And then what?
Some other angel would just take his place.
How do you know that? Is it like a hierarchy where if the top guy dies the next in line get his power?And then what?
Some other angel would just take his place.
How do you know that? Is it like a hierarchy where if the top guy dies the next in line get his power?
If so, I imagine God could kill the next devil too. Or maybe he could just decide that they weren't allowed to hurt people.
Maybe the deists are right in that some god created everything and then just stepped back.
IF the stars are home to the angels, as some think (including myself), science says there are what? 200 billion suns?How do you know that? Is it like a hierarchy where if the top guy dies the next in line get his power?
If so, I imagine God could kill the next devil too. Or maybe he could just decide that they weren't allowed to hurt people.
It's our Milky Way Galaxy alone that has an estimated 200 billion suns.IF the stars are home to the angels, as some think (including myself), science says there are what? 200 billion suns?
According to the Bible, one third of the angels rebelled.
That's almost 70 billion fallen angels in the known universe.
Would 70 billion fallen angels be too much for God to handle?IF the stars are home to the angels, as some think (including myself), science says there are what? 200 billion suns?
According to the Bible, one third of the angels rebelled.
That's almost 70 billion fallen angels in the known universe.
Negative.Would 70 billion fallen angels be too much for God to handle?
I didn't say that Jobs children and servants did not die in the story of Job. I said that his wife did not die in the story. I believe that it must be this way to allow the course of vanity to be witnessed so that it will not happen again.But the question remains: why? Must it be this way? Couldn't God have made things differently? Shouldn't he, if he is indeed almighty and all loving?Of course you can believe that Job's wife (or any other innocent bystander) didn't really die, but as far as I can tell, that's not what the stories say, and not what most Christians believe either.
But then the doubt that vanity is based upon would not be disproven nor defeated.What was God supposed to do, you ask. Kill Satan, would be my suggestion.
I agree. Since all things are built upon faith, it's understandable that corruption in the creation would manifest through unfaith. I believe that every person will be given every opportunity to see the truth and believe. If not here, then in death. When I hear a story of someone whose love was so great that he suffered a cross of crucifixion for my sake and in my stead, I am forced through my own honesty to admit that such a man is worthy of my trust.Whatever God's reasons for hiding himself from people, it shouldn't be a surprise that they don't believe.
I agree with you, but we don't actually know what the lake of fire is, nor what eternal torment is. All we know is that it's not good. It could mean that those that are there suffer a personal torment that is the product of never admitting the truth that Christ is trustworthy. It's easy to believe that the Christ is trustworthy for me, and I do not see how I could ever lose faith in him. I mean he suffered intense torture, pain, scorn and death for me according to the Gospel. What greater act of love could someone do?Yes, that's an important point, the possibility of an afterlife or a new world where all the suffering is made up for. But that's sadly not what most Christians believe. They believe 1) that God is almighty and all loving, AND 2) that billions of people live, suffer, die and then live forever in hell. My point is that you can't hold both of those beliefs at the same time. They're fundamentally opposite. For me personally, losing faith was indeed a loss.
For me personally, losing faith was indeed a loss. I tried to hang on to it for years, trying to reconcile the opposing parts of the theology, or at least find some sort of evindence that God is the most reasonable explanation for whatever, but in the end I couldn't. Just so you don't think it's because I'm angry at God or something like that. Maybe I'll come to believe again some day, but I'm pretty sure I won't believe that God is both good and almighty, or that his highest wish is to have a relation with every person, because that's just clearly not the case. Maybe the deists are right in that some god created everything and then just stepped back.
If there is a Creator that created everything, then He would know all things. Hence Truth would be what he said it to be. The lie exists to subvert the truth so it must come after the truth so as to usurp from the truth. The truth is that the highest spiritual value comprehendible to mankind is Love/empathy. Hence we experience the Spirit of our Maker in this existence. There is still the lie. That God is not Love/empathy, but anything other than that which is true and of the highest value to mankind.What makes you say God is love?
But that's what I don't get, why it must be this way, why God couldn't or wouldn't find a better way to do it. It seems like Job's children and servants were sacrificed so that God may make a point for others.I didn't say that Jobs children and servants did not die in the story of Job. I said that his wife did not die in the story. I believe that it must be this way to allow the course of vanity to be witnessed so that it will not happen again.
Again I find it hard to believe God couldn't have done that any other way. Or at least have limited satan's power (or our ability to suffer) more.But then the doubt that vanity is based upon would not be disproven nor defeated.
Glad to hear that. That's a much more positive, coherent and defensible position than the all too common idea that if you don't get to hear the gospel you're screwed when you die and God is going to torture you forever. That view is extremely hard to reconcile with what the NT writers say about God IMO.I agree. Since all things are built upon faith, it's understandable that corruption in the creation would manifest through unfaith. I believe that every person will be given every opportunity to see the truth and believe. If not here, then in death.
Hmm. The question doesn't really make sense to me if you exclude the question of whether or not it's actually true. I used to believe it was true, and the only reasonable (maybe even the only possible) response was to trust that man. I wouldn't have if I believed he was nothing but a man, but since I believed he was the son of God, then yes.You're complicating the matter or else listening to people who are also complicating the matter. Stop allowing other voices of cynicism, whether in your ears or in your thoughts to obscure the issue. Just give me one honest answer from your heart. If you heard a story about a man named Jesus, who suffered ridicule, scorn, beatings, intense pain, torture, and death by being nailed to a cross for your sake and in your stead, would you trust such a man with your life? Do not complicate the question with thinking you're being asked whether the story is true. You can look into that afterwards. Just answer the question.
But being loving doesn't make his claims about God trustworthy per se.I have looked into it and have no doubt that Jesus existed and died and was foretold of. But more than that I have received the holy Spirit which testifies of him and comes in belief in his name. It's easy to believe that the Christ is trustworthy for me, and I do not see how I could ever lose faith in him. I mean he suffered intense torture, pain, scorn and death for me, according to the Gospel. What greater act of love could someone do to be trustworthy?
I think if the gospel is indeed true, it means that everyone will get saved eventually. Or at the very least sinners will die (as opposed to getting eternal life in hell). The bible can certainly be interpreted that way, at least.You say that you hate the suffering in this world? Well there is a Gospel of the kingdom of God that was delivered to mankind and the Christ is the door out of this world and into that kingdom but you have to trust this man named Jesus
If I understand you correctly, the lie is a necessary evil for love or God to do his thing?If there is a Creator that created everything, then He would know all things. Hence Truth would be what he said it to be. The lie exists to subvert the truth so it must come after the truth so as to usurp from the truth. The truth is that the highest spiritual value comprehendible to mankind is Love/empathy. Hence we experience the Spirit of our Maker in this existence. There is still the lie. That God is not Love/empathy, but anything other than that which is true and of the highest value to mankind.
Hence the intention of lie runs perfectly counter to the greatest commandment to Love God with all you heart mind and soul or in other words Love Love/empathy with all your heart mind and soul, so as to subvert the faith. The lie has to usurp from the truth, which is why the suffering in this world is blamed on God rather than on the unbelief of God. Therefore those who believe in the Christ Jesus as the true image of God sent by God, will escape this world that is ruled by the lie that God is not Love.
Jewish antiquities historian Josephus, Roman historian Tacitus. That the self stated purpose of God's chosen people was to bring forth the Messiah. The fact that Messiah was prophesied to come, and that he would be rejected by his own people but believed upon by the world. The end of the Jewish religion when the temple was destroyed in 60 A.D... The fact that we have B.C. and A.D...The scriptures and writings of early Christians.What did "looking into it" encompass?
(just curious)
The scriptures and writings of early Christians.
I am not sure I understand the question. Is this an addendum to your first question of what proof is there that Jesus existed? Or a new question of why Christianity over all other religions?OK, but what specifically about them (as opposed to the countless other writings of other religions and cultures)?
I am not sure I understand the question. Is this an addendum to your first question of what proof is there that Jesus existed? Or a new question of why Christianity over all other religions?
Well, I was only seeking the evidence of his existence. Obviously the writings are about Jesus. I figured the earlier the writings occurred, the better chance of examining actual witness to that period and place in history. What's sad is that most of the early church writings from the beginning were destroyed in the fires at Alexandria.Expanding on your answer to the first question.
You said you're looking into it included reading old writings. What about those writings did you find sufficiently convincing that you didn't find in any other non-Christian writings?
I really don't see any other way to show what happens down the path of unfaith, other than allowing it to actually happen in a temporal existence. The dichotomy of life and death is not enough if there is no true and thorough realization of what was lost and why and how it was lost. Remember, that this is a temporal reality, like walking through a purifying fire and coming out refined. We are not equipped to fully comprehend the full worth of the experience. I would bet my life that if you were to speak to Job's children and servants, they would say that they would gladly experience it a hundred times over, rather than miss out on an eternal, blissful, epiphany.You've been thinking these things through, this is greatBut that's what I don't get, why it must be this way, why God couldn't or wouldn't find a better way to do it. It seems like Job's children and servants were sacrificed so that God may make a point for others. Again I find it hard to believe God couldn't have done that any other way. Or at least have limited satan's power (or our ability to suffer) more.
1 Peter 4:6, For this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.Glad to hear that. That's a much more positive, coherent and defensible position than the all too common idea that if you don't get to hear the gospel you're screwed when you die and God is going to torture you forever. That view is extremely hard to reconcile with what the NT writers say about God IMO.
All men who would sacrifice themselves for others are trustworthy and sons of the Most High. But this is the Christ, the foretold of lamb of God. A fact of history and the very reason for the creation.Hmm. The question doesn't really make sense to me if you exclude the question of whether or not it's actually true. I used to believe it was true, and the only reasonable (maybe even the only possible) response was to trust that man. I wouldn't have if I believed he was nothing but a man, but since I believed he was the son of God, then yes.
Respectfully, that does not even factor in, since all things are built upon faith. As I have already stated, it's about what you want to believe. We are not judging the Gospel, we are being judged by the Gospel. That is because the Eternal Truth precedes us in existence.But being loving doesn't make his claims about God trustworthy per se.
There's a big difference between sacrificing one's self to kill others who don't believe, and sacrificing one's self to allow those who don't believe to kill you. The semantics show that only the latter believes that Love is Eternal.That said, one thing that strikes me most about the Paul and the other first Christians was their willingness to leave everything and die for what they believed in. That's one thing that kept me believing for so long, because it just seems unlikely that someone would just make something like that up. Then again, muslims suffer and die for their faith as well.
You know, they say that there is a such thing as ignorance is bliss. And scripture says that much knowledge brings much sorrow. I would have to confess that I have never found peace or hope or contentment in this world. I can only see a dog eat dog world in turmoil and unrest, people chasing the dollar, children losing their innocence, land, water and air being polluted, all the animals dying, etc..(But, and this I think is important, I have found that one can have peace, hope, meaning and contentment in life without believing in the Christian message. For me it used to be a big deal that the peace I found in God couldn't be found anywhere else, but in fact it can.)
To me "I wish" is more a sentiment of magical terminology. "I hope" is one of positive plausibility.(But I still wish the gospel (the way I understand it, with ultimate salvation and reconciliation for everyone) is true.)I think if the gospel is indeed true, it means that everyone will get saved eventually. Or at the very least sinners will die (as opposed to getting eternal life in hell). The bible can certainly be interpreted that way, at least.
If you recall, you asked me why I say that God is Love? So no I am not at all implying that a lie is a necessary evil.If I understand you correctly, the lie is a necessary evil for love or God to do his thing?
Affirmative.I do think that that is generally accepted among many believers and unbelievers.
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?