Christianity

[Harbal]

Even so, despite your total faith in God’s judgement, you are human, with a human’s sense of right and wrong, and what is fair or unfair, so, human to human, tell me if you think it fair that I suffer for eternity for failing to believe that God exists?

It's not just the "Does God exist," question, Harbal. It's much more than that.

The Bible says that even the various enemies of God believe He exists. So we get no special status for admitting that. What's important about belief is not believing in mere facts; it's how that faith introduces us to God Himself. When we show even a little willingness to enter into a relationship with Him, God is willing in return. But God is also committed to our individuality, our freedom, our identity, our value...and part of that is that we are choosing beings.

You don't force a person with whom you have an ambition for a love relationship into something he or she doesn't want. You don't break his or her will, and compel him or her to love you, turning him or her into some kind of automaton or being whose will and identity don't matter. You don't dehumanize him or her. Instead, you appeal to them, and leave them to make the decision about whether or not they want to reciprocate. Real relationships are always two-sided, and voluntary on both sides. God's willingness is not even in doubt. But ours is.

We have a choice. We don't have to do much to signal our willingness to have some relationship with God. But we do have to do something -- not just as a signal of our will, but because unless we agree, it's not a real relationship anyway.

The Bible says, "...without faith it is impossible to please [God], for the one who comes to God must believe that He exists, and that He proves to be One who rewards those who seek Him." (Heb. 11:6) Believe that God will reward you, if you seek Him. You will find Him. That's the promise. But it has to come from your choice in the matter.

That's my attempt to explain complicated issues, and respond to very good questions, as clearly as I can. I hope it's as forthcoming as you would like.

Thanks for your response, but you didn't answer my question: "so, human to human, tell me if you think it fair that I suffer for eternity for failing to believe that God exists?"

If you don't feel able to answer that specific question, please just say that, and I won't push it. I've explained my position regarding my attitude towards belief in God, and I ask that you respect that as a statement of how things are. I'm not susceptible to persuasion; we've been through it before, and it always leaves me completely unmoved. I'm not the sort of person who worships anything, so I don't think God would be fully satisfied with by conduct, even were I ever to change my mind about his existence. It's not just that I don't believe in God; neither do I want all the rigmarole that goes with it. It's just not a lifestyle, or attitude, that appeals to me. My lack of belief in God is genuine, and not something I have control over, but all the rest; the Bible, and the devotion to a deity, that's just not for me, so yes, that is something that I willfully reject. So, given what I have told you about myself, Is it your personal opinion that I deserve to suffer for all eternity for my choice?

[attofishpi]

I still don't under_stand. Being a son of God does not render one AS God.

It is not an issue that I adjudicate. It is generally and widely believed and is one of the core tenets of Christianity.

Are you suggesting that (in the least) God was never considered the father of all men in Judaism - that any 'annointed one' could not be, would not be referred to as the 'son of God'?

Again, it is not my role to 'suggest' anything. In Judaism god was certainly seen as the creator of man. Could that be different from being 'father'?

The language, the term, "son of god" is not one that Judaism could make, due to its tenets. The Moshiach would be an agent but not an aspect of god. The Prophets are not god-aspects but inspired persons. There is an aspect of god that inspires: Shechinah. As with most -- all -- Jewish metaphysics it is rather complex.

..and ultimately sad, that men defer all reasoning for what others write and is classified as 'holy scripture'. Very very sad, that they don't analyse the minds of at least what "prophets" have written/said for their own minds.

As our ilk do hey Jacobi?

[Alexis Jacobi]

If you don't feel able to answer that specific question, please just say that, and I won't push it. I've explained my position regarding my attitude towards belief in God, and I ask that you respect that as a statement of how things are. I'm not susceptible to persuasion; we've been through it before, and it always leaves me completely unmoved. I'm not the sort of person who worships anything, so I don't think God would be fully satisfied with by conduct, even were I ever to change my mind about his existence. It's not just that I don't believe in God; neither do I want all the rigmarole that goes with it. It's just not a lifestyle, or attitude, that appeals to me. My lack of belief in God is genuine, and not something I have control over, but all the rest; the Bible, and the devotion to a deity, that's just not for me, so yes, that is something that I willfully reject. So, given what I have told you about myself, Is it your personal opinion that I deserve to suffer for all eternity for my choice?

Immanuel made his play. It was carried out with exquisite restraint -- humbly, nearly imploringly.

And yet all those words, from the beginning! were wasted on you. I mean wasted in the sense that you are not convincible.

But now you know. You have heard. Either you will be moved (at some point) to repent and bow before Jesus, or you will spend the rest of eternity on that simmering Lake of Fire.

First, comes the pleasant engagement. It is all very reasonable. But then, then comes the argument's heavy artillery.

[attofishpi]

The Greatest I Am - the matter and anti-matter saw each others perfect reflection but to have each other would cause nothing.

Shekhinah and Sitra Achra.

[Harbal]

Immanuel made his play. It was carried out with exquisite restraint -- humbly, nearly imploringly.

And yet all those words, from the beginning! were wasted on you. I mean wasted in the sense that you are not convincible.

But now you know. You have heard. Either you will be moved (at some point) to repent and bow before Jesus, or you will spend the rest of eternity on that simmering Lake of Fire.

First, comes the pleasant engagement. It is all very reasonable. But then, then comes the argument's heavy artillery.

It doesn't matter what our beliefs or opinions are, or what causes we promote, we are still just people, and it would be nice to occassionally interact with each other on an unguarded, human being to human being level. Just come out from behind the high wall some of us live behind and communicate openly and honestly. I can't see it happening though.

Your wall is every bit as high as IC's, btw, Alexis.

[attofishpi]

Immanuel made his play. It was carried out with exquisite restraint -- humbly, nearly imploringly.

And yet all those words, from the beginning! were wasted on you. I mean wasted in the sense that you are not convincible.

But now you know. You have heard. Either you will be moved (at some point) to repent and bow before Jesus, or you will spend the rest of eternity on that simmering Lake of Fire.

First, comes the pleasant engagement. It is all very reasonable. But then, then comes the argument's heavy artillery.

It doesn't matter what our beliefs or opinions are, or what causes we promote, we are still just people, and it would be nice to occassionally interact with each other on an unguarded, human being to human being level. Just come out from behind the high wall some of us live behind and communicate openly and honestly. I can't see it happening though.

Your wall is every bit as high as IC's, btw, Alexis.

vERY dIFFERENT wALLS.

[attofishpi]

Cockney twang

Eye
Nose
Eye
Ear
Mouth
Ear

[Alexis Jacobi]

It doesn't matter what our beliefs or opinions are, or what causes we promote, we are still just people, and it would be nice to occassionally interact with each other on an unguarded, human being to human being level. Just come out from behind the high wall some of us live behind and communicate openly and honestly. I can't see it happening though.

But it does, and very much, matter what opinions we have and what causes we promote. What I am forced to do (it amounts to a sort of performance) in relation to you (i.e. the assertions that you make without grasping that you are actively asserting even when your assertions are neutral or void of content) is simply to notice what you are saying and then repeat it back to you in a somewhat different form.

But yes, you are right: we are always just people.

You are also missing a core point, and I have tried to refine it right here on these pages. The belief that Evangelical Christians hold to in our present is consequential, and not non-consequential. If Evangelical Christians believe that by helping to send Jews back to Israel (Christian Zionism) and that this will help jump-start End Times, I think we can fairly say that *ideas have consequences*.

That is just one example.

I agree with you: we do all of us stand on our *walls* and make statements about what we value. When I researched The Culture Wars I saw quickly that it was those things (what is valued and why) that were at the base of all concerns.

And then I thought: We have no choice but to define what we believe, to then determine what our beliefs requires, and then to act in our world in accord with our beliefs.

What is your strategy? It appears to be an odd form of neutrality. It is as if you've relinquished -- but what have you relinquished? Having values? I cannot quite figure it out. But I have described your position as uniquely modern and uniquely postmodern.

And with zero intention of offending.

My purpose? It has been all that it was ever stated to be: to examine these issues in depth. And we are doing that.

Your wall is every bit as high as IC's, btw, Alexis.

Oh is it? Are you sure?

In actual point of fact, and if I have a 'wall', it is really quite different. If I say that Immanuel Can is fronting a System, and that the system is in essence that of Hebrew Idea-Imperialsm, the characterization is one of critique. It also implies there is a way around it.

Is that a 'wall' for you? If anything another metaphor is needed: It is a ladder over a wall.

But let's remember: it is this and a great many things that we are indeed talking through here on this thread!

Now, if only Iambiguous can be hauled back from his far sea of irascibility and frustration!

"He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest." John Fowles

[Dubious]

Well, it's hard to imagine that anybody would be so unaware of what's at stake that they'd actually decide that. So perhaps the only synonym for that would be the unsavoury cognate of "agnostic," meaning "ignorant" or "unthinking." But I wouldn't want to call anybody that.

Okay, make me aware of what is at stake, if only to relieve yourself of the arduous task of trying to imagine me.

If God exists, what's at stake is one's eternal soul...its destiny, and its ultimate value. The stakes literally could not be higher. One is deciding on the disposition of one's soul forever...and one is receiving the outcome of one's own determination.

Compared to that, nothing on Earth is serious business.

It's not "if god exists". It's only true if Jesus is god, the most pathetic ever created! Most other gods - who don't beg for humans to believe in them - are not likely to give a crap.

[Immanuel Can]

Thanks for your response, but you didn't answer my question: "so, human to human, tell me if you think it fair that I suffer for eternity for failing to believe that God exists?"

I thought I did.

Nobody is sent to "suffer for eternity for failing to believe that God exists." Nobody is saved by "deciding to believe that God exists," either. One is given to go wherever one chooses, based on whether or not one wishes to have an actual relationship with God.

That God exists is merely a claim of fact. I can believe that David Beckham exists...that, too, is just a fact. But it does not even open the question of what my relationship is, or is not, to David Beckham.

Your question aims too low, therefore.

If you don't feel able to answer that specific question, please just say that, and I won't push it.

I can only say this: I can answer A question, but it has to be one premised on the right assumptions. This one, as worded, isn't.

I've explained my position regarding my attitude towards belief in God, and I ask that you respect that as a statement of how things are.

I believe I'm doing that...did I give any other impression?

I'm not susceptible to persuasion;

Ah. Now we've got something.

A person who is "not susceptible to persuasion" is, by Biblical definition, guilty of what is called "willful unbelief," not just ordinary "not knowing" or "not believing." That is to say, that the person COULD know, and SHOULD know, but refuses to know.

The bad news is that nobody enters the Kingdom of God in a state of willful unbelief. (Heb. 3:19, for example)

So now we can answer your question, or something like it: yes, I think that's fair. I think we should all get exactly what we choose, in that regard.

My lack of belief in God is genuine, and not something I have control over, but all the rest; the Bible, and the devotion to a deity, that's just not for me, so yes, that is something that I willfully reject. So, given what I have told you about myself, Is it your personal opinion that I deserve to suffer for all eternity for my choice?

You have said it. You choose not to have any relationship with God. Not that you wanted one, and couldn't have it. Not that you were willing to attempt one, and didn't get it. Not that you looked, and none was available. It was a choice. And, as you say, a "willful" choice.

And the Bible says that God says this to those who do that: "depart from Me, you workers of iniquity, for I never knew you." (Matt. 7:23) Interestingly, the Greek word "knew" there, is ginosko, which means, "to stand in an approving relationship to" according to W.E. Vine, the expert on Biblical language. (It's also the word from which we get "agnostic," interestingly). So the import of that statement is, "I have no relationship to you."

So your question is answered, after all. And in as direct and truthful terms as I can apply. The bad news is that the present news is not good; but present news only stays the only news if nothing changes. However, you seem to want to assure me that nothing ever will change. You'll perhaps forgive me if I hope better for you, anyway. For I certainly do.

[Immanuel Can]

Your wall is every bit as high as IC's, btw, Alexis.

As hard as this may be to imagine, H., there are other ways of living and seeing things than your own. That doesn't mean you owe me, or AJ, for that matter, to agree we've got things right...you owe us nothing, in fact, obviously. But it does mean that a person isn't necessarily inauthentic or "behind a wall" for thinking very differently from the way you are inclined to.

I don't mean that sarcastically. It's hard for any of us to imagine people who are really different from us. We all naturally, tend to suppose others' experiences and attitudes are just like ours would be, if we were in their place. It's our chief resource, the analogy with our own feelings. That's the basis of empathy...the projection of our own experiences onto others, and the analogizing of the two. And then we say, "I know exactly how you feel."

But anybody who's heard that line knows that it's almost always untrue. What we mean is actually, "I am imagining my feelings, situation and perspectives are the same as yours, and painting them over you, hoping I'm right." But we're nearly always wrong. We don't have the same situation, experiences and so on that others have, and our feelings may be rather different from theirs. And so they recoil a little at our self-absorption, and reply, "I'm sorry, but you really could not possibly know how this feels to me." They are right.

You can imagine everybody is like you...and if you were to, say, be open to belief in God, it would require a different state of disposition than you currently occupy, by your own account. Thus, your assumption that others must be "faking it" is hasty. They can quite easily be sincere.

And actually, to ask them to speak from anywhere where they actually aren't, is to ask them to create a "wall" where there is none. It's an invitation to them to the effect that you'll be more willing to hear them if they misrepresent themselves to you more winsomely.

It's an invitation that, as a Christian, I have to decline. What you see is what you get. Take it or leave it.

[Alexis Jacobi]

But now you know. You have heard. Either you will be moved (at some point) to repent and bow before Jesus, or you will spend the rest of eternity on that simmering Lake of Fire.

First, comes the pleasant engagement. It is all very reasonable. But then, then comes the argument's heavy artillery.

Then:

Immanuel writes: A person who is "not susceptible to persuasion" is, by Biblical definition, guilty of what is called "willful unbelief," not just ordinary "not knowing" or "not believing." That is to say, that the person COULD know, and SHOULD know, but refuses to know.

The bad news is that nobody enters the Kingdom of God in a state of willful unbelief. (Heb. 3:19, for example)

I tooooooold you.

First the entreaties, then the threats of Doom.

Soft sell, then hard sell.

[attofishpi]

I seriously DO_U_BT that (IC) you have ever heard a word spoken to you from God....yet, you continue to regurgitate stuff written by other men.

For the life of me burning in hell, I do not know Y

[Alexis Jacobi]

As hard as this may be to imagine, H., there are other ways of living and seeing things than your own. That doesn't mean you owe me, or AJ, for that matter, to agree we've got things right...you owe us nothing, in fact, obviously. But it does mean that a person isn't necessarily inauthentic or "behind a wall" for thinking very differently from the way you are inclined to.

What I say, what I recommend, is stepping back from all Pictures and trying to discern in them, out of them, what is actually being said through them.

We all wish to arrive at explanations that feel ultimate. Statements beyond which there is no further clarification needed.

Who can say -- definitively -- what is ultimately right and wrong when it comes to life's existential decisions?

Authenticity. Another wonderful turn in such an interesting conversation.

[attofishpi]

ACCORDING TO IMMANUEL C:

Everyone gets born once, judged whether to burn in hell forever or yippy skippy live forever just because Jesus suffered for a (in comparison) very small amount of time nailed up on some wood. Well, would U?

Y

..don't ask anyone around here, they have no idea (and me, it's too personal)