give a solid answer, you invariably find some new problem to nitpick. Such is the nature of nitpicking skeptics.

cvanwey · Apr 22, 2020

John Helpher said:
This is the essence of just about all your comments to me and others I've seen you responding to. It really does not matter what I (or we) say; you will find some conflict. While people fall over themselves trying to justify themselves to you, and even if they give a solid answer, you invariably find some new problem to nitpick. Such is the nature of nitpicking skeptics.

"Solid answer"? You have made no attempt in answering about the 'rich'.... You are instead griping about how I am a nitpicker, a troll, and/or dishonest... You are tripping all over yourself -- (Matthew 7:1-5, James 4:11-12).

Let me simplify...

1. Does Jesus deem you rich? If not, why not?
2. Does Jesus ask that the rich need to give away their possessions to be a follower? If not, why not?
3. Have you made an attempt to do this? If not, why not?
4. Does Jesus states it's virtually impossible for the rich to enter heaven? Assuming you agree He states this, then please again refer to the first question.

John Helpher · Apr 22, 2020

cvanwey said:
1. Does Jesus deem you rich? If not, why not?
2. Does Jesus ask that the rich need to give away their possessions to be a follower? If not, why not?
3. Have you made an attempt to do this? If not, why not?
4. Does Jesus states it's virtually impossible for the rich to enter heaven? Assuming you agree He states this, then please again refer to the first question.

You've already said that you're quite willing to jump to conclusions if I don't jump through your hoops regarding what *I* do with the teachings of Jesus, when really, you shouldn't jump to conclusions for any reason, let alone using the practice as some kind of threat to extort personal information. Combine this with your previous assertion that you'll find a problem with my position no matter what I say and it becomes clear that it'd be foolish to give you information about myself. This is why I feel justified in saying that you're not sincere. Even if I did give you the information you want, you'd trample on it (and me) as part of your nitpicker campaign against Christians.

cvanwey · Apr 22, 2020

dcalling said:
Where did I say that? I said repentance is a 1 and 0 thing. You either have repented or not. If you have not repented you are not saved. If you have been saved you will repent your sins. Can you show me why is it irrelevant?

Let's just focus on this one as all your other questions became irrelevant if you can't get over this one.

You stated that you cannot repent for all sin, for various reasons. I agreed. Hence, I guess God's grace/mercy takes place of the ones for which you fall short...? But in the same breath, you also state, "If you have not repented you are not saved".

You can't have your cake and eat it too sir

So, if you are not required to repent of all sin, as you can't, (and we agree), I then re-ask the prior question.... Where does God's grace start, and where does your requirement for repentance end?

If you cannot give me a hard answer, then this almost makes repentance superfluous. Meaning, irrelevant. What counts, apparently, is God's grace alone. Repentance is like parsley. It is not required, but maybe makes the plate pretty. The grace is like the main course, the repentance is like the parsley. You take away the main course, you have nothing. You take away the parsley, you can still eat.

But if repentance is more than parsley, than maybe you can give me the answer, as to how much repentance is necessary? Otherwise, seems as though you have a direct conflict with your prior statement "If you have not repented you are not saved".?.?.?.?

cvanwey · Apr 22, 2020

John Helpher said:
You've already said that you're quite willing to jump to conclusions if I don't jump through your hoops regarding what *I* do with the teachings of Jesus, when really, you shouldn't jump to conclusions for any reason, let alone using the practice as some kind of threat to extort personal information. Combine this with your previous assertion that you'll find a problem with my position no matter what I say and it becomes clear that it'd be foolish to give you information about myself. This is why I feel justified in saying that you're not sincere. Even if I did give you the information you want, you'd trample on it (and me) as part of your nitpicker campaign against Christians.

You again misunderstand... Maybe you are not following my responses closely enough....???

My point is that YOU CANNOT follow Jesus. No matter what you decide to do, you will fall short. And not because it's merely too much to ask, or because you don't want to. But instead because it is logically impossible. So if the default answer is 'grace', then I guess it goes back to... As long as you have faith, and your intentions are in the right place..... See below...

Case and point...

- If faith is all, then why care about morals, even though God wants you to apparently?
- If it's faith plus works, how do you know how much faith, and how many works?
- If you've ever blasphemed the Holy Spirit, seems as though you are screwed. And I reckon most have.

The list goes on and on and on.

So please, pick your path, and reconcile the conflict... I'm not trying to nitpick, believe it or not. The thread is to demonstrate that it seems the authors of the Bible are the direct provider of confusion.

I ask again, in earnest....

1. Does Jesus deem you rich? If not, why not?
2. Does Jesus ask that the rich need to give away their possessions to be a follower? If not, why not?
3. Have you made an attempt to do this? If not, why not?
4. Does Jesus states it's virtually impossible for the rich to enter heaven? Assuming you agree He states this, then please again refer to the first question.

John Helpher · Apr 23, 2020

cvanwey said:
You stated that you cannot repent for all sin, for various reasons. I agreed. Hence, I guess God's grace/mercy takes place of the ones for which you fall short...? But in the same breath, you also state, "If you have not repented you are not saved".

You can't have your cake and eat it too sir

Careful, dcalling. This is a nitpicker trick. Yes, God's grace is able to cover for area's where we fall short, even when it comes to understanding what we need to repent for, and areas where we may not realize what we need to repent of, but, since God is no fool, he'll also expect us to repent in the areas where we do recognize problems.

But cvanwey isn't interested in an explanation that clears up the confusion; he thinks he's caught you in a gotcha-argument, replete with a smirky face just in case you didn't quite catch the condescension.

cvanwey said:
So, if you are not required to repent of all sin, as you can't, (and we agree), I then re-ask the prior question.... Where does God's grace start, and where does your requirement for repentance end?

We're required to repent of the sin that we understand we need to repent of. Obviously, if we're unaware of a problem, then we won't realize it needs to be repented of, but why let good sense get in the way of a nitpick?

cvanwey said:
If you cannot give me a hard answer, then this almost makes repentance superfluous.

Another trick. If you, a human with incomplete understanding of all truth, who's still learning as you go cannot give the correct answer (and he's already practically bragged that there is no correct answer (see post#132) to a skeptic who's also already said that he's quite willing to jump to conclusions if people do not provide him with the answers he demands (see post#131), then he'll assume that repentance "almost" becomes futile, using you as the justification.

This is the kind of word game Cvanwey has been doing all through this thread.

Purveyor of Confusion

John 3:16

Blessings Collector

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

John 3:16

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

John 3:16

Well-Known Member

John 3:16

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

John 3:16

Similar threads