Does a Good God Exist?

[Guest shiloh357]

shiloh357, on 20 December 2010 - 08:29 PM, said:

That is not true. He took the sins of mankind on Himself, but you must consent in order to realize that reality. Otherwise you still bear the burden yourself and you will still die for your sin.

That makes more sense, though I am now wondering whether it is moral to foist one

[enoob57]

Have you noticed a pattern? Are you intentionally trying to make it sound as threatening as possible? Do you think God prefers that His children come to Him through love or through fear?

The greatest platform af all is The Love of God for it cannot be copied, faked, imitated for it's source is God! There was only one that performed the ability to walk in life with said Love and not violate it in any way. You say you are capable of loving... it is easy to test- go to one of your enemies and give yourself to them in such a way the all of what you are is willfully given even in sacrifice so that they are improved and I said all of yourself... nothing withheld: possessions, money, comforts, home, family, friends, even your life... That is why MG has begged in her prayers this for you and all else, who are children, which come to this reading and understanding of you also as well say Father help... you have had more love than you can know Tommy poured out unto God for your salvation....

How sad it is for those who read of what love is and quickly dismiss it by this thinking- "my enemies would not appreciate this if I did give myself this way, but that it would only make me a schmuck in their eyes"... They might even spit on you and beat you with joy and delight as they tortured you to death because all they have in their heart is hatred for me... but you do it anyway for you know that what is in you [The Love of God] cannot be but what it is and that is to Love God and others more than all else, even self which holds that love. This Love must be expressed in actions for it is as real as real will ever get! The capacity of those who deny God and His Word as to understand this love is not there... for the performance of hell is the greatest display of Love for all eternity for it is the separation of those who wish to have nothing to do with God from those who wish to be filled through and through with nothing but Him!!! The reason the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom is that it is the foundation of knowledge which states with God all things are possible and In His pleasure all things consist and abide toward that beginning without end... we call it life but until Christ came and lived it fully unto The Father we had no concept by the Law of God just exactly how Love was the Laws fulfillment.

So that those who obeyed the outward aspects of The Law appeared to be Lovers of God... but these are the ones when the Son of God came crucified Him. For I am sure that you have had instances where an outward appearance to a superior would be to your betterment and so you lived a lie for whatever that betterment might bring. This made the superior think of you one way when really you were of another... The Love of God cannot dwell in such a person for they are operating only in their own interests and through deception they think life is obtained! We "the children of God" know that Life is of God and that we have been so steeped in the lies and deceptions of self and the world around that we cannot rely on anything else but His Word to guide us into what truth really is... It doesn't take long for one to search for Him in His Word that He comes to them and opens their minds to the realities of Himself so that Salvation occurs... then the true journey begins and we look for others to tell... Prayed... Love Steven

[doubting_tommy]

That makes more sense, though I am now wondering whether it is moral to foist one's sins upon another, even if he is willing. Obviously we die otherwise, but maybe the moral thing to do is to accept one's punishment rather than have someone else do the time for you, as it were.

Tommy, I implore you to get some teaching; learn the Bible, learn what the Messiah did for you. You are so lost out there; I really fear for you. Praying for the blinders to be taken away and your heart to become receptive to the Truth.

Thank you.

[doubting_tommy]

Taking the time to warn you of danger is "uncouth?" What kind of person would let simply let someone walk into danger if they have it in their power to warn them and try to prevent them from coming to harm? I am sorry, but you are just really reaching. You are trying for any angle you can think of to paint anything God does as wrong in order to justify your unbelief. Your approach is simply irrational.

I

[doubting_tommy]

That is your decision ultimately. Jesus provided a way for you to have eternal life, but if you reject cause you think going to hell is far more moral and proper, then nothing anyone can say will make any difference.

It might be possible for God to forgive me without placing my sins upon Jesus, in which case it might be possible to go to Heaven. It seems unlikely though, assuming your positions is correct, since it would kind of defeat the point of the whole thing. But we should remember that debt can be written off as well as paid.

Instead of pretending that you live on some high moral plain, perhaps the "moral" thing for you to do is to be honest that there is nothing God (even if you believe He does exist) could do that would make you accept Him.

God could make himself known to me, such that I have good solid proof that He exists and that He is the God of the Bible. Then I would have no choice but to accept Him. Or God could send someone like you to give me compelling arguments which could change my mind. Maybe I

[Guest shiloh357]

I

[Guest shiloh357]

shiloh357, on 21 December 2010 - 05:21 AM, said:

That is your decision ultimately. Jesus provided a way for you to have eternal life, but if you reject cause you think going to hell is far more moral and proper, then nothing anyone can say will make any difference.

It might be possible for God to forgive me without placing my sins upon Jesus, in which case it might be possible to go to Heaven.

No, that is not possible.

It seems unlikely though, assuming your positions is correct, since it would kind of defeat the point of the whole thing. But we should remember that debt can be written off as well as paid.

Not the debt of sin. This is not like monetary debt on a loan or something. This is something far more serious and spiritual in nature. It required a spiritual remedy.

I

[doubting_tommy]

God's approach is to send people like me to warn you of the dangers of continuing as you are. I don't have to try to convince. My job is to simply warn you. If you reject the warning, that is up to you. God does not ask me to convince you.

But the warning cannot possibly be effective if the premises on which it relies are not convincing to me- you would not take me seriously if I warned that you are displeasing Odin, for example.

I am not also not responsble before God for your acceptance or rejection of the warning. That is on your head. You are the one who has to decide if the risk of rejecting the warning is worth it or not. I am only responsible before God for telling you the truth. The rest is up to you.

I didn

[other one]

]

If that's true, then it's not quite the case that it's 'just the same' as someone paying a debt to society. The fact that we have no directly analogous human situation could explain why it's so difficult for me to understand. Or it could be evidence that the concept is in fact incoherent. There may be further possibilities.

there may well be further possibilities:

John 6:44-45

44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.

NKJV

I dare say that until this happens, you will be lost in this world...... and that's sad. May we all pray that the Father opens the eyes of everyone within this thread, for it is the only answer for the batting back and forth of all the questions. Until this happens we will be at a stalemate.

***Praying****

[doubting_tommy]

No, that is not possible.

Do you mean not possible in a purely logical sense, or not possible based on the claims made about God in the Bible or both?

Not the debt of sin. This is not like monetary debt on a loan or something. This is something far more serious and spiritual in nature. It required a spiritual remedy.

Maybe debt isn’t the best word to use to describe it then. If I owe you money, someone else could pay it for me, but if I wrong you morally, then it seems as though I must either atone for this, or you must forgive me, in which case it seems to be that you are absolving me, or writing off my debt.

Who knows? Again, if you think it is worth the risk. Tell me this, what you do stand to lose by placing your faith in Jesus?

The first thing I stand to lose is that, if I am wrong, I will have wasted part of my life in trying to adhere to rules which do not need to be adhered to, in feeling guilty for failing to live up to things which I don’t need to, and so on. That’s not definitive, of course, but it bears keeping in mind.

The second thing I stand to lose is that, if I am wrong, it might be the case that placing my faith in Jesus will offend the ‘true’ God who might send me to an eternity of suffering for disobeying him and failing to place my faith in him.

Not disproportionate at all. Your eternal destruction will be the result of rejecting Christ in this life. That is what you reap for eternity. But then you claim you are prepared for that if it comes, LOL.

I suppose I don’t see how the act of rejecting Christ really merits an infinity of suffering. Just seems kinda mean to me and more than a little over-the-top.

That is really just an excuse. The plan of salvation is so simple a child can understand it. The Bible is written on a 5th grade reading level. Your lack of understanding is purposeful. You don't want to accept it, so you muddy the water where the Bible is the most clear and then feign not being able to understand.

Reminds me of that old joke about quantum mechanics: “if you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don’t understand quantum mechanics”. I think the ink spilled over the centuries by theologians and philosophers of religion is pretty good evidence for the claim that these issues aren’t half as simple as you’re trying to claim.

Omnipotence has often misunderstood as the power to do "anything." It really is not that simple. God is a logic, and order. He is also a God of transcedent holiness. He cannot do anything to compromise that.

But why not? What is it about ‘omnipotence’ which entails that a God of transcendent holiness cannot do anything to compromise that?

I guess I have to spell it out for you. By normal usage, I am speaking of using the invention within the parameters of its intended purpose. You are still trying to muddy the water. The anaolgy was meant to show that God, by virtue of having made us, knows what we are made of, knows what is and is not in us. He knows our bodies better than science does. He knows what makes us sick and what will keep us healthy. He knows our personalities and what we are good at and not so good at. He has made each of with purpose and a plan if we are willing to accept it. He konws and wants only the best for us.

You’re still not appreciating the distinction between descriptive and normative. God may know all the physical facts about what the universe is made up of, how it works etc., and God may also know all about our mental states- what we think, what we feel and so on. But an additional, normative component is required in order to know what is ‘best’ for us.

As for the purpose of the universe, it’s going to be very difficult, if not impossible to explain what this is, without resorting to the naturalistic fallacy or to the Bible (which you are free to do, of course, but this part of the discussion arose in the context of what we are entitled to conclude in the absence of the Bible as a source).

The analogy is not tight. But there is no analogy that would be when we are speaking about a God who is trascends the limits of human comprension. God is beyond comprehension, and there is no analogy I can offer that will be without its flaws, but in terms of the CENTRAL IDEA, the analogy works fine.

The reason it doesn’t work is because the analogy arose with regard to a question of necessity. In order for the analogy to work, you need to provide one which shows how something is necessarily the case. We know that it is not *necessarily* the case that the inventor of something will always be best-placed to know how that something ought to be used, so your analogy cannot show that it is a necessity that God knows best, simply because God is the inventor. (again, my own view would be that God would know best, but not because he is the inventor).

Your problem is that you want to ignore the central idea and stretch the analogy way beyond the central idea so that you can point out why it won't work in every concievable situation imaginable. You could do that with any analogy, but for some reason you think this kind of debate strategy appears intellectual, but it doesn't. It only shows that you are unable to deal with the analogy and speak to the central idea. That is why it makes you look foolish.

This strategy which you think makes me look foolish is not so much ‘a’ debate strategy, as ‘the’ debate strategy. Your argument was as follows:

1. The inventor of X necessarily knows what is best for X

2. God invented X

_____

3. God knows what is best for X.

In reply I provided several examples where A may be the inventor of X, but is not best placed to know how to use X, demonstrating that your argument is not sound as the first premise is false.

Edited December 21, 2010 by doubting_tommy