Troubling Doctrines For Christians

[Space Commander Travis]

I'm saying that Jesus intentionally spoke in order that certain people wouldn't understand him. If he wanted everyone saved he wouldn't have used parables. Those who wanted to understand Jesus would have to enquire further, but he knew that many wouldn't. Everything is up for individual interpretation, but not all interpretations are valid. Needless to say that after reading the New Testament, the teachings of Paul and Jesus have never clashed for me, they complement each other. Not having any reason not to accept Paul, I choose to believe that his teachings are valid for spiritual growth and understanding God.

I'm sorry? You really think Jesus did not want everyone "saved"? That he really thought that everyone was already predestined for being "Saved" or for "destruction"? And is that what you chose to interpret from it?

I'm afraid all I can say is merciful heavens above. And you can decide for yourself whether I'm being allegorical there. Do you remember that little speech he gave called the Sermon on the Mount? Now that was only intended for the Select Few, was it? He didn't actually mean for all of Humanity to listen to his message? When he said "You are the salt of the earth" etc, what he meant was "only the Elite who have been selected by God are the Salt of the Earth, and it's only them i'm talking to, and I'm sorry, but God has just decided to consign the rest of you to destruction"?

[Space Commander Travis]

* Another point: Do you not think that sticking to this dogma might actually be counterproductive to promote the cause and the image of Christianity? I mean, if this dogma was true, it would mean that there wouldn't be any point in being Christian, would there, and accepting Jesus and so on, if it had already been decided whether one was scheduled for Heaven or for Destruction? I mean, on basic philosophical terms. Not to mention that, if people are still going to insist, even now, on this dogma, and even more than that if they're going to insist that that's what Jesus himself believed, then how do they think that it is possibly going to attract people to Christianity? Or is that actually what people want; is that why they insist on clinging to this idea, because the people who do believe it believe that they're among those who God has predordained to join him in Bliss, so they can feel smug towards all the plebs?

i can tell you, the more I look through this and similar threads, the more and more sympathic I get towards Dawkins.

[+Link of Hyrule]

I'm sorry? You really think Jesus did not want everyone "saved"? That he really thought that everyone was already predestined for being "Saved" or for "destruction"? And is that what you chose to interpret from it?

I'm afraid all I can say is merciful heavens above. And you can decide for yourself whether I'm being allegorical there. Do you remember that little speech he gave called the Sermon on the Mount? Now that was only intended for the Select Few, was it? He didn't actually mean for all of Humanity to listen to his message? When he said "You are the salt of the earth" etc, what he meant was "only the Elite who have been selected by God are the Salt of the Earth, and it's only them i'm talking to, and I'm sorry, but God has just decided to consign the rest of you to destruction"?

Everyone, all of humanity even, can listen to his message. Not all of them will accept it though, and Jesus knows this. He deliberately makes it so. This would have been more true during the time Jesus was alive, since he spoke to the crowds in parables and most of them went away nodding to themselves and going "hmmm", but then Jesus interpreted the parables for his disciples in private (and presumably any in the crowd who were curious enough to enquire further would have approached him to become a disciple). Today we have the Gospels in which we need only read about the parable and then the interpretation of the parable is usually right there in the next few sentences.

In any case, the Sermon on the Mount was for believers only. It wasn't a universal message for all of humankind. "You are the salt of the earth" was written to Jesus' followers, not to everyone and everyone.

* Another point: Do you not think that sticking to this dogma might actually be counterproductive to promote the cause and the image of Christianity? I mean, if this dogma was true, it would mean that there wouldn't be any point in being Christian, would there, and accepting Jesus and so on, if it had already been decided whether one was scheduled for Heaven or for Destruction? I mean, on basic philosophical terms. Not to mention that, if people are still going to insist, even now, on this dogma, and even more than that if they're going to insist that that's what Jesus himself believed, then how do they think that it is possibly going to attract people to Christianity? Or is that actually what people want; is that why they insist on clinging to this idea, because the people who do believe it believe that they're among those who God has predordained to join him in Bliss, so they can feel smug towards all the plebs?

i can tell you, the more I look through this and similar threads, the more and more sympathic I get towards Dawkins.

I don't believe this is counter-productive to Christianity. First, it is illogical to say that there is no point in being Christian. This is often the Arminian counter-argument to Calvin (Arminianism is the argument for free will). The adherents of Arminianism say that there is no point in evangelism if Calvinism is correct. They say that they don't need to preach the gospel, and don't even need to live a Christian life, because at the end of the day God has called the Elect already and therefore God will save those already saved.

This is a straw-man. No Calvinist I know would state their case in such a manner. Being a Calvinist myself, I'd respond by saying that there certainly is a point in evangelism - how do you know that God hasn't predestined you to be the one through whom someone else is destined to be saved? Of course, you may not be big on evangelism, so this first part of the answer may not apply to you. The other part of the straw man, however, that you don't need to even live a Christian life, is relevant. Again, no Calvinist would ever use this argument. No one knows whether they are saved or not, only God does. In the meantime, we have perhaps the illusion of free will - our choices are seemingly free (certain Calvinist theologians have dubbed this "real will" as opposed to "free will"). Thus if we are Christian we should strive with our real will to live for God, otherwise we may prove through our actions that we are not part of the Elect (the argument that we don't even need to act Christian and still be saved is predicated on the unfounded assumption that you are already saved no matter what you do).

This is the pure Calvinist response. I, however, am not a pure Calvinist. I believe that somehow, despite it being a contradiction in the physical realm, free will and predestination can co-exist in God's spiritual existence. That we are predestined and therefore we act freely, and we act with our free will and were therefore predestined to do so. Both statements equally true. Whatever the case, though, not living a Christian existence would seem to be proof that one is not among the Elect, unless that person were to change their ways to a more Christ-like existence.

On a final note, you again bring up smugness, that this is what believers think in order to "feel smug towards the plebs". This is the second time you've mentioned it, and the first time I told you it was a load of crud, even though I can see why you would say it. You ignored my response, and chose to repeat it again. Are you intentionally misrepresenting my position to make it look as absurd as possible? This is NOT about smugness. The entire idea of feeling "smug" hinges on the idea that "I am saved and you are not". I don't know what the future holds. I don't know whether you or anyone else is going to turn to Christ and become part of the Elect? I don't know whether I may one day fall away in the future and realise that I never was part of the Elect. By being "smug towards the plebs" (feelings of superiority towards the unsaved) then what I am really saying is "I know better than God, I Judge with my personally flawed humanity that person x is unable to be saved. They are NOT part of the Elect, and never will be, thus I can feel better about myself because of them". That is a total misrepresentation of everything I believe, and certainly a misrepresentation of what the majority of Calvinists believe (naturally I cannot speak for all Calvinists in this matter).

~ Regards, PA

Edited March 4, 2013 by Paranoid Android

[danielost]

Is it possible that this is a principle, is the truth, irregardless of which text its written in? Those who came through christ and now are in communion with god and can see the assocoation between God and Christ, that indeed this figure is the carnate of god and representation of ourselves as well, to them it is clear that this Jesus is the way the truth and the life. There are other variables that make this hard for some people to accept. 1. The spirit of the lord moves on its own accord like the wind choosing who to reveal this too, that is important to consider 2. Hearts are hardened to Christianity because of its authoritative stance and its hate practices and because of this have built a even higher defence around thier heart from the likes of God, 3. In order for a person to come to god they will have to face thier own demons and this can be a scary place and also a place of deep denial

There is a balance between political correctness and truth.

Chist is the eye opener, the one who was resurrected on our behalf and so has the ability to resurrect. Any person who is in relation with god understands this principle regardless to the fact if they are christian or not. (If they dont they should, and it would be clear to me that if any would say, any way but Jesus is the right way, that they have a lot more soul work to do.) There is power in the name of Jesus and indeed he is the Christ. I have posed this question before and am not adverse to the idea that Jesus (although very real) is a figure for this Christ, but it is the priciple that is important here and not our adversities to religion and text. I have asked the question: are there other ways to God? I dont think its about putting a face on it or arguing about certain scriptures or what they mean, and for me it is definately not about being confined to one particular text... but acknowedging that God does love and value each and everyone of us to redeem us back to himself, not only because he cares about our needs and wants whats best for us but because he wants to be in communion with us, he wants to watch and help us grow and in reality he needs us! We are an extention of him' we are apart of thw universal body, and as long as we are sick the whole world is sick, being adjoined back to god is like being on the antibiotic team, healing yourself and therefore healing the world.

That being said. There are parts of the bible that make me mad, not because I cant accept that the whole world is sick and so therefore is every institution.. I get that but the problem is that these things have become an issue in seperating us further from god and furthervfrom each other because most christians stick by the dogma that the bible is the final authority, this not only limits Christians in understanding who God really is but causes even the concept and reality of divinity to be something that is argued about rather than experienced.

If anybody would listen to little old me today I would tell them there is truth and esoteric knowledge in the teachings of the bible if you contemplate and apply its teaching while in the spirit (this is a state of submission, not in a negative way but in a way of spiritual alertness, a higher state of your own self, a spiritually activated state) and that it is true Jesus is the Way the Truth and the Life.

For Christians I would quote this scripture:

1Cor. 8:3

If any man love God he is known by God.

To me this speaks of ANYONE regardless of religion.

PEACE

Yes, there are other ways to god. But christ is a hand rail to help guide you to god. Nothing is out of our reach. Christ told us to b perfect s god is in heavon. He wouldn't have said that if it was impossible.

[IamsSon]

This is for both Christians and former Christians. What doctrines trouble you the most? You could expand your answers to troubling scriptures, as well. Have you solved problems caused by these troubling doctrines, scriptures, teachings, etc.?

My List Includes These:

.Eternal Hell is excessive, and why would souls be predestined to go there?

.The unforgivable sin reference terrified me when I was a kid, and it seems contradictory and out of place.

.The tone of the New Testament is much different than the tone of the Old Testament.

.Why was slavery not criticized?

Both PA and Sundew gave answers very similar to what I would have given to these.

My list includes:

• Predestination/Free will: After much discussion with fellow Christians both on UM (I'm looking at you PA) and off, I have come to the conclusion that this topic is much more complicated than "either/or" and that the reality may be much closer to a "this, that, and the other." Although the phrase "free will" does not appear in Scripture, the concept of choice and the importance of making a choice to follow God is found in both the Old and New Testaments, as is the concept of God setting things up and God deciding to do or not do, to allow or not allow, so somehow choice is important although God's will is done.
  
• Letting God dispense justice: I'm an American of Mexican descent. It is a deeply ingrained value that you take care of your family, especially the women in your family, and if anyone hurts them, it is your duty to hurt them back. As a Christian I am called to love everyone, and I also know that God will dispense justice, but I am fairly sure, if my wife, daughter, or mother are harmed, I will probably only "remember" that I am supposed to love this person and let God deal with them after I've watched them being poured into a stretcher.
  
• "Being still" and acting: We are called to prayerfully "be still" and let God work, but we are also called to do the work He called us to do. I sometimes struggle with knowing when to be still and when to act.
  
• Evangelizing: Many people, and many churches see Jesus's command in Matthew 28:18-20 as permission to harass non-believers. However, the passage clearly says we should make disciples. The process of making disciples requires establishing a relationship, not just walking up to strangers and telling them they are eternally lost without Jesus.
  

[danielost]

Predestination=the path the history must take,

Free will=you can do what ever you want to do.

[IamsSon]

Predestination=the path the history must take,

Free will=you can do what ever you want to do.

Yeah, but...

God would not want any to perish, so obviously He allows people to choose. But...

God basically told Job the universe exists to accomplish His will, so what He will is what is going to happen.

[No Censorship]

I'm afraid I don't take every single thing that's said in every single part of the Bible, including the OT and the many opinions of Paul, literally. I prefer to look at what Jesus said about things. All the "salvation or damnation" was all invented by "Christian thinkers" like Paul & Augustine and all that lot, very often to completely twist and pervert the words of the one they claimed to follow, for their own purposes. That purpose mainly being to get power for themselves and control over the people. It was often little short of a crime. And all this argument about "an omniscisent God" knowing what choice people would make is really anthropomorphising, isn't it. It gives the impression of how as sitting up there, on his throne in the clouds, with huge filing cabinets full of dossiers on every single person who's ever lived, and a record of whether they've been naughty or nice.

Not really. I don't picture God as Santa Claus. I view Him as a spiritual entity, not an anthropomorphic character that resembles Zeus or Jupiter. Such an entity knows what decisions His creation will or won't make in their lives. That's my entire point. That's why it's hard not to be freaked out by predestination. It goes back to asking why some people are ostensibly sentenced to Hell at birth. Of course, this whole question seems moot to non-believers.

[No Censorship]

The slavery n the bible, more closely reflects indenturd servants here the usa.

It's not even close unless you're talking about how many "servants" were really treated in colonial America. They were treated more like Kunta Kinte than Jeeves, the butler.

[No Censorship]

Both PA and Sundew gave answers very similar to what I would have given to these.

My list includes:

• Predestination/Free will: After much discussion with fellow Christians both on UM (I'm looking at you PA) and off, I have come to the conclusion that this topic is much more complicated than "either/or" and that the reality may be much closer to a "this, that, and the other." Although the phrase "free will" does not appear in Scripture, the concept of choice and the importance of making a choice to follow God is found in both the Old and New Testaments, as is the concept of God setting things up and God deciding to do or not do, to allow or not allow, so somehow choice is important although God's will is done.
  
• Letting God dispense justice: I'm an American of Mexican descent. It is a deeply ingrained value that you take care of your family, especially the women in your family, and if anyone hurts them, it is your duty to hurt them back. As a Christian I am called to love everyone, and I also know that God will dispense justice, but I am fairly sure, if my wife, daughter, or mother are harmed, I will probably only "remember" that I am supposed to love this person and let God deal with them after I've watched them being poured into a stretcher.
  
• "Being still" and acting: We are called to prayerfully "be still" and let God work, but we are also called to do the work He called us to do. I sometimes struggle with knowing when to be still and when to act.
  
• Evangelizing: Many people, and many churches see Jesus's command in Matthew 28:18-20 as permission to harass non-believers. However, the passage clearly says we should make disciples. The process of making disciples requires establishing a relationship, not just walking up to strangers and telling them they are eternally lost without Jesus.
  

Your first comment mirrors many experts on the subject. It's mature and reasonable. It makes some kind of sense. Still, it avoids the question. I don't say that in a disrespectful or provocative sense. I understand why it's not possible to square some conundrums. I'm at the point where I realize that we often can't answer troubling questions. We have to rely on faith when it comes to certain ideas. It's more of a realization and recognition than a resignation. It's a bit humbling, but it sometimes helps to be honest with oneself about some doctrines. Like the man says, we see through a glass darkly. Fortunately, you, as well as many others, have the faith to keep your "sight" intact.

[IamsSon]

Your first comment mirrors many experts on the subject. It's mature and reasonable. It makes some kind of sense. Still, it avoids the question. I don't say that in a disrespectful or provocative sense. I understand why it's not possible to square some conundrums. I'm at the point where I realize that we often can't answer troubling questions. We have to rely on faith when it comes to certain ideas. It's more of a realization and recognition than a resignation. It's a bit humbling, but it sometimes helps to be honest with oneself about some doctrines. Like the man says, we see through a glass darkly. Fortunately, you, as well as many others, have the faith to keep your "sight" intact.

The more I study and discuss with Bible scholars, the less certain I am that there is a better answer than one that from our limited perspective seems to avoid the question. I found a video that I think may provide an answer to how we might have choice and yet God's will be done:

Edited March 5, 2013 by IamsSon

[No Censorship]

BTW, I like your Penn Gillette quote. It seems like radical atheists and religious fanatics have the same kinds of personalities. If you want to appreciate how long eternity is, read some of their debates! That's what happens when two infallible people meet.

[IamsSon]

BTW, I like your Penn Gillette quote. It seems like radical atheists and religious fanatics have the same kinds of personalities. If you want to appreciate how long eternity is, read some of their debates! That's what happens when two infallible people meet.

I think what Penn Gillette has realized is that radical atheists are religious fanatics.

[Space Commander Travis]

Not really. I don't picture God as Santa Claus. I view Him as a spiritual entity, not an anthropomorphic character that resembles Zeus or Jupiter. Such an entity knows what decisions His creation will or won't make in their lives. That's my entire point. That's why it's hard not to be freaked out by predestination. It goes back to asking why some people are ostensibly sentenced to Hell at birth. Of course, this whole question seems moot to non-believers.

All that only matters if you believe in the old dualistic Heaven/hell concept. I mean, really, that's really just as much an extrapolation from what scriptural evidence there is as nearly every other piece of traditional Christian doctrine. It's very easy not to be freaked out by Predestination if you realise that it was just another piece of baggage that was heaped onto the cart by all these Thinkers who've cluttered the original concept of God and the teachings of Jesus. And as a concept, it's absurd; it completely destroys the whole point of anything Jesus taught, unless you really do believe that he was only talking to those who were already Chosen, and that therefore his message was actually very elitist and he wasn't actually bothered about the vast mass of Humanity at all. And i do feel that believing that is rather an insult to him.

[Frank Merton]

To me the logic of Christianity is completely opposite what the churches teach.

Premise One: God is omnipotent and therefore gets anything he wants.

Premise Two: God is omni-benevolent and therefore wants everyone to be saved.

Conclusion: Everyone is saved. If there is predestination, then it is predestined that everyone is saved.

I leave aside just what "saved" might mean and how many lifetimes getting there might require.

[aryannatimothy]

End of the world in revelations I guess.

[Marcion Meets E. Sibyl]

I'll let you decide what he meant on Romans 9

The section I'll be focusing my discussion on is Romans 9:10-24, but it won't hurt to familiarise yourself with the rest of Romans (if you haven't already). Anyway, I'll pick up from verse 10:

10 Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."

Paul starts in verse 10 by appealing to the Old Testament story of Esau and Jacob. In this Old Testament story, Esau lost his birthright to Jacob, even though he was the firstborn and therefore rightful heir. Paul states clearly in verse 11 - before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad - in order that God's purpose in election might stand: not by works..... Again this is a very clear statement concerning God's purpose of election in choosing one over the other, not because of anything they had done (works), indeed before they were born or had done anything to deserve it or not, God had chosen one over the other. One could argue that it related specifically to Esau and Jacob and does not directly relate to us today (a valid observation, but for the rest of the passage - which broadens the context to beyond Old Testament patriarchs)..... Continuing on to the next set of verses:

Hello PA,

Predestination or not, we, as flesh and blood human beings, don't know God's will or mind. I don't believe that all events on earth (and that includes most people's lives) have been willed or arranged by God. God's intervention is another matter, for God works in mysterious ways, after all, and we don't know the complete history of our souls. Do we know that we have made a pact with God a long time ago? Well, that is where our free will comes in -- to uncover our destiny, or sync with it. A designated person is not the same as "all people." On the other hand, now that I'm a Christian (I'm a Christian mainly because I feel this indescribable "joy" in my heart when I think of Jesus Christ) I question the reality of free will in my life, especially when I feel that I'm in the guiding hands of the Holy Spirit. Free will is out-the-door once you get "reborn," I believe this because it's only the logical conclusion. At any rate, God made us in His own image for us to be able to figure some things out, to put 2 and 2 together if you will. Predestination has nothing to do with it because we're not zombies and for the most part, we still have our intellect. To be able to put 2 and 2 together that rings true to one's heart is, indeed, profound and a blessing, however.

14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

Paul again draws on Old Testament references, quoting the story of Pharaoh and Moses from Exodus 33 in stating "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy". He repeats this in various wording in this section multiple times. And in verse 17, again talking of Pharaoh - I (God) raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power..... Did Pharaoh have a choice in the matter? I would argue that he did not, especially when Exodus notes that Pharaoh was about to let the Israelites go, except for God's intervention in hardening Pharaoh's heart (however, there is a point worth raising on this issue - I'll discuss this shortly). Moving on to verse 19, and this is where I find the passage getting really interesting:

19 One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' " 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

Paul specifically addresses the argument that many today use - "if God made me like this, how can God still blame me for my actions". And the simple answer Paul gives - who are you to talk back to God. God, the King, the creator. You can't understand God. He's too big for you, you're just a human. It's not an answer a lot of people like (heck, I don't like it either, and I'm a Christian). It's not exactly an ideal answer, and I sure wish anywhere in the Bible there was a better answer provided, but this is the answer given. Paul then uses an analogy that any in the day could understand - how can a pot say to a potter "why did you make me like this". The potter can make grand pots or common use pots (a decorative vase, or a chamber pot for example). The pot has no say in the matter - it's all up to the creator of the pot! God, the creator. In any case, I'm going to move on to the next few verses:

Here's the original (I always prefer the "original" and it makes things clearer): (Isaiah 45:9) "Woe to the one who quarrels with his Maker-- An earthenware vessel among the vessels of earth! Will the clay say to the potter, 'What are you doing?' Or the thing you are making say, 'He has no hands'?"

Another original : (Hosea 2:23) "And I will sow her for myself in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them who were not my people, you are my people; and they shall say, you are my God."

Paul's bleak interpretation is not the way I'm getting this at all because things will work out in the end, and one will accept one's destiny, wholeheartedly. Destiny doesn't have to be a "Christian outcome." There are many paths out there (for a reason, I believe), and there are those who even accept total oblivion (or deletion of one's "awareness") without bathing an eye. "This is it for me, man." "I would hate to have another lifetime!" "I wanna achieve nirvana." "Moksha is the only way!" I'm sure you've heard those, too. And most of all, "God doesn't make mistakes." God knows what's in our (we, all of us, not just Christians) hearts. Again, things will work out for all of us, for God is not cruel. Being misinterpreted or misinterpretation is another story, yeah.

We have an intellect, we can ask God questions.

I also believe that if one strays from one's destiny, God will show the way, even in one's "darkest" moment in the afterlife (think of Lazarus): (Luke 10:20) "Nevertheless in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven." "Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd."

Again, do we know that we have made a pact with God a long time ago?

22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

I'll end my discussion here after these verses. Here, Paul theorises why people are actually created for destruction - why would God make people destined for destruction? What if God created these "objects of his wrath - prepared for destruction" to show the "riches of his mercy" to those whom he "also prepared in advance for glory". He prepared certain people for destruction, in order to show glory to those who also were prepared for glory - in other words, how can we who are saved truly apprecciate the massive gift of eternal life that God has given us if we didn't have an alternative (destruction) to compare it to.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That's really sad. Paul the "apostle," lucky 13, or is it? I'm glad Jesus Christ is not Paul.

Peace to you, PA.

----------------------------

"Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar." (Proverbs 30:6)

"Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you." (Deuteronomy 4:2)

Edited March 13, 2013 by braveone2u

[Ultima Weapon]

To me the logic of Christianity is completely opposite what the churches teach.

Premise One: God is omnipotent and therefore gets anything he wants.

Premise Two: God is omni-benevolent and therefore wants everyone to be saved.

Conclusion: Everyone is saved. If there is predestination, then it is predestined that everyone is saved.

I leave aside just what "saved" might mean and how many lifetimes getting there might require.

I don't know where you get that ideology because that's not what Christianity preaches. God doesn't get everything he wants, otherwise everyone would be saved, however contrary to that they're not. Predestination may be preached by some people yet it is completey unscriptural and they obviously do not understand the mind of God.

[No Censorship]

All that only matters if you believe in the old dualistic Heaven/hell concept. I mean, really, that's really just as much an extrapolation from what scriptural evidence there is as nearly every other piece of traditional Christian doctrine. It's very easy not to be freaked out by Predestination if you realise that it was just another piece of baggage that was heaped onto the cart by all these Thinkers who've cluttered the original concept of God and the teachings of Jesus. And as a concept, it's absurd; it completely destroys the whole point of anything Jesus taught, unless you really do believe that he was only talking to those who were already Chosen, and that therefore his message was actually very elitist and he wasn't actually bothered about the vast mass of Humanity at all. And i do feel that believing that is rather an insult to him.

I agree that the Gospel is meant for all humanity. We all decide whether or not to accept it. Does an omniscient God not know what choice we will make before we make it? That is my main question.

[No Censorship]

To me the logic of Christianity is completely opposite what the churches teach.

Premise One: God is omnipotent and therefore gets anything he wants.

Premise Two: God is omni-benevolent and therefore wants everyone to be saved.

Conclusion: Everyone is saved. If there is predestination, then it is predestined that everyone is saved.

I leave aside just what "saved" might mean and how many lifetimes getting there might require.

That's understandable. I've gone back and forth on those points too. In order to stay sane, I don't dwell on those points too much. Too much cognitive dissonance can lead to psychosis (kidding).

[+Link of Hyrule]

Paul's bleak interpretation is not the way I'm getting this at all....

That's really sad. Paul the "apostle," lucky 13, or is it? I'm glad Jesus Christ is not Paul.

Peace to you, PA.

I was with you, all the way to this. I do not view any of Paul's comment here in Romans 9 to be "bleak". If you read bleakness into my commentary, the fault is with your understanding of my position, not my position itself.

I'm also glad Jesus is not Paul - that would kind of put a dampener on Paul's "some say I follow Apollos...." diatribe in Corinthians, but that doesn't mean I don't listen to Paul's writings to be of value in learning what Christ wants for us.

That's how I view things

[Marcion Meets E. Sibyl]

Yes, it's been kindly noted, PA. My comment was directed at Paul, specifically. You were just analyzing and paraphrasing his position. Thank you for sharing your thoughts, however. Peace.

[No Censorship]

End of the world in revelations I guess.

The Book of Revelation scared me when I first read it. I often heard trumpets for a while.

[+Link of Hyrule]

The Book of Revelation scared me when I first read it. I often heard trumpets for a while.

It's funny. A lot of people get scared with Revelation. But here's the rub, it was written with the intent of encouraging people, strengthening them. I guess it's always important to take the intention of the author into consideration.

[Space Commander Travis]

I agree that the Gospel is meant for all humanity. We all decide whether or not to accept it. Does an omniscient God not know what choice we will make before we make it? That is my main question.

I think the basic fault with this concept, that God Knows what choice we will make and so on, is that it looks at God in human terms, as being a human mind writ large, and that God thinks like us and that time means the same for him as it does to us. I think God is not a mind that thinks and follows thought processes, but as a completely different kind of intelligence to anything that we can comprehend. - which of course is why the Ancients described him and his actions in human terms, as a father figure with a big Beard, because that was the only way they could put it in terms that anyone could comprehend. And perhaps, why, if this was indeed what happened, he entered into the person of Jesus. So really I think the questioon of "how could God not know" what will happen is not really relevant, because God is a different kind of intelligence that doesn't think on linear timescales like we do.