15 Oct 07
Originally posted by epiphinehasSomeone who "has faith" that he himself is God has the same experience. The faith you are talking about is self-delusion; the needy belief that something will save you from death. But grownups must put away their toys someday.
The epistemic value of faith, which I would accord faith anyway, is hard to explain. A non-believer may contend with scripture and seek to understand it, but no matter how deeply it is studied, without faith the depth of its contents will in no wise reveal itself. Why? Part of it is due, I think, to the lack of discipleship. A faithful person reading ...[text shortened]... cool thing about it is, it's available to everyone. All you need is faith.
The idea that reading any book in an analytical way is worthless or that someone can gain anything from a preconceived belief that a book is infallible is sad nonsense.
15 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderAnd if he did and acted in the way he does in the Bible, his will would be so warped and capricious that it would be impossible to predict what he might do at any given time - he would certainly have a sense of the absurd and perhaps a sense of humor.
Gee, I think I can be more blasphemous than that! Did I ever tell you the one about Jesus, The Father and the Holy Spirit in a gay bar?
Siccing your imaginary Big Daddy on me doesn't exactly cause my knees to knock together; you might as well say Sauron will throw me into the fires of Mount Doom some day. The type of monstrous Super Duper Go e (apologies to Telerion); yet another meaningless example of the Fallacy of Equivocation.
Although my assurance will mean nothing to you, I can assure you that the God described in the Bible is real as is His eventual judgment. While you think you are mocking me, you will find out soon enough that your blinding arrogance will not be glossed over.
As to whether or not God has a sense of humor, I have no doubt. While it cannot be equated with man's perception of the same, the essence of ours is derived from His. That being said, what makes something funny is its juxtaposition with a standard. According to you, you are the standard. I find that outrageously funny, and yet emphatically sad.
A procedure which examines a certain type of evidence and thus utterly disregards that evidence in reaching a judgment, cannot be considered "fair" in any manner known to Merriam-Webster.
Here's your preferred (albeit limited) definition from the fols at MW:
6 a: marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism. b (1): conforming with the established rules...
So let's break those down. Imparitality and honesty: pass, pass. Free from self-interest: fail. From prejudice or favortism: pass, pass. Conforming with the established rule: pass. Overall, five out of six aspects of your selected definition are clearly in God's favor.
As you are likely aware, a judge is charged to use a standard when rendering a decision in light of all relative action. By your thinking, works ought to be the area judged. However, by using your preferred area of consideration, no one would enter into God's presence! Thankfully, God, in His infinite wisdom, found a way around man's fallibility. In paying the price of salvation, He is able to impute His righteousness (His work) into our account. No one goes to hell for their deficient work! Only those who refuse to accept the free gift of salvation end up in hell. Works have nothing to do with the eternal destination. The judgment of works is strictly for the record (believer and unbeliever) or reward (believer only).
15 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIt's unfortunate for you that Jesus, the one you supposedly believe in, said the exact opposite in Matthew 25.
[b]And if he did and acted in the way he does in the Bible, his will would be so warped and capricious that it would be impossible to predict what he might do at any given time - he would certainly have a sense of the absurd and perhaps a sense of humor.
Although my assurance will mean nothing to you, I can assure you that the God described in the Bib of works is strictly for the record (believer and unbeliever) or reward (believer only).[/b]
Freaky: Works have nothing to do with the eternal destination.
Jesus: 34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 for I was hungry, and ye gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in;
36 naked, and ye clothed me; I was sick, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee hungry, and fed thee? or athirst, and gave thee drink?
38 And when saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39 And when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me.
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 for I was hungry, and ye did not give me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink;
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in; naked, and ye clothed me not; sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer, saying, Lord, when saw we thee hungry, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not unto one of these least, ye did it not unto me.
46 And these shall go away into eternal punishment: but the righteous into eternal life.
5 out of 6 ain't sufficient. Besides it is clearly dishonest to have a procedure to produce evidence that is then totally disregarded (the ole "bait and switch"😉. Nor does the meaningless procedure rate as imparital (how could it when one entity establishes the rules and is then sole judge of how they are applied?), free from predujice or favoritism and as the "rules" established can be freely disregarded by the ruler, I'd say that your system fails all six. As rightly pointed out by another poster, it fits squarely in the definition of a "kangaroo court".
15 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderYour opinion is noted.
Someone who "has faith" that he himself is God has the same experience. The faith you are talking about is self-delusion; the needy belief that something will save you from death. But grownups must put away their toys someday.
The idea that reading any book in an analytical way is worthless or that someone can gain anything from a preconceived belief that a book is infallible is sad nonsense.
15 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHAmen!
Although my assurance will mean nothing to you, I can assure you that the God described in the Bible is real as is His eventual judgment. While you think you are mocking me, you will find out soon enough that your blinding arrogance will not be glossed over.
16 Oct 07
Originally posted by no1marauderIt's unfortunate for you that Jesus, the one you supposedly believe in, said the exact opposite in Matthew 25.
It's unfortunate for you that Jesus, the one you supposedly believe in, said the exact opposite in Matthew 25.
Freaky: Works have nothing to do with the eternal destination.
Jesus: 34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 fo ...[text shortened]... ointed out by another poster, it fits squarely in the definition of a "kangaroo court".
Ah, yes. Fortunately for me, however, I understand what the Lord Jesus Christ meant in this passage in light of all passages. Apparently, you do not. Classify that one uner "Unfortunate for you."
5 out of 6 ain't sufficient.
It is when working with too broad a definition.
Besides it is clearly dishonest to have a procedure to produce evidence that is then totally disregarded...
Go back and read what was written again, no1. The evidence is produced for a specific judgment. The pertaining judgment has nothing to do with eternal destination, and yet you insist on forcing the issue. Eternal destination is a completely different rendering, based upon absolute righteousness: either you have it or you don't. Believers have it (regardless of their work) by virtue of their acceptance (faith), by means of imputation (God's righteousness into the account of every believer).
(how could it when one entity establishes the rules and is then sole judge of how they are applied?)
Hint: because He's God. Not for nothing, but your 'argument' sounds unnervingly similar to Satan's. Wonder why that is?
...and as the "rules" established can be freely disregarded by the ruler...
I know you'll just accuse me of repeating myself, but be that as it may... God is as incapable of 'disregarding the rules' as He is of ceasing to exist: He is the rule!
16 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWell why don't you break out your Secret Decoder Ring and tell us how Matthew 25:31-46 is possibly compatible with your claim that works have no bearing on eternal destination? So far, I classify it as you refusing to accept the words of your supposed Savior. It's even worse for you as the two parables preceding Christ's description of Judgment Day directly reinforce the message in the passage given.
[b]It's unfortunate for you that Jesus, the one you supposedly believe in, said the exact opposite in Matthew 25.
Ah, yes. Fortunately for me, however, I understand what the Lord Jesus Christ meant in this passage in light of all passages. Apparently, you do not. Classify that one uner "Unfortunate for you."
5 out of 6 ain't sufficient.
of 'disregarding the rules' as He is of ceasing to exist: He is the rule![/b]
Again you are merely committing the Fallacy of Equivocation with your "Everything God does is fair by definition" BS. And I read what you wrote, but it doesn't effect the argument that as far as the "non-righteous" are concerned evidence is submitted and then totally disregarded in rendering the judgment. This makes the whole procedure capricious and a waste of time and even though Super Duper God has all the time in the world to do such idiotic and pointless
charades in your weird theology I wonder why you insist on making him sound like such a nutjob.
17 Oct 07
A quote from a National Geographic channel show about the Noah Ark's story reminded me of you, Freaky:
"The Bible is like a person ....... if you torture it enough, you can get it to say anything".
See you're not willing to share the SDR take on Matthew 25. I suppose getting God's Secret Handshake is out of the question too?
18 Oct 07
Originally posted by no1marauderWell why don't you break out your Secret Decoder Ring and tell us how Matthew 25:31-46 is possibly compatible with your claim that works have no bearing on eternal destination?
Well why don't you break out your Secret Decoder Ring and tell us how Matthew 25:31-46 is possibly compatible with your claim that works have no bearing on eternal destination? So far, I classify it as you refusing to accept the words of your supposed Savior. It's even worse for you as the two parables preceding Christ's description of Judgment Day direc ...[text shortened]... s in your weird theology I wonder why you insist on making him sound like such a nutjob.
First things first, no1. Are you a believer (i.e., have you ever in your life accepted the work that Christ did on the cross as a substitute for your own)?
Again you are merely committing the Fallacy of Equivocation with your "Everything God does is fair by definition" BS.
Use of an incorrect formula (or placement therein) could result in an FOE, relative to an assessment of God's actions. I think you're looking at the formula something like this:
God is fair.
God cannot be unfair.
Therefore, all of God's actions are fair.
Just by changing the first statement to a more accurate description of the matter, an FOE becomes a true statement.
Fairness is based upon the totality of God's character.
God's actions are always in agreement with His character.
Therefore, God's actions are always fair.
This makes the whole procedure capricious and a waste of time...
You claimed to have read what was written but your response does not address the same. If the judgment serves a specific purpose (record and/or reward), then production of the evidence is not unwarranted.
18 Oct 07
2 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBH1. NOYB. I reject your assertion that whether one has accepted your belief system has anything to do with the ability to understand the text of Matthew.
[b/]Well why don't you break out your Secret Decoder Ring and tell us how Matthew 25:31-46 is possibly compatible with your claim that works have no bearing on eternal destination?
First things first, no1. Are you a believer (i.e., have you ever in your life accepted the work that Christ did on the cross as a substitute for your own)?
Again you fic purpose (record and/or reward), then production of the evidence is not unwarranted.
2. Fallacy of Equivocation
3. Why does Super Duper God need a record? I understand what you are claiming, but it is nonsensical when discussing an omniscient God (and of no use to the "non-righteous"😉.
18 Oct 07
Originally posted by no1marauder1. NOYB. I reject your assertion that whether one has accepted your belief system has anything to do with the ability to understand the text of Matthew.
1. NOYB. I reject your assertion that whether one has accepted your belief system has anything to do with the ability to understand the text of Matthew.
2. Fallacy of Equivocation
3. Why does Super Duper God need a record? I understand what you are claiming, but it is nonsensical when discussing an omniscient God (and of no use to the "non-righteous"😉.
Reject away. Your insistence on it being any other way does nothing to change reality.
2. Fallacy of Equivocation
Based on your statement, apparently.
3. Why does Super Duper God need a record?
I know not about your Super Duper God, but the Living God needs nothing. The record of human history will be kept forever, however.
Originally posted by FreakyKBH1. Your insistence to the contrary just brands you the arrogant fanatic that you are obviously are. If you can't explain why Jesus directly rejects your assertion, that's OK - but pretending that you have secret knowledge that changes the meaning of his words just shows how deluded you are.
[b/]1. NOYB. I reject your assertion that whether one has accepted your belief system has anything to do with the ability to understand the text of Matthew.
Reject away. Your insistence on it being any other way does nothing to change reality.
2. Fallacy of Equivocation
Based on your statement, apparently.
3. Why does Super Duper God ...[text shortened]... d, but the Living God needs nothing. The record of human history will be kept forever, however.
2. No based on YOUR statements.
Freaky: Prior to meeting his ultimate fate, fairness demands that an accounting be taken for how the unbeliever lived his life. God is fair and will do just that thing.
Of course, now we're simply back to it's fair because God says so. That's simply changing the standard meaning of a word to fit your argument. And that is called the Fallacy of Equivocation.
3. Does he need to be reminded about what happened to each person on this Non-Judgment Day? If not, what is the purpose of it for the "non-righteous"? An actual answer would be nice.
EDIT: Of course, every discussion with you winds up the same way with you acting like a squirrel that won't share his nuts. Why you bother to post in a Forum is a mystery if in the end you simply refuse to discuss matters because you claim that Super Duper God as given you info that others aren't entitled to (sounds Gnostic to me).
18 Oct 07
Originally posted by no1marauderAgreed, and rec'd.
1. Your insistence to the contrary just brands you the arrogant fanatic that you are obviously are. If you can't explain why Jesus directly rejects your assertion, that's OK - but pretending that you have secret knowledge that changes the meaning of his words just shows how deluded you are.
2. No based on YOUR statements.
Freaky: Prior to meeting ...[text shortened]... uper Duper God as given you info that others aren't entitled to (sounds Gnostic to me).
If Freaky is truly making the claim (and it appears he is) that one cannot truly understand the words of Christ without first believing that his death provided our salvation then there really is no point for him to be here.
Freaky...why are you here?