Repenting After Death

[mcdaddy]

A

[agnosticator]

Empirically no, but we can deduce that the event is supernatural

 

 

You are simply begging the question if you assume something observed is natural.

 

Oh! I forgot to redefine the word "observe" to mean: "to imagine something outside of the universe." Your redefinition of the term "evidence" makes it useless, too. "Supernatural" is an oxymoron, just like your "reasonable faith" is. You'd be more honest if you were agnostic, rather than a disciple of William L. Craig. It's a sad attempt to disguise your faith with reason. The two are diametrically opposed, and never the twain shall meet. Be honest with yourself. Wake up out of your delusion and smell reality!

 

Here a researcher explains that there are no known physiological causes that can produce long sequences of shared subjective experience, which is what the mental experiences are with sleep paralysis.

 

First off, it wasn't sleep paralysis. It was a hypnopompic/hypnagogic dream state. There was no "hag" involved, and David J Hufford gave his prejudiced, subjective opinion that these dream states are "supernatural". Google other researchers on the subject before you set his opinion in stone.

[bdp]

God wants justice.

 

 

'god' wants it's ass kissed or else. Even if it did exist there would be no reason to give it anything but an upraised middle finger. Or two fingers for those of you in the UK.

[BrotherJosh]

Just like how Xianity has nothing to do with Judaism. Misapplied prophecies, wrong apocalyptic theories and timeframes, etc etc ad infinum.

 

Exactly, just like how Judaism is a giant melting pot of Canaanite, Babylonian, Zoroastrian, and early Mesopotamian beliefs and culture.

[mcdaddy]

Just like how Xianity has nothing to do with Judaism. Misapplied prophecies, wrong apocalyptic theories and timeframes, etc etc ad infinum.

 

Exactly, just like how Judaism is a giant melting pot of Canaanite, Babylonian, Zoroastrian, and early Mesopotamian beliefs and culture.

 

B to the ingo.

[OrdinaryClay]

And the Book of Mormon is also a special revelation.

 

Revelation from a demon, just as the blasphemies of crowley and dee. It is illogical to conclude that just because lies exist the truth can not be found.

 

You provided no scripture to back up the rest of your claims so I did not see much point in responding.

[OrdinaryClay]

Joseph Smith was an occultist.

 

OrdinaryClay, I find it fascinating that you think Joseph Smith was an occultist but do not apply the same label to Jesus. Between shuttling demons from people to pigs, attacking a fig tree with Finger of Death and transmuting water into wine, he'd fit right in as a D&D magic-user.

 

Jesus is God. The Creator is Holy. His works glorified the Creator.

 

Joh 18:20

Jesus answered him, "I have spoken openly to the world; I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all the Jews come together; and I spoke nothing in secret.

 

Rev 4:8

And the four living creatures, each one of them having six wings, are full of eyes around and within; and day and night they do not cease to say, "HOLY, HOLY, HOLY is THE LORD GOD, THE ALMIGHTY, WHO WAS AND WHO IS AND WHO IS TO COME."

 

White Robe per the Wayreth convention, freelance seiðkona, and Gygaxian alignment Chaotic Frilly. )

 

I'm not familiar with these.

[agnosticator]

And the Book of Mormon is also a special revelation.

 

Revelation from a demon,......

 

[florduh]

You provided no scripture to back up the rest of your claims so I did not see much point in responding.

This is exactly why conversations like this are pointless. One side uses historical and scientific fact, observation of the real world, and logic. The other accepts only information that conforms to what they consider infallible holy pronouncements from a god. Hopeless impasse.

[mcdaddy]

It's like having a conversation with a wall, Florduh. And the wall says, " logic and intelligence not welcome here".

[OrdinaryClay]

Eph 2:8-9

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Without the works, the faith is dead.

Without the works, salvation is not assured.

The whole duty of man is to keep the commands.

That's work.

 

Eph 2:9 can not be any clearer.

 

You have it backward. A proper and genuine husband, for example, loves his wife not because of what she does for him. Likewise the wife. The couple do works for each other because they love each other. The works are the fruit of the spirit. They are the results and evidence of our salvation which was given to us for free.

You’re relying on Paul and ignoring Jesus, Peter, and the Old Testament.

You have to believe, confess belief, repent, be baptized, maintain belief, and do at least some works of charity to qualify for salvation.

These actions are works, and are to be done by the individual, they are not free.

They are not simply by-products because if you don’t do them you don’t get saved.

The only way you by-pass these stipulations is to be predestined to salvation, in which case your fate was already decided and so-called "free will" is moot.

The Old Testament requires obedience to the law and that’s a work as well.

Contrary to Paul’s theology, works do save.

 

When we have the Spirit of God with us and with in us, the works flow naturally. James was warning against hypocrisy

If the works aren’t performed salvation is not ensured.

Belief and maintaining belief are works, as are repenting, being baptized, and charity.

The Spirit of God is with those that obey, not with those that pick and choose how much they want to do.

That’s the decree of Jesus in Matthew 25.

Those that do not perform charity are damned.

Your theology also turns Peter’s instructions on repenting and being baptized into little more than window dressing.

Keeping the law is also a work, it doesn’t flow automatically.

The Hebrew God certainly isn’t going to be with people that pick and choose which laws are relevant, which is what Christianity does.

 

Rom 3:27-28

Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

Salvation according to the Hebrew God is based on repenting and keeping the law.

Faith motivates obedience to the law, it is not apart from the law.

Paul’s theology attempts to vilify the law and replace it with something else, namely faith in a human sacrifice.

 

Paul was in confirmation with Jesus and the Old Testament.

Peter was in confirmation with Jesus and the Old Testament.

The Bible teaches we are saved through grace lest any man should boast.

Belief and repentance are not works as all they require is a simple act of will accessible to anyone with volition. "lest any man should boast"

 

Mat 25 teaches good judgment on our part, righteous judgement on the part of God, and the fruit of the spirit.

 

Christ taught that rote acts of religious action, i.e. salvation through works, were not adequate. He was the path to salvation

 

Luk 14:5

And He said to them, "Which one of you will have a son or an ox fall into a well, and will not immediately pull him out on a Sabbath day?"

 

Joh 7:24

"Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment."

 

Joh 3:14-16

"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

 

Luk 7:50

And He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

 

1Sa 16:7

But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not look at his appearance or at the height of his stature, because I have rejected him; for God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart."

 

And David proclaimed that salvation is far from the wicked for they seek not the law.

Obedience is work.

 

1 Sa 16:7 shows that God can not be fooled by hypocrisy. The verses below show how God seeks a broken and lowly spirit and not works.

 

 

Psalms 34:18

Jehovah is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart, And saveth such as are of a contrite spirit.

 

Psalms 51:17

The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: A broken and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

 

Isaiah 57:15

For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy: I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite.

 

Isaiah 66:2

For all these things hath my hand made, and so all these things came to be, saith Jehovah: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and that trembleth at my word.

 

 

Hosea 6:6

For I desire goodness, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt-offerings.

A contrite spirit will obey the law.

Obeying the law is a work.

Seek the law and salvation is in your grasp.

If you do the work, you save your soul.

 

Psa 119:155

Salvation is far from the wicked: for they seek not thy statutes.

 

Ezek 18:27

Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.

 

These verses fit well with what I listed. God looks at the heart as I demonstrated. The fruit of this changed heart are works of God. A wicked man must willfully have a changed heart (turn from his ways), and the fruit of this conversion are doing the will of God.

[centauri]

And the Book of Mormon is also a special revelation.

 

Revelation from a demon, just as the blasphemies of crowley and dee. It is illogical to conclude that just because lies exist the truth can not be found.

It's also illogical to conclude that traditions and mere claims make something true.

You have no problem relying on Paul, who was instructed by a shining light that claimed to be Jesus.

(It could just as easily have been Satan that Paul encountered, who Paul admits poses as a light being.)

 

Paul then contradicts the Old Testament by trying to undermine the law and replaces it with a new system revolving around faith in an illegal human sacrifice.

Paul was rank heretic but you have no problem with his blasphemy.

 

You provided no scripture to back up the rest of your claims so I did not see much point in responding.

Not so fast.

You were asked to provide the scriptural proof text from the Old Testament that confirms Satan was an enemy of God, fell from heaven because he rebelled, and has demons as servants.

You provided nothing except a combination of special pleading and circular logic for your doctrine, claiming that because the New Testament says so, it must be true.

 

Here's the rest that you ignored, complete with New Testament references, which I previously assumed you were already aware of, being well versed in scripture.

 

You’re special pleading by saying the New Testament is exempt from being classified as teaching contrary to scripture. It undermines the Old Testament in numerous areas.

 

It changes the rules for salvation. (Numerous examples of this including Mark 16:16.)

 

It changes the requirements for a king messiah. (The genealogies in Matt 1 and Luke 3 do not qualify Jesus to sit on the thrione of David, and the virgin birth eliminates his ability to qualify.)

 

It changes the priesthood, inventing a new one for Jesus. (Heb 4,7)

 

It undermines God’s law, claiming that a messianic impostor took it out of the way. (Numerous including, Rom 10:4 Col 2:14)

 

It redefines the new covenant, claiming that faith in a human sacrifice replaces the law. (Heb 8)

 

It promotes an illegal sin sacrifice as providing atonement. (Many examples including, John 1:29, Heb 10)

 

It makes unsupported claims about Satan, redefining one of God’s created beings, turning it into an enemy of God. (Luke 10:18, Rev 2:13, Rev 12:19, Rev 20:2)

 

Abandoning the word and creating new doctrines is what the Hebrew deity told his people not to do.

[OrdinaryClay]

OC just a tip. Using eSword here is a waste of time with the screen shots of the Strong's Concordance. It is not a very useful tool if you are really looking for the origins of scriptures. You are still using the bible to prove the bible and is circular logic.

 

You are assuming we never looked at this and that we did not study (I mean really study) the bible first hand. I used it extensively but I also looked at the more scholarly renditions of folk that traced back origins of the bible and the church.

 

The gospels are NOT first hand accounts and there is a lot of embellishment. The epistles are really all garbage and more evidence of a new religion being invented by someone attributed to a Paul character. You have been duped pal. None of it is real.

 

There is so much you are unaware of, it would take me months to walk you through it all.

 

I have a summary in my own words how this transpired and will try find it and share it here.

 

Before I write you off as a troll, you are obviously using what knowledge you have and are looking deeper than most folk but you still have a huge confirmation bias. IOW you need for this to be true at this juncture. We all went through this phase.

 

It is not like we were fooled by satan or were looking for an excuse to leave. The realisation that it was all BS (various reasons) was a painful exit for us all.

 

It is hard to admit you were lied to and that you were duped.

 

If you are really interested in learning, I will help you but it will take time, but you will lose your faith. My evidence is overwhelming and top apologists are clearly seen as liars. I would even debate them as even their seminary knowledge sucks.

 

Tell me if I am on the button here and if you want to go down the rabbit hole. It is very deep.

 

 

What I was doing was using the Bible to demonstrate doctrine. That is different. I agree the origin of scripture is an interesting subject independently from doctrine.

 

I appreciate your concern, but it would be presumptions on your part to assume I'm unaware. The truth is I have dug very deeply into this and am convinced in the truth as revealed by God.

 

I've been exploring the rabbit hole for some time, but if you feel you have some information that eludes me feel free to present it.

[mcdaddy]

And Paul never mentions being converted by a luminous Jesus figure. In his authentic letters he only says that Jesus was revealed to him by study of the scriptures. That's it, no Damascus road experience. Acts is at best dubious, at worst complete fiction. It cannot be relied on in the least.

[Deva]

What I was doing was using the Bible to demonstrate doctrine.

 

What a waste of time - you won't get any results with that here. We don't think the Bible is anything other than a product of the human mind.

 

Doctrine is just some interpretation - and Christians can't agree among themselves.

[centauri]

Eph 2:8-9

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

 

centauri-

Without the works, the faith is dead.

Without the works, salvation is not assured.

The whole duty of man is to keep the commands.

That's work.

 

OC-

Eph 2:9 can not be any clearer.

 

You have it backward. A proper and genuine husband, for example, loves his wife not because of what she does for him. Likewise the wife. The couple do works for each other because they love each other. The works are the fruit of the spirit. They are the results and evidence of our salvation which was given to us for free.

 

centauri-

You’re relying on Paul and ignoring Jesus, Peter, and the Old Testament.

You have to believe, confess belief, repent, be baptized, maintain belief, and do at least some works of charity to qualify for salvation.

These actions are works, and are to be done by the individual, they are not free.

They are not simply by-products because if you don’t do them you don’t get saved.

The only way you by-pass these stipulations is to be predestined to salvation, in which case your fate was already decided and so-called "free will" is moot.

The Old Testament requires obedience to the law and that’s a work as well.

Contrary to Paul’s theology, works do save.

 

OC-

When we have the Spirit of God with us and with in us, the works flow naturally. James was warning against hypocrisy.

 

centauri-

If the works aren’t performed salvation is not ensured.

Belief and maintaining belief are works, as are repenting, being baptized, and charity.

The Spirit of God is with those that obey, not with those that pick and choose how much they want to do.

That’s the decree of Jesus in Matthew 25.

Those that do not perform charity are damned.

Your theology also turns Peter’s instructions on repenting and being baptized into little more than window dressing.

Keeping the law is also a work, it doesn’t flow automatically.

The Hebrew God certainly isn’t going to be with people that pick and choose which laws are relevant, which is what Christianity does.

 

Rom 3:27-28

Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

 

centauri-

Salvation according to the Hebrew God is based on repenting and keeping the law.

Faith motivates obedience to the law, it is not apart from the law.

Paul’s theology attempts to vilify the law and replace it with something else, namely faith in a human sacrifice.

 

OC-

Paul was in confirmation with Jesus and the Old Testament.

 

centauri-

No, he was not.

He dismissed works because he couldn't have anything good coming from the law.

He taught that Jesus was the end of the law, which not only contradicts the Old Testament, it contradicts Jesus.

 

Peter was in confirmation with Jesus and the Old Testament.

I'm not aware that being baptized was required for salvation according to Yahweh.

Chapter and verse from the Hebrew scriptures for that please.

 

The Bible teaches we are saved through grace lest any man should boast.

That's Paul's theology.

Saved by grace would apply to predestined believers.

Others would have do perform actions which were already listed.

 

Belief and repentance are not works as all they require is a simple act of will accessible to anyone with volition. "lest any man should boast"

If it requires the person to take an affirmative action, which it does, then its a work.

You can't claim an act isn't an act simply because it's simple to do.

 

Mat 25 teaches good judgment on our part, righteous judgement on the part of God, and the fruit of the spirit.

 

Christ taught that rote acts of religious action, i.e. salvation through works, were not adequate. He was the path to salvation

 

Luk 14:5

And He said to them, "Which one of you will have a son or an ox fall into a well, and will not immediately pull him out on a Sabbath day?"

 

Joh 7:24

"Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment."

 

Joh 3:14-16

"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

 

Luk 7:50

And He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

 

Matt 25 teaches that acts of charity were needed to ensure salvation.

Calling Jesus Lord is not sufficient.

Those that did not perform these acts were damned.

 

Matt 25:44-46

Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

 

centauri-

A contrite spirit will obey the law.

Obeying the law is a work.

Seek the law and salvation is in your grasp.

If you do the work, you save your soul.

 

Psa 119:155

Salvation is far from the wicked: for they seek not thy statutes.

 

Ezek 18:27

Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.

 

OC-

These verses fit well with what I listed. God looks at the heart as I demonstrated. The fruit of this changed heart are works of God. A wicked man must willfully have a changed heart (turn from his ways), and the fruit of this conversion are doing the will of God.

There is no salvation unless you perform the work.

The conditions in Ezek 18:27 are both inclusive for salvation.

The individual must do the work of obeying in order to have salvation.

If you don't do the work, you have no salvation.

Faith and works are both needed.

[OrdinaryClay]

Isa 45:7

The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these.

 

Isa 45:7 refers to physical disasters. This is not the evil resulting from free. True evil is from the hearts of free willed beings. God created the universe with the laws of nature. Physical disasters happen.

Isa 45:7

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

 

The word "ra" includes ethical evil, not simply physical disasters.

 

I agree the Hebrew word is used for both forms of evil, but the context of the verse is referring to God's majesty with regard to physical creation. This is not a verse addressing ethical issues and sin. There are plenty of verses dealing with sin. This is not one of them

 

The Bible contradicts "free will" in both the Old and New Testaments.

God predestines and manipulates at least some humans.

There is also no free will when punishment is delivered for failure to behave in a certain way.

At best this God gives conditional choice.

Truly free will doesn’t involve ultimatums.

 

The Bible does not contradict free will in either the Old or New Testament.

 

God possess foreknowledge but knowing something will happen is not the same as making something happen, clearly they are distinct. Influencing someone is not the same as forcing them to do something - entrapment is a legal excuse, not a real one. Free will is free. You have the choice. The fact that there are consequences to those choices does not mean you have no choice.

[OrdinaryClay]

OC, if you deny that God creates evil and claim that rational creatures make decisions that He does not predestine, then your result is a universe with areas that are autonomous from God's control. God is not sovereign acc. to your doctrine. How can you even be sure that God will win in the end, if He is not in control over parts of what He has made?

This is an interesting point. Thanks for bringing it up.

 

Now, I'm not sure what you mean by win. He is the Creator so He will not be destroyed so in that sense He will win, but if you mean win in the sense that He will maximize the number of free willed creatures that accept Him as Lord and Creator and love and worship Him then I think He does not need control over free will to achieve this.

 

First, God's sovereignty or omnipotence does not mean He can violate the laws of logic. For example, He can not force a free willed person to love him of his own free will. This is logically impossible. Second, God's sovereignty means He has ultimate authority over which world He chose to create (actualize). I believe He has chosen to create a world in which the optimum number of people are saved so He wins in that sense too even though we have free will. (A heads up, this last point deals with something called Molinism, take a look and ask questions if you like)

[mymistake]

I want to thank OrdianryClay for demonstrating why talking to Christians about religion is a complete waste of time. Never bother in real life. Christians always try to pull the same dishonest tricks but when the do it verbally there is no record so they will just lie and deny their own actions. It's better to let the Christian deconvert on their own. The Christian propaganda machine puts much effort into protecting it's members from reality. You can't reach them.

[bdp]

Hopeless impasse.

 

From a hopeless ass.

 

(Meaning OC, not you).

[bdp]

speaking of which, OC totally ignores my posts. I am totally butthurt about this.

[OrdinaryClay]

This is not proclaimed by Peter to be a prophecy. This is not proclaimed by Peter as a word of God. In context He is simply warning his brothers and sisters that Christ may come at any time. No one knows the time and place as Christ said so Peter can not be prophesying as to when.

 

Mat 24:36

"But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.

Peter predicted that the end of all things was near.

Is prophecy a form of prediction?

It’s supposed to be the word of God by virtue that it’s in the Bible, or so Christians have told me.

So are you saying that it wasn’t authorized by God for Peter to predict this?

You’re also trying to rewrite scripture.

The text does not say:

The end of all things could come at any time.

 

It says the end of all things was at hand.

 

1 Peter 4:7

But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

 

"At hand" means near or soon.

 

You omitted the key verse where Jesus tells his audience that it would happen during their lifetimes.

 

Matt 24:34

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

 

Is all prediction prophecy? Peter could not have been predicting prophetically the end of days because Christ told us no one knows the day or time. Peter was telling them to be sober and watch. He is telling them to pay attention and be mindful because things could happen at any time. The first century Christians, as have all Christians through the ages, were mindful of Christ's admonition to be watchful and not sleep as described in the parable of the ten virgins in Mat 25

 

It is inspired of God if it's in the Bible. Prophecy, as in foretelling the details of the future, is a subset of what is contained in the Bible.

 

I'm not rewriting scripture. I taking it in context.

 

As the Greek and context combined show Mat 24:34 was referring to the Jewish people as a race

 

[OrdinaryClay]

First off, it wasn't sleep paralysis. It was a hypnopompic/hypnagogic dream state. There was no "hag" involved, and David J Hufford gave his prejudiced, subjective opinion that these dream states are "supernatural". Google other researchers on the subject before you set his opinion in stone.

 

 

I have looked at other opinions on the subject. The physiological aspects are well understood, agreed, but the shared visions and complex sequences of experience are not at all explained by any researcher. For science that part is unexplained.

[OrdinaryClay]

You provided no scripture to back up the rest of your claims so I did not see much point in responding.

This is exactly why conversations like this are pointless. One side uses historical and scientific fact, observation of the real world, and logic. The other accepts only information that conforms to what they consider infallible holy pronouncements from a god. Hopeless impasse.

 

The discussion you are referring to was about Bible doctrine, and was not a scientific discussion. In that case it is valid to ask for scripture references.

[♦ ficino ♦]

OC, if you deny that God creates evil and claim that rational creatures make decisions that He does not predestine, then your result is a universe with areas that are autonomous from God's control. God is not sovereign acc. to your doctrine. How can you even be sure that God will win in the end, if He is not in control over parts of what He has made?

This is an interesting point. Thanks for bringing it up.

 

Now, I'm not sure what you mean by win. He is the Creator so He will not be destroyed so in that sense He will win, but if you mean win in the sense that He will maximize the number of free willed creatures that accept Him as Lord and Creator and love and worship Him then I think He does not need control over free will to achieve this.

 

First, God's sovereignty or omnipotence does not mean He can violate the laws of logic. For example, He can not force a free willed person to love him of his own free will. This is logically impossible. Second, God's sovereignty means He has ultimate authority over which world He chose to create (actualize). I believe He has chosen to create a world in which the optimum number of people are saved so He wins in that sense too even though we have free will. (A heads up, this last point deals with something called Molinism, take a look and ask questions if you like)

Thanks for the link on Molinism, just had time to glance at it, will read it through later. My point was that if God does not predetermine the decisions that creatures will make in their secret "hearts," then there is no guarantee that any will choose God. It also does not follow simply from the attribute creator that a creator cannot be destroyed, and it certainly does not follow that a creator cannot be overcome - look at Dr. Frankenstein! All the attributes that we assign to God of course represent God as never being destroyed and as never being rejected by all creatures, but I question whether those outcomes are guaranteed outcomes if you take God's absolute sovereignty out of the mix. Finally, I think that even foreknowledge of P implies that P cannot be otherwise, so things become incoherent if you try to hold to foreknowledge but deny absolute predestination.