Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI note once again that you chose not to pick out a single question and attempt any answer.
Maybe we need to begin at the beginning. Try following this particular line of discussion from the start (20 Dec '06 07:51) which was a question addressed to Nicksten who started this thread.
He replied with the following:
Christians arent angels and yes, Christians are not any less sinful that the general population, and that is why we have to keep ...[text shortened]... r care to have a thoughtful discussion, then please organize your thoughts and present them.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI think what you are doing regarding this issue is falling into one of the two extremes that God does not intend us to fall into.
I guess I'll take that as you don't care to have a thoughtful discussion.
Extreme(1 ) says that we have God's ways to follow and that's all there is to it. We are commanded and encouraged to follow this way and we are fully capable of doing so and we should be asking ourselves some damn serious questions (about our foundations for example) if we drift from this path. Man is fully able to do this and if we don't it's a pretty poor show and it's because we have not been humble enough. We are called to be be perfect and so we should be. it's a one time deal.
Extreme (2) says that God understands that we are only human and we are destined to fail and we should be expecting to actively seek God's forgiveness constantly because we are only ever going to fall flat on our face. We should realise that all that talk about perfect humility is Ok in theory but in practice no-one can ever get there so why bother? We are called to follow God's ways but , hey , he didn't really expect us to do it did he? Sin ,sin and more sin , God will forgive us!
Extreme (1) leads us into judgementalism , perfectionism and potentially pride based on how well we are doing and a reliance on our own strength (not God's) We can easily judge others who do not succeed as we do and loose appreciation of God's patience and forgiveness along with loosing a sense of our own humanity.
Extreme (2) leads into complacency and laziness. We do not take God seriously and we expect too less of ourselves. We end up not rising to the challenge and expecting to fail and not following God's ways. We do not aspire to what we can be and become too wrapped up in a self image based on flawed humanity.
Now , you will notice that neither of these extremes are desirable and are to be avoided. The Bible tries to keep us tucked in between these extremes , so for every quote you have offered in defence of extreme 1 there are others in defence of extreme 2 (eg "For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathise with our weakness.....He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray" Hebrews 5+6)
So when we read any of these quotes we are supposed to bear in mind the opposite quote alongside it. Neither extreme is to be taken out of context. This is what I mean by the grey areas in between your all or nothing thinking.
An example if I may , I play Golf and when I play I go out every time with the sincere belief that I can break 80 and play really well. I try my hardest and give it everything. However , whilst trying my hardest I am also very aware that I am unlikely to break 80 very often so I have to be careful I don't beat myself up when I get a double bogey. I accept the double bogey, however , this doesn't stop me from believing I can birdie the next hole even though I know that a par is much more likely. I have to keep my expectations up to avoid going into a run of bad holes but I also have to stay clear of counterproductive effort (any golfers out there will know what I mean by "trying too hard"😉
Now I have seen myself and other golfers fall into one of two traps here. We can easily get down on ourselves and set too high a standard and start on a road to club throwing and frustration ( cue bad scores as well) or we can become accustomed to double bogeys and accept less than we can achieve (cue lazy three putts and thoughtless shots into trees). Anyone who plays golf will know that they tend to play best when they stay in the middle and do both. They try their heart out but when the bad shots come (as they will) they accept them. This for me , is the zone I try to get into (and score best in) and I think it's analogous of the zone God wants us in with his ways.
So do we try our hearts out in the expectation that we will never need to repent or confess again? Or do we accept that we will fail and need to come back to God again and again? The answer?-----BOTH!
Anything else is a trap of either pride or laziness.
So my point is that you have fallen into the trap of extreme 1 and think that Christians are in extreme 2. It's the nature of polarising that one fails to see the middle ground and only sees the other pole. A polariser has to make it an either/or situation because holding on to two opposite ideas simultaneously seems too complicated. the grey bit becomes invisible.
So although what you are saying about repentance is based on scripture , it is only a half truth (extreme 1) and as such is a distortion of true Christianity.
fancy a game of Golf? 😀
Originally posted by knightmeisterYou continue to misrepresent my position several times throughout your post, although you have no basis to do so. Why do you feel compelled to continue to resort to schoolboy tactics? If anyone falls into the trap of absolutes, it is you: "So my point is that you have fallen into the trap of extreme 1 and think that Christians are in extreme 2."; "This is what I mean by the grey areas in between your all or nothing thinking."; "Anything else is a trap of either pride or laziness."
I think what you are doing regarding this issue is falling into one of the two extremes that God does not intend us to fall into.
Extreme(1 ) says that we have God's ways to follow and that's all there is to it. We are commanded and encouraged to follow this way and we are fully capable of doing so and we should be asking ourselves some damn seriou ...[text shortened]... s such is a distortion of true Christianity.
fancy a game of Golf? 😀
Interesting that rather than have a thoughtful discussion, you continue to try to "score points" by misrepresenting my position. Interesting that you find seeking spiritual maturity analogous to a child's game. Why does everything seem to be a competition with you?
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneThis is curious . I thought I did exactly what you wanted me to do which was to put forward an argument of "substance". This is what I have done in response to what I perceived your position to be. It is up to you to correct any misperceptions I may have just as I am correcting your misperceptions of what Christianity is. Once again I have next to no idea what you think about the issues I have brought up because you have avoided them .
You continue to misrepresent my position several times throughout your post, although you have no basis to do so. Why do you feel compelled to continue to resort to schoolboy tactics? If anyone falls into the trap of absolutes, it is you: "So my point is that you have fallen into the trap of extreme 1 and think that Christians are in extreme 2."; "This i ity analogous to a child's game. Why does everything seem to be a competition with you?
I sat down in front of my keyboard and thought " Ok , I'm going to put forward a postion and really try to play it TofOne's way. " However , the discussion you seem to want to have is a very sterile one where the rules are - I agree with you all the time and raise no objections to your position and if I don't I am a "schoolboy". Of course , that would make you the schoolmaster and as we know the schoolmaster cannot be challenged. If I raise an objection to your misrepresentations of Christianity then I am "scoring points" or full of "pride".
You seem to want to seek discussion only with people who agree with you and if they don't then you seem to sidestep any questions and ignore any content in what they have said (just as you have ignored the content of my previous post)
You are right about being in competition though. If you misrepresent the truth of Christianity and claim it to say something it doesn't then I will get competitive. Unless you had forgotten the picture Jesus painted of the world was very much one of truth under attack from lies and deception. What you have said about repentance and confession is a distortion based on a half truth and it would be disingenuous of me not to challenge it. I'm not scoring points against you I'm just defending the truth. In any case I have not resorted to being offensive in the way others have on other threads. I have not rubbished your arguments I have used reasoned argument and piercing questions. If you think that me saying you are polarising the argument is wrong then refute my argument with reason and content rather than this schoolboy lecturing stuff. I won't cry , sir , even if you send me to detention!
If you wanted a wine and slippers discussion then why go into the deep end with Christianity and Truth? Did you really expect Christians to just sit on their hands while you quoted Jesus in such a pick and mix fashion? The truth is not so woolly as that my friend.
By the way , why is Golf a "child's game"?
Originally posted by NickstenThe thing is that Humans bring on suffering themselves.
A man went to a barbershop to have his hair cut and his beard trimmed.
As the barber began to work, they began to have a good conversation.
They talked about so many things and various subjects.
When they eventually touched on the subject of God, the barber said:
"I don't believe that God exists."
"Why do you say that?" asked the customer.
...[text shortened]... ng you a joyful Holiday Season and a happy and prosperous 2007
God does love the world and that is why he gave us Jesus to save us from pain and suffering.
Originally posted by knightmeisterRubbish - now if your God is as omnipotent as you say he is, it would present no problem for him. The same way that you try and weasel your way around the logical impossibility for the 3 Os to exist manifest by one God.
But can you explain how God can create real free will but exclude any possibility of anything happening that he might not like? It's logically impossible.
At least I had an explanation.
I also think that there are certain things that seem paradoxical about God because of our limited understanding of his dimension of eternity, but ultimately , ...[text shortened]... you are so concerned with trying to trip me up that you forget to think the thing through.
Originally posted by scottishinnzPlease, do tell, how are they a logical impossibility?
Rubbish - now if your God is as omnipotent as you say he is, it would present no problem for him. The same way that you try and weasel your way around the logical impossibility for the 3 Os to exist manifest by one God.
Originally posted by Conrau KTheists typically state that the presence of evil is a requirement of free will, however, free will is a crock, since an omniscient God knows everything you will do, and therefore your choice is limited. An omnibenevolent god, who is also omnipotent, would not allow the presence of evil.
Please, do tell, how are they a logical impossibility?
Originally posted by Conrau KWe already had a discussion about this, in which you went round and round in circles and ended up contradicting yourself several times. You can attribute any ability you want to God, but that doesn't make it logically possible. Shall we discuss the logical impossibility of God acting within the universe but outside of time again?
Please, do tell, how are they a logical impossibility?
Originally posted by whiteroseI never contradicted myself. As I exlained your definition of omnipotence was both absurd and remote from how theist's use it.
We already had a discussion about this, in which you went round and round in circles and ended up contradicting yourself several times. You can attribute any ability you want to God, but that doesn't make it logically possible. Shall we discuss the logical impossibility of God acting within the universe but outside of time again?
Originally posted by scottishinnzNo, theists say that evil is a product of free will, not a requirement. You will also find a number of theists (and atheists) who do not find free will incompatible with determinism, or even that omniscience implies determinism.
Theists typically state that the presence of evil is a requirement of free will, however, free will is a crock, since an omniscient God knows everything you will do, and therefore your choice is limited. An omnibenevolent god, who is also omnipotent, would not allow the presence of evil.
I haeve never heard of the term "omnibenevolent" outside this site. It is not one of the "3 Os". The three O's are: omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence.
Originally posted by scottishinnzI have only heard of evil things happening to evil people!
Theists typically state that the presence of evil is a requirement of free will, however, free will is a crock, since an omniscient God knows everything you will do, and therefore your choice is limited. An omnibenevolent god, who is also omnipotent, would not allow the presence of evil.
If you live your life with God, no evil will follow you.
The following I got from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil
In religion and ethics, Evil refers to the "bad" aspects of the behaviour and reasoning of human beings —those which are deliberately void of conscience, and show a wanton penchant for destruction. Evil is sometimes defined as the absence of a good which could and should be present; the absence of which is a void in what should be. In most cultures, the word is used to describe acts, thoughts, and ideas which are thought to (either directly or causally) bring about affliction and death —the opposite of goodness, which itself refers to aspects which are life-affirming, peaceful, and constructive.
Perhaps evil is best represented in the human situation in the form of unprovoked hatred against and coupled with an aggressive impulse to cause harm to another person or group. Such hatred can be aroused from within the individual or group through jealousy, wrong teachings or due to unexplained extra-personal forces.
Originally posted by NickstenSurely that's rather obvious..... otherwise they wouldn't be evil now would they.....?
I have only heard of evil things happening to evil people!
Perhaps if a good person has a crash it's a lesson, and a bad person has a crash it's because they were evil eh?
Originally posted by Conrau KMy definition of omnipotence was straight out of the dictionary. If theists use a different one then you should have given me the definition you were using.
I never contradicted myself. As I exlained your definition of omnipotence was both absurd and remote from how theist's use it.