Purveyor of Confusion

[cvanwey]

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...

Regardless, this does not address my inquiries. You stated "Sure, I will, but He might not. You’re not even one of His followers..."

You don't seem very optimistic that God will grant your request for clarification in verse Matthew 12:32? Did you at least ask Him? The question is really two-fold. 1) You ask Him for yourself, and, 2) you also ask Him to convey the same message to me. Did He at least do the first part?

Please remember, in post #305, you stated "And on what basis would you determine whether or not you accept what I say?"

And I told you. Have God clarify this verse, via intercessory prayer. This is exactly why I asked follow-up questions, as to avoid a straw man.

************************

You also seem to give the impression that unbelievers are even less likely to receive responses, as you stated above. But your response below does not follow.... I.E. "I have no clue, that would be up to God, not me."

Why concern yourself so, of if I'm a current follower or not, if you have no clue as to whether or not God cares?

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.

Like I stated many times now. You asked what would convince me. I answered. I stated your intercessory prayer, to have God give me the same answer He gives you would be killing two birds with one stone. 1) We would know what God meant when He told readers they are not forgiven in Matthew 12:32. 2) Getting a message from God, based upon your acknowledged act of intercessory prayer, would instantly make me believe there exists a sentient agent, whom listens and responds to humans when asked. -- As it also seems to elude to in Scripture....

And now you are back-pedaling....

 

[Tom 1]

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.

Why? Uncertainties are good, opinion, disagreement, consensus, individuality - these are all hallmarks of what makes us human. What’s wrong with that? Your notion of ‘truth’ is too basic.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

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

In my opinion, this is a passage spoken to Jews and then regurgitated in a Jewish gospel for the sole purpose of pointing out to Jews that their ideas of righteousness are completely wrong. See also Matthew 6:1

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

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

On the contrary, I think is a near universal thing and is not confined to any one denomination. I've read theological comments by Christians throughout the centuries and see it as a common theme, from the early church fathers, through Roman Catholicism, past the reformers (Sola Fide) into the modern day.

And the reason for this is, as I have previously stated, that the whole New Testament tells of it.

As a consequence the denomination I belong to is irrelevant.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

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?"

I think you are mixing up post 313 with the one I deleted (318) and then edited out the mistakes and posted as 319.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

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

So you said that religion is a hindrance to to human flourishing, so I listed a number of things that came about due to religion all of which led and lead to human flourishing.

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

You are so right and it all seems to be aimed at you. We Christians are united in conflict against your ideas. Why does that surprise you.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

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

So what you are saying is that you now understand that this passage does not contradict the remainder of scripture but fits into the general pattern described throughout of salvation through faith. I was repeating it because you didn't seem to understand the concept, wanting to make works the criteria for salvation rather than the consequence of salvation.

 

[SPF]

You don't seem very optimistic that God will grant your request for clarification in verse Matthew 12:32?

Because I’m not, as it pertains to clarification for you.

The question is really two-fold. 1) You ask Him for yourself,

I have, and I think I do know what the passage means.

2) you also ask Him to convey the same message to me. Did He at least do the first part?

I prayed that if enlightening you to the meaning of this passage would draw you to Him, that He would. But whether or not it would draw you to Him, or whether or not He even wants to draw you to Him at the point, or if He has other plans to draw you by other means - I don’t know. Thus, I pray that His Will be done.

You also seem to give the impression that unbelievers are even less likely to receive responses, as you stated above. But your response below does not follow.... I.E. "I have no clue, that would be up to God, not me."

It follows perfectly fine. I can simultaneously not be optimistic about something while recognizing that God may do something I’m not optimistic about.

 

[cvanwey]

Why? Uncertainties are good, opinion, disagreement, consensus, individuality - these are all hallmarks of what makes us human. What’s wrong with that? Your notion of ‘truth’ is too basic.

Um, your points of contention, more-so relate to the subjective. However, some may end up coinciding with truth; either by dumb luck, or maybe a bit of reason and/or evidence?

'Truth' is independent of opinion, individuality, 'good', etc...

When God asserts a passage, it presumably means one thing. And yet, read that passage to 10 people, and see how many differing 'conclusions' you might receive. This demonstrates that maybe, just maybe, the provider of truth did not choose [the most] effective means of communication.?.?

 

[cvanwey]

In my opinion, this is a passage spoken to Jews and then regurgitated in a Jewish gospel for the sole purpose of pointing out to Jews that their ideas of righteousness are completely wrong. See also Matthew 6:1

Great! So here we are, thus far... We have one passage in Scripture. And not just any mundane passage, but a passage that, when NOT read by the hyper-educated, could reasonably conclude that if the reader was to 'speak against' the Holy Spirit, they will never be forgiven.

Now, how might this confusion have been easily avoided? Well, God might be aware that many readers are either uneducated, less informed, ignorant, not taught by the right instructor, etc. And again, God might be aware that many may fear a grave threat, when maybe God is not presenting one. Assuming God would know that many might conclude that what they read with their own eye-balls means they are doomed eternal; maybe instead it would have been reasonable for God to add a verse or two, just to clarify?

I'm not God, but it seems reasonable that God seems to possibly throw a major threat out there, and cares not to explain.

Thus far, we have the following:

(You) - 'the sole purpose of pointing out to Jews that their ideas of righteousness are completely wrong'

(Me) - 'It means what it says - and many may already be doomed, no matter how much faith they possess now or in the future.'

(dcalling) - 'No one can commit this sin'

(Thomas) - 'The Christians whom commit this sin go to a lesser heaven.'

4 bright people, 4 possible conclusions....

Confusion anyone?

 

[Tom 1]

Um, your points of contention, more-so relate to the subjective. However, some may end up coinciding with truth; either by dumb luck, or maybe a bit of reason and/or evidence?

'Truth' is independent of opinion, individuality, 'good', etc...

When God asserts a passage, it presumably means one thing. And yet, read that passage to 10 people, and see how many differing 'conclusions' you might receive. This demonstrates that maybe, just maybe, the provider of truth did not choose [the most] effective means of communication.?.?

You need a re-think, back to the drawing board kind of thing. Your arguments are way too deeply rooted in a rigidly religious mode of thought. To argue this effectively as an atheist/agnostic/whatever, you need to clear out all of your religious thinking and start again from scratch.

These are the basics -
People think
The thunks in one person’s head are different to another’s
This is a good thing
Problems arise when one person or another gets the idea that their thinking is the ‘right’ thinking when there is no objective measure to be had.

The bible is a big book. There are some parts that can’t really be interpreted more than one way - if Jesus says ‘I am the way’ etc then there is little ambiguity. To understand much of the bible it is necessary however to understand the time and culture it came out of. That takes a lot of time, a lot of thinking, and a lot of willingness to be open to a much broader landscape than this or that religious group’s notion of truth. You appear to think this is a simple matter, well, quite clearly, it isn’t. You could start by making yourself more familiar with Abraham’s story, from every angle. Then move on to Job, spend a few months on that. There is far more to the picture than your arguments suggest you think.

 

[cvanwey]

On the contrary, I think is a near universal thing and is not confined to any one denomination. I've read theological comments by Christians throughout the centuries and see it as a common theme, from the early church fathers, through Roman Catholicism, past the reformers (Sola Fide) into the modern day.

And the reason for this is, as I have previously stated, that the whole New Testament tells of it.

As a consequence the denomination I belong to is irrelevant.

How about this.... Compare notes, in regards to two denominations alone. Namely, just for starters, between a Catholic and a Unitarian; in regards to the 'way of salvation'. News flash.., I sincerely doubt they would reach a 'common ground'. And once they hash this out, work it out, iron it out, and come to resolve; you still have many others to go....

 

[cvanwey]

I think you are mixing up post 313 with the one I deleted (318) and then edited out the mistakes and posted as 319.

Thank you... Found it... Here was your response:

"Catered for. Still-born and child death have committed no sin and therefore have nothing to be redeemed from. Likewise those who have mental defects that prevent them from understanding anything. But if you can understand mentally, you can put your Faith in Jesus and there you go..."

Aren't all humans born in original sin, in need of redemption, according to Christians?

 

[cvanwey]

So you said that religion is a hindrance to to human flourishing, so I listed a number of things that came about due to religion all of which led and lead to human flourishing.

It's fare to say that the vast majority of people, especially in those days, were religious. This means little really.

You are so right and it all seems to be aimed at you. We Christians are united in conflict against your ideas. Why does that surprise you.

Again, take a look at Matthew 12:32 alone You are not united. Far from it...

 

[cvanwey]

So what you are saying is that you now understand that this passage does not contradict the remainder of scripture but fits into the general pattern described throughout of salvation through faith. I was repeating it because you didn't seem to understand the concept, wanting to make works the criteria for salvation rather than the consequence of salvation.

It contradicts. If you read #280, and subsequent responses enough, it might start to sink in for you. Or maybe not...

 

[cvanwey]

I prayed that if enlightening you to the meaning of this passage would draw you to Him, that He would.

I'm telling you, if I received a response from Him, I would have no choice but to acknowledge He exists. But He cares not to do it. And guess what? You are not the first to state you will do that for me, even here in this forum arena. Hence, it sounds like He cares not to do so...

I have, and I think I do know what the passage means.

Since the second part is likely going unanswered, humor me...

What does God tell you, regarding Matthew 12:32?

It follows perfectly fine. I can simultaneously not be optimistic about something while recognizing that God may do something I’m not optimistic about.

"In your opinion, even if it is wrong."

 

[cvanwey]

You need a re-think, back to the drawing board kind of thing. Your arguments are way too deeply rooted in a rigidly religious mode of thought. To argue this effectively as an atheist/agnostic/whatever, you need to clear out all of your religious thinking and start again from scratch.

These are the basics -
People think
The thunks in one person’s head are different to another’s
This is a good thing
Problems arise when one person or another gets the idea that their thinking is the ‘right’ thinking when there is no objective measure to be had.

The bible is a big book. There are some parts that can’t really be interpreted more than one way - if Jesus says ‘I am the way’ etc then there is little ambiguity. To understand much of the bible it is necessary however to understand the time and culture it came out of. That takes a lot of time, a lot of thinking, and a lot of willingness to be open to a much broader landscape than this or that religious group’s notion of truth. You appear to think this is a simple matter, well, quite clearly, it isn’t. You could start by making yourself more familiar with Abraham’s story, from every angle. Then move on to Job, spend a few months on that. There is far more to the picture than your arguments suggest you think.

Nah... I'm staying with post #369 here. If you care to engage, please do so. If not, that's okay too.

 

[Tom 1]

Nah... I'm staying with post #369 here. If you care to engage, please do so. If not, that's okay too.

It’s a false dichotomy - either this thing is totally true, according to my/your understanding - or it isn’t understandable. That doesn’t represent any sort of objective standard. I mentioned Abraham’s story as there is a great deal of ‘space’ and a lot of cultural relevance in the text, just the kind of thing that leaves a lot of room for rumination without altering the fundamental message. What, would you say, is the principle point of Abraham’s story from a biblical perspective, taking into account how it is treated in the OT and NT?

 

[SPF]

I'm telling you, if I received a response from Him, I would have no choice but to acknowledge He exists.

Yes, and Peter said he wouldn’t deny Christ.

But would you have no choice but to acknowledge your sin, need for forgiveness, and believe that Christ died and rose from the cross for your sins? That’s what matters.

What does God tell you, regarding Matthew 12:32?

I don’t see how it would benefit you in my sharing that.

The role of the Holy Spirit is to empower Believers and point people towards Christ. It’s not His job to answer 100% of every theological question people have all the time.

We have plenty of guidance in where it matters from the Spirit - conviction of sin, guidance in life, prompting towards better loving others, and in growing to become more like Christ.

 

[cvanwey]

I don’t see how it would benefit you in my sharing that.

Though I appreciate what you are trying to do, I've been down that road many times before. The result is always the same. God never contacts me regardless. Thus, I will address the response posted above.

It benefits in the sense as to demonstrate the title of this thread. Can you please now, at least tell me what God informed you, about Matthew 12:32?