Which leads us back to the topic of this thread, which I would very much like to see some answers to: if you had God's power, how would you communicate with people?
God's message was not popular with many.Very good. In which case, God has failed. He tried to persuade people, but His message was unwelcome. Which leads us to ask, how is it possible that an entity possessing the wisdom, power and goodness of God - well, how is it possible that the message he crafted was one that people did not want to hear? [...]
Yes, but none of them really seem to address the question.Interesting point, considering several answers have been posted by Christians.
Of course popularity is not a measure of quality. But that's beside the point. Please stay on topic.God's message was not popular with many.
Bible, however, announced that this will happen: Revelation 11:10 (that's a rather drastic example of lack of popularity, I hope you won't take offence...).
Since I'm a musician and I have a genuine interest in the topic of popularity...
Do you think that popularity is a measure for quality? Take for instance Youtube:
Is the most-viewed Youtube-video the best?
Yes, but none of them really seem to address the question. If you think any of them did, please point me to the post
I would send messages by toast based paradolia.
God would no doubt work a miracle so they could tolerate it.That might exclude the gluten intolerant.
What is the Lord's promise --to save as many as possible? No, according to the context, he, not being willing to lose even one of those he had chosen, will keep his promise, but it will take some time. God is not a victim of time and circumstance --he causes them.2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some count slackness; but is long suffering, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Or, to put it another way, God is good. Of course he wants everyone to be saved, even if He understands that not all of them may be.
Going throughout the whole world spreading the gospel to everyone sounds pretty much like spreading Christianity.
I see. So you think God's happy just so long as everyone knows that a religion called Christianity exists. They don't need to know anything else, just to know that it's there.
Again, you're think that God just wants people to know that Christianity exists? Nothing more than that? Are you saying that anything more than telling people about Christianity would be unethical?
Do you know what God's plan is? If not, then how can you know if He's making a mistake or not?
Would you say the situation in the world vis-a-vis Christianity is ideal at the moment? I mean, you said yourself, everyone in the world knows what Christianity is, more or less. So is that okay? Is that the ideal state?
If your answer is yes, I'm puzzled. If the answer is no, then now you know what I mean by "our current predicament".
Why would you make the leap from me saying you might benefit from reconsidering your beliefs to thinking I called you an idiot? I'm sure you wouldn't say that everyone who could benefit from rethinking their assumptions is an idiot.
What you have seen, in this thread, is that there is something strange about the way that God chose to communicate with humans. That's the whole topic of this thread, and so far I haven't seen any satisfying explanations for it.
Am I confused about something?
Funny. I hear that a lot around here.
Interesting take. It sounds like you are saying that nobody will go to hell, because God has a plan to save all of us.What is the Lord's promise --to save as many as possible? No, according to the context, he, not being willing to lose even one of those he had chosen, will keep his promise, but it will take some time. God is not a victim of time and circumstance --he causes them.
Look at the facts. Less than 1/3 of the world believe the Gospel. That doesn't sound very effective to me. Are you saying that God's plan is for everyone to know about Christianity but He doesn't care if they believe it or not? Because if He does want people to believe in Him as well as know about Him, then He has failed. I know it's impossible for God to fail, but when it walks like a duck...Going throughout the whole world spreading the gospel to everyone sounds pretty much like spreading the Gospel.
Try to grasp the points rather than dismissing them as snark, please. If I'm being ironic here, it's because the situation itself calls for it. What do you call a failing plan that Christians refuse to call failure?God happy? First Cause with Intent happy. Of course he's happy --none more. Read some of the old philosophers concerning the attributes of God, and think about it a bit. But your remark is more than a little more snarky than reasonable. His plan is for some to be saved, and the others to reject the gospel.
Exactly the problem. He's God, he can't make mistakes.If he is God, just for starters, it is impossible for him to make a mistake. Again, read the old philosophers regarding God's attributes. He needs no plan B.
I think the goal of the gospel is for everyone to be a Christian.As for "our current predicament" I'm not sure what you are referring to with "ideal state". Ideal according to God --according to us? Ideal for what --the dominion of Christianity? Do you suppose we are in favor of Christianity to be pervasive or even to "usher in" the kingdom of God? What is it really you think the Bible teaches that is supposed to be happening here, and what is it you think is the goal of the gospel?
If you don't know what God is doing, then you can't be sure that He is doing it right.FWIW absolutely and precisely everything is going exactly as planned. Not as commanded, but as planned and predestined. No, I don't know what exactly God is doing, but the Bible has a lot to say about it --more than I understand, but there is a lot that IS understandable, if you really wanted to understand.
I believe that the foundational beliefs of your life are wrong.Wow. Ok. For the purpose of making a point I took your asking if I am always right, etc, to imply I am an idiot, though of course, it was only rhetorically done. That is to say, I didn't actually think you thought I am an idiot, but that you were a bit overdoing it with your rhetorical questions there.
Hmmm. Maybe it's you who subconsciously has doubts and wants to explore them? That is one of the things that can happen here, you know.No, I have seen that you seem to think so, or at least want to come across that way, though I have a bit of an inkling you aren't really that ignorant, but like most other atheists I have run across, you want what is dancing on the edges of your conscience and consciousness proven to you.
If you think I am confused, then enlighten me.Yes, if you actually and sincerely mean everything you have said as you have written them, rather than having written them AT Christians, you are confused. I could be wrong, of course, but it seems you are trying to make a point rather than asking questions.
No, That's pretty much the opposite of what I'm saying --making me think you are pretending to misunderstand me. I don't think he plans to save any but those he has "chosen" from the very beginning. Many Bible versions use the word, "Elect", there. And lest you take that somewhere I had not meant, they are chosen for his own purposes, though for their own good too, but also he chose them because of no intrinsic worthiness or anything else better about them than anyone else.Interesting take. It sounds like you are saying that nobody will go to hell, because God has a plan to save all of us.
I don't think that's what most Christians believe, and I'm surprised to hear it from you. Perhaps you'd like to clarify your meaning.
Look at the facts. Less than 1/3 of the world believe the Gospel. That doesn't sound very effective to me. Are you saying that God's plan is for everyone to know about Christianity but He doesn't care if they believe it or not? Because if He does want people to believe in Him as well as know about Him, then He has failed. I know it's impossible for God to fail, but when it walks like a duck...
Try to grasp the points rather than dismissing them as snark, please. If I'm being ironic here, it's because the situation itself calls for it. What do you call a failing plan that Christians refuse to call failure?
Exactly the problem. He's God, he can't make mistakes.
So, when it's manifestly obvious that He has made a mistake, you must deny it, or use ad hoc rationalisations. Or just fall back on "there must be something we don't know", as you just did.
I think the goal of the gospel is for everyone to be a Christian.
Look, if someone isn't saved, then what happens to them? They go to hell.
That, to put it mildly, is a Bad Thing.
Presumably, since God loves us, He doesn't want Bad Things to happen to us.
However, right now, most humans are not Christians.
You should see that as a problem, but you can't unless you admit that God has problems. You are facing a logical inconsistency. Such things have caused people to re-evaluate their beliefs before now. Even the smartest of us regularly have to do this, you know.
If you don't know what God is doing, then you can't be sure that He is doing it right.
Just for one, when I said that God had not planned to save everyone, you turned it around somehow to make it sound like you thought I believe God would save everyone. I really don't know how you got that.If you think I am confused, then enlighten me.
I thought I had answered quite at length. Maybe you didn't consider what I said in light of your question, or perhaps, I was not plain enough.So, we're on page 3 of the thread, and still waiting for an answer to the question. To be perfectly fair, we have had one or two, but they were very brief - and not, I think, really addressing the issue.
Mark, those three posts were very handsomely said, and I appreciate your civility.I thought I had answered quite at length. Maybe you didn't consider what I said in light of your question, or perhaps, I was not plain enough.
If I had God's powers, I would necessarily be God. But to your point (in your question), I am not God, so how I would communicate is irrelevant. Your question, as you have shown, is for the purpose of pointing out inconsistencies in Christian dogma, as though, since we would communicate this way or that demonstrates that God should not communicate as he is said to do.
One thing I earnestly hold to is that God is not like us; it is the other way around --we are like him, however poorly so. He is not patterned after us. Nor will we be complete until we are one with him (another Biblical promise concerning the "elect").
I do have a bad habit of assuming that what I see as necessary implications to a statement (or to the thought that produced the statement) should be plain to others. I apologize for doing that.
Would you
(a) rely on ancient texts, written by unknown/anonymous sources, or
(b) find other ways to reach out to people?
and if you truly seek you will always find.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?