Are my spirtual beliefs wrong?

[quote name='Halo05']Note - I didn't read any of the other responses because I don't really want mine to be tainted.

First, bravo to the guy who smiled and waved at you. That's a "good" religious person in my book and from what little of the Bible I understand, pretty much what Jesus would've done. Boo to you for being a dick to begin with but whatever, I know the feeling and I've done similar things before.

Second, sure you could be wrong. So what? If you think going to church is where you're being pushed, give it a shot. It works for tons of people. I don't really think it works for them because God is literally shaping them but it works because it makes them feel better about themselves. If you wind up not liking it or get weirded out, oh well, no big deal.

Anyhow, good luck.[/QUOTE]
Well, I don't think I the only being a dick. I'm sure if I was out singing into a bullhorn and approaching cars to tell them about how there is no god and science is the true path people would be offended too.
Just because more people believe in God than not doesn't mean that those religious people interrupting lives is any less offensive than if I did it.
Sorry to go off topic (which has now turned into a very interesting read of religious intrepertation) I'll admit I haven't read the last couple pages, but at the same time I had no idea this topic was still getting so much action.
 
[quote name='Friend of Sonic']Well, I don't think I the only being a dick. I'm sure if I was out singing into a bullhorn and approaching cars to tell them about how there is no god and science is the true path people would be offended too.
Just because more people believe in God than not doesn't mean that those religious people interrupting lives is any less offensive than if I did it.
Sorry to go off topic (which has now turned into a very interesting read of religious intrepertation) I'll admit I haven't read the last couple pages, but at the same time I had no idea this topic was still getting so much action.[/quote]You raise a fascinating point. The message of Christianity--of eternal life or death--is a message important enough to scream from the mountain tops and the street corners. There are times where I feel a smidge guilty that we don't do that, but that's the not-clearly-thinking-me.

I don't care where you're peddling some stupid wares, seeking donations for a charity, or trying to push your religion of Christianity, Islam, Wicca, or Atheism, nothing sets someone more on edge than direct confrontation. It's probably the least effective means to communicate anything, ever, and ultimately you end up not only looking like a complete tool but also turning away your audience from paying attention to anything you have to hear. I understand the heart of Christians who take this approach, but it's not all that wise.
 
I'm glad I've sparked some interesting discussion. My view on God and free will is a little less conventional than yours, daroga.

I take the approach that God granted us free will almost as a form of power which he did not grant others in creation. This power was given to us by God and, in a sense, removed the direct control over exactly what we do from Him. God gave us choice and removed His direct control over our lives. That's part of why we pray for His intervention and His help because God has given us the power to live on our own without Him guiding every step of the way.

God doesn't know what we're going to do. God can predict, in theory, a plethora of ideas that may be similar to what we're thinking since God understands our nature...but He's given up the power to know exactly what we're going to do and given that power to us.
 
[quote name='t0llenz']I'm glad I've sparked some interesting discussion. My view on God and free will is a little less conventional than yours, daroga.

I take the approach that God granted us free will almost as a form of power which he did not grant others in creation. This power was given to us by God and, in a sense, removed the direct control over exactly what we do from Him. God gave us choice and removed His direct control over our lives. That's part of why we pray for His intervention and His help because God has given us the power to live on our own without Him guiding every step of the way.

God doesn't know what we're going to do. God can predict, in theory, a plethora of ideas that may be similar to what we're thinking since God understands our nature...but He's given up the power to know exactly what we're going to do and given that power to us.[/QUOTE]

So, in a way, if you think of the old "Can God make a rock even He cannot lift?" question, we're sort of the rock, metaphorically. That's a pretty interesting idea.
 
Let's see what the Bible has to say about "free will":

1 Peter 2:8 "They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for."

Rom 9:20-23 "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it,Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonor?"
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Let's see what the Bible has to say about "free will":

1 Peter 2:8 "They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for."

Rom 9:20-23 "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it,Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonor?"[/quote]Pyro, those are good points and two often misunderstood passages.

The point Peter is making is not that they were predetermined ahead of time to go to hell. All Peter is saying here is that some people disobey (disbelieve) the message [note the context, especially the verses from Isaiah Peter is quoting], and this appointed them to stumble (be condemned in the judgement).

Paul isn't speaking to predetermined courses of actions to people's lives in Romans, but that a creation cannot critique a creator for what he does. The potter makes some pots for a religious ceremony, some for a toliet, as that is his choice. God, likewise, can do as he pleases with his creation. The concept of free will doesn't really enter the picture here as it's talking about God displaying his glory. Things may not always make sense to us how God handles things (to whom is it rational that God would take on flesh and die to save his creation from their sins?), but we don't really have any right to complain to correct how God is running the world. "My thoughts are not your thoughts" God says in Isaiah, not because we are rational and he is irrational but that he is perfect and we are sinful.

t0lenz, that's an interesting perspective. Note that such a view is not a biblical one and takes you out of the realm of Christianity and into the real of deism and a clock-maker God who set things up and lets it go.
 
Why does that take me out of the realm of Christianity and into deism? God still can and does intervene in my view, BUT God granted us the power of free will, allowing us to decide our own fate. I never said that God does not and can not intervene in our lives, in fact I believe in an ever present God and in intercessionary prayer. The only difference with mainstream Christianity is what God's gift of free will means, not that it exists.

I know that I'm not your standard Christian. I don't really fit the mold of the many different denominations out there with some of my ideas -- but I worship YHWH alone and believe that Jesus was the Christ, born, died, and rose again. I believe that his death and resurrection is the reason for God's forgiveness of mankind's sins.
 
Ah, ok. That's a bit different.

Your view on God's knowledge is interesting. It's actually a fairly close description of Christ's humiliation--his willful setting aside of his divine powers, for a time. Thus he doesn't know, during his ministry, when the end of the world would come. That of course all changed after the resurrection.

That said, an overall view that God's lack knowledge of what we'll do or what will happen for certain in the future is contradictory to what he tells us about himself in the Bible. But, if I recall, such things are not a problem for you.
 
[quote name='daroga']t0lenz, that's an interesting perspective. Note that such a view is not a biblical one and takes you out of the realm of Christianity and into the real of deism and a clock-maker God who set things up and lets it go.[/QUOTE]

Now I'm confused. How is t0lenz's interpretation (or the watch-maker God in general, I guess) antithetical to Christian thought? I understand how it may be at odds with certain denominations ... but they don't all interpret the bible in exactly the same way, yet are still Christian by all but the most extreme understanding of the word.
 
I can see what you're saying, although I don't specifically recall any verses where God told man that he knows what they'll do next. The point of free will was to allow man to come to terms with their maker on their own, not being forced into that choice. If God wanted us to be a race of merely subservient beings who do nothing but worship and support Him, He would never have had a need to make man...He already had the angels.

I know, my perspectives don't always come as firmly rooted in specific passages in The Bible, but every Christian group has interpreted things from The Bible differently and, at times, have expounded upon what has been written. The stories of Lucifer's fall, for instance, have no Biblical basis. Lucifer and the angels battling for Heaven, not in The Bible...and yet many Christian denominations believe it to be true. Purgatory has no Biblical basis, nor do any descriptions of Heaven or Hell beyond that they exist.

I suppose I have a question for you, daroga. Do you consider members of the Latter Day Saints church to be Christians? I know a good number of Christian denominations (including the United Methodist Church of which I'm a confirmed member) do not.
 
[quote name='daroga']I don't care where you're peddling some stupid wares, seeking donations for a charity, or trying to push your religion of Christianity, Islam, Wicca, or Atheism, nothing sets someone more on edge than direct confrontation. It's probably the least effective means to communicate anything, ever, and ultimately you end up not only looking like a complete tool but also turning away your audience from paying attention to anything you have to hear. I understand the heart of Christians who take this approach, but it's not all that wise.[/quote]

I'd say direct confrontation has worked pretty well for the church.

spanishinqui.jpg


IMO it's the more passive and contemplative religions, the ones that respect an individual's opinion and choice, that don't attract as many adherents.
 
[quote name='camoor']IMO it's the more passive and contemplative religions, the ones that respect an individual's opinion and choice, that don't attract as many adherents.[/QUOTE]

Which religions would those be?
 
[quote name='trq']Now I'm confused. How is t0lenz's interpretation (or the watch-maker God in general, I guess) antithetical to Christian thought? I understand how it may be at odds with certain denominations ... but they don't all interpret the bible in exactly the same way, yet are still Christian by all but the most extreme understanding of the word.[/quote]I'm was reading a bit too much into what he said. A watch-maker God would not send his Son into the world to save them from their sins. He's a creator, not a caretaker, preserver, or more importantly, redeemer. But that's not really what t0lenz was getting at, so I retract that statement. ;)

[quote name='t0llenz']I suppose I have a question for you, daroga. Do you consider members of the Latter Day Saints church to be Christians? I know a good number of Christian denominations (including the United Methodist Church of which I'm a confirmed member) do not.[/quote]No, the LDS church is not a Christian church. They use a lot of Christian verbage, but the meanings behind those words are generally misunderstood or purposefully changed. Speaking to an LDS member is incredibly hard because of that language barrier. You're not just starting with a blank slate with someone who doesn't have a clue as to what "grace," "justification," or "salvation" actually mean. You've got a person that is working with different defintions of those words than Scripture or even English at times would have for them which makes a conversation not ending up in just talking right past each other quite difficult.

That said, members of the LDS church are some of the people my heart goes out to the most. Their religion is one of pure law, of demanding nothing but obedience to a rigid moral code. There's no true understanding of the forgiving love of God in Christ that compeltely washes away all sins. The pressures that weigh down on these men and women (especially teens) is unfathomable to me. This site might have some interesting reads on it: http://www.truthinloveministry.net/urgency.htm
 
I like how the bible tells you to rip out your right eye if it sins, and cut off your right hand if it sins. Why don't people do this more often. Its what the book tells you to do?
 
nah I think it was in the new testemant. Mathew something. It was right at the beginning. I was abit shocked. Supposedly marrying a divorced woman is adulterous as well.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Old Testament laws now longer apply. Except when they do.[/quote]
That eye and hand shit isn't even OT, it's what Jesus says!

But I doubt anybody interprets that as sincerely telling them to cut their hand off, since that would be unnecessarily painful and serve no real purpose. Physically painful things are either metaphorical or don't apply anymore (unless it's hell, in which case it's not usually metaphorical, but rather a good rhetorical device :p).

EDIT: Mat. 18:8 btw, since I apparently reply slowly
 
Ah, dammit. Yeah, what Spaz said. Just don't tell the Snakes' Handlers.

"Homer, I was born a Snakes' Handler and I'll die a Snakes' Handler."
 
Jesus' point is how serious sin is (i.e., kills faith which will land you in hell as you separate yourself from God's forgivness), not to hack apart your body.

The point does stand though. If for some reason your right hand was causing you to sin (which, I can't imagine how that would be actually, 100% true, but whatever), it would be far better to lose that part of your body for this life than to fore-go heaven and keep your body in-tact on this side of eternity.

For the Old Testament laws issue, there seems to be a general lack of understanding between the theocracy of post-Exodus Israel and universal moral laws. Likewise, for the ceremonial laws, take a spin through the book of Hebrews to understand why Christians don't make sacrifices of sheep and goats. Amazing what a bit of context can clear up.
 
[quote name='daroga']The point Peter is making is not that they were predetermined ahead of time to go to hell. All Peter is saying here is that some people disobey (disbelieve) the message [note the context, especially the verses from Isaiah Peter is quoting], and this appointed them to stumble (be condemned in the judgement).[/quote]It doesn't say "some people stumbled and this caused them to stumble". It says they WERE DESTINED TO STUMBLE. Who destined them? Fate? Well who guides fate? If the Bible is true, and people are destined to disobey, then either God destined certain people to disobey and fall, or God is at the whim of fate.. in which case, why call him God?

And if ANYTHING, God, fate, whatever, can DESTINE a person to either damnation or salvation, there is no room for free will.

Paul isn't speaking to predetermined courses of actions to people's lives in Romans, but that a creation cannot critique a creator for what he does. The potter makes some pots for a religious ceremony, some for a toliet, as that is his choice. God, likewise, can do as he pleases with his creation. The concept of free will doesn't really enter the picture here as it's talking about God displaying his glory. Things may not always make sense to us how God handles things (to whom is it rational that God would take on flesh and die to save his creation from their sins?), but we don't really have any right to complain to correct how God is running the world. "My thoughts are not your thoughts" God says in Isaiah, not because we are rational and he is irrational but that he is perfect and we are sinful.
Click to expand...

It's certainly reasonable to question why God would make human beings in his image only to destroy them later (what kind of emotionally unbent potter would "make vessels unto destruction"?) all you want, but what I was commenting on was the fact that the Bible teaches he does.

The Bible says: "Don't question why God destines some to damnation" and you say: "oh, it's not talking about God destining some to damnation, it's talking about not questioning him". Yeah, well duh, but that's not what I'm talking about, buddy, I'm talking about the little part where God DESTINES SOME TO DAMNATION.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']And if ANYTHING, God, fate, whatever, can DESTINE a person to either damnation or salvation, there is no room for free will.[/quote]I'm sorry if I indicated otherwise.

Mankind does not have a free will in spiritual matters. I cannot choose to believe in Christ. My sinful nature prevents me from doing anything other than hate and reject God. But yet, that's not God CAUSING me to hate him nor predestining me to hell. The blame for my damnation would be on my shoulders, not his. You've stumbled into the error found in Calvinism known as double-predestination. Wholly logical, but completely non-biblical.

Where we have a free will is in non-spiritual matters. What job to get, what to wear, what to eat, where to live, what to do on a Saturday night, those things we are all free, despite God knowing what we'll choose he did not force us into those choices.
 
[quote name='daroga']Jesus' point is how serious sin is (i.e., kills faith which will land you in hell as you separate yourself from God's forgivness), not to hack apart your body.

The point does stand though. If for some reason your right hand was causing you to sin (which, I can't imagine how that would be actually, 100% true, but whatever), it would be far better to lose that part of your body for this life than to fore-go heaven and keep your body in-tact on this side of eternity.
.[/quote]


I don't think the book is something you decide what it means. You read it word for word. Its straight from god. Us meer mortals can't try and understand his/her words we must just follow.


Me.. I follow the spaghetti monster. Its just as real as any god.
 
[quote name='daroga']Where we have a free will is in non-spiritual matters. What job to get, what to wear, what to eat, where to live, what to do on a Saturday night, those things we are all free, despite God knowing what we'll choose he did not force us into those choices.[/QUOTE]
Then why give two hoots about free-will?
 
[quote name='daroga']You've stumbled into the error found in Calvinism known as double-predestination. Wholly logical, but completely non-biblical.[/quote]How could you say it's non-biblical? I just gave you several verses. I gave you more bible verses than I did explanation.

And if it's "logical" in any way, it's "logical" in that it is logically derived from the scriptures.

Where we have a free will is in non-spiritual matters. What job to get, what to wear, what to eat, where to live, what to do on a Saturday night, those things we are all free, despite God knowing what we'll choose he did not force us into those choices.
Click to expand...
How does he know what we'll choose unless we are destined to choose something or another? If we are destined to choose something or another (and the Bible explicitly states, on a few specific instances, that people are destined), then there is no choice. You can not "choose" something that you are destined to do. There is no choice.

If God knows I am going to pee off the top of a three-storey building and splatter twenty seven leaves below while singing the gloria patri, then I AM going to pee off the top of a three-storey building and splatter twenty seven leaves below while singing the gloria patri. If it IS going to happen, I can not choose for it not to happen, my choice has been taken away. I do not have free will at all: I can't even choose to sing the Doxology instead. My will is completely and totally bound to that which is already foreknown!


Here are some more "completely unbiblical" paragraphs:

For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son. And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.

As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
 
Real quick: that hatred stems from their rejection of God (note what I said above, the fault for damnation falls on the sinner, not on God.) The classic case (and the one we're given the most details about the inner-workings of) is Pharoah at the Exodus. Pharoah constantly hardens his heart. He continually rejects God, and finally, and very strikingly, God hardens his heart.

At that point, he's done. He's locked into hell. He still has breath in his lungs, yes, but he's the very definition of the "living dead." But once again, that's not because God predestined him to do that, but because he rejected God's words over and over again. This is what Jesus is referring to when he says the the "sin against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven." But that state is only something God knows about; I cannot read anyone else's heart so I have to assume that this is not the case.

Predestination to hell is non-biblical because of God's will: "[God] wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4). Any other passage interpreted in opposition to that is a false interpretation. That's why the Bible reader must use Scripture to interpret Scripture, using the easy passages to understand the difficult. Otherwise, you could make up all sorts of insanity with no bearing on reality. Like I've said before: context. Not just of an individual verse, chapter, or book, but of the Bible at large.

You're still putting the cart before the horse on the knowledge/destination issue. It's a struggle that we have who don't understand what omniscience is even like. I understand your train of thought, but it's just not correct.
 
[quote name='daroga']It's a struggle that we have who don't understand what omniscience is even like.[/QUOTE]
It's like a self-contradictory concept dreamed up by primitive man, that's what it's like ;)
 
Double predestination doesn't even require an active act of divine reprobation.

If I decide to stop breathing, I am also responsible for deciding to end my life, even if I was only making a conscious decision to stop breathing. And if I'm omniscient, and am aware that I require oxygen to survive, I am even that much more responsible for ending my own life.

You can't have a diving election of a few, without the passing over of others. You can't have the will to save all, without the election, and eventual sanctification, of all. If you want to use your passage in 1 Timothy to reject Calvinism, you must accept universalism. Do you?


Omniscience is a self-contradictory concept dreamt up by primitive man. I once met an open theist who said "God does not have to 'know the future' to be omniscient, being omniscient is knowing everything. The future is not yet something: it may soon possibly be something, but it is not yet something. Something that does not exist is not something, only once it exists is it something." At least he was trying to make sense, even if his Bible doesn't.
 
Like I said, wholly logical, non-biblical.

These statements are stated by Scripture and stand side-by-side:
  • God wants all men to be saved.
  • All men are not saved.
  • The fault for a person's damnation comes from their own sins and rejection of God.
  • The credit for a person's salvation is entirely God's.
I'm right there with you that logically it should be a double-sided coin, but it's not. If it was the passage in 1 Timothy would be completely false. If God predesited some to be saved and others to go to hell, he would not want "all men to be saved."

The doctrine of election is never used in Scripture to blast an unbeliever because it has nothing to say about the unbeliever. It is merely a doctrine of comfort to the believer to know that they are one of God's elect.

You can rant and rave about how that makes no sense and I'll agree with you all the way. But, that's the way it is. It also doesn't make sense that God would rectify his love and his justice by becoming a human being himself and suffering for all of our sins on the cross. It doesn't make sense that God, an eternal being, could die. But, that's the way it is. And in that case, excatly the way it had to be to pay the eternal debt we owe to God that we could never do even the smallest thing about.

The real problem in all of this is a total lack of understanding of just how much sin has ruined everything around us and in us. If a child is born with yellow-tinted contacts in he'd assume that he could see clearly and as it was. Unless someone told him that everything that he saw as yellow was not the way it should be, he'd never know. And even with knowing, unless someone took out the contacts, he'd only be aware that he was seeing things poorly, but never really knowing what they looked like.

Likewise, our sin prevents us from truly grasping the concepts talked about in God's Word. The basics of forgiveness, etc. are very clear. But once you start getting into God's nature you're well beyond the realm of sinful human understanding. We can dream and wax philosophic on the subjects, but we're still the child with the yellow contacts in. We can never fully grasp the truth as long as sin remains a part of who we are. Things will only become clear on the other side of eternity, when it will be a joyful revelation to some and a horrendous realization to others.
 
As an aside, daroga, and I imagine you already know this, but there are Biblical scholars that argue that 1 Timothy is one of the letters of Paul not actually written by Paul. So I'm just wondering, would that matter to you? If it wasn't written by Paul, but some other dude wrote it instead would the things in it be just as true (true as in representative of what God wants) since it's canon anyway?

Not really related, but I just wanted to know your thoughts on that.
 
so pyrogamer,
youre saying that fate does exist because everyone and everything has a destiny. therefore, we have no control over anything that happens and furthermore, nothing that happens is our fault.... right?

i think we do have a choice. it doesnt make sense to me that that everything is predetermined. lets say i went to baskin robins, and chose chocolate chip cookie dough. are you saying there is no way i could have chosen any other flavor? what if i narrowed it down to either that or cookies and cream?
i could have CHOSEN either one. god didnt choose for me, i did.

i dont know. thats just the way i see it
 
[quote name='tlsar']so pyrogamer,
youre saying that fate does exist because everyone and everything has a destiny. therefore, we have no control over anything that happens and furthermore, nothing that happens is our fault.... right?

i think we do have a choice. it doesnt make sense to me that that everything is predetermined. lets say i went to baskin robins, and chose chocolate chip cookie dough. are you saying there is no way i could have chosen any other flavor? what if i narrowed it down to either that or cookies and cream?
i could have CHOSEN either one. god didnt choose for me, i did.

i dont know. thats just the way i see it[/QUOTE]No. I don't believe in fate or in destiny or in predestination, or in determinism.

But the Bible does. It believes in all of those. Especially Paul (perhaps exclusively Paul: that one "disciple" that never met Jesus once in his life, and mentions Jesus' words and teachings the least out of all the disciples)

And you've correctly surmised that a denial of free will would equal no choice in any matter, responsibility, and led to its pure end apathy and nihilism.

We do have freedom, we do have choices, and we are utterly responsible for everything we do.

If God knows what kind of Baskin Robin's ice cream I am going to have before I choose, then I am no longer free to choose whatever Baskin Robin's ice cream I want. I HAVE to choose the one that god has foreknown. My will is bound to that choice. I might not be forced to choose it: I might want to choose it, it might be the one I would naturally go to, the one I want. But my will is not free in the matter.

The existence of any Omniscience that foreknows everything that will happen in the future, implies that there is only one way the future can happen, and that means no choice, and no free will.

The concept of God entirely does away with the very possibility of free will.

And the Bible is even more specific of how we have no free will in spiritual matters. We cannot choose god, and often god even hardens our hearts. He'll often decide before people are born that he hates a certain person and loves another one. They have no choice in the matter. They have no free will.

Naturally, the only logical conclusion is that god is responsible for everything that occurs. Of course he is: it's only his will that is free. But the bible doesn't exactly make sense of itself.
 
Before I throw in my two cents I would like to say I'm an Athiest and at the same time wish I wasn't. Logically though I have to be because I'm just a logical person. Dying = the suck imo :D

Anyways, I'd just like to throw out there that those who believe in a God should look past the bible, koran, and all those other Biblical writings and look into themselves. They should take a look at the world and decide what is right and wrong themself. To decide what happens in the world is good and bad with there own free will. Live the way that this "God" wanted you to live and that's with making your own decisions. Then again by me saying this doesn't it just make me as crazy as all the other scholars that tells everyone "Gods" words?

Another thing to wrap your mind around is what is truly good or bad? After years and decades and centuries of society telling us do we truly know anymore? Think about it ...
 
[quote name='SpazX']As an aside, daroga, and I imagine you already know this, but there are Biblical scholars that argue that 1 Timothy is one of the letters of Paul not actually written by Paul. So I'm just wondering, would that matter to you? If it wasn't written by Paul, but some other dude wrote it instead would the things in it be just as true (true as in representative of what God wants) since it's canon anyway?

Not really related, but I just wanted to know your thoughts on that.[/quote]Having closely studied the Greek, I have no reason to question the Pauline authorship of 1 Timothy or any of his epistles. The letters to Timothy are certainly of a different character than, say, Romans or Corinthians, but that's due to audience. Paul is writing not to a congregation (or region) at large, but to a specific person. And not only a specific person, but a close friend and fellow worker.

As for your hypothetical, I'm not sure I can comment on that. I will say this, that we don't know who wrote the book of Hebrews. A lot of theories are tossed around (Apollos? Paul? Peter?), but he have no firm idea. The authority of the Scriptures doesn't come because they were written by a certain person's pen or because some council declared them to be canon. The Scriptures authorize themselves, men (even councils) only recognize the self-authenticating Scriptures.

My faith isn't built on what men in Nicea did in the 300s AD. It's built on the supernatural power of the Scriptures. It's just as Paul wrote to the Romans, "Faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ" (10:17). This faith is the principle reason we have so many examples of people here talking past each other. The Bible itself says as much will happen, "The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him" (1 Corinthians 2:14).
 
[quote name='tlsar']i get the feeling the bible isnt telling us everything[/quote]

Ya.. they're still working on the sequel. Its pure Vaporware though. Just like Duke Nuke'm Forever.


Anyway.....

One of the joys of being in the military is there is always a bible around. Well at work there's a small little camo covered bible that I've been reading (even has a nice american flag in it, which comes across as ridiculous as the "Good bless America" bumper stickers). Being an atheist/agnostic I've never opened it up before but wow there's some weird things. I'm just a few pages into Mathew but I think J.C was cool with slavery. As he enters a city a Roman soldier comes running up to him and (paraphrasing here)
"Hey Lord God my slave is sick and dying can you heal him?"
"Sure I can take me to your house."
"NO. my house isn't clean and your the Lord god, can you do it from here?"
"Sure. Ok your slave is healed."
"Thanks. Jesus!"

Now i'm no son of god but wouldn't he have said. slavery is not kosher! or given the roman some speech about equality of man?
 
[quote name='homeland']I'm just a few pages into Mathew but I think J.C was cool with slavery.[/QUOTE]
There's a difference between indentured servitude and chattel slavery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indentured_servant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave

The Bible on slavery:

"Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death. " (Ex 21.16)

Then again, if they're foreigners, fuck 'em:

Leviticus 25:44 "And as for your male and female slaves whom you may have-from the nations that are around you, from them you may buy male and female slaves."
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']No. I don't believe in fate or in destiny or in predestination, or in determinism.

But the Bible does. It believes in all of those. Especially Paul (perhaps exclusively Paul: that one "disciple" that never met Jesus once in his life, and mentions Jesus' words and teachings the least out of all the disciples)

And you've correctly surmised that a denial of free will would equal no choice in any matter, responsibility, and led to its pure end apathy and nihilism.

We do have freedom, we do have choices, and we are utterly responsible for everything we do.

If God knows what kind of Baskin Robin's ice cream I am going to have before I choose, then I am no longer free to choose whatever Baskin Robin's ice cream I want. I HAVE to choose the one that god has foreknown. My will is bound to that choice. I might not be forced to choose it: I might want to choose it, it might be the one I would naturally go to, the one I want. But my will is not free in the matter.

The existence of any Omniscience that foreknows everything that will happen in the future, implies that there is only one way the future can happen, and that means no choice, and no free will.

The concept of God entirely does away with the very possibility of free will.

And the Bible is even more specific of how we have no free will in spiritual matters. We cannot choose god, and often god even hardens our hearts. He'll often decide before people are born that he hates a certain person and loves another one. They have no choice in the matter. They have no free will.

Naturally, the only logical conclusion is that god is responsible for everything that occurs. Of course he is: it's only his will that is free. But the bible doesn't exactly make sense of itself.[/quote]

Out of curiosity, what influence do you think cause and effect has on one's free will?

To run with Tslar's ice cream example, yes when one goes to Baskin Robbins one can choose any of the flavors and there's no omniscient will forcing an ice cream upon oneself, but the ice cream one will choose is more or less decided by factor's beyond one's control. Perhaps one was raised in a house where chocolate is exalted, despite a love of vanilla being written in one's DNA. Maybe one didn't enjoy chocolate, and under the family's pressure persevered on and acquired the taste.

Accordingly, if one chooses the vanilla, it's because one was born liking it, if one chooses the the chocolate, it's because in the past one forced oneself to like it in order to conform with others. In these cases free will was stunted by society and accident of birth, two things beyond control of the individual. It seems to me that there's a reason for everything, and it always informs, if not decides our actions.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']There's a difference between indentured servitude and chattel slavery.[/quote] True, although I don't think a lot of slavery recorded in the Bible was what we typically think of as being an indentured servant (i.e., a rather temporary thing). Likewise, it wasn't the horrible abuses that come to mind immediately when one thinks of slavery on this continent. But the Roman / Middle Eastern culture of having slaves, typically mirrored a symbiotic relationship rather than the "master" / "worthless piece of property" that one might think of at the word "slavery."

There are warnings against abuses of slavery as well. Paul's whole letter to Philemon (what a lengthy book!) is a letter to a man who owned a slave whom Paul was returning to him. That look is an interesting study in "Christian Slavery," recognizing the salves not only as a benefit to your household but also, in this case, as a fellow believer in the Savior.

That being said, slavery always comes off in the Bible as something tolerated, but never encouraged.

And Pyro, do watch yourself again in not mixing up theocratic Israel laws with universal moral codes. It's easy to do, but a hugely important distinction. If for no other reason it could make you look kinda silly if misused. :) I don't think you did above, really, but it's a fine line to walk.
 
[quote name='daroga']True, although I don't think a lot of slavery recorded in the Bible was what we typically think of as being an indentured servant (i.e., a rather temporary thing). Likewise, it wasn't the horrible abuses that come to mind immediately when one thinks of slavery on this continent. But the Roman / Middle Eastern culture of having slaves, typically mirrored a symbiotic relationship rather than the "master" / "worthless piece of property" that one might think of at the word "slavery." [/quote]

I wonder what the enslaved would say.
 
[quote name='camoor']I wonder what the enslaved would say.[/quote]


Probably went about their life singing "always look on the bright side of life"
 
[quote name='camoor']I wonder what the enslaved would say.[/quote]Please don't misunderstand me. There certainly weren't people jumping up and down with joy because they were slaves. They were often prisoners of war, those who had lost.

My point merely was that we would be ill-advised to take the framework of slavery in America and apply it to late BC, early AD (BCE and CE if you prefer) slave customs. There are similarities, no doubt, but not universally so.

Amazing the tangents we can get off on, eh?
 
ive been thinking about it lately.
it doesnt make sense to me.
cause when we die, our brain dies too.
so there would be no way to perceive heaven or hell even if they did exist...
and i dont think time exists either, at least not the way we think of it.
but aliens??
were getting into a whole other thing there.

theres a lot of things on my mind i want to get other peoples opinions on
 
Short answer, "Yes."

Long answer, "You betchya."

The soul and the resurrection of the body would clear up your concerns, tlsar.
 
[quote name='tlsar']ive been thinking about it lately.
it doesnt make sense to me.
cause when we die, our brain dies too.
so there would be no way to perceive heaven or hell even if they did exist...[/quote]Absolutely. Thought, personality, etc. are completely tied to the brain. But when you accept the idea of guys coming back from the dead (and I mean dead-dead) or the Earth temporarily ceasing to rotate or... or our planet existing on the back of a giant turtle (admittedly, the last one isn't pertinent to the discussion at hand), the idea that our mind resides in our soul instead of/as well as our brain is not so hard to stomach.
[quote name='tlsar'] and i dont think time exists either, at least not the way we think of it.[/quote]Sorry to quote this guy as often as I do, but is this to your liking?
[quote name='tlsar'] but aliens??[/quote]Wait. What the fuck?
 
yes, aliens.
come on we all know theyre out there.
its just selfish to think the entire universe belongs to us humans on our tiny planet.
 
[quote name='tlsar']yes, aliens.
come on we all know theyre out there.
its just selfish to think the entire universe belongs to us humans on our tiny planet.[/quote]

Sure, there has to be some form of life elsewhere, but wtf does that have to do with anything?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top