• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Which Commandments?

Discussion in 'Christian Apologetics' started by doubtingmerle, Apr 11, 2021.

  1. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,008
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    What part of "You cannot do anything to go to Heaven --it is not yours to accomplish"* do you not understand?

    And what part did you not understand of "Now, you say I had a completely different list, implying that my list was another for 'what must I do to go to Heaven'—it was not. It was a list of the logical sequence (cause and effect) involved in what happens when the Elect is born again. And it was no complete list either, just some of the first few things." You seem to be employing (I don't want to claim something about your personality here) the loaded question fallacy. You insist on an answer to your question that ascribes to the faulty premise: that a person must (or even can) do something to go to Heaven.

    *probably not an exact quote.
     
  2. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,008
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    It was not a red herring. It was free information, relevant to the subject. You made it sound like God made a rule in which his son had no say.

    "It seems like" to you because of your false notions of what it is to be God. God could not simply forgive sin, without payment of the debt of sin. It would be contradictory to his justice and so, contradictory to his nature, not to mention it would ignore the nature of sin, as if the creature's claim that the Creator is a liar, or irrelevant, was of no violation of the 'way of things'.

    It is not a red herring. It was free information, relevant to the subject. The fact they are happy relates the fact that the death of Christ is worth the result.

    Your responses —all of them— exhibit your tendency to speak as though, and so probably your mindset, that God is like us, thinks like us, decides like us, has needs like us, desires like we do, must figure things out, must weigh options etc. It is not so. If you would, please do a search and study of the term, "Divine Simplicity". Also, "Aseity of God".

    If this is the way God did it, it is the ONLY way to accomplish what he had in mind.

    But some things we do know, which I have already talked about. For example: That Christ had to be, himself, God, for his substitution on our behalf to be effective. A mere creature could not do this, no matter how well intentioned. That God does not do anything capriciously or without particular purpose. That God wastes no effort, nor causes suffering needlessly. That God's Word will accomplish all for which it was sent (yes, that is a pun).
     
  3. doubtingmerle

    doubtingmerle I'll think about it. Supporter

    +2,071
    Humanist
    Mark,

    The question before us is, "If a man is a murderer, a thief, and a wearer of garments made of two different fabrics, what must he do to go to heaven?"

    There seem to be two different Mark Quayles using your account. One Mark Quayle says the answer is, "nothing". One Mark Quayle says there is a big long list of things. The Mark Quayle that wrote this post says, "nothing". I suppose the other Mark Quayle will respond to me here, and say a whole list of things.

    The part I don't understand is why your posts keep switching back and forth between the two answers.

    The person using your account today says there is nothing that the murdering, stealing, wearer of two different fabrics needs to do. Apparently he can go on killing, stealing, and wearing mixed fabrics. None of that matters. You seem to be saying that God simply picks some people, and nothing we do changes that, or influences him to pick us.

    So now we find that we don't need to believe, we don't need to say the sinner's prayer, we don't need to confess, we don't need to repent, we don't need to continue in Christ, we don't need to stop wearing fabrics made of two materials, we don't need to avoid murdering, we don't need to do anything to go to heaven.

    Is that your final answer?


    The part I don't understand is why there is a person using your account who says we do need to do the things in the list.

    I do understand that the person currently using this account says we don't need to repent or continue in Christ to go to heaven.

    But I suspect you (or a different person using your account) will respond to this and say we must do these things.



    I told you I would laugh so hard I would spit my beer out if you ignored the question and tried to divert it into a question of what causes one to do these things. And what do you do? You ignore the question and talk about the cause!

    Pardon me, while I clean up the mess.


    [​IMG]
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

    OK, I'm back.

    I have explained to you that I am not asking what causes you to do these things. Please let me know how many more times you would like me to repeat, "I am not asking what causes you to do these things" before you will admit that I am not asking what causes you to do these things.

    I am asking you if you need to do the things in your list to go to heaven.

    Got it. Here is the list the other person using your account posted:

    1) Be elected by God,
    2) Be regenerated,
    3) Confess and repent of sin
    4) Continue to pursue Christ

    Now we find it is not a complete list. Would all the people using your account get together and give me a complete list of what one needs to (be caused to) do to go to heaven, please.

     
  4. doubtingmerle

    doubtingmerle I'll think about it. Supporter

    +2,071
    Humanist
    You say this in response to, "Red herring. I never said anything about Jesus being unwilling."

    Huh? In what way does "I never said anything about Jesus being unwilling" sound like "I say God made Jesus do something he was not willing?"

    Ok, there is a rule that says, "God could not simply forgive sin without payment of the debt of sin."

    Who made that rule? You said God made that rule. Why did God make a rule that says, "God can not simply forgive sin, without payment of the debt of sin." He is God. Doesn't he have free will to decide what the rules are?


    We went over this before. Suppose you offend your neighbor and he says somebody needs to kill his (willing) son before he forgives you. When you ask him why in the world he makes such a demand he tells you, "It is just my nature to have a (willing) son die before I forgive anybody". Is your neighbor being rational?

    One would think an omnipotent, loving God would have a nature that looks to us to be more rational.


    OK, so suppose the neighbor you offended says somebody needs to kill his (willing) son because otherwise it would ignore the nature of you carelessly overspraying weed killer on his flowers. Is that neighbor's response rational?

    I am not saying the Creator is a liar or irrelevant. I am asking why the Creator's nature is such that he needs to have his (willing) son killed before he forgives.
    Understood that if the result is that millions of people are saved from eternal agony, it is worth the result.

    That does not address the question of why God could not simply forgive without having his (willing) son die first.

    If his thoughts appear to us to be irrational, how do you know they are not irrational?

    How do you know God did it this way? All you have is an ancient book that is full of contradictions.

    If he was God, and he died, then God was dead. How did God rise from the dead if God was dead?

    If Jesus suffers for no reason other then the fact that God demanded that Jesus (willingly) suffers before God can forgive, then why would that suffering not be needless?
     
  5. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,008
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    Then perhaps you've been ignoring the third Mark Quayle. The one who's been showing you consistently that your loaded question fallacy won't work with me.

    You say, "The person using your account today says there is nothing that the murdering, stealing, wearer of two different fabrics needs to do." That is not true. What I said is that there is nothing he CAN do. That Heaven cannot be earned, 'gotten' without Christ.


    I suspect you are wrong.

    Almost lost my coffee this morning!

    I am telling you what causes one to do those things so that you may, perhaps, though it seems a distant possibility, that you would understand why we need Christ, not works, to go to Heaven.

    ....and......once again, we see this posited as my answer for how to go to heaven, which, as I said before, twice—no, three times now, with the original statement, and four with this one—it is NOT my answer for how to go to heaven.

    Your loaded question fallacy will not work with me. Your re-positioning of my answers won't fly.

    Let me try one last time before I lose my coffee again. (This is all three of me here, lest you be confused beyond reason;) Let me put it like this: It is true, that if one was to obey all the law of God perfectly, they would go to Heaven, but that will not happen with anyone—only Christ has accomplished that feat. THEREFORE, and for reasons of his own, God has put in place a means of going to Heaven for those to whom he chose to give mercy (i.e. to the 'Elect'): Christ's substitution —that is, Christ bearing the sin of the Elect in his death— and the imputation of his righteousness (sinlessness) to the account of the Elect.

    *Pours another mug full*
     
  6. doubtingmerle

    doubtingmerle I'll think about it. Supporter

    +2,071
    Humanist
    Nowhere does this post attempt to address the question: If a man is a murderer, a thief, and a wearer of garments made of two different fabrics, what must he do to go to heaven?

    Your answer in the previous post appeared to be, We don't need to believe, we don't need to say the sinner's prayer, we don't need to confess, we don't need to repent, we don't need to continue in Christ, we don't need to stop wearing fabrics made of two materials, we don't need to avoid murdering, we don't need to do anything to go to heaven.

    Is this your final answer?
    You are avoiding the question of this thread. If you arrived on this thread by mistake, and have no interest in the topic of this thread, you may want to find a thread that you are interested in. If you cannot find a thread you are interested in, you may want to start a new thread. You could title it, "This is what causes one to do these things".

    But in the meantime you are on this thread. Do you or do you not wish to address the topic of this thread?
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2021
  7. doubtingmerle

    doubtingmerle I'll think about it. Supporter

    +2,071
    Humanist
    Let's put it this way:

    The man was lost and didn't have a cell phone. So he stopped and asked Jesus for directions. "How do I get across the river?" Jesus knew there was an old bridge (the commandments) which looked like this:


    [​IMG]

    He also knew there was another way across that looked like this:

    [​IMG]

    Jesus thought about it a minute, then gave the man the directions to the first bridge.

    Why didn't Jesus direct him to the correct bridge?
     
  8. dcalling

    dcalling Senior Member

    +305
    Non-Denom
    Married
    You still have to follow commandments. Follow Jesus will make you follow commandments, even though none of us can follow it completely.
    That is a totally different discussion. I don't believe we have free will, what made us human is self awareness (which machines can't have). Of course I could be wrong and let's not get distracted. So let's assume we have free will.

    What I believe is, once someone is saved, they know clearly what they are doing and no matter what they won't want to give up that salvation, even from a pure self persavation point of view (i.e. no sane person want to commit suicide). This is from my own experience, I know I won't lose my salvation.

    Believers can be in jail, or doing worse things than none-believers, the only difference is believers know they can't save themselves and needs God to save them.

    he will tell him the steps to go to that bridge.

    I only follow what I can understand. The bible says the people at the time take Saturday for sabath, that is fine. I also know God want us to follow sabath (which is basically His rest), not any man made days. Should we do sabbath on middle east time? We are saved by God, and we follow what God made us understand.

    Thanks, I read that and it is beautiful. I can't fully follow that, just as I can't fully follow the biggest rule, i.e. love God with all my soul heart mind. That is why I am saved by grace, and not by my works :)
     
  9. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,008
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    What I said was, "You made it sound like God made a rule in which his son had no say." Why do you keep changing up what I said?

    Did I even say it was a rule? Why do I suspect I did not, and once again you are misquoting me? I'm not even going to bother to go look. But if I did, I only meant the principle involved comes from God.

    Either way, it is 'the way of things' after God's own nature. It is a contradiction of his nature to do otherwise. He is perfectly just.

    Once again, you show your assessment of Almighty God according to your time-and-earth-bound mentality. You suppose he has to weigh options and decide before acting? He doesn't make up rules that govern what he does. He simply does, and if you want to call the principles involved rules, then treat them as you treat any old rule (throw this one out, make up a better one) —and worse, treat the logically self-contradictory as genuine options— go ahead with dispersion of reason. You are positing a strawman. It is not God.

    Is God a neighbor?

    Why should his nature look to you to be more rational? He does not live for your sake. He is using you for his sake. If he convinces you, he will do so when the time is right.


    You continue with this misrepresentation of what happened in the substitution of Christ on behalf of those to whom God chose to show mercy. It is NOT merely that "he needs to have his (willing) son killed before he forgives."

    Let me try to get this across to you by way of parallel. In Reformed circles, we say that God chose each person for the particular purpose he had in mind for them from the foundation of the world. He has no substitutes, in case something goes wrong with the original plan. What he planned from the beginning will happen. All that I just described is background for the parallel I will try to show you: Some would say that since there is only one person for that purpose to which God has made him, that God NEEDS that person to do what he does, in order to bring about the plan. But the doctrine of the Aseity of God shows that God has no needs. What God does, will happen. Divine Simplicity shows that God need not consider and weigh options, before deciding. God simply does. He is not a victim of circumstances, subject to the vagaries of chance, or to principles outside of his control.

    But you suppose him to be altogether as we are, other than tremendously powerful. No, it's worse. You suppose him to be able to do the logically self-contradictory.

    Because he is God, beyond us. Also, they don't appear to everyone to be irrational. Those who assume he is irrational don't know him, or don't know what he is doing. They assume a goal he does not have in mind.

    I have yet to find a contradiction. I have seen lists of supposed contradictions, and they are just silly. I have seen brain twisters they haven't thought of, things they would not comprehend, things I don't understand, and hope to ask him about, but they don't contradict.

    Jesus Christ possessed two natures, human and divine. That does not imply that his human nature was not also himself as God, but it was a human nature. That human nature died. He was not two beings, but one.

    Here's how RC Sproul describes it:
    "Godness and humanness are mutually exclusive categories. Something or someone cannot be God and man at the same time and in the same relationship. That is why the formula for the incarnation is not that Christ is totally God and totally man at the same time and in the same way. We are not saying that Christ's physical body is a divine body. We are saying that the single person has two natures. The divine nature is truly divine, the human nature truly human. The two coexist or are united in one person, but the two natures are not mixed, confused, separated or divided. Each nature retains its own attributes (see Chalcedonian Creed) The divine nature is not both divine and human. The human nature is not both human and divine. The person is both human and divine, but not in the same relationship."

    RC Sproul --Not a Chance (God, Science, and the Revolt against Reason)



    What makes you think he suffered for no reason other than the fact that God demanded that Jesus (willingly) suffers before God can forgive? Have you not heard of the substitution? Or of his love for certain among us, redeeming those particular ones? Have I not told you of his plan for Heaven, (the Bride of Christ, God's Dwelling Place), from before the foundation of the world?
     
  10. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,008
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    The OP made no mention of this. Have you moved the goalposts?

    Why do you insist on employing the loaded question fallacy?

    My answer in the previous post is that we CANNOT do anything to go to heaven. Do I need to repeat it yet again???

    I have addressed it by demonstrating that it is a bogus question. If I avoid the question it is because it is a bogus question. A loaded question, requiring the person answering, to assume as fact that we CAN do something to go to heaven.
     
  11. doubtingmerle

    doubtingmerle I'll think about it. Supporter

    +2,071
    Humanist
    Got it. If I want to go to heaven I need to follow some commandments. If I make a few mistakes, God will forgive me. It is all about trying to do right within the limits of human frailty.

    Except nobody can seem to tell me which commandments I need to follow and which are irrelevant.

    Got it. You believe that the alternative is unbearable agony in fire for eternity. You don't want that. You will do anything to prevent that from happening. From a pure self-preservation point of view, you will do every thing you can to follow whatever commandments you need to follow in order to escape the horrors of hell.

    So we are back to doing the best you can, lest you get beat up for all eternity.

    I think there are better, more healthy ways to motivate people to do good.

    What does "save" mean in this sentence?


    And the "steps to go to that bridge" consist of trying to do good, finding out we have normal human limitations, and then getting help so we can be better? Is that the basic gist of it?

    I'll go along with that.

    Me too.
    Uh, actually, Numbers 15:32-36 make it clear that it was God, not man, that was demanding strict adherence to a specific day. Once again (with bold emphasis added):

    And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.

    And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.

    And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.

    And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.

    And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.

    I am not reading here that God was saying take some time for R&R, and some person was saying it had to be on a particular man-made day. I am reading that God was demanding a specific day.

    Ding. Ding. We have a winner.

    The ancients thought of the world as a limited flat earth with everybody having the 7th day of the week at the same time. That is not how it works on a round globe. For some people it is Friday as I write, and for others it is Saturday. And if the international dateline was located in a different location, it would change when Saturday occurs. And if I lived on the space station, how in the world would I determine if it was currently Saturday and needed to be kept holy?

    If Moses had thought this out, the commandment would have said it is good to takes some time for rest and relaxation. He did not say that. He said keep the seventh day holy.

    I find it is better to live my life based on good principles, rather than try to follow ancient scribblings in Hebrew.


    If God exists and is making me understand things, then I think he is making me understand that there are better ways to have a good life then living out of fear of hell and literal interpretations of ancient books.


    Of course not. None of us could fully follow the command to give to everybody that asks. It would have been better if the verse had said to be generous.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2021
  12. dcalling

    dcalling Senior Member

    +305
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Nope, you need first accept God, and that will make you follow commandments. You got it backwards. We have to follow commandments, but that is not because we have to follow it, it is because the believe in God that make us want to follow it. i.e. you don't kill not because the law says you don't kill, but because your heart won't let you kill.

    Yes, it is called love, and it is from God.
    Accept God's salvation, accept the payment from Jesus (Yeshua)
    The realization of our short comings and something greater.
    For a specific time and place, God told Moses to do that. None of the Rabi today will tell you to do that.

    that is why it is not important to do Shabat on a set day. Jesus and his dicipals pick corn on Sabbath. In Ancient Hebrew Sbt has the meaning of pressing to go home (and stop desiring earthly things). It is something that we should desire every day.

    Except everyone has their own good principles. Do you think all the bad rulers think they are doing things the wrong way?

    Without God's help we won't be able to understand things. It is from my personal experience. I have a lot of the same view points as you, and the day I believed is like someone flipped a switch, the evidences didn't change but something changed in me. It is the same felling that when you are facing a difficult math issue (or try to learn a new tech archtechure), just can't understand it, and one day you suddenly know. Not sure if you every had that experience before.

    Except this is from God, the standard is just that high.
     
  13. doubtingmerle

    doubtingmerle I'll think about it. Supporter

    +2,071
    Humanist
    Check.

    I don't kill, not just because the law says not to kill, but because my heart doesn't want to kill.

    But I know of many Christians (and Non-Christians) who do want to kill.

    I don't know where it comes from but yes, I have love.

    Check.
    Ah, the commandments in the Bible are for a specific time and place. When it comes down to it, it is better to use our sense of reasoning to figure out what R&R we need, rather than strictly follow the command to remember the Sabbath to keep it holy.

    I am starting to like the way you think.
    Got it. R&R is good. Demanding a literal following of the sabbath day command is bad.


    Understood. Some people are mistaken.

    That does not prove I am mistaken.

    That's odd. Why is it that folks like Interested Atheist, Clizby Wampuscat, Nihilist Virus, Cvanway and others understand things so well?

    And why is it that some other posters (whom I will not name) seem far from understanding?

    I had a similar experience. I was terrified of hell as a youth, and then I found I could simply trust Christ. It was like a light switched on. Sorta. But the fear of hell never really went away. And the fear that other people were going to hell drove me to the streets, door to door, trying to persuade others to accept Christ. All this while fighting back my own fears of hell and doing my best to squash out the frequent doubts and questions.

    And then one day I saw that there likely was no hell and no God to condemn me. I found that I was free to think, to ask hard questions, to explore, to reach out, to take whatever path I found to be best. For the first time in my life I could really experience the thrill of the mind set free. That second change was literally very much like someone had flipped a switch,

    It is the same feeling you get when your are facing a difficult math issue and just can't understand it. And then one day you suddenly know. Not sure if you ever had that experience before.
     
  14. doubtingmerle

    doubtingmerle I'll think about it. Supporter

    +2,071
    Humanist
    OK, let's reword it. Is it a requirement that God's son needs to die before he forgives?

    Then who made the requirement that God's son needs to do it? If God made that requirement, then that is no different from saying God chose to have his son die before he forgave because he chose to have his son die before he forgave.



    And if it is your neighbor's nature to demand his son die before he forgives you, you would think your neighbor was whacky.

    You are positing word salad.

    Was that sentence supposed to mean something?

    No.

    I used a neighbor as an analogy. Here is another analogy.

    And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint;
    Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man:
    And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.
    And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man;
    Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.
    And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.
    (Luke 18:1-6)​

    Was Jesus here calling God an unjust judge. No. It was an analogy.

    Was Jesus here saying that prayer is like whining continuously until you get a response, not because the authority cares, but because the authority just wants you to go away? Well, er, uh, yes, that seems to be the whole point of these verses. And it really is a rather odd description of prayer, and an unflattering view of God.

    Because I have some knowledge of rational and irrational, of basic decency, and of right and wrong.

    For instance, describing one's self as one who does not care about people's needs, while claiming to be loving, seems to me to be irrational.

    I wasn't saying that was all there was to it. I was saying that Christians say God needs to have his son killed before he forgives. That is a strange requirement that God imposed upon himself.
    Having a nature that forgives without demanding the death of one's son does not appear to me to be logically self-contradictory.

    I will give you the same answer I gave my son years ago when he mowed the lawn and said he saw no skippers.

    "You would see them if you really looked."


    Why did God require Jesus to be a substitute for us when an omnipotent God could have made the requirement that no substitution is required?
    Why did his love require Jesus to die, when an omnipotent God could have made the requirement that no death is required?
    Why did redeeming those particular ones require Jesus to die, when an omnipotent God could have made the requirement that no death is required?
    Why did his plan require Jesus to die, when an omnipotent God could have made the requirement that no death is required?

    And if you avoid the questions again by talking about Jesus being willing, or some other diversion, I will laugh so hard I will spit my coffee out.
     
  15. doubtingmerle

    doubtingmerle I'll think about it. Supporter

    +2,071
    Humanist
    The OP asked what one needed to do to go to heaven. You jumped on this thread. Do you or do you not wish to discuss the question asked in the OP?


    Does this mean that God simply picks people to go to heaven, and we don't need to believe, we don't need to say the sinner's prayer, we don't need to confess, we don't need to repent, we don't need to continue in Christ, we don't need to stop wearing fabrics made of two materials, we don't need to refrain from murdering, we don't need to do anything to go to heaven?
     
  16. Tinker Grey

    Tinker Grey Wanderer Supporter

    +3,605
    Atheist
    Reminds me of Penn Jillette:
    (Penn Jillette - Wikiquote)
     
  17. doubtingmerle

    doubtingmerle I'll think about it. Supporter

    +2,071
    Humanist
  18. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,008
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    As soon as I saw you said, "OK, let's reword it. Is it a requirement....?" My first thought was that it was good I had just finished my last swallow of coffee so I didn't spew it out! You really are something!

    Let's cut to the chase. It was necessary that Christ die to save those to whom God chose to show mercy. It is not a rule. It is not a requirement. It was the means by which God worked salvation. There was no other way to make the particular people for himself he had in mind. You are constructing structures that are irrelevant to the facts. You are looking at us, and trying to make God fit, instead of trying to fit us into God's doings.

    See above. Do you have some reason to think God demanded Christ die?


    He simply does [what he does], and if you want to call the principles involved rules, [and] then treat them as you [would] treat any old rule (throw this one out, make up a better one) —and worse, treat the logically self-contradictory [, that God be subject to rules, and other such things as you demand from a human perspective as logical,] as genuine options— go ahead with [dissipation] of reason. You are positing a strawman [to think what God does is subject to rules].

    There. I rewrote it with a few extra words. Better now?

    I notice you left out the end of the passage you quoted. Why? I take it here from verse 6, with which you ended your quote: 6 And the Lord said, “Listen to what the unjust judge says. 7 And will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off? 8 I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?”

    It shows Jesus' line of thinking, that if an unjust ruler would do the right thing for a persistent citizen, how much more would it be so with the Almighty who loves his chosen people?

    What are you referring to here? Where does God describe himself as one who does not care about people's needs?

    See the beginning of this post. You are still misrepresenting what God did.

    Btw, I don't know any Christians that would put it like that, though some might be tricked into agreeing that is what happened.

    He exacts payment for the debt of sin. YOU can forgive without payment, because you are not the judge, and maintaining justice is not in your bailiwick.

    Ha! And I was just thinking about you saying there were contradictions in Scripture —that if you were so inclined, you would not see those as contradictions; you could easily enough explain why they seemed that way to people who look for contradictions, and too easily take things out of context etc.

    Could he have? Wrong again.
    There was no other way. Omnipotent God cannot do the logically self-contradictory. It is a nonsense. You are asking the scales of justice to balance, without equal weight on each side.

    He could have? You are still wrong.

    There was no other way. Omnipotent God cannot do the logically self-contradictory. It is a nonsense. You are asking the scales of justice to balance, without equal weight on each side.

    Maybe you call it justice, when a transgression has no penalty.

    And I, my beer! I TOLD you, God cannot do the logically self-contradictory, such as calling unequal debt vs payment justice. But you demand it, over and over and over.
     
  19. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,008
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    Why do you bring up these things, then? If they are just some more things you thought of that some might say are required to go to heaven, ok.

    As for discussing the question asked in the OP, I already answered, "the question is bogus." It is you who insist I continue answering.

    No. It means God picks people to be with Himself forever, and they CANNOT do anything to get there. It is the work of God, from first to last. As a result, they will do the things that mark them as his own. If they do not, they are demonstrating that they are not his own. Regeneration, Belief, Faith, Confession to God, Repentance, Obedience, Pursuing Christ, etc etc are results of the Spirit of God within the believer, not the cause of his indwelling.
     
  20. doubtingmerle

    doubtingmerle I'll think about it. Supporter

    +2,071
    Humanist
    [​IMG]

    Note to self: Do not ever read Mark's posts with liquid in your mouth! Always follow this rule, er, uh, this self-imposed requirement. ;)

    Pardon me while I clean this up.

    [​IMG]

    OK, I'm back.

    Not only might somebody say these things, you just did. You might think you evaded the question, but you didn't. You just said that one must repent, obey and pursue Christ to go to heaven.
    If the question is bogus, why did you answer it?

    Here is your answer.
    First, I told you I would laugh so hard I would spit my beer out if you ignored the question and tried to divert it into a question of what causes one to do these things. And what do you do? You try to ignore the question and talk about the cause! Hence today's mess.

    Second, I notice that you answer with negatives. I find that people that obfuscate often switch to negatives, double negatives, and even triple negatives. Somehow they think that if they don't avoid not answering, that answers.

    Now lets take a quick look at some basic logic:

    Let A = you repent.
    Let B = you go to heaven.
    If not A then not B. (that is what you just said.)
    Therefore: If B then A. (Since this is logically equivalent to the assertion above.)
    Therefore: If you go to heaven, you repented.
    Therefore: You must repent to go to heaven.​

    Applying the same logic to your entire paragraph, we find that you just said we need to do the following to go to heaven:
    1) Be elected
    2) Be regenerated*
    3) Believe*
    4) Have faith*
    5) Confess to God*
    6) Repent*
    7) Obey*
    8) Pursue Christ*
    9) etc etc* ​

    * Mark asserts that these are the result of the Spirit's indwelling, not the cause of the Spirit's indwelling. That assertion is irrelevant to this discussion.

    Is this your final answer?
     
Loading...