1. Standard memberHand of Hecate
    Merciless Vagabond
    Deep in it.
    Joined
    08 Feb '05
    Moves
    14614
    12 Jan '12 23:02
    Premises:
    1. God exists.
    2. Eternal life can be achieved through belief in this God.
    3. Any time spent in the Earthly realm is time spent outside of God's grace.

    Conclusion:
    Takingany action to prolong your life on Earth is sinful. You should kill yourself or find someone to facilitate this process for you.
  2. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12694
    12 Jan '12 23:40
    Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
    Premises:
    1. God exists.
    2. Eternal life can be achieved through belief in this God.
    3. Any time spent in the Earthly realm is time spent outside of God's grace.

    Conclusion:
    Takingany action to prolong your life on Earth is sinful. You should kill yourself or find someone to facilitate this process for you.
    I believe your third premise to be incorrect.
  3. Joined
    10 Jun '11
    Moves
    3829
    13 Jan '12 00:43
    Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
    Premises:
    1. God exists.
    2. Eternal life can be achieved through belief in this God.
    3. Any time spent in the Earthly realm is time spent outside of God's grace.

    Conclusion:
    Takingany action to prolong your life on Earth is sinful. You should kill yourself or find someone to facilitate this process for you.
    it's is strange that i agree with rjhinds on this one. the premises as listed together do not accurately describe any religion that i am aware of .
  4. Joined
    02 Feb '06
    Moves
    106662
    13 Jan '12 02:17
    Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
    Premises:
    1. God exists.
    2. Eternal life can be achieved through belief in this God.
    3. Any time spent in the Earthly realm is time spent outside of God's grace.

    Conclusion:
    Takingany action to prolong your life on Earth is sinful. You should kill yourself or find someone to facilitate this process for you.
    I think when you get right down to it no Christian of any denomination is in any rush to test the theory of salvation.
  5. Standard memberHand of Hecate
    Merciless Vagabond
    Deep in it.
    Joined
    08 Feb '05
    Moves
    14614
    13 Jan '12 02:26
    Originally posted by Ullr
    I think when you get right down to it no Christian of any denomination is in any rush to test the theory of salvation.
    Exactly.
  6. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12694
    13 Jan '12 03:05
    Originally posted by Ullr
    I think when you get right down to it no Christian of any denomination is in any rush to test the theory of salvation.
    What is the theory of salvation? I have never head of such a theory.
    Do you mean the "Ransom theory of atonement"?

    Okay, I found something on the web about the Islamic Theory of
    Salvation. Is this what you were talking about?

    YouTube
  7. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12694
    13 Jan '12 03:172 edits
    Originally posted by Ullr
    I think when you get right down to it no Christian of any denomination is in any rush to test the theory of salvation.
    Upon googling the theory of salvation I came across the following:

    Physics and Faith … the “String Theory” of salvation

    Before I move on to John 15, I wanted to pause and summarize briefly what I’m calling the “string theory” of salvation. Much of this is taken from a sermon my rector preached on John 14 a few years ago and my own very limited understanding of physics.

    One of the goals of physics is to find a theory that can explains how the universe works. Out of this has come the theory of relativity, which explains how the very big things work … gravity, the speed of light, black holes and so on. Also out of this has come the field of quantum mechanics which speaks to how things work on the subatomic level. They both seem to work well and scientists can make accurate prediction using them. The big problem is that the theories are very inconsistent with each other. It’s like the rules of the universe change when going from the really big to the really small and you cannot make predictions on the subatomic level using mathematical formulas associated with the theory of relativity.

    In his sermon, my rector compared it to looking great in a striped shirt and having a fabulous pair of plaid pants, but if you try to wear them together, you wind up looking ridiculous and the outfit just doesn’t work.

    In John 14 you have a very inclusive statement followed very soon by a very exclusive one. “In my Father’s house there are many dwelling places, and I am going to prepare a place for you” could be called the theological cousin of the Theory of Relativity and “I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but through me” could be the counterpart to Quantum Mechanics. In the universe, two seemingly inconsistent laws live side-by-side and all of creation keeps humming along. In John, the universal and the particular meet in almost the same breath, and Jesus keeps on going as if he has not said anything contradictory. Creation proudly wears its striped shirt and plaid pants and is ready for a night on the town.

    Physicists, not content to just live with the fact that the universe should not function according to two inconsistent laws, and there must be some way the whole thing just works. String theory is a recent development that appears to hold much promise into filling in the gaps between the universal and the particular, finding out why Creation appears to act in inconsistent and sometimes contradictory ways.



    When my rector explored the theological equivalents and how it all ties together he said, about John 14:2, In my Father’s house there are many dwelling places:

    …in this one verse on the lips of Jesus, people have heard the radical welcome of God’s wide-open, even universal embrace to all sorts and conditions of believers. Those whom we might call “John 14:2″ people rightly point out that it is the love and grace of God that saves, not the merits of anyone’s correct believing.

    and then again about John 14:6, No one comes to the Father but through me:

    Here is but one example of a consistent Biblical truth often referred to as “the scandal of particularity.” What this means is that God chooses particular nations and individuals — and not others — to be the focal points of revelation. God poured himself into a covenant relationship with the Jews as he did no other nation. God poured himself into Jesus as he did no other person. It’s a scandal because God’s designated doorways to himself seem too few, too narrow, and too culturally constrained to reach a diverse world.

    So how does it all work? What are the strings that tie the universal embrace of God with the particular truth claims of Christianity? He sums our dilemma as follows:

    John 14:2 people claim that we are children of God by virtue of creation, and you can’t give tickets to heaven only to those lucky enough to have heard about Jesus [I would add and believe about him in a certain way -- Rb]. John 14:6 people counter that we are children of God by virtue of the cross and the resurrection, and you can’t have a church whose only particular claim is that we have no particular truth claim.

    The string that ties the universal and the particular is none other than Jesus himself. If we had time and space, we could look at clues that he gives us about his divine nature. The Bible also speaks of Jesus being the Chief Cornerstone, and there is a hymn which speaks of Christ “binding all the church in one.” In sum, says my rector, “our calling is never to follow any one theology but rather the risen Lord Jesus, who is alive and leading. He says to us as well as to the disciples, ‘Let not your hearts be troubled; believe in God, believe also in me.”

    Once again, scientists have a thing or two to teach those of us with an interest in religion and faith. If the scientific community refuses to believe that Creation can be inconsistent with itself and its own laws of universality and particularity, then why can’t we? The universe is not divided against itself, and neither is God’s house.

    In Stephen Hawking’s book, A Brief History of Time, he says “Humanity’s deepest desire for knowledge is justification enough for our continuing quest.” This alone should give a sort of divine discontent in those of us to follow Jesus to continue to press on for our own answers, and to know more about Jesus. The more we know, the more we will see we have much more to learn. To end with one more quote from my rector, “I pray that our continuing quest will be for all the world to know of the many rooms in our heavenly Father’s house, prepared for each and every soul by him who is the way, the truth, and the life.”

    P.S. Maybe this is why God is defined as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
    A Trinity to tie it all together like a "string" theory.
  8. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    13 Jan '12 08:15
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Upon googling the theory of salvation I came across the following:

    Physics and Faith … the “String Theory” of salvation

    Before I move on to John 15, I wanted to pause and summarize briefly what I’m calling the “string theory” of salvation. Much of this is taken from a sermon my rector preached on John 14 a few years ago and my own very limited understa ...[text shortened]... ather, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
    A Trinity to tie it all together like a "string" theory.
    "very limited" understanding of physics eh? Of course, I believe this statement but you contradict

    http://www.redhotchess.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=144238&page=1
  9. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12694
    13 Jan '12 11:322 edits
    Originally posted by Agerg
    "very limited" understanding of physics eh? Of course, I believe this statement but you contradict

    http://www.redhotchess.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=144238&page=1
    Are you referring to this statement on that thread:

    I have studied Physics and know the laws of thermodynamics probably
    better than anyone on this website. So I think I will be able to judge
    if he has a misunderstanding of them or not myself once I get the book.
    If the book is very funny, as you claim, then it will not be a total loss of
    money and time.

    P.S. I am quoting someone else who says he has a limited understanding
    of Physics. Only the final line about the trinity is my statement on the
    current post. The quote was from:

    http://teaheepeehee.wordpress.com/2008/05/05/physics-and-faith-the-string-theory-of-salvation/
  10. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91614
    14 Jan '12 03:252 edits
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Are you referring to this statement on that thread:

    I have studied Physics and know the laws of thermodynamics probably
    better than anyone on this website. So I think I will be able to judge
    if he has a misunderstanding of them or not myself once I get the book.
    If the book is very funny, as you claim, then it will not be a total loss of
    money and ...[text shortened]...
    http://teaheepeehee.wordpress.com/2008/05/05/physics-and-faith-the-string-theory-of-salvation/
    Are you saying that you "know the laws of thermodynamics probably better than anyone on this website", or on this forum?
    Because I'm sure some of the science posters would beat you hands down, unless I am missing something here.
    Try KazetNagorra (not sure of spelling).Or even Proper Knob,(or someone similar). I'd be a very keen spectator in that debate/discussion.
    I would also be willing to take bets on how long it takes before RJ "cracks" , or strays from the point or tries to elude any questions. (or whatever other methods he has to employ to weasel out out of any questions/points that you cant answer.

    Go on. Take it to science or keep it here but lets fleash it out. I noticed that you have been posting in other threads, whereas this one is aimed fairly and squarely at you. This is your time to shine. I was hoping to learn some stuff about thermodynamics from you. Really, no joke!!

    You have my blessing 🙂
  11. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12694
    14 Jan '12 07:58
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    Are you saying that you "know the laws of thermodynamics probably better than anyone on this website", or on this forum?
    Because I'm sure some of the science posters would beat you hands down, unless I am missing something here.
    Try KazetNagorra (not sure of spelling).Or even Proper Knob,(or someone similar). I'd be a very keen spectator in that deba ...[text shortened]... rn some stuff about thermodynamics from you. Really, no joke!!

    You have my blessing 🙂
    You are right. I would be safer to say this forum. I do not know about
    those on the science forum or the whole website.
  12. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91614
    14 Jan '12 09:06
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    You are right. I would be safer to say this forum. I do not know about
    those on the science forum or the whole website.
    Yes, you would be safer, no doubt.
    remember a lot of these rhp members are quite well educated. Dont forget that.
    But as long as its in spirtuality, then you have a sort of license that you dont really have anywhere else.
  13. Standard memberHand of Hecate
    Merciless Vagabond
    Deep in it.
    Joined
    08 Feb '05
    Moves
    14614
    14 Jan '12 18:001 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    What is the theory of salvation? I have never head of such a theory.
    Do you mean the "Ransom theory of atonement"?

    Okay, I found something on the web about the Islamic Theory of
    Salvation. Is this what you were talking about?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd1amsDSKNA
    The longer ou live in the Earthly realm the more opportunity you have to commit, by accident or design, a mortal sin. Better to live as short a lifespan as possible.
  14. Standard memberHand of Hecate
    Merciless Vagabond
    Deep in it.
    Joined
    08 Feb '05
    Moves
    14614
    14 Jan '12 18:03
    For that matter, raising children to the point they truly believe and then killing them will obviously put your own soul in peril, but, save countless others. Why let them get to the point where they have the reasoning capacity to doubt.
  15. Jo'Burg South Africa
    Joined
    20 Mar '06
    Moves
    45427
    17 Jan '12 22:44
    Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
    Premises:
    1. God exists.
    2. Eternal life can be achieved through belief in this God.
    3. Any time spent in the Earthly realm is time spent outside of God's grace.

    Conclusion:
    Takingany action to prolong your life on Earth is sinful. You should kill yourself or find someone to facilitate this process for you.
    Any time spent in this realm is not without God's grace - it is time you spent to prove you are worth His grace - This is my own opinion and I think other Christians may not agree with me, but like I said, my own opinion.
Back to Top