Knock knock, its God calling

[Vangelovski]

Sagan also liked marijuana (a lot). But it is always nice to read intelligent people's thoughts.

Did Carl have anything to say about how or why these physical laws came into existence? Did he have anything to say about how it is even possible that these laws can and do exist, or how anything can and does exist?

[Vangelovski]

The problem of science v spirituality is the 'pesky' issue of "light years" (and other issues of the natural universe as recognized by science)
Science has a far more dynamic nature to question, whilst spirituality is a more 'confined' (some would argue, unquestioning) pursuit.

Phoenix, what is science?

[Big Bad Sven]

The devil is a loser and hes my bitch

[Risto the Great]

The Devil's irrelevant to your personal salvation. You could ask the same question and insert anyone's name in there. It still has nothing to do with you or anyone else. Everyone is responsible for their own decisions.

I agree. But do you disagree that the threat of eternal damnation in Christianity is framed as a motivational notion to seek salvation from our Lord?

Because there is a law, there is also a punishment for disobeying the law. This is called justice. And the punishment is eternity in hell.

You said it. It scared me. I wanted to become more religious immediately.

Whether or not the world would be a nicer place without the devil, I'm not so sure. We've managed to stuff it up pretty well all on our own.

I guess I tend to equate the Devil with hell. Which is wrong I suppose. I assume hell existed before the devil. I was talking about an afterlife anyway. It seems the devil in hell is all part of the punishment for not following the "law" you describe.

People aren't insignificant and enlightenment has nothing to do with anything. If we were insignificant or unimportant to God He would not have paid our debt for us.

Did he pay the debt? Are we ready for another payment? Looking around at the world we live in, I'm sure we might be ready for a debt reduction. The SFC "spiritual financial crisis" seems to be in full swing.

Hell sounds awful. The prospect of eternal damnation sounds awful. Would I deserve it if I ask questions about it? It sounds like an investment and the Investment Memorandum sounds a little vague in some areas. It seems somewhat harsh that my (very few) sins this lifetime might condemn me to an eternity of punishment.

Here is an interesting discussion about hell:

Some modern critics of the doctrine of Hell (such as Marilyn McCord Adams) claim that, even if Hell is seen as a choice rather than as punishment, it would be unreasonable for God to give such flawed and ignorant creatures as ourselves the responsibility of our eternal destinies.[13] Jonathan Kvanvig, in The Problem of Hell (1993), agrees that God would not allow one to be eternally damned by a decision made under the wrong circumstances. One should not always honor the choices of human beings, even when they are full adults, if, for instance, the choice is made while depressed or careless. On Kvanvig's view, God will abandon no person until they have made a settled, final decision, under favorable circumstances, to reject God, but God will respect a choice made under the right circumstances. Once a person finally and competently chooses to reject God, out of respect for the person's autonomy, God allows them to be annihilated. The fact that one must believe in God or be subject to eternal damnation or annihilation, even if the choice is completely made by a person, is often perceived as a scare tactic that inevitably forces or scares one into having to believe in God, and God would seem corrupt and evil in saying, "You can believe in me or not, but if you do not, you will either suffer for all eternity in Hell (i.e., eternal damnation) or else be destroyed or obliterated out-of-existence (i.e., annihilation)". The argument runs flaw in that as a matter of fact, God does not say "you can believe in me or not". But this rebuttal seems to work against itself by implying that since God does not give any other option, humans have no choice but to believe in God to enter Heaven; this view would ultimately brand God as evil for demanding worship on the threat of eternal damnation or annihilation.

Let me ask you something RtG, why did you wish everyone a happy Easter in the other thread and then less than 24 hours later question the very existence of the God whose sacrifice you initially acknowledged?

A few reasons. I regard our Macedonian forum members as friends and am inclined to welcome them and help them if I can. If they are religious, I respect their decision and certainly wouldn't want to reject them because of their faith. I have family who are extremely religious also. I even took my family to church on Good Friday. I want my sons to be exposed to our ancestral faith and have a framework within which to help them arrive at their own conclusions. I also have to declare that I view Macedonian Orthodox Christianity as an affirmation of our national identity. I'm sure it goes against all notions of Christianity, but there you go.

I think I said "Happy Easter" in that thread. I even would be happy to acknowledge that Christ did rise again to people that believe it solemnly. Would it have been more appropriate to say "yeah, pull the other one" as a response?

Having said all of that, I'm a hell of a nice guy and I don't want to be a nice guy in hell.

[Risto the Great]

Did Carl have anything to say about how or why these physical laws came into existence? Did he have anything to say about how it is even possible that these laws can and do exist, or how anything can and does exist?

I don't know. But he would be in hell now and I don't want to go there to ask him.

[Vangelovski]

I agree. But do you disagree that the threat of eternal damnation in Christianity is framed as a motivational notion to seek salvation from our Lord?

Some preists possibly use it that way, but the real question is this - why should we be accepted into Heaven if we reject God beyond the limit He has set (our life here on earth)? If I defame you, sleep with your wife, steal from you, murder your children and commit a whole host of other sins agaist you, and then you (after you've spent the time in prision on my behalf) say to me Tom, I'll forgive you for everything if you just accept me and then I just spit in your face and tell you where to shove your forgiveness, should I still expect you to offer your forgiveness beyond limit? Won't there eventually come a time when the limit of your patience will be reached?

Would you even offer forgiveness in the first place? Would you even spend the time in prison on my behalf? That's exactly what God has done and is doing, but his patience will end one day. I can't see how there can be any legitimate expectations that we can refuse to even believe that He exists and then demand entry into His Kingdom.

You said it. It scared me. I wanted to become more religious immediately.

You don’t need to become more ‘religious’ if by religious you mean wearing a funny hat and outfit and doing silly rituals. Its really a change of heart and mind by realising that you fall short of His moral expectation and accepting that Jesus is God and trusting him with your life.

I guess I tend to equate the Devil with hell. Which is wrong I suppose. I assume hell existed before the devil. I was talking about an afterlife anyway. It seems the devil in hell is all part of the punishment for not following the "law" you describe.

The devil was created as an angel to serve God in heaven. He rebelled against God and according to the Bible took one third of the angels with him. They became known as demons. Hell was created for the devil and his demons, not for people. People were created to be with God. But because we have a free will, God ultimately allows us to make our own decisions. This way we can have a genuine relationship with him. If He wanted robots, He would have made robots, but He wanted free willed creatures that would freely choose Him.

Did he pay the debt? Are we ready for another payment? Looking around at the world we live in, I'm sure we might be ready for a debt reduction. The SFC "spiritual financial crisis" seems to be in full swing.

The SFC may be in full swing, but Christ paid the penalty once and for all and for everyone past, present and future. His paid for your and my sins, past, present and future. Are you willing to accept his payment? Its really not that difficult at all.

Hell sounds awful. The prospect of eternal damnation sounds awful. Would I deserve it if I ask questions about it? It sounds like an investment and the Investment Memorandum sounds a little vague in some areas. It seems somewhat harsh that my (very few) sins this lifetime might condemn me to an eternity of punishment.

Hell does sound awful. You don’t deserve it for asking questions – you’re meant to ask questions.

What is vague? I’m more than happy to explain what I can.

Have you only had a few sins in your lifetime? How many times have you lied, stolen (even a pencil), cheated or perved at a woman? How many times have you rejected God – or not accepted Him? This last one on a daily basis maybe?

Even if you only ever committed one sin, you are unworthy of being in the presence of a holy God. Whether you’ve committed millions or just one, you’re still in need of a saviour who has paid the punishment for those sins (or just one).

Here is an interesting discussion about hell:

This gave me a chuckle. When the writer of that paragraph creates his own universe, then he can set his own rules.

As discussed above, hell is not a threat. It’s the reality of the situation. Why should God accept someone that does not accept Him? Is that fair? Is that just? Could you have a genuine peace with someone (i.e., a Greek) who denies your existence as a Macedonian? Heaven is about having a relationship with God - a genuine peace if you will. God created us so that we can have a relationship with Him. We rejected Him by sinning against Him. Rather than making us do the work to reconcile ourselves with God, He came down and paid the penalty for those sins so that we can be reconciled with Him again. What this writer is saying is that we should still be able to reject God and sin against Him and He should still have to accept us into Heaven!? Why? Why should He have to do that? Think about the example I gave you above.

If He wanted to, He could just destroy all of us now like ants. He doesn't have to go to all this trouble, pleading with us, paying for our crimes against Him. Why should we be so insolent and then expect Him to take us into Heaven, whinging about percieved threats? And so what if it is a threat? Does that change the fact that belief is a prerequisite for salvation? You may not like it, but its still a reality. And who is this writer to judge what is good and evil? On what basis does he do it? According to his own moral values which he himself probably doesn't even follow? Like I said, when this writer creates his own universe, he can set his own rules. But I'm sure he won't be accepting anyone who denies him, let alone pay the punishment for someone who breaks his rules.

A few reasons. I regard our Macedonian forum members as friends and am inclined to welcome them and help them if I can. If they are religious, I respect their decision and certainly wouldn't want to reject them because of their faith. I have family who are extremely religious also. I even took my family to church on Good Friday. I want my sons to be exposed to our ancestral faith and have a framework within which to help them arrive at their own conclusions. I also have to declare that I view Macedonian Orthodox Christianity as an affirmation of our national identity. I'm sure it goes against all notions of Christianity, but there you go.

I think I said "Happy Easter" in that thread. I even would be happy to acknowledge that Christ did rise again to people that believe it solemnly. Would it have been more appropriate to say "yeah, pull the other one" as a response?

Having said all of that, I'm a hell of a nice guy and I don't want to be a nice guy in hell.

Being a Macedonian is not a sin. Its who God made you.

You said you have a framework for your kids to help them arrive to their own conclusions? What is that framework?

[TrueMacedonian]

Side note: Can the devil repent? If he did, would he no longer spend an eternity in Hell?

That's a pretty good question. No ones touching this one for some reason. I would assume that God wouldn't believe the devil because he lies alot

[Vangelovski]

That's a pretty good question. No ones touching this one for some reason. I would assume that God wouldn't believe the devil because he lies alot

I did, I asked if anyone attempts to even gain a basic understanding of the faith they identify with before posting.

Salvation is open only to humans.

[TrueMacedonian]

I can really say that there are unique and inspirational things in the bible. I enjoy proverbs the most. It's certain things Jesus supposedly said that make me question christianity.

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to 'set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter in law against her mother in law'; And 'a man's enemies will be those of his own household.' He loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me." Matthew 10:34-37

[Vangelovski]

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to 'set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter in law against her mother in law'; And 'a man's enemies will be those of his own household.' He loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me." Matthew 10:34-37

It means that people will have conflict with each other like we do on this forum. Those who believe in Jesus will try to spread his word for the benefit of those that don't, and those that don't believe in Jesus will oppose it.

How's that any different to anything else. What don't you like about it?

Besides, what does it matter whether you like it or not if that is the reality of existence? Does you not liking it change anything?

[Risto the Great]

Some preists possibly use it that way, but the real question is this - why should we be accepted into Heaven if we reject God beyond the limit He has set (our life here on earth)? If I defame you, sleep with your wife, steal from you, murder your children and commit a whole host of other sins agaist you, and then you (after you've spent the time in prision on my behalf) say to me Tom, I'll forgive you for everything if you just accept me and then I just spit in your face and tell you where to shove your forgiveness, should I still expect you to offer your forgiveness beyond limit? Won't there eventually come a time when the limit of your patience will be reached?

Sounds brilliant. I love it. But it sounds hollow when people keep on sinning! Are priests wrong for using it this way? You used it in a similar fashion. The threat is palpable.

The devil was created as an angel to serve God in heaven. He rebelled against God and according to the Bible took one third of the angels with him. They became known as demons. Hell was created for the devil and his demons, not for people. People were created to be with God. But because we have a free will, God ultimately allows us to make our own decisions. This way we can have a genuine relationship with him. If He wanted robots, He would have made robots, but He wanted free willed creatures that would freely choose Him. [/FONT]

So, because of their free will, Hell is the alternative destination for the wayward sorts. He needs it as a plan B.

The SFC may be in full swing, but Christ paid the penalty once and for all and for everyone past, present and future. His paid for your and my sins, past, present and future. Are you willing to accept his payment? Its really not that difficult at all

Again, Christians accept it and continue to sin. Ridiculous.

Have you only had a few sins in your lifetime? How many times have you lied, stolen (even a pencil), cheated or perved at a woman? How many times have you rejected God – or not accepted Him? This last one on a daily basis maybe?

Even if you only ever committed one sin, you are unworthy of being in the presence of a holy God. Whether you’ve committed millions or just one, you’re still in need of a saviour who has paid the punishment for those sins (or just one).

I know this sounds horrible. But I don't really understand the gravity of Jesus' death. He was the son of God. He was the only person who knew he truly had a place upstairs. It wasn't a question of faith or mystery or anything like that. He knew he was coming back. It is a heresy to suggest he was ONLY a human that suffered on the cross (which sounds pretty horrible). That he had a dual nature the entire time.

If I had a dual nature whilst on the cross, my human part would have suffered but my God part would have been kind of indifferent I would imagine. I don't say this to offend. I genuinely see it as a reasonable conclusion (for God).

I guess I don't get the sacrifice. You sacrifice your only son only to get him back again. If I did the same, I think it would hurt a whole lot more. He wouldn't be coming back to me.

This gave me a chuckle. When the writer of that paragraph creates his own universe, then he can set his own rules.

The Bible is in fact made up of different components depending on which denomination one subscribes to. They could almost be separate universes too.

But I thought the assessment was a reasonable one worthy of discussion. What alternative universe offended you the most about it?

As discussed above, hell is not a threat. It’s the reality of the situation. Why should God accept someone that does not accept Him? Is that fair? Is that just? Could you have a genuine peace with someone (i.e., a Greek) who denies your existence as a Macedonian? Heaven is about having a relationship with God - a genuine peace if you will. God created us so that we can have a relationship with Him. We rejected Him by sinning against Him. Rather than making us do the work to reconcile ourselves with God, He came down and paid the penalty for those sins so that we can be reconciled with Him again. What this writer is saying is that we should still be able to reject God and sin against Him and He should still have to accept us into Heaven!? Why? Why should He have to do that? Think about the example I gave you above.

God created that reality. He could have created a little black hole where we all get sucked into anti-matter. But Hell is a convenient deterrent that works for hundreds of millions of practising Christians on a daily basis. If you think the threat of hell doesn't keep millions of Christians in line, then you really should get out more often.

You said you have a framework for your kids to help them arrive to their own conclusions? What is that framework?

No, I didn't say that. I said "I want my sons to be exposed to our ancestral faith and have a framework within which to help them arrive at their own conclusions."

I didn't say I created a framework for them. I want them to have a framework. Part of their framework includes going to a Christian private school as well as attending our Macedonian church on occasions.

[Vangelovski]

Sounds brilliant. I love it. But it sounds hollow when people keep on sinning! Are priests wrong for using it this way? You used it in a similar fashion. The threat is palpable.

It is what it is. If you see it as a threat then so be it. Like I said before, so what if it is a threat? Does it change anything? Does your view or my view change reality?

Again, Christians accept it and continue to sin. Ridiculous.

Everyone will fall short. Just because someone has accepted Jesus does not mean they will never sin again in this life. The have accepted Jesus because they recognise they are sinners.

I know this sounds horrible. But I don't really understand the gravity of Jesus' death. He was the son of God. He was the only person who knew he truly had a place upstairs. It wasn't a question of faith or mystery or anything like that. He knew he was coming back. It is a heresy to suggest he was ONLY a human that suffered on the cross (which sounds pretty horrible). That he had a dual nature the entire time.

If I had a dual nature whilst on the cross, my human part would have suffered but my God part would have been kind of indifferent I would imagine. I don't say this to offend. I genuinely see it as a reasonable conclusion (for God).

I guess I don't get the sacrifice. You sacrifice your only son only to get him back again. If I did the same, I think it would hurt a whole lot more. He wouldn't be coming back to me.

Does it matter how God paid for your redemption? The fact that He did is the point. If I paid off your debt, what concern is it to you whether I used my savings account or my award savers account? What does it matter whether the sacrifice for my was a big one or a little one, when for you it could mean the difference between a life at home or a life on the street?

What does it change for humanity? God did what was required so that we don’t have to do it. If you’re still talking about ‘fairness’, we’ll always be on the losing side.

The Bible is in fact made up of different components depending on which denomination one subscribes to. They could almost be separate universes too.

Different components? You may see it that way because you haven’t really made an effort to study it.

But I thought the assessment was a reasonable one worthy of discussion. What alternative universe offended you the most about it?

It didn’t offend me, it humoured me because the writer was complaining about fairness (as if he was on the losing end) and suggesting that he, a finite being, was wise enough to catch out God, an infinite supreme being, in some game of moral superiority, when he clearly does not understand grace and salvation.

God created that reality. He could have created a little black hole where we all get sucked into anti-matter. But Hell is a convenient deterrent that works for hundreds of millions of practising Christians on a daily basis. If you think the threat of hell doesn't keep millions of Christians in line, then you really should get out more often.

I highly doubt there are hundreds of millions of actual Christians in the world. Paper Christians maybe, but people that actually believe that God exists, that recognise their sinful nature and that have entrusted their lives to Jesus, not so many. Whether they see hell as some sort of deterrent and whether it keeps them in line I don’t know. But once you genuinely trust in Christ, you can’t lose your salvation. There is no more threat of hell. And while you’ll still fall and sin, you realise that you don’t want to because of who God is, not because of what He can do.

I know it was a painful loss for you, but it’s a good example of who God is, so I apologise if I stir up some painful memories. As a child, you may not break the house rules because you are afraid of the punishment, but as you grow up, you realise how much your father loves you and you don’t want to hurt him because you love him, not because you are scared of what he may do to you.

Likewise, a father does not want to hurt his children, he wants only the best for them. But there comes a time when they must make their own choices and he needs to respect those choices, even when he knows the are the wrong ones.

[Risto the Great]

Really well put about the father analogy Vangelovski. I like it.

Different components? You may see it that way because you haven’t really made an effort to study it.

Do you accept that different denominations accept different texts as being part of the Holy Book?

Does it matter how God paid for your redemption? The fact that He did is the point. If I paid off your debt, what concern is it to you whether I used my savings account or my award savers account? What does it matter whether the sacrifice for my was a big one or a little one, when for you it could mean the difference between a life at home or a life on the street?

What does it change for humanity? God did what was required so that we don’t have to do it. If you’re still talking about ‘fairness’, we’ll always be on the losing side.

Interesting way of looking at it. You've removed the drama out of the equation and remain logical within your context. It's good. I still think the talk of the "begotten son" is meant to extract maximum drama:
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life"

I still don't get what was given. But anyway, its been interesting.

I'm not there but I like the approach.

cheers

[Tomche Makedonche]

I’m reminded of an old joke:

When I was a kid, all I wanted was a bike for my birthday, so every night I prayed to god to please give me a bike and I would continue to be a devout Christian forever. When my birthday finally came round, I was surprised to find that all my good deeds and prayers went unanswered. So I asked my parents “why didn’t god give me the bike?” to which they explained that god didn’t work that way. So the next day I stole the bike and asked god for forgiveness.

By the way, I know its a little late but Happy Easter to all and Vistina Vajskrse

[Vangelovski]

Do you accept that different denominations accept different texts as being part of the Holy Book?

If you are referring to the apocryphal books then nobody considers them as 'cannonical' texts. The Catholics and Orthodox put them in as 'good' reading, but not the word of God. Otherwise, there is only one set of texts that are considered the actual Word of God.

Interesting way of looking at it. You've removed the drama out of the equation and remain logical within your context. It's good. I still think the talk of the "begotten son" is meant to extract maximum drama:
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life"

I still don't get what was given. But anyway, its been interesting.

I'm not there but I like the approach.

cheers

I don't think there is any drama in it. The use of 'begotten' is explaining who Jesus is - God himself.

It doesn't matter 'what was given'. The punishment needs to satisfy God, not you. The fact that he's satisfied is to your benefit.