Food for Thought: Is Your Religion the Only Way

Originally posted by twhitehead
The fact that you do see a correlation means one of two things:
1. You either believe traffic court to be a totally just system
2. You believe God to be as unjust as traffic court.

I personally believe it to be unjust to be judged on something you did not know. I accept a traffic court judge punishing me solely on the understanding that he is incapab ...[text shortened]... opinion a judgment based on a violation of a law that the perpetrator is not aware of is unjust.

You are worried about justice in a traffic court, you better be more
worried about the law. God will be just, much to our displeasure when
He judges, the thing about God is that He does not mix mercy and
judgment, you get what you get in full without end.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Have you seen me say what I have with regard to God a fact at any
time, in any post, in any discussion? Long and short answer to that
question is no, you have not. I am content to say I believe and it is
a matter of faith for me, you are confusing facts and faith in this with
me. When it comes to faith and science, the ten dollar bill discussion
is a p ...[text shortened]... here and now you look, the more you are relying on things that
cannot be proven wrong.
Kelly

"Have you seen me say what I have with regard to God a fact at any
time, in any post, in any discussion?"

YES
did you not read my previous post?
Kelly: "The FACT that God has made a way for all of us to get right with Him"

Originally posted by whiterose
"Have you seen me say what I have with regard to God a fact at any
time, in any post, in any discussion?"

YES
did you not read my previous post?
Kelly: "The FACT that God has made a way for all of us to get right with Him"

Wow, I did, sorry.
It is faith, and I believe it to be true, but I was wrong to say fact.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
You are worried about justice in a traffic court, you better be more
worried about the law.

I don't understand what you mean. Which law are you referring to and why should it worry me?

God will be just, much to our displeasure when He judges, the thing about God is that He does not mix mercy and judgment, you get what you get in full without end.
Kelly
Interesting. That contradicts what every other Christian I have met says. It also contradicts my idea of justice. But then maybe justice is relative just like morals so your claim that God is just is really meaningless.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I don't understand what you mean. Which law are you referring to and why should it worry me?

[b]God will be just, much to our displeasure when He judges, the thing about God is that He does not mix mercy and judgment, you get what you get in full without end.
Kelly
Interesting. That contradicts what every other Christian I have met says. It also ...[text shortened]... aybe justice is relative just like morals so your claim that God is just is really meaningless.[/b]

I don't know what other Christians have told you, but it is quite
simple when you recieve God's grace it is eternal He mixes no
guilt into it, you are clean and clean forever; however, the same
is also true of God's wrath, He will give it to those that get it, and
they will get no mercy with it, it will be unlimited as the grace is
and it will last just as long.

The law if you look it up you will see that not knowing is not an excuse
if all the proper signs are there, your lack of knownledge though it
may be true will not excuse you.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I don't know what other Christians have told you, but it is quite
simple when you recieve God's grace it is eternal He mixes no
guilt into it, you are clean and clean forever; however, the same
is also true of God's wrath, He will give it to those that get it, and
they will get no mercy with it, it will be unlimited as the grace is
and it will last just as long.

What about someone like me who no longer believes? Do I still get grace? Is the unchangeable God's grace unwavering, or does it come and go depending on human belief?

I refer you to 2 Timothy 2:13: "If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself." Also worth considering is Numbers 23:19: "God is not a man that he should lie, nor a son of man that he should change his mind."

So how about it? Do I get to sit here and smugly pick apart your arguments, profess agnosticism, and then have a laugh about it in eternity? Or does the book of life come with a big ass eraser?

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
What about someone like me who no longer believes? Do I still get grace? Is the unchangeable God's grace unwavering, or does it come and go depending on human belief?

I refer you to 2 Timothy 2:13: "If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself." Also worth considering is Numbers 23:19: "God is not a man that he should lie, nor hen have a laugh about it in eternity? Or does the book of life come with a big ass eraser?

Look at the Timothy verse again. I think it is not about life eternal or perishing. It is about reigning with Him or not. That is reigning with Him in the coming millennial kingdom of 1,000 years before the eternal age (See Rev. 20). The letter is addressed to a saved disciple and should be understood that way.


Within the context it says:

"If we endure, we shall also reign with Him; if we deny Him, He also will deny us;

If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself"

Reigning with Him is a distinct matter from having eternal salvation.
Reigning with Him is dependent upon endurance.
If we deny Him He will also deny us.

To deny Him is also to become faithless. How can you deny Him unless you have become faithless? That is as a saved disciple.

If we are faithless (i.e. denying Him) He remains faithful for He cannot deny Himself.

In other words, for the believer in Christ, he can lose the reward of reigning with Christ, but Christ, though denying him this reward, remains faithful to him for eternal salvation. That is He cannot deny Himself.

That's how I understand that passage. Once you are born of God you cannot be unborn of God. He remains faithful to that organic relationship in life. He cannot deny Himself, even though the backslidder may temporarily deny Him and lose the reward of co-reigning with Christ in the millennial kingdom.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
One motivation for following a religion is to alleviate the fear of death and of the unknown. People find comfort in the idea that they will go to heaven after they die, and be reunited with their loved ones and friends.

This need to feel certain about the 'truth' of things like salvation and afterlife can become exaggerated to the point where theolog ...[text shortened]... . that influence their beliefs, sometimes in radically different directions than our own.

My main motivation to follow Catholicism is try and hook up with the slammin' hotties they have as altar boys.

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
What about someone like me who no longer believes? Do I still get grace? Is the unchangeable God's grace unwavering, or does it come and go depending on human belief?

I refer you to 2 Timothy 2:13: "If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself." Also worth considering is Numbers 23:19: "God is not a man that he should lie, nor ...[text shortened]... hen have a laugh about it in eternity? Or does the book of life come with a big ass eraser?

Did you have a relationship with God through Jesus Christ or were you
just following a set of man made rules that had the name god in them?
Kelly

Clear light passes through a prism—

Now lets go to war over
whether it's many or one,
or which colors represent
its only true expression.

The one light, of whom you are,
reflected in creation,
will certainly punish you
if you do not make the right decision...

Originally posted by KellyJay
Did you have a relationship with God through Jesus Christ or were you
just following a set of man made rules that had the name god in them?
Kelly

Yeah, I had the full-bore saved by faith in Jesus thang.

In good faith, I started looking into the origins of xianity and the bible, and historicizing xianity (placing the practices and beliefs in the context of the times and culture in which they arose). I started looking at the history of the church through the lens of the historical method.

After all, as Augustine maintained, all truth is God's truth, right?

I found out that whether or not all truth was God's truth, not all fact was Christian fact. I didn't want it to happen, and in fact spent six years fighting it in earnest, but in the end I discovered that an evangelical faith in xianity itself was, historically speaking, a house built on sand. Personally, I was unable to disentangle theological truth-claims from historical factuality, mainly because I'm a child of the 20th-century, rather than a 1st-century believer. It was not enough to say that Jesus was the kind of person who would do and say certain things (as a 1st-century believer would have done), as illustrated by examples in the gospels; I needed to know that he actually did say and do those things, exactly as they were written and copied. As it became increasingly obvious that the latter was an untenable idea, the whole basis for faith was thrown into question.

And when the rains of logic came, and the waters of probability rose, well, you know how the parable ends.

Originally posted by wittywonka
I'm sorry, but I'm not actually sure I completely understand what you are saying about a "collective" body of faith. Could you rephrase what you are saying?

Simply that an all-good God could prioritise the eternal welfare of humanity as a whole even if it meant some individuals did not receive optimum fates.