06 Sep 08
6 edits
Originally posted by epiphinehas"My guess would be that in a large sampling both groups would be roughly equal in virtue. People are people, and generally have the same capacity for virtue regardless of religious affiliation or lack thereof."
[b]What do you mean by "truly born of God"?
Born again of water and the Spirit (John 3:5). A new birth wrought by the Holy Spirit and signified by water baptism.
At what point is a Christian "truly born of God"?
The moment a person is quickened/regenerated/resurrected in his or her spirit by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Roughl God"?
🙄
Can a non-Christian be "truly born of God"?
Absolutely not.[/b]
If a large sampling of both groups would be "roughly equal in virtue" and there is "no comparison" between someone "truly born of God" and an atheist committed to virtue and non-Christians cannot be "truly born of God", then it follows that the number of Christians "truly born of God" is insignificant.
BTW, your definition of "truly born of God" does not bring any clarity. For all intents and purposes you might as well be saying that someone "truly born of God" is someone "truly born of God". My definition is simple: someone "truly born of God" embodies truth, love, compassion, justice, etc., i.e., their essence is "born" of the above. The natural result is that their actions reflect this. It is who they "are". On the other side, the actions of someone not "truly born of God" can result in unrighteousness, i.e., sin. Can you be more precise?
06 Sep 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneIt is who they "are". On the other side, the actions of someone not "truly born of God" can result in unrighteousness, i.e., sin.------------------------------ToO-----------------------------------
[b]"My guess would be that in a large sampling both groups would be roughly equal in virtue. People are people, and generally have the same capacity for virtue regardless of religious affiliation or lack thereof."
If a large sampling of both groups would be "roughly equal in virtue" and there is "no comparison" between someone "truly born of God" a ...[text shortened]... od" can result in unrighteousness, i.e., sin. Can you be more precise?[/b]
The problem is that the world is not split up into completely neat catagories like this. There are many people who are committed to love and truth who have problems and do not live perfect lives free of sin. There are others who would not be seen in a good light by society who nevertheless do acts of kindness.
I'm beginning to accept that you will never talk about your own life. But maybe as a compromise you could cite some well known examples of men/women who you think are "born of God" and embody truth , love and justice and compassion. Then you could show us how they are sinless in your opinion.
I'll start. Take Bono of U2 . Here's a man whose music and lyrics ooze with messages of love and justice. He has also backed this up with actions and worked with Amnesty/ Jubilee Fund / Live Aid. He also shows many signs of really caring about justice and I've not heard anything really bad about him in terms of his dealings with people.
Despite all this , he would not claim to be without sin and I doubt that he would say his life perfectly reflects God's love in every aspect. He might well have arguments with his wife ,and despite having done loads for Africa's poor , he does live in a big castle. So "born of God " or not. ? Righteous or unrighteous? Liar or proponent of Truth?
Once you have addressed this then please provide an example of your own. Let's see if your theories pan out in practice. I think I am topis here am I not?
06 Sep 08
3 edits
Originally posted by knightmeisterPlease stop addressing posts to me, posting about me as well as starting threads about me and lying about me.
Why are you asking these questions when the idea of being "born again" and all that it entails (eg repentance , receiving the Spirit , baptism etc ) all form a central part of Jesus's teachings?
Since you seem to feel you can take on all of Christendom concerning Jesus's teachings I thought you were the expert on them? So why the pretense? Just tel - You expect Ephin. to answer simple direct questions when you will not yourself?)
Your post is purely an attack. An attack with a premise that is so ill-conceived as to be ridiculous. I asked those questions to get clarification on what he posted - clarification on his meaning.
Do you really think that making inane accusation after inane accusation really proves anything?
This continued blatant character assassination is, as another poster described it, "trashy and lame".
When is this stalking going to end? It's been going on for months.
06 Sep 08
Originally posted by black beetleYou believe and say that I am praying into thin air , so why is it wrong for me to say that the air around you is filled with God's grace?
Dear KM you quoted " Just as you believe that I am by implication praying into thin air like a deluded fool , so I also believe that you are standing under grace and that God is currently using you to further the cause of Love and Justice."
Well I think that you are praying to your god, however I don't believe to his existence. This does not make you ...[text shortened]... n boh of our views. For me every Christian is Christian and every atheist, atheist.-
06 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI asked those questions to get clarification on what he posted - clarification on his meaning.------------------ToO-----------------
Please stop posting about me as well as starting threads about me and lying about me.
Your post is purely an attack. An attack with a premise that is so ill-conceived as to be ridiculous. I asked those questions to get clarification on what he posted - clarification on his meaning.
Do you really think that making inane accusation after inane accus ...[text shortened]... it, "trashy and lame".
When is this stalking going to end? It's been going on for months.
But do you not see the contradiction here? Ephin and I (amongst others) have been asking you for months for clarification on exactly what you actually believe and it is not forthcoming and yet here you are expecting others to do what you refuse to do yourself.
You're the only one around here who refuses to be upfront and clear about your basic beliefs but at the same time seems to expect others to be clear about theirs. I presume that you have a deeper motive for asking Ephin these questions (since I doubt you want to convert) , so I'm guessing you will proceed to pick apart his beliefs after he answers. However, will you allow what you believe to be scrutinised as well?
I'm not out to get you , I've always been about having a proper , honest debate that really gets down to the basic issues. At first I thought you were too , but then it seemed that you only wanted to play with your loaded dice and preferred to ask challenging questions instead of answering any.
I will admit that I have become over zealous in my challenge of your osition , so I will tone things down and keep more on topic in future. I think they way forward may be to provide you with opportunities to flesh out what you believe without you having to be too explicit. The Bono post could be a good compromise, yes? Would you like to pick some examples yourself of people you think are born of God?
06 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterOnce again, please stop addressing posts to me, posting about me as well as starting threads about me and lying about me.
I asked those questions to get clarification on what he posted - clarification on his meaning.------------------ToO-----------------
But do you not see the contradiction here? Ephin and I (amongst others) have been asking you for months for clarification on exactly what you actually believe and it is not forthcoming and yet here you are expecting o y with your loaded dice and preferred to ask challenging questions instead of answering any.
In short, stop stalking and harassing me.
How many more posters need to point out to you that you have crossed the line of decent behavior? Some on more than one occasion.
06 Sep 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneOk mate , if it's offending you then I'll back off. Would you prefer that I answer none of your posts at all , or would you prefer me just to respond in a way that leaves "you" out of it altogether?
Once again, please stop addressing posts to me, posting about me as well as starting threads about me and lying about me.
In short, stop stalking me.
How many more posters need to point out to you that you have crossed the line of decent behavior? Some on more than one occasion.
As a suggestion I will just pursue one thread at a time containing your thoughts and limit myself to simple non-personal reflections. Would that be acceptable?
06 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterAs I've repeatedly been saying:
Ok mate , if it's offending you then I'll back off. Would you prefer that I answer none of your posts at all , or would you prefer me just to respond in a way that leaves "you" out of it altogether?
As a suggestion I will just pursue one thread at a time containing your thoughts and limit myself to simple non-personal reflections. Would that be acceptable?
Once again, please stop addressing posts to me, posting about me as well as starting threads about me and lying about me.
06 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI don't think you have the right to expect someone to not respond to your posts if you are challenging their position and those who share those beliefs.
As I said:
Once again, please [b]stop addressing posts to me, posting about me as well as starting threads about me and lying about me.[/b]
However, if you would prefer me not to bring your cyber-space-personal-charactor into it then I can do that. I can keep things chilled.
(BTW-Since no-one really knows who anyone is really (for example anyone of us could be a psychology experiment done by a bunch of graduates) then I can't really hurt you or slander your charactor with anything that isn't already public knowledge. If what I have said about your posts is untrue then others will take a look at what you have posted and it will only reflect on me in the end. I can only make a judgement call on the basis of your posts which are public knowledge. I have no idea who you are so I can hardly slander you with accusations of dodgy financial dealings or the like! LOL. I cannot "harrass" you either unless I know where you live. That was a joke BTW. )
06 Sep 08
Originally posted by knightmeisterYou've managed to stay true to yourself to the end.
I don't think you have the right to expect someone to not respond to your posts if you are challenging their position and those who share those beliefs.
However, if you would prefer me not to bring your cyber-space-personal-charactor into it then I can do that. I can keep things chilled.
(BTW-Since no-one really knows who anyone is really (for ...[text shortened]... ! LOL. I cannot "harrass" you either unless I know where you live. That was a joke BTW. )
06 Sep 08
Originally posted by epiphinehasHowever, if you were to compare the life of someone truly 'born of God' with the life of an atheist committed to virtue, there is no comparison. The quality of holiness genuinely born-again people possess is on a different level altogether. The life of virtue one is capable of in one's own power cannot hold a candle to what the power of God is able to produce in the heart of a born-again believer.
My guess would be that in a large sampling both groups would be roughly equal in virtue. People are people, and generally have the same capacity for virtue regardless of religious affiliation or lack thereof. Assuming these folks, atheist and Christian alike, are expecting themselves to adhere to truth, love, humility, compassion, justice, etc. to the ...[text shortened]... d a candle to what the power of God is able to produce in the heart of a born-again believer.
However, if you were to compare the life of someone truly realized in their “Buddha-nature” with the life anyone else committed to virtue, there is no comparison. The quality of holiness genuine realized Buddhas posses is on a different level altogether. The life of virtue one is capable of in one’s “own” power cannot hold a candle to what the power of Buddha is able to produce in the heart of one who has realized his Buddha-nature.
QED
_____________________________
Which is not to imply that I feel personally affronted by your statements. Only my superficial ego-self-construct could choose to feel affronted. (Not being “perfected”, it still can sometimes happen—but I eventually, at least, realize the error and silliness of it: error and silliness for which I am solely responsible.)
______________________________
If someone says: “I have seen the Buddha”,
I say:
“The Buddha is just what is doing such seeing.
Be just that.”
Naming names—even Buddha-names,
even “I”-names, any names—
is just the activity of naming names.
Who is “Buddha”, before any names?
Who are “you”, before your making
of any labels, words or names?
06 Sep 08
Originally posted by vistesdI bow.-
[b]However, if you were to compare the life of someone truly 'born of God' with the life of an atheist committed to virtue, there is no comparison. The quality of holiness genuinely born-again people possess is on a different level altogether. The life of virtue one is capable of in one's own power cannot hold a candle to what the power of God is able to pro ...[text shortened]... Buddha”, before any names?
Who are “you”, before your making
of any labels, words or names?
07 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneCan you be more precise?
[b]"My guess would be that in a large sampling both groups would be roughly equal in virtue. People are people, and generally have the same capacity for virtue regardless of religious affiliation or lack thereof."
If a large sampling of both groups would be "roughly equal in virtue" and there is "no comparison" between someone "truly born of God" a od" can result in unrighteousness, i.e., sin. Can you be more precise?[/b]
God gives a new nature - a holy nature - to those who believe in His Son.
Their new nature makes obeying Christ's commands easy.
Without being born again such obedience is impossible.