Our existence on earth is pointless

[Nihilist Virus]

No it doesn't because you state existence here is a test. And omniscience has nothing to do with this conversation because it is not an act. Existence here is not a test. Its an opportunity. An opportunity to choose God or not. An opportunity to glorify God or not. An opportunity for God to show you his glory and you to accept it or not.

Omniscience has nothing to do with a test because omniscience is not an act? Because it's in a noun form and not a verb form? That's like saying that faith in Jesus has nothing to do with the afterlife because I used the noun form of "faith."

 

[Nihilist Virus]

God reveals himself to me through the Scriptures which, in my view, recount redemptive history.

In your view? So it's not something you feel but rather something you believe intellectually? If that's the case, why do you believe that?

 

[rjs330]

Omniscience has nothing to do with a test because omniscience is not an act? Because it's in a noun form and not a verb form? That's like saying that faith in Jesus has nothing to do with the afterlife because I used the noun form of "faith."

Please NV, you are smarter than that. You know Omniscience is not an act and there is no action in cause here. You know better. If I knew you were going to wake up tomorrow did I have any action in causing you to wake? No.

 

[ScottA]

Believers would prefer to have been initially created in heaven, since heaven is paradise and also they would be immediately in the presence of their Lord.

Come Judgment Day, all unbelievers will wish that they had initially been created in heaven instead of being tested on earth.

Jesus preferred to not die, as evidenced by his intense anguish in the garden shortly before his arrest. If humanity was initially created in heaven, Jesus wouldn't have had to die. If Jesus didn't have to die, there would have been no point in his incarnation on earth.

What was the point of God putting us on earth? I find that all parties involved would have preferred for earth's existence to be skipped over entirely.

If earth is for a test, I find that pointless since God is omniscient. Those who would have failed the test simply need not have been created. Indeed, many here on this forum groan about my existence.

If it's the case that we cannot inhabit heaven without first being redeemed by the blood of Jesus, and Jesus's existence on earth necessitates the existence of earth, then please explain how the angels inhabited heaven before Christ's death. Couldn't the same explanation apply to us if we were created perfect and already in heaven just as the angels?

Therefore, on Christianity, there is no point in earth's existence. So Christianity would have us believe that earth's existence is not only a pointless game, but a dangerous game with infinite risk that could be avoided entirely to the benefit of everyone if only the creator were so inclined.

On atheism, there is also no point in earth's existence. However, it is not a pointless game of Russian Roulette but rather it is the one and only opportunity at life that any of us will have.

You are not a parent, are you?

If you were...you would know that a child, however seemingly innocent and perfect, is not born with appreciation.

There's your answer.

 

[Tree of Life]

In your view? So it's not something you feel but rather something you believe intellectually? If that's the case, why do you believe that?

This is a question for another thread. Did I answer your OP to your satisfaction?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Please NV, you are smarter than that. You know Omniscience is not an act and there is no action in cause here. You know better. If I knew you were going to wake up tomorrow did I have any action in causing you to wake? No.

You need to re-read the OP. Nothing you're saying is making sense.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

This is a question for another thread. Did I answer your OP to your satisfaction?

I can give you that.

You said that we are here to glorify God. That is the purpose of earth's existence. We learn of God's glory through history, and we get this history from the Bible. If I'm asking why you believe the Bible, I find that to be relevant.

The Christianity I come from holds the Bible to be inerrant. To my surprise, I've found that to be a minority view on these forums. If you believe in inerrancy, then that can be used as your justification here and we would indeed have to carry on from there on another thread (if at all). But if you don't hold to inerrancy, then the Bible is a fallible book. How do you analyze such a book? Painstakingly, line by line. Hence my question: why do you believe the relevant accounts regarding God in history are true?

So either way, your answer rests upon the Bible. I find the Bible to be filled with error and terror to the brim. Therefore, I find your answer to be unsatisfactory unless you can vindicate the Bible. I know you won't get to that on this thread, but could you indulge me on one thing? Could you please tell me, without justification, which of the below you hold to?

1. The Bible is inerrant (typically a belief for Baptists).

2. The original copies were inerrant but the present Bible has errors which do not cause significant harm to the text (I believe this is the Chicago statement).

3. The Bible is obviously full of errors and/or outdated material and I have to use my own reasoning when reading.

4. The Bible is obviously full of errors and/or outdated material and I have to be guided by the Holy Spirit when reading.


Actually I really like this question and I'm going to post a poll in the Exploring Christianity forum.

 

[Tree of Life]

2. The original copies were inerrant but the present Bible has errors which do not cause significant harm to the text (I believe this is the Chicago statement).

I believe that the autographs (original documents) were without error. It's possible that some textual corruption has taken place in the apographs but this has not done significant harm to the text and scholarship makes advancements every year in getting back to the original documents.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I believe that the autographs (original documents) were without error. It's possible that some textual corruption has taken place in the apographs but this has not done significant harm to the text and scholarship makes advancements every year in getting back to the original documents.

Ok, thanks.

 

[ScottA]

I can give you that.

You said that we are here to glorify God. That is the purpose of earth's existence. We learn of God's glory through history, and we get this history from the Bible. If I'm asking why you believe the Bible, I find that to be relevant.

The Christianity I come from holds the Bible to be inerrant. To my surprise, I've found that to be a minority view on these forums. If you believe in inerrancy, then that can be used as your justification here and we would indeed have to carry on from there on another thread (if at all). But if you don't hold to inerrancy, then the Bible is a fallible book. How do you analyze such a book? Painstakingly, line by line. Hence my question: why do you believe the relevant accounts regarding God in history are true?

So either way, your answer rests upon the Bible. I find the Bible to be filled with error and terror to the brim. Therefore, I find your answer to be unsatisfactory unless you can vindicate the Bible. I know you won't get to that on this thread, but could you indulge me on one thing? Could you please tell me, without justification, which of the below you hold to?

1. The Bible is inerrant (typically a belief for Baptists).

2. The original copies were inerrant but the present Bible has errors which do not cause significant harm to the text (I believe this is the Chicago statement).

3. The Bible is obviously full of errors and/or outdated material and I have to use my own reasoning when reading.

4. The Bible is obviously full of errors and/or outdated material and I have to be guided by the Holy Spirit when reading.


Actually I really like this question and I'm going to post a poll in the Exploring Christianity forum.

5. The Bible is not a literary work, but a spiritual work, whereby it is inerrant only in spirit.

 

[rjs330]

You need to re-read the OP. Nothing you're saying is making sense.

I re read it. Your statement is in error.

 

[miknik5]

Believers would prefer to have been initially created in heaven, since heaven is paradise and also they would be immediately in the presence of their Lord.

Come Judgment Day, all unbelievers will wish that they had initially been created in heaven instead of being tested on earth.

Jesus preferred to not die, as evidenced by his intense anguish in the garden shortly before his arrest. If humanity was initially created in heaven, Jesus wouldn't have had to die. If Jesus didn't have to die, there would have been no point in his incarnation on earth.

What was the point of God putting us on earth? I find that all parties involved would have preferred for earth's existence to be skipped over entirely.

If earth is for a test, I find that pointless since God is omniscient. Those who would have failed the test simply need not have been created. Indeed, many here on this forum groan about my existence.

If it's the case that we cannot inhabit heaven without first being redeemed by the blood of Jesus, and Jesus's existence on earth necessitates the existence of earth, then please explain how the angels inhabited heaven before Christ's death. Couldn't the same explanation apply to us if we were created perfect and already in heaven just as the angels?

Therefore, on Christianity, there is no point in earth's existence. So Christianity would have us believe that earth's existence is not only a pointless game, but a dangerous game with infinite risk that could be avoided entirely to the benefit of everyone if only the creator were so inclined.

On atheism, there is also no point in earth's existence. However, it is not a pointless game of Russian Roulette but rather it is the one and only opportunity at life that any of us will have.

GOD knew the end from the beginning. HE created man for HIS glory but HE even as HE created us knew not only our fall but more importantly the victory in HIS SON. HE knew HE would have s set apart people called by HIS NAME who would glorify HIM and HIS NAME as HOLY

 

[miknik5]

You left out the part about Satan