Disobedience has consequences.

[LostMarbels]

You forgot the second definition.

"lack of faith in something"

Just wanted to make sure we weren't deliberately missing something.

No, I answered the query as posed:

"Reject" implies intent. Disbelief is not a conscious choice. For what would I be held accountable?"

There is a point where disbelief becomes a conscience choice.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

No, I answered the query as posed:

"Reject" implies intent. Disbelief is not a conscious choice. For what would I be held accountable?"

There is a point where disbelief becomes a conscience choice.

oh is it now? Could you suddenly choose to believe in lucky the leprechaun?

Also the definition he'd fall under is "lack of faith in something" which is disbelief. Which invalidates your claim he's willingly rejecting it.

 

[El Rey David]

God is not a big fluffy teddy bear that is all sugar coated rainbows and hugs. There are some Christiandestroyed thet might preach this, but then they're changing the Bible to fit them instead of changing themselves to fit the Bible. God is just like an earthly parent who wants His children to obey. Just like a parent has a need for discipline when it comes to a child's obedience, the same applies to the big picture. We are children of God regardless of your belief, and you are not exempt from making mistakes regardless of how 'good' you think you are. If you screw up as a kid, do you not ask your parents for forgiveness? When they forgive you, do you then not except it? What causes you such heart hardheartedness that you are unwilling to treat your Heavenly Father the same?

God's wrath is real, and it will pour out on those who refuse to accept his forgiveness. God is a jealous God, and He does not want us worshiping anything over Him. If you do not believe in Him, than you believe in something else. A false idol. The new false idols of this world are money, property, self, food, celebrities, etc. When we love something worldly more than God we are living in sin. We must love God, each other, and put our faith in Him. He has chosen us, and we should be thankful. Follow the rules of the loving parent who created us, and remain obedient to the Word of God. "For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God." (1 Peter 2:15-16)

I really never have thought of God as being a big fluffy teddie bear. God has killed millions of men women and even innocent little children and babies. He destroyed the whole earth that one time with the Noah and ark episode.

 

[oi_antz]

It would seem we all have biases and preconceptions. Some of us dismantle and discard those biases and preconceptions that do not comport with objective, independently verifiable observations of reality.

Ok, thanks. Do you think it is possible to be totally unbiased? Are you biased in your view of what is stated and claimed in the scriptures of the bible?

And not necessarily true, agreed?

Yes. I am an agnostic Christian, though only because it is logical to be so.

"All the hundreds of millions of people who, in their time, believed the Earth was flat never succeeded in unrounding it by an inch.”" - Isaac Asimov

My view is not opposing, it is sceptical. I maintain a position of disbelief until given sufficient information to convince me otherwise.

Mine is skeptical too. I maintain a position of belief until given sufficient reason to convince me otherwise. Information only contributes to a reason, which I think you could consider for future.

Genesis 1
And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. 30 Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so.

Romans 5
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned

Romans 8
For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

Thanks!

That it didn't take very long.
Only after the fall Eve became pregnant so I don't think it took 100 years.

And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.

Ok, thank you.

Jesus taught salvation by faith not sacrifice. The hope of Jesus was that the Jews would take up their calling, believe in his gospel and carry that gospel to the world. We know what happened.

Paul taught "Christ and him crucified" in the form of the Old Testiment scapegoat. Blood sacrifice for sins was common among many evolutionary religions, having never been personally taught by Christ it's understandable that Paul would bring his own opinions to the newly forming religion about Jesus, not nessisarily of Jesus.

Hi, thanks for responding, but actually I did want to know the exact statement that St Paul made to this effect. Would you mind telling me where it can be located? I am asking this, because I notice that St Paul is extremely subtle and precise with his words, and most people have a lot of difficulty actually reading him carefully enough. I would like to see whether there really is a contradiction between his teaching and that of Jesus'.

 

[oi_antz]

I really never have thought of God as being a big fluffy teddie bear. God has killed millions of men women and even innocent little children and babies. He destroyed the whole earth that one time with the Noah and ark episode.

I do, BTW. Someone who loves and is lovable, able to give comfort, but who is powerful and perfect and should be revered and respected. I think what you are describing is one very good example of why it was necessary for Jesus to come in flesh, because we now know Him in the form of a human, which is easier for us to relate to than what you have described.

 

[LostMarbels]

oh is it now? Could you suddenly choose to believe in lucky the leprechaun?

Perfect illustration of the point.

Scoff: To show or express derision or scorn

Full Definition of DERISION
1
a : the use of ridicule or scorn to show contempt

It is at this point that unbelief or lack of faith has become a conscious choice for you, and you will refute anything I say.

 

[oi_antz]

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.

 

[Davian]

Disbelief:
NOUN

1. 
   inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real:

You omitted 2) lack of faith in something.

There is a point where one can become willfully ignorant. They simple do not want to believe and brush it aside without ever even looking into a matter.

Have you the ability to read minds?

The bible calls this person a Scoffer.

I don't care if it calls me a cab.

Scoffer: someone who jeers or mocks or treats something with contempt or calls out in derision.

Scoff: To show or express derision or scorn

Full Definition of DERISION
1
a : the use of ridicule or scorn to show contempt

b : a state of being laughed at or ridiculed : a state of being derided
2
: an object of ridicule or scorn

2Pe_3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

"walking after their own lusts" = Making their own way.

When it comes to the point where an individual only talks to Christians in-order to tell them how stupid their belief is,

Where have I done this?

and show them their wrong,

Is it not the religionists' burden to demonstrate that their opinions are right?

and or go out of their way to ridicule, mock and otherwise denounce their God,

I do not do that, but I will ridicule some of the ridiculous justifications some religionists use to prop up their beliefs.

then that individual is only trying to sow discord.

Not at all. Are you not here on a voluntary basis?

There is no longer any attempt of said individual to understand the Christian God.

I think I have a clear understanding of the Christian God. It is a character in a book.

At this point their disbelief becomes refusal to accept something, and it is at that point it is a conscience decision.

That does not describe me.

It is at this point that God will judge this person.

My disbelief is not the result of a conscious action. For what will I be held accountable?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Perfect illustration of the point.

Scoff: To show or express derision or scorn

Full Definition of DERISION
1
a : the use of ridicule or scorn to show contempt

It is at this point that unbelief or lack of faith has become a conscious choice for you, and you will refute anything I say.

I showed you no ridicule nor contempt. Answer the question or concede the point.

 

[Davian]

Ok, thanks. Do you think it is possible to be totally unbiased?

No.

Are you biased in your view of what is stated and claimed in the scriptures of the bible?

Probably. I desire to have an accurate description of reality.

Yes. I am an agnostic Christian, though only because it is logical to be so.

I do not see how it is logical to believe in gods.

Mine is skeptical too. I maintain a position of belief until given sufficient reason to convince me otherwise.

That is an application of the word "skeptical" that I am unfamiliar with. In that context, I take it that you mean "credulous". That is not what I meant.

Information only contributes to a reason, which I think you could consider for future.

What information in particular?

 

[LostMarbels]

This is only an answer to the question. Not a personal accusation.

"There is a point where one can become willfully ignorant. They simply do not want to believe and brush it aside without ever even looking into a matter."

I was trying to show how disbelief can be a conscious decision. That is it.

A person can willfully decide not to believe, and even engage in actions knowing they will never believe such foolishness. At that point the said individual has made a conscious choice to refute and/or disbelieve.

 

[Davian]

This is only an answer to the question. Not a personal accusation.

"There is a point where one can become willfully ignorant. They simply do not want to believe and brush it aside without ever even looking into a matter."

I was trying to show how disbelief can be a conscious decision. That is it.

A person can willfully decide not to believe, and even engage in actions knowing they will never believe such foolishness. At that point the said individual has made a conscious choice to refute and/or disbelieve.

Then if your disbelief is not a conscious decision, you should not be held accountable for it; agreed?

 

[LostMarbels]

I showed you no ridicule nor contempt. Answer the question or concede the point.

So why the reference to a fairy tale then? Your making a statement that believing in God is like believing in fairy tales.

And to as why I'm on this line of conversation is because unbelief can be disobedience. Even an act of out right defiance and refusal. And to the OP disobedience-has-consequences. So some forms of disbelief can have consequences.

 

[LostMarbels]

Then if your disbelief is not a conscious decision, you should not be held accountable for it; agreed?

Not believing in a warning is not going to stop a situation from killing you. But true ignorance, honestly having no idea about a situation would leave one innocent. We all fail to heed warnings at our own peril.

 

[Davian]

Not believing in a warning is not going to stop a situation from killing you. But true ignorance, honestly having no idea about a situation would leave one innocent. We all fail to heed warnings at our own peril.

If I told you right now that your home was on fire, would you believe me, and get out right away?

 

[LostMarbels]

Ah... so were going with empirical proof?

empirical
[em-pir-i-kuh l]

adjective

1.
derived from or guided by experience or experiment.
2.
depending upon experience or observation alone, without using scientific method or theory, especially as in medicine.
3.
provable or verifiable by experience or experiment.

So, on that basis no. I observe no evidence to believe that my house is on fire.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

So why the reference to a fairy tale then? Your making a statement that believing in God is like believing in fairy tales.

Because it needed to be something trivial. Something you obviously don't believe in.

I'm proving the point that disbelief relies on the parameters of what you find believable and isn't just a switch you turn on and off.

You can say you now believe in Lucky the leprechaun but you'll never convince your actual mind that Lucky is real and that you actually believe in him because he does not fit the parameters of what you would believe to be real.

And to as why I'm on this line of conversation is because unbelief can be disobedience.

No. It doesn't even fit the first description because the whole concept hasn't been proven to be true or real to us.

 

[oi_antz]

Probably. I desire to have an accurate description of reality.

Do you believe there is statements in the bible that contradict reality, and do you believe there are statements in the bible that do not contradict reality? Can you please give some explicit description so I am not forced to guess what you have in mind?

I do not see how it is logical to believe in gods.

It is more logical than the alternative: to think that those who believe in Him, trusted Him, spoke of their experiences with Him are lying or delusional. Especially since I am one of those people. If you think there is another explanation than dishonesty or mistake, please mention it because I probably have not thought of it yet.

That is an application of the word "skeptical" that I am unfamiliar with. In that context, I take it that you mean "credulous". That is not what I meant.

Well in making the claim that God is not real, which contradicts what I think is most the reasonable belief, I am skeptical of that idea. I can not just believe your idea without a good enough reason.

What information in particular?

No, information in general.

Then if your disbelief is not a conscious decision, you should not be held accountable for it; agreed?

.. Is that possible?

 

[Davian]

Ah... so were going with empirical proof?

empirical
[em-pir-i-kuh l]

adjective

1.
derived from or guided by experience or experiment.
2.
depending upon experience or observation alone, without using scientific method or theory, especially as in medicine.
3.
provable or verifiable by experience or experiment.

So, on that basis no. I observe no evidence to believe that my house is on fire.

I do not recall including any such qualifier.

The flames are invisible and smokeless, so you cannot see them. Do you believe me?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Ah... so were going with empirical proof?

empirical
[em-pir-i-kuh l]

adjective

1.
derived from or guided by experience or experiment.
2.
depending upon experience or observation alone, without using scientific method or theory, especially as in medicine.
3.
provable or verifiable by experience or experiment.

So, on that basis no. I observe no evidence to believe that my house is on fire.

So using this do you think its reasonable to believe in a deity?