Yes, but what if we are not wrong?

[Wryetui]

Hello there guys. I am sure this have been discussed before in this forum, but I would like to know your point of view in my post here. What if, after all, the judeo-christian turns out to be the only one (as I believe He is), you die, but you realize you are perfectly conscious, you have your memories intact, but you are standing before Christ, before God, and it turns out that your entire life you have been denying Him. What now?

I don't want to debate the possibility of: yeah, but what if it's not true and you have been believing in a lie your whole life? I don't mind about that.

So, what if it turns out to be all true and you will most likely burn, not being able to assume God's love? (In this case, note that I do not have the knowledge to know who is going or not going to be in the state of hell).

 

[bhsmte]

Hello there guys. I am sure this have been discussed before in this forum, but I would like to know your point of view in my post here. What if, after all, the judeo-christian turns out to be the only one (as I believe He is), you die, but you realize you are perfectly conscious, you have your memories intact, but you are standing before Christ, before God, and it turns out that your entire life you have been denying Him. What now?

I don't want to debate the possibility of: yeah, but what if it's not true and you have been believing in a lie your whole life? I don't mind about that.

So, what if it turns out to be all true and you will most likely burn, not being able to assume God's love? (In this case, note that I do not have the knowledge to know who is going or not going to be in the state of hell).

For me, it is not about "denying", it is about being able to reconcile the story with reality in my own mind.

Since I could no longer reconcile the story after 40 years of being a Christian, I couldn't pretend I believed it, when I didn't.

And, if the story is true and I am in front of God at death, I would have a lot of questions for him. Hopefully, he would answer them.

 

[BL2KTN]

The same as if it turns out Vishnu is the one... lots of questions I'll have for him/it/her.

 

[RDKirk]

Hello there guys. I am sure this have been discussed before in this forum, but I would like to know your point of view in my post here. What if, after all, the judeo-christian turns out to be the only one (as I believe He is), you die, but you realize you are perfectly conscious, you have your memories intact, but you are standing before Christ, before God, and it turns out that your entire life you have been denying Him. What now?

I don't want to debate the possibility of: yeah, but what if it's not true and you have been believing in a lie your whole life? I don't mind about that.

So, what if it turns out to be all true and you will most likely burn, not being able to assume God's love? (In this case, note that I do not have the knowledge to know who is going or not going to be in the state of hell).

Here are some facts Christians are going to have to accept before attempting any evangelism:

1. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them -- John 6:44

2. He went on to say, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them." -- John 6:65

3. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. -- John 10:27

4. Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind. -- Romans 1

5. And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie. -- 2 Thessalonians 2

What does all this mean? It means that it's not your job to worry about those who are not willing to accept the gospel. Your job is to present it to those God has enabled just as Paul did on Mars' Hill (Acts 17), and those God has enabled will accept it.

Everyone else is God's responsibility, and He'll deal with the consequences.

 

[bhsmte]

Here are some facts Christians are going to have to accept before attempting any evangelism:

1. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them -- John 6:44

2. He went on to say, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them." -- John 6:65

3. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. -- John 10:27

4. Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind. -- Romans 1

5. And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie. -- 2 Thessalonians 2

What does all this mean? It means that it's not your job to worry about those who are not willing to accept the gospel. Your job is to present it to those God has enabled just as Paul did on Mars' Hill (Acts 17), and those God has enabled will accept it.

Everyone else is God's responsibility, and He'll deal with the consequences.

If God cares about everyone, why wouldn't he enable everyone?

 

[Wryetui]

Here are some facts Christians are going to have to accept before attempting any evangelism:

1. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them -- John 6:44

2. He went on to say, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them." -- John 6:65

3. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. -- John 10:27

4. Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind. -- Romans 1

5. And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie. -- 2 Thessalonians 2

What does all this mean? It means that it's not your job to worry about those who are not willing to accept the gospel. Your job is to present it to those God has enabled just as Paul did on Mars' Hill (Acts 17), and those God has enabled will accept it.

Everyone else is God's responsibility, and He'll deal with the consequences.

So my miraculous and unexpected conversion is a sign that God wanted me to be a christian again? I am here now because our Father has guided me to the Truth?

 

[bhsmte]

So my miraculous and unexpected conversion is a sign that God wanted me to be a christian again? I am here now because our Father has guided me to the Truth?

Some would say that yes.

But it leads to this question for me at least; why would God only want certain people to be Christians, by engaging them? Is God ok with as the world stands today (2/3 don't believe) and they are doomed, when he could choose to engage them as well?

 

[ananda]

What if, after all, the judeo-christian turns out to be the only one (as I believe He is), you die, but you realize you are perfectly conscious, you have your memories intact, but you are standing before Christ, before God, and it turns out that your entire life you have been denying Him. What now?

Then I would ask him, if he really wanted us to know him, why were his messages and scriptures so:

1. inscrutable (require armies of apologists to defend and clarify his messages, often contradicting each other),
2. complex (Hebrew being an imprecise language, each word has a variety of meanings),
3. contradictory (in the various books themselves),
4. inaccessible (I have to trust in others as intermediaries to tell me what he said?, e.g. priests, prophets, pastors, bishops, translators, etc.), and
5. largely fixed to one ancient culture instead of being universally relevant, among other problems.

 

[RDKirk]

If God cares about everyone, why wouldn't he enable everyone?

Ultimately, God will have to answer that question. My guess is that as demonstrated in 1 Chronicles 18, 1 Kings 22, and Romans 1, God is giving you what you want.

But it's not any Christian's responsibility to beat you over the head with it.

 

[Wryetui]

Some would say that yes.

But it leads to this question for me at least; why would God only want certain people to be Christians, by engaging them? Is God ok with as the world stands today (2/3 don't believe) and they are doomed, when he could choose to engage them as well?

Because God knows best who would really accept and live His message and Gospel. Imagine God turning miraculously someone a christian in Saudi Arabia, why? So he gets killed? By tearing him up from islam? I don't see God forcing someone on being a christian, and if He doesn't enter in everybody's life enabling everyone is because He knos best about their free will.

God returned me to faith because He knew that I would accept Him and that Him would not come in vain to my life, that I would really love and enjoy and praise Him for what He did. If God is not showing into your life and enabling you to love Him is because He knows that nothing of what He does yet will be productive for you, since you are such consumed by your atheism that in no manner He could come to your life yet respecting your free will.

God is like the rain, and we are the dry soil. We need to prepare that soil, we need to plow the soil or the rain will come in vain, that's why we always must to be prepared. Although the rain doesn't come when we want, but when He wants, so we must have our soil plowed in every moment. Without the rain, without God, that's what we are, just dry soil. When I talk to people that sadly lives without God, this verses are always coming to my mind:


Jeremiah 17:5-8



“Cursed is the man who trusts in man
And makes flesh his strength,
Whose heart departs from the Lord.
6 For he shall be like a shrub in the desert,
And shall not see when good comes,
But shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness,
In a salt land which is not inhabited.

7 “Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord,
And whose hope is the Lord.
8 For he shall be like a tree planted by the waters,
Which spreads out its roots by the river,
And will not fear when heat comes;
But its leaf will be green,
And will not be anxious in the year of drought,
Nor will cease from yielding fruit.

 

[bhsmte]

Because God knows best who would really accept and live His message and Gospel. Imagine God turning miraculously someone a christian in Saudi Arabia, why? So he gets killed? By tearing him up from islam? I don't see God forcing someone on being a christian, and if He doesn't enter in everybody's life enabling everyone is because He knos best about their free will.

You are saying then, that God had no hand in 2/3 of the worlds population not agreeing with Christianity, it was all the work of people?

That could be, but why would a caring God be ok with all these people being doomed, because of circumstances they were born into?

I can not reconcile this with a God who is caring and gives all his creation equal opportunity, because it is clear, there is not equal opportunity.

 

[Received]

If you're not wrong, you're not wrong.

The real interesting question is to ask how could any deity be so angry about someone just getting something wrong.

 

[Wryetui]

You are saying then, that God had no hand in 2/3 of the worlds population not agreeing with Christianity, it was all the work of people?

That could be, but why would a caring God be ok with all these people being doomed, because of circumstances they were born into?

I can not reconcile this with a God who is caring and gives all his creation equal opportunity, because it is clear, there is not equal opportunity.

What do you want God to do? To burst into Saudi Arabia forcing everyone to believe in His Son? Wouldn't that make all the atheists in the world criticize Him because He was a liar concerning free will? Oh but that's no problem, He would shut up those atheists by brainwashing them too, and now that He got into brainwashing, let's just brainwash all people, forcing them to be like robots and making them believe in Him, done!

I find it quite awesome how atheists always argue about God not helping the rest of the world by sending His grace over them and making them be saved, but they don't look at themselves. Look at you, you live in a christian country, you were a christian but you refused God completely, you chose not to love Him and you rather say He doesn't exist, but yet complain about God not forcing people around the world to believe in Him

 

[bhsmte]

What do you want God to do? To burst into Saudi Arabia forcing everyone to believe in His Son? Wouldn't that make all the atheists in the world criticize Him because He was a liar concerning free will? Oh but that's no problem, He would shut up those atheists by brainwashing them too, and now that He got into brainwashing, let's just brainwash all people, forcing them to be like robots and making them believe in Him, done!

I find it quite awesome how atheists always argue about God not helping the rest of the world by sending His grace over them and making them be saved, but they don't look at themselves. Look at you, you live in a christian country, you were a christian but you refused God completely, you chose not to love Him and you rather say He doesn't exist, but yet complain about God not forcing people around the world to believe in Him

I have heard this all before, but it really doesn't address the issue I raised.

In regards to what God should do? What is he capable of doing?

 

[dumpsterdiver45]

Then I would ask him, if he really wanted us to know him, why were his messages and scriptures so:

1. inscrutable (require armies of apologists to defend and clarify his messages, often contradicting each other),

This doesn't seem a legitimate complaint; everything in life is inscrutable to some degree. And scientists, politicians, psychologists, teachers, etc. contradict each other all the time. This is just what people do.

2. complex (Hebrew being an imprecise language, each word has a variety of meanings),

Life's complex. Why should the immaterial realm and the things that proceed from it be different?

3. contradictory (in the various books themselves),

Because they're recorded by fallible humans. The only theists left listening to this argument are the rigid fundamentalists who created it.

4. inaccessible (I have to trust in others as intermediaries to tell me what he said?, e.g. priests, prophets, pastors, bishops, translators, etc.),

We rely on others to instruct us in virtually all areas of life from birth. Why should religion be different? More to the point, few hear God because His pure Truth is a roaring fire to human falsity. He has to make room in hearts and minds of persons He sends to speak for Him...we might count it both regrettable and fortunate that we're not at the top of His visitor's list in this regard.

5. largely fixed to one ancient culture instead of being universally relevant, among other problems.

Like most Christians, you miss the point. Everything in stages and progressing according to a recognizable pattern: Jews chosen, became elitist, grace flows outward. Christians chosen, became elitist, grace is flowing outward. It's a story. Everyone is already saved/fixed, the story's just unfolding. His mercy is and always has been universal, but humans have ears to hear only so many universal truths it seems....thus, the story continues to play out until we're all in all. First the pathology of sin has to run its course, it seems.

 

[Received]

Because they're recorded by fallible humans. The only theists left listening to this argument are the rigid fundamentalists who created it.

This is one of the most satisfying responses I've seen in a while.

 

[ananda]

This doesn't seem a legitimate complaint; everything in life is inscrutable to some degree. And scientists, politicians, psychologists, teachers, etc. contradict each other all the time. This is just what people do.

Yes, but God/Jesus is supposedly omniscient, unlike scientists, politicians, etc. Shouldn't God/Jesus be able to deliver a stunningly clear message comprehensible to all peoples of all cultures throughout all time?

Life's complex. Why should the immaterial realm and the things that proceed from it be different?

But, IMO, the main goal and subject of the Christian gospel message is focused on how to achieve eternal life. Why must his extensive writings be so complex, considering that he is supposedly an infinitely omniscient God who should be able to communicate simply to limited humans, especially since so many mainstream churches simply state that "belief & faith" in him is all that is necessary?

Because they're recorded by fallible humans. The only theists left listening to this argument are the rigid fundamentalists who created it.

Doesn't that say that the Christian God/Jesus could not therefore control or preserve his revelation? What does that say about his omnipotence or omniscience?

We rely on others to instruct us in virtually all areas of life from birth. Why should religion be different? More to the point, few hear God because His pure Truth is a roaring fire to human falsity. He has to make room in hearts and minds of persons He sends to speak for Him...we might count it both regrettable and fortunate that we're not at the top of His visitor's list in this regard.

Because that leaves us with doubt as whom to listen to. This priest? That prophet? That other pastor? All with differing interpretations.

Like most Christians, you miss the point. Everything in stages and progressing according to a recognizable pattern: Jews chosen, became elitist, grace flows outward. Christians chosen, became elitist, grace is flowing outward. It's a story. Everyone is already saved/fixed, the story's just unfolding. His mercy is and always has been universal, but humans have ears to hear only so many universal truths it seems....thus, the story continues to play out until we're all in all. First the pathology of sin has to run its course, it seems.

Why does it have to be this long, elaborate drawn-out play, though?

 

[True Scotsman]

Hello there guys. I am sure this have been discussed before in this forum, but I would like to know your point of view in my post here. What if, after all, the judeo-christian turns out to be the only one (as I believe He is), you die, but you realize you are perfectly conscious, you have your memories intact, but you are standing before Christ, before God, and it turns out that your entire life you have been denying Him. What now?

I don't want to debate the possibility of: yeah, but what if it's not true and you have been believing in a lie your whole life? I don't mind about that.

So, what if it turns out to be all true and you will most likely burn, not being able to assume God's love? (In this case, note that I do not have the knowledge to know who is going or not going to be in the state of hell).

I guess I'll just have to burn then. Any god that would burn me for eternity for not believing in it when it provided no evidence is an irrational god. I don't have to worry about it though because it won't happen and it doesn't take much intellect to know that it won't.

Anyone who is willing to take Pascal's wager is the one who deserves punishment in my opinion.

 

[ananda]

I guess I'll just have to burn then. Any god that would burn me for eternity for not believing in it when it provided no evidence is an irrational god. I don't have to worry about it though because it won't happen and it doesn't take much intellect to know that it won't.

Anyone who is willing to take Pascal's wager is the one who deserves punishment in my opinion.

I'm growing in the opinion that "God" has no self (selfless) ... not that it doesn't exist, but that there is some sort of existence in its absence of self, but not in the sort of existence that we know of as "existence".

The idea of "self" implies separation from other "selves", yet most virtues, e.g. love, compassion, peace, generosity, empathy, etc. involves selflessness - giving up of the self, or, in other words, giving up of separations between one "self" and other "selves". This makes others a part of you. Perhaps, in my idea of "God", this is why it is selfless - it is the ultimate in selflessness, and in that sense, it is nothing - in it's "self".

So, most major religions, Christianity included, and Pascal's wager, teach that we need to attach to a personal infinite God possessing a unique "self" as the supreme goal of life, whereas, if my interpretation is correct, the complete opposite might be in fact true.

 

[Wryetui]

I guess I'll just have to burn then. Any god that would burn me for eternity for not believing in it when it provided no evidence is an irrational god. I don't have to worry about it though because it won't happen and it doesn't take much intellect to know that it won't.

Anyone who is willing to take Pascal's wager is the one who deserves punishment in my opinion.

No, it is not that way

You don't burn in hell for not believing in God. You "burn" in hell because of what sin has did to us, because it has rotten our soul, and has degraded it, it is a reality, our soul is like it is because of sin, and what it has done to us. You are sending yourself to hell, like if you are diseased and refuse by any ways the medication, what can the doctor do your you? Christ, He is the great doctor of humanity, you don't burn in hell because He punishes you for not believing in Him, He is the God of love, not just a selfish human like us, He doesn't need our praises to Him, but we need Him as our doctor. God has seen what sin did to us, so He sent His only Son so we can be healed by Him, if we refuse that healing, if we refuse that medication, is the doctor guilty because the patients refused His medication, even if that medication costed Him His life?

No it is not, you won't blame a doctor in a hospital for a patient's life if that doctor gave him the meds he needed but he refused to take them, so why do you blame God because you are sending yourself to Hell?