Originally posted by FMF
I don't want to hear evasive waffle about "privilege" or "volition" or about whether a choice is "uncoerced", if you don't mind. I am interested in a straight answer. Do you seriously believe ~ psychologically speaking, philosophically speaking, spiritually speaking ~ that people can somehow make a "decision" to believe something that they simply do not find to be believable?

If you find it unbelievable, then rejection should be your decision. Simple, huh? 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
If you find it unbelievable, then rejection should be your decision. Simple, huh? 😏

An unbelievable thing is not something someone can choose or decide to believe. Grampy Bobby's claim that one only has to "choose" to believe something - even when it doesn't make sense to say one can choose to believe something unbelievable (which is what his long-standing evasions and deflections presumably mean) - is sheer nonsense. And yet his entire theological ideology depends on it.

Originally posted by checkbaiter

I understand what you are saying, but it is confusing. How is "Deification" possible?

It is not easy.
Think of the saved being filled both within with the life of God and swallowed up without with the life of God. That is a thorough saturation with the life of God. Don't you think so?

Here we see filled up within with God as life:

"But whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall by no means thirst forever;

but the water that I will give him will become in him a fountain of water gushing up into eternal life." (John 4:14)

Surely that is being filled up inwardly with God's life.
What about outwardly ?

" If indeed, being clothed, we will not be found naked.

For also, we who are in this tabernacle goran, being burdened, in that we do not desire to be unclothed, but clothed upon, that what is mortal may be SWALLOWED UP by life." (2 Cor. 5:3,4)

Surely this is to be swallowed up even in our body in God's divine life. So we can see what Paul must mean when he says we would be filled unto all the fullness of God

" ... And to know the knowledge surpassing love of Christ, that you may be filled unto all the fullness of God." (Eph. 3:19)

Isn't mankind eventually going to be here on earth?

Yes. At least on earth. My opinion is that perhaps His kingdom will extend further.

But this is my musing. I am not dogmatic about it.

That is, the "new heavens and the new earth".

That is right. That is Revelation 21:1. The full matching Bride occupies the new heaven and new earth.

Peter says new heavens and new earth in which righteousness dwells (2 Peter 3:13) .

If we are a born again person at least one part of our being is already in that realm - our regenerated spirit.

It is going to end as God began, in the "garden of delights."

His consummation is beyond what God begun. Not just at what He began but beyond what He began. It is back to Eden yet BEYOND.

A place where there will be peace, no more sin, no more tears, an abundance of food, etc.

God's will - Revelation 21 and 22.
Yet beyond this is the climax - the mingling of God and man,

We need to also uplift out view of the church. For the church must be the community where God is growing Christ within saved people. And the local church must be a place where this growing of God in man is also the building up of the living temple of God for the new heaven and new earth.

"For we are God's fellow workers, you [the church in Corinth] are God's cultivated land [farm] God's building."

And won't we hold different positions in the Kingdom depending on rewards earned in the here and now?

Yes. The millennial kingdom, though, is a preliminary period of 1,000 years BEFORE the eternal age of the new heaven and new earth. (Rev. 20).

Some still need maturing during that time who have missed the reward. The reward is set before the saints as an incentive to cooperate with grace.

The period after the millennial kingdom sees the church with no more immaturity. So the entire total renovation of the old heaven and old earth is ready. And the mingling of God and man is consummated in the new heaven and new earth.

God's will is accomplished.
God's eternal purpose is accomplished.

Originally posted by sonship

I understand what you are saying, but it is confusing. How is "Deification" possible?

It is not easy.
Think of the saved being filled both within with the life of God and swallowed up without with the life of God. That is a thorough saturation with the life of God. Don't you think so?

Here we see filled up within with God as life: ...[text shortened]... w heaven and new earth.

God's will is accomplished.
God's eternal purpose is accomplished.

I see the mingling with God, but I don't quite see it as becoming God. Yes, in our new spiritual bodies we will no longer have sinful thoughts, the sinful nature is completely gone, (praise God for that!) Satan and his host is gone!
We will then take in the beauty of God, His Majesty, we will finally see Him face to face. It will be a glorious time.
We will then properly love Him and worship Him as we should. God will...in the ages to come, show us His loving kindness, which is much anticipated as I think about it.
Becoming like God is , to me anyway, borderline blasphemy but if it is His will, that is another matter.

Originally posted by checkbaiter

I see the mingling with God, but I don't quite see it as becoming God. Yes, in our new spiritual bodies we will no longer have sinful thoughts, the sinful nature is completely gone, (praise God for that!) Satan and his host is gone!
We will then take in the beauty of God, His Majesty, we will finally see Him face to face. It will be a glorious time.
We will then properly love Him and worship Him as we should. God will...in the ages to come, show us His loving kindness, which is much anticipated as I think about it.
Becoming like God is , to me anyway, borderline blasphemy but if it is His will, that is another matter.

We are not becomming God in these following aspects.

1.) We will not be omnipresent.
2.) We will not be omnipotent.
3.) Will will not be omniscient.
4.) We will not be an object or objects of worship.
5.) We will not be creators of universes.

These are not communicable attributes of God.
There remain attributes of His Headship.

Now having said that, I would like you to consider the following concepts.

1.) The son of a horse is what? A horse.

2.) The son of a whale is what ? A whale.

3.) The son of an eagle is what ? An eagle.

4.) The son of a MAN is what? A man.

5.) Now what is a son of God ?
What are sons of God ?

Your answer ?

My Answer: Is it not also the case that sons of God ... are God ?

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] I see the mingling with God, but I don't quite see it as becoming God. Yes, in our new spiritual bodies we will no longer have sinful thoughts, the sinful nature is completely gone, (praise God for that!) Satan and his host is gone!
We will then take in the beauty of God, His Majesty, we will finally see Him face to face. It will be a glorious time. ...[text shortened]... f God ?

Your answer ?

My Answer: Is it not also the case that sons of God ... are God ?

Okay, I see, thanks... In that sense it makes sense

Originally posted by RJHinds
If you find it unbelievable, then rejection should be your decision. Simple, huh? 😏

Yes, RJH, there are only two diametrically opposed decisions.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Okay, I see, thanks... In that sense it makes sense

There are permanent boundaries to the believers' deification.
There are non-communicable attributes which God alone possess from eternity to eternity.

Now a picture is often worth a thousand words. I would like to share the picture in the book of Revelation of the appearance of God and the appearance of the holy city New Jerusalem.

God - appears as jasper.

"Immediately I was in spirit; and behold, there was a throne set in heaven, and upon the throne there was One sitting.

And He who was sitting was like a jasper stone and a sardius, ... " (Rev. 4:2,3a)

I believe this shade of jasper is the deep dark green color - the color of a rich life, perhaps like a dark green evergreen tree.

Now notice the city of God which is the Bride and Wife of Christ. She too is of jasper color.

" And he carried me away in spirit onto a great and high mountain and showed me the holy city, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God.

Having the glory of God. Her light was like a most precious stone, like a jasper stone, as clear as crystal." (Rev. 21:10,11)

The means that God has wrought Himself into the holy city.
This means God has dispensed His life and nature into the city.
Both God and the city coming out of God have the appearance of jasper, the appearance of the richness of divine life.

Once saved we have a destiny of being deified with the communicable attributes of God expressed in human virtues.

Originally posted by RJHinds
If you find it unbelievable, then rejection should be your decision. Simple, huh? 😏

Glad to see your back RJ...🙂

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Glad to see your back RJ...🙂

You saw RJ's back?

I told you that you need lessons in the English language.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Yes, RJH, there are only two diametrically opposed decisions.

Can you give us an example from your own life where you decided to believe something that you didn't believe?

Originally posted by FMF
An unbelievable thing is not something someone can choose or decide to believe. Grampy Bobby's claim that one only has to "choose" to believe something - even when it doesn't make sense to say one can choose to believe something unbelievable (which is what his long-standing evasions and deflections presumably mean) - is sheer nonsense. And yet his entire theological ideology depends on it.

And yet there are those who will not be swayed in their own belief (or non-belief, if you insist), apparently without researching the issue or giving any time to collecting all the evidence for the belief of others. To merely reject without giving it much thought belies the idea that those who reject do so because they are "more intelligent", and supports the idea that they are just "believing their own BS" without further research. People change their minds about any number of subjects every day on far less evidence. Choice refers to the entire set of decisions one makes on the way to decision-making, such as whether they pause to collect all the details or not.

Calling others' beliefs "nonsense" or "unbelievable" shows your hand, here. And yet you are one of the first to claim that it is theists who are "locked in" to their own beliefs. Calling your side of the argument "reasonable" and all others as "unbelievable" or "nonsensical" doesn't exactly prove your point, either.

Originally posted by FMF
Can you give us an example from your own life where you decided to believe something that you didn't believe?

"Is it safe?"

The only thing you're missing here are the restraints and the dental probe.

Originally posted by Suzianne
To merely reject without giving it much thought belies the idea that those who reject do so because they are "more intelligent", and supports the idea that they are just "believing their own BS" without further research.

Who is it you think has rejected something without much thought?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Calling others' beliefs "nonsense" or "unbelievable" shows your hand, here.

What I have said is that I think it is nonsense to suggest that someone can somehow decide or choose to believe something they in fact find unbelievable. If you disagree, why not explain how it can be done?