Purveyor of Confusion

[cvanwey]

You do. This should be a reason for me to consider. Let's assume I could just ask God, here.
Nevertheless, I am thankful that God left open so many things. My little brain would be overcharged with Bibles 1000 or even 10.000 pages longer than is.
Look, discussions here are already complex, I think. The debates are vast. If God will add 1000 more verses... then it get's even more complex.

I'm afraid what is making this debate vast, is God's chosen elusiveness in regards to 'blasphemy.'

Again, if we were speaking about something mundane, I would not harp upon it so much. But God issues, what could be argued, as one of the largest threats to humans, and cares not to add a couple of sentences, or lines of verse, to clarify such a grave threat?

All-the-while, in other parts of the Bible, He goes into great detail about 'lesser' topics.

So, I am thankful for every bit of complexity left out in the Bible.

It's not so much about 'complexity', but instead mere clarification. God cares not to clarify/simplify/explain.

Moreover, once we begin with that "I asked God, and I received the following answer:"-style of discussion... we will act against the CF terms of service. This is not
allowed and they don't allow for it for a reason, I guess.

I'm not aware of such a rule? But if this is the case, are you saying that if this rule was not in place, you would pray for God to give me the correct answer?

because the unfogivable sin is so special.

Your response does not follow? Let me re-issue my comment/question:

God provides at least (3) separate passages in the Bible, regarding what [not] to do, i.e. He will never forgive you. But, He chooses not to clarify what exactly this involves, and how it is involved?

If @dcalling is right, then the passage would be all but futile.
There are people who genuinly believe in Jesus, such as the Pharisees... in contrast to you, but do not think it might be a good idea to declare him as Lord. This is what the passage is alluding to.

If he is right, then no one can commit this sin anyways. Which means the verses are unnecessary to list. Hence, you would have a shorter Bible

And further, the only purpose such verse would pose, is to scare some Christians - as they would wonder if they committed this act of blasphemy, in God's eyes.

 

[Tom 1]

True. And yet, it seems this was God's chosen primary method to convey 'truth'? Bazaar indeed.

How so? If you start with the idea that everyone should have the same understanding of anything resembling the bible, your starting point is rooted in an unreal notion about what it means to be human.

 

[cvanwey]

Which is a good thing. Wondering will always cause people to question and questioning will stop people from taking for granted what they have been told and investigate for themselves. I've wavered back and forth over the years about the literalness of the flood, but none of that has made much difference to my faith. As I've said elsewhere, Faith in Jesus. So Faith in Floods is just a bit of idolatry and actually not what the Jews would have done anyway.

If you look back through history it is not a new argument.

True. But.....

The question(s) remain....

Were these verses 'God inspired'? And if so, what was the intent - (literal or figurative)? Can you answer that little nugget of a question?

That isn't true. Jesus spoke in parables because it was a way of getting people away from their preconceptions. Stories have a way of speaking to us in a way that straight instruction does not. Even Aesop understood that.

This isn't what I'm talking about. Due to the confusion of the Bible, we have many humans whom choose to instead pray, verses receive medical treatment. We have many stifle their education, based upon scientific discovery which directly opposes their viewed literal translation in framework of the Bible.

Just think about all the humans, in history, whom might have contributed to further human well-being, but due to literal 'translation' of verse, were/are instead confined. This is not just evident from the Bible, but other claimed holy texts as well.

'IF' the goal is human flourishing, then religion seems to have acted as a hindrance of sorts. Do you think God cares? Seems as though clarification might serve as a better route to take? Heck, we are >2000 years deep, and we are still arguing the same old tired points.

 

[cvanwey]

How so? If you start with the idea that everyone should have the same understanding of anything resembling the bible, your starting point is rooted in an unreal notion about what it means to be human.

Assuming the goal is 'truth', seems as though for God to encourage and/or directly author a text book, where humans will muck it up left and right, may not be the 'best' way to go?

Again, we are talking about 'truth' here.

 

[cvanwey]

I did or can you not read the bit where it says 'see my next response'.

No. You had a response posted, which I read. I was going to respond to it, but now it seems to be missing...?

It was in regards to me asking what comes of all the humans whom do not or cannot commit to faith?

Your response was something along the lines of... "They go to heaven because they are without sin?"

 

[cvanwey]

I wouldn't call myself any denomination. That's a term used to describe sections of the church and like Donne said, 'no man is an island'. At best I might be considered part of a denomination.

Do you understand why I asked this question?

 

[thomas_t]

I'm not aware of such a rule? But if this is the case, are you saying that if this rule was not in place, you would pray for God to give me the correct answer?

From the terms of service: Personal Prophecy (prophetic utterance) will be considered off-topic to all site forums. These may be posted in your own personal blog.

But I wouldn't speak a prayer for you just to make a passage clear that is not clear maybe.
In my opinion, the degree of clarity of a subject in the Bible... determines the degree of importance of it. Lesser topics have lesser coverage. What you're harping on here is really a speciality. All the non-believers can't speak against the Holy Spirit... and believers normally won't do, I think. Those who do are really special cases.
But here on these boards, people tend to spend more time on things unclear in the Bible than about those clearly stated. This is an illness, as I would call it. I don't want to add to that. I don't want to help a sceptic do something unhealthy for him and the entire board of CF. It's a virtue to focus more on said things in the Bible and less on the space between the lines...

God provides at least (3) separate passages in the Bible, regarding what [not] to do, i.e. He will never forgive you. But, He chooses not to clarify what exactly this involves, and how it is involved?

the 3 things are according to you.
The unforgivable thing is too special to receive this much attention I think. The debate is so vast because you choose so. Others maybe, too. I see zero reason for it to cover such a huge space in this thread. Can I ask you... why do you think there would be more than one person in this world to commit this sin? And no: speaking against God the father or God the son is not equivalent to speaking against the Holy Spirit, please don't reiterate that one...

If he is right, then no one can commit this sin anyways. Which means the verses are unnecessary to list.

of course people theoretically can, if they a) are Jesus-believers and b) fail to anounce the Jesus they truely believe in as Lord...
If they would is another question.

 

[Tom 1]

Assuming the goal is 'truth', seems as though for God to encourage and/or directly author a text book, where humans will muck it up left and right, may not be the 'best' way to go?

Again, we are talking about 'truth' here.

What it looks like is that you have an idea about what you think the bible ‘should’ be or do or something like that, and based on that you make questions about your idea.

 

[cvanwey]

What it looks like is that you have an idea about what you think the bible ‘should’ be or do or something like that, and based on that you make questions about your idea.

No. I'm agreeing with you, in part. In post #333, you stated:

"The idea that a book, or anything for that matter, could ‘make’ people have the same ideas about anything even moderately complex is an obvious fallacy. If that were possible, then we wouldn’t be human, and we wouldn’t be talking about why people don’t agree, or anything else interesting."

God has any/all means available to convey matters in 'truth'. His best option/conclusion, is to either allow for, author, and/or inspire a Book of claims, which constitutes 'truth'.

As it stands, this Book is the main hunk of cheese; for which millions/billions base their life upon.

 

[dcalling]

If @dcalling is right, then the passage would be all but futile.
There are people who genuinly believe in Jesus, such as the Pharisees... in contrast to you, but do not think it might be a good idea to declare him as Lord. This is what the passage is alluding to.

I might be wrong, but I might be right as well.

And even if I am right, the passage is still not futile, it is just knowledge given to us by God. i.e. even if predestination is right, does not make our trip to this world futile. It is like stating 1+1 = 2, no one change change it but it is not futile, it is just destined

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

Were these verses 'God inspired'?

The whole Bible is God inspired.

And if so, what was the intent - (literal or figurative)? Can you answer that little nugget of a question?

No, I can give you an opinion, but if you want an absolute answer you'll have to go to the source.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

'IF' the goal is human flourishing, then religion seems to have acted as a hindrance of sorts. Do you think God cares? Seems as though clarification might serve as a better route to take? Heck, we are >2000 years deep, and we are still arguing the same old tired points.

Oh, I don't know. What about hospitals, universities, schools, laws. I'm pretty certain that all of those didn't hinder human flourishing. And we haven't actually been arguing these for 2000 years. In fact its been less than a week.

And if you are tired of it, why bring it up? It doesn't bother me one way or the other. If anything I see it as a distraction from what is important, like why you seem to have stopped trying to get to the bottom of salvation. Does it mean you now understand it?

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

Do you understand why I asked this question?

Well I guess it is the same reason any atheist or skeptic asks... to change the subject.

 

[Tom 1]

No. I'm agreeing with you, in part. In post #333, you stated:

"The idea that a book, or anything for that matter, could ‘make’ people have the same ideas about anything even moderately complex is an obvious fallacy. If that were possible, then we wouldn’t be human, and we wouldn’t be talking about why people don’t agree, or anything else interesting."

God has any/all means available to convey matters in 'truth'. His best option/conclusion, is to either allow for, author, and/or inspire a Book of claims, which constitutes 'truth'.

As it stands, this Book is the main hunk of cheese; for which millions/billions base their life upon.

Meaning what? That there would be some other mystical way of ‘making’ everyone think the same thing? Your question assumes that would be possible, and that it would be a good thing. The whole idea is superficial.

 

[cvanwey]

The whole Bible is God inspired.

Okay. So we agree the Bible asserts this...

No, I can give you an opinion, but if you want an absolute answer you'll have to go to the source.

Please, by all means, give me your opinion. And I already tried the source, for many years. Seems He is not going to bother

 

[cvanwey]

Oh, I don't know. What about hospitals, universities, schools, laws.

What about them?

I'm pretty certain that all of those didn't hinder human flourishing.

Not quite sure what point you are trying to make here? Please elaborate?

And we haven't actually been arguing these for 2000 years. In fact its been less than a week.

Um, okay. I think you know what I mean Since the inception of 'Christianity', ethnocentrism applies to many. And the kicker is, when using these claimed Holy Texts, one can 'effectively' argue for their 'viewpoint'. Including you - even though I'm sure you are also aware there exists many whom carry opposing beliefs, while using the very same Book of 'evidence' as yourself.

And if you are tired of it, why bring it up?

I brought up this topic to expose conflict. And virtually every post a Christian makes, demonstrates this...

It doesn't bother me one way or the other. If anything I see it as a distraction from what is important, like why you seem to have stopped trying to get to the bottom of salvation. Does it mean you now understand it?

Oh, I understand. I understand when my interlocutor is unable to acknowledge/reconcile a basic point, i.e. post #280, rather than repeat it, again and again, I have just decided let it go

 

[cvanwey]

Well I guess it is the same reason any atheist or skeptic asks... to change the subject.

Not even close. I asked because you stated:

"For 2000 years Christians have looked at this and any confusion has been wiped away by the process of study and teaching. So it clearly isn't has confusing as you would like it to be. So I don't think believers have all that much of an issue."

The mere fact that I can ask such a basic question, with confidence, lends to a conclusion that your 'faith' is not nearly as universal, among believers, as you might think or want it to be

 

[cvanwey]

Meaning what? That there would be some other mystical way of ‘making’ everyone think the same thing? Your question assumes that would be possible, and that it would be a good thing. The whole idea is superficial.

My point is simple. God's best method to convey 'TRUTH', is to allow for humans to write stuff down. And as you already attested to yourself, this leads to many uncertainties. I would think God could find a more effective way; verses to guarantee confusion among many?

If 'truth' is universal, seems as though God might of ventured upon another path to demonstrate as such.

 

[cvanwey]

From the terms of service: Personal Prophecy (prophetic utterance) will be considered off-topic to all site forums. These may be posted in your own personal blog.

Sounds to me like you are finding every reason not to perform such a simple and straight forward task? If you really wanted to, you could PM me such information

But I wouldn't speak a prayer for you just to make a passage clear that is not clear maybe.
In my opinion, the degree of clarity of a subject in the Bible... determines the degree of importance of it. Lesser topics have lesser coverage. What you're harping on here is really a speciality. All the non-believers can't speak against the Holy Spirit... and believers normally won't do, I think. Those who do are really special cases.
But here on these boards, people tend to spend more time on things unclear in the Bible than about those clearly stated. This is an illness, as I would call it. I don't want to add to that. I don't want to help a sceptic do something unhealthy for him and the entire board of CF. It's a virtue to focus more on said things in the Bible and less on the space between the lines...

This is what I see from you @thomas_t . When I ask you to demonstrate a simple task you instead hide behind excuses. I have a hunch the reason you will not attempt to perform such a task, is that you know such a task will fail. Period.

So again, I will give you the same simple set of instructions, for which I gave to 'SPF'. You can do this through PM, if you are afraid of reprimand...

*** Pray to God for THE proper translation of Matthew 12:32. Ask God to give both you and I the answer. To make sure we are on the same page, I will relay to you, what God said to me, as soon as I receive it. Not only will we receive closure upon a seemingly alarming verse in Scripture, but, you may have single-handedly converted a skeptic to begin becoming a true believer. ***

And if you continue to conjure up excuses, as to why you are not going to perform this remedial task, for which God seems to invite in Scripture, then your words are virtually meaningless.

Your move buddy

 

[SPF]

You have such little confidence it seems? I guess when a believers states "I'm going to pray for you", to an atheist, it is nothing more than a 'saying.'?

I only speak for myself, and you would probably be better off only applying my words to myself and not use me as a template for how all Christians think. But that’s just common sense...

And further, in reference to your response, what if you were praying for a believer to receive this information? Are the chances any better?

I have no clue, that would be up to God, not me. But for you specifically, your problem and “block” in coming to Christ has nothing to do with you understanding this passage. So again, I don’t know that God would enlighten you. Nor do I know how you would even know if you were enlightened.... Especially since you think you already are.