The Problem of evoL

[Astreja]

2 hours ago, Johnny said:

You just happened to come about in an impossible way that we have enough knowledge to know it's impossible.

 

Um, no.  That's not what science currently says about abiogenesis - a more accurate portrayal of modern biology's position is "We don't know... yet.  We're working on it.  Stay tuned."

[◊ Weezer ◊]

Johnny, I think everyone here was a christian for years, many of us from the cradle , as the saying goes.  And several were ministers.  We were and are very interested in truth.  And we left our minds open to new truths, and explored other options.  We know your arguments.  Will you do like I asked in the other forum, pray to god to help you discern truth, listen to our arguments, and study the history of gods and religions.  How do you know you have the "true" religion until you study them all?  You may decide there is no one and only true religion.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

4 hours ago, Johnny said:

I'm not the one missing things here

Yes.  You are.  You are missing the point that god is evil.  I don't know how I could make it any clearer; but somehow you're still not getting it.

 

4 hours ago, Johnny said:

A member of the human race that you think God had no part of bringing into existence.

I have made absolutely NO claims about how anything came into existence.  I have already told you I will not debate with you about claims I have not made.  Go attack your strawman somewhere else.

 

4 hours ago, Johnny said:

What stopped you from telling me how you came about?

Again, I made no claim about this.  This is not under discussion between you and I.  I am under no obligation to tell you how I came about.

 

4 hours ago, Johnny said:

You think this always existed then came into forming the universe that somehow ended up with such fine-tuning for life that would be impossible, then you believe life came about on its own which is impossible, and kept on duplicating itself somehow then went to sexual reproduction forming us. Sexual intercourse is 'fun' but the reproduction part of it that makes us, NO WAY can that have come together all on its own. So you're the human race that you cannot give evidence for how you think came along

This is a strawman argument. 

 

4 hours ago, Johnny said:

You have to admit, since you came about by mere chances out of chaos, how would you know anything for sure?

Please provide evidence to support the claim that I came about by mere chances out of chaos.  

 

4 hours ago, Johnny said:

Don't get me wrong, I HATE the scum that get away with their evil, but without a higher authority setting the standard of morality, morals are just subjective. 

Do you believe that god gives objective morality?

 

4 hours ago, Johnny said:

So then give evidence how you came about. 

No.

 

4 hours ago, Johnny said:

It's NOT an ad hominem, you believe that you came about by impossible means.

You don't know a god damn thing about what I believe or don't, son.  You're simply rehashing the same strawman argument because you haven't bothered to pay attention and listen to what people here are trying to explain to you.  This is extremely disrespectful behavior, on your part; and I suggest you shore it up.

[Johnny]

7 hours ago, Astreja said:

 

Um, no.  That's not what science currently says about abiogenesis - a more accurate portrayal of modern biology's position is "We don't know... yet.  We're working on it.  Stay tuned."

Of course, all the evidence is against you. Anyone having the slightest realization of what life takes would admit what a miracle it is. The more we discover the worse it gets for you, not better. But you go on dreaming and pretend that you care about reality. 

[Johnny]

7 hours ago, Weezer said:

Johnny, I think everyone here was a christian for years, many of us from the cradle , as the saying goes.  And several were ministers.  We were and are very interested in truth.  And we left our minds open to new truths, and explored other options.  We know your arguments.  Will you do like I asked in the other forum, pray to god to help you discern truth, listen to our arguments, and study the history of gods and religions.  How do you know you have the "true" religion until you study them all?  You may decide there is no one and only true religion.

So, you've been in it and you didn't even know why there is evil and free will. You're clearly blaming God so I have to wonder what you learned those years as a Christian. I stay out of churches and feel embarrassed to call myself a Christian because of the silly things they believe. Many believe bad things happen because God is trying to test them or strengthen them or punish them. 

 

Staying out of churches for many years now except for funerals here and there, it's not like I can build such a distaste that I let my brain go dead and jump on the atheistic bandwagon with its ridiculous "science." I've looked heavily on both sides and it is clear, you all truly are not honest with the evidence. So you don't know the bible and science but yet you want me to think because you all left that it makes sense that I do too. I would if you all made sense but you all clearly do NOT! 

 

Maybe that will get me banned for stating what I see. It's funny how everyone else can express themselves like I'm going to get "torn apart" along with a whole host of other things but anyone honestly upholding facts like me, I better be careful somehow. 

 

" We know your arguments."

 

Then it is clear you still can't get around them. It is like Lawrence Krauss and his prideful ways of how believers are just dolts and his book A Universe From Nothing is so scientific. Funny how he starts with space, matter, and time already there yet still calls it nothing. Then, how it created even more. 

 

It's interesting too how with that mindset of his the boldly says...

 

"The universe is huge and old and rare things happen all the time, including life."

 

There you go, life just happened and so did the universe. NO proof. Those that accept his 'proofs' like you all accept it all just being there and then doing all the miracles things afterward that are impossible just comes to doing that easily. You let your honesty just disappear. 

 

So leaving the churches, sadly, I can understand that and I can't blame you. Leaving your brains though, that's is all on you.

[Johnny]

6 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Yes.  You are.  You are missing the point that god is evil.  I don't know how I could make it any clearer; but somehow you're still not getting it.

You made it clear. I made it clear you are wrong. 

 

6 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

I have made absolutely NO claims about how anything came into existence.  I have already told you I will not debate with you about claims I have not made.  Go attack your strawman somewhere else.

Me, "By what authority do you speak?"

You, "By my own authority as a man and a member of the human race.  By what authority do you speak?"

 

Ok, fair enough and I do apologize. I took that as you don't believe God created all this and you because that means you don't have a higher authority, but evidently you do or you don't see God as your higher authority even though He created you. 

 

I mean a LOT rides on saying you are the authority as a man and member of the human race. It sure matters on the subject of authority.

 

6 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Again, I made no claim about this.  This is not under discussion between you and I.  I am under no obligation to tell you how I came about.

Here's where I differ. To leave God out as the higher authority and not wanting to say how you even came about in the human race that made you your own authority does matter. At least it would matter to me if I wrote "By my own authority as a man and a member of the human race.  By what authority do you speak?"

 

This somehow is not important factor to you though as I would see it is. Ok, got it. You can make that claim with no need to explain yourself. It still does not look very confident how you can claim no higher authority.

 

6 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

This is a strawman argument. 

I agree, it is. I will admit my error having done so many other comments in other topics that you were involved in with others saying this all was here already as in the big bang. It was not intentional and I do owe you an apology. 

 

6 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Do you believe that god gives objective morality?

 

Now on this, it was made CLEAR God is not the cause of our suffering and evil. You keep saying God is. So don't give me any questions on something you clearly are wrong about. You want very hard to blame the God of the bible and yet you don't want to see what the bible truly says. You don't want the whole story because the whole story proves you wrong. 

 

6 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

11 hours ago, Johnny said:

So then give evidence how you came about. 

No.

 

Got it, you refuse to show how "By my own authority as a man and a member of the human race." but you want go into how you even got here to show such an authority. I don't have an issue with saying God who created all this is my authority but you do have an issue showing your authority. Why you're so shy about that is up to you. As stated, it has a lot to do with this subject but yet you won't touch it for some reason. That's leaving you rather 'short.'

6 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

11 hours ago, Johnny said:

It's NOT an ad hominem, you believe that you came about by impossible means.

You don't know a god damn thing about what I believe or don't, son.  You're simply rehashing the same strawman argument because you haven't bothered to pay attention and listen to what people here are trying to explain to you.  This is extremely disrespectful behavior, on your part; and I suggest you shore it up.

I admitted already why I put what I put in error, not intentionally. It's not like I'm dealing with one person, you, in this whole forum, but to say because you haven't bothered to pay attention and listen to what people here are trying to explain to you.  This is extremely disrespectful behavior, on your part; and I suggest you shore it up."

 

Now, look who's calling the kettle black on that one. I made it clear God is my authority and you will NOT give how you have authority when I ask you how. On top of that, I made it clear God is not the cause of evil and suffering. You just go on saying He is and IGNORE what was put right in front of you. So no, don't give me that that it is me not paying attention and listening. It's very clear, you or anyone else can say those verses given in that video are untrue. Really, if you're going to blame the God of the bible, then know the story, but you'd rather make up anything you want despite the evidence put right in front of you That one is on you. You will not man up and admit that. You are lying saying I'm not paying attention and listening. This thread with its posts prove me correct.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

3 minutes ago, Johnny said:

Now on this, it was made CLEAR God is not the cause of our suffering and evil. You keep saying God is.

This is complete bullshit.  Not once have I said that god is the cause of our suffering.  As I have stated earlier, you have completely missed the point in your haste to charge at your strawman arguments with the fury of a kamikaze drunk on sake.

 

6 minutes ago, Johnny said:

You want very hard to blame the God of the bible and yet you don't want to see what the bible truly says.

Please produce a quote of me saying that god is to blame.  Otherwise, I will continue this line of questioning.

 

Do you believe objective morality comes from god?

 

9 minutes ago, Johnny said:

Now, look who's calling the kettle black on that one. I made it clear God is my authority and you will NOT give how you have authority when I ask you how.

Irrespective of who you believe your authority is, your behavior in our community is your responsibility.

 

10 minutes ago, Johnny said:

On top of that, I made it clear God is not the cause of evil and suffering.

Same strawman.  Got anything new?

 

11 minutes ago, Johnny said:

You just go on saying He is and IGNORE what was put right in front of you. So no, don't give me that that it is me not paying attention and listening. It's very clear, you or anyone else can say those verses given in that video are untrue. Really, if you're going to blame the God of the bible, then know the story, but you'd rather make up anything you want despite the evidence put right in front of you That one is on you. You will not man up and admit that. You are lying saying I'm not paying attention and listening.

If you were paying attention and listening, you would not be repeating the same strawman argument 3 fucking times in one post, son.  Now, shore it up.  I ain't asking.

[midniterider]

17 hours ago, Johnny said:

For some reason I'm not seeing my reply to this. Since I'm new to the forum I may have done something wrong so I'll try again. 

 

"When you present the Problem of Evil to a person, you are essentially asking them to choose between a god of power and a god of love."

 

I'm not making a choice between the two. God did give freedom of will and does not have the power to suddenly not have it. God did create spiritual beings and physical beings. That is quite powerful to me. God is love and gave us all choices. If we He created robots with no free choice that is no loving. Lucifer made the choice to go against God and so did a third of the angels. 

 

"...most people want to say that god is able to prevent evil but free will blah blah... which amounts to able but not willing. "

 

Are you going to go by what people say or what God says? 

 

I would go by what people say. 

 

Gosh I didn't know 1/3 of the angels busted loose. Why do you suppose 1/3 of God's angelic creations would leave him? Common sense would point to God being a butthead. 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

2 hours ago, Johnny said:

 

 Leaving your brains though, that's is all on you.

 

 

That is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black! 

 

In one way you are similar to the atheists.  Neither of you can say, "I don't know".   

 

Have you answered my question elsewhere as to where "supernatural" came from that put "all this" into being?  Can you admitt you don't know?   Or will your ego let you do that?

 

To me, supernatural means magic.  And with magic, all things are possible.  And I'm not going to argue with magic.  I'll just cotinue with what is, and make the best of what we got.  

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

@Edgarcito, I would like to continue our dialogue as I think we are making some good progress.  However, I am going to lock this thread as well until we get the situation with Johnny sorted out.  I'll reopen it once I have forgotten and been reminded twice.  Thanks for your input and understanding.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

@Edgarcito, you and I were discussing the need, or lack thereof, of jesus and the cross in light of humanity's ability to interact with one another in grace and trust.  I believe it's your turn to have the floor.  Whenever you're ready...

[Johnny]

On 6/30/2022 at 9:27 AM, TheRedneckProfessor said:

This is complete bullshit.  Not once have I said that god is the cause of our suffering.  As I have stated earlier, you have completely missed the point in your haste to charge at your strawman arguments with the fury of a kamikaze drunk on sake.

 

You..."I had an epiphany this afternoon whilst arguing in the Twitter-verse.  When presented with Epicurus' Problem of Evil, most people want to say that god is able to prevent evil but free will blah blah... which amounts to able but not willing. 

 

Here's the lightening bolt, though.  When you present the Problem of Evil to a person, you are essentially asking them to choose between a god of power and a god of love.  And which god they choose speaks a lot about their own personal character.  Hmm...

 

What might it say that most choose the god of power?  Serious question, by the way; not rhetorical."

 

Me...What belief system says such things? The belief system based on the bible, as far as I know.

 

YOU..."It's almost as if, subconsciously, christians know the loving father routine is just a facade and god really is a tyrannical autocrat.  This is why, given the option of defending god's omnipotence versus defending his omnibenevolence, they almost invariably choose to leave god's power intact and try to explain evil away with mysterious ways, free will, or some other magical pile of apologist horseshit."

 

Me...What do Christians base their belief on? The bible.

 

YOU..."And the 10-year-old girl who gets raped, what about her free will?  What does god's refusal to intervene tell us about himself?  If he consistently enables evil, then he is also evil."

 

Then you have the gall to say....Not once have I said that god is the cause of our suffering.

 

You clearly took this from a biblical perspective, "choose between a god of power and a god of love," "christians know the loving father routine is just a facade and god really is a tyrannical autocrat," "most people want to say that god is able to prevent evil but free will blah blah...," "what about her free will?", "What does god's refusal to intervene tell us about himself?  If he consistently enables evil, then he is also evil."

 

What does the bible teach that you are clearly referencing from, that God created all. That God gave us free will. That from that there were those that didn't want to follow God and did evil. 

 

Then I supply a video that shows that God is not all-powerful to stop what was given in free will. You though still want to blame God. Then do that. Do it to your heart's content and IGNORE what the bible YOU are referencing to, actually SAYS. Ignore it. It's clear that is your desire, to make assertions on a book that you don't even know, but you want to claim you know no matter how you're shown to be wrong.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Please post a direct quote showing me stating that god is the cause of our suffering.  If you cannot, then shut the fuck up. 

 

This will be the last time I address this particular strawman. 

[midniterider]

The bible is an unimportant book of fiction. 

[Johnny]

1 hour ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Please post a direct quote showing me stating that god is the cause of our suffering.  If you cannot, then shut the fuck up. 

 

This will be the last time I address this particular strawman. 

You clearly showed that it your stance. You're referring to the bible that God created everything. I already stated that. If God created everything that included satan and his angels that followed the same, then God would be the 'cause' by giving free will to follow Him or not. Adam and Eve also had that same free will but sinned that allowed evil to the humans God created. If God never created, there would be no source of evil. The God of the bible can't do the evil because the God of the bible says one of the things He is, is love. As I already stated all this. You don't get it both ways. You are clearly referring to the God of the bible. As I already showed, you want to use the bible for your case of evil, but you don't even know what the bible says. 

 

It's was shown before.....

 

You..."I had an epiphany this afternoon whilst arguing in the Twitter-verse.  When presented with Epicurus' Problem of Evil, most people want to say that god is able to prevent evil but free will blah blah... which amounts to able but not willing. 

 

Here's the lightening bolt, though.  When you present the Problem of Evil to a person, you are essentially asking them to choose between a god of power and a god of love.  And which god they choose speaks a lot about their own personal character.  Hmm...

 

What might it say that most choose the god of power?  Serious question, by the way; not rhetorical."

 

Me...What belief system says such things? The belief system based on the bible, as far as I know.

 

YOU..."It's almost as if, subconsciously, christians know the loving father routine is just a facade and god really is a tyrannical autocrat.  This is why, given the option of defending god's omnipotence versus defending his omnibenevolence, they almost invariably choose to leave god's power intact and try to explain evil away with mysterious ways, free will, or some other magical pile of apologist horseshit."

 

Me...What do Christians base their belief on? The bible.

 

YOU..."And the 10-year-old girl who gets raped, what about her free will?  What does god's refusal to intervene tell us about himself?  If he consistently enables evil, then he is also evil."

 

Then you have the gall to say....Not once have I said that god is the cause of our suffering.

 

You clearly took this from a biblical perspective, "choose between a god of power and a god of love," "christians know the loving father routine is just a facade and god really is a tyrannical autocrat," "most people want to say that god is able to prevent evil but free will blah blah...," "what about her free will?", "What does god's refusal to intervene tell us about himself?  If he consistently enables evil, then he is also evil."

 

What does the bible teach that you are clearly referencing from, that God created all. That God gave us free will. That from that there were those that didn't want to follow God and did evil. 

 

Then I supply a video that shows that God is not all-powerful to stop what was given in free will. You though still want to blame God. Then do that. Do it to your heart's content and IGNORE what the bible YOU are referencing to, actually SAYS. Ignore it. It's clear that is your desire, to make assertions on a book that you don't even know, but you want to claim you know no matter how you're shown to be wrong.

 

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

So, in other words, @Johnny, you cannot provide a direct quote wherein I state that god is the cause of suffering.  You still insist, however, on making the claim that I did state it; and attacking your resultant strawman.  This type of behavior, according to theBible, is called bearing false witness.  

 

You, sir, are a liar.

 

There is suffering.  Suffering comes from attachment and desire.  There is a way to end suffering.  The way to end suffering is to follow the middle path.  As an adherent to Buddhist philosophy, THIS is what I believe concerning the cause of suffering.  Not god.  Not angels or devils.  Not Adam and Eve. 

 

Now sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up.  The truth is not in you and god hates a liar.

[midniterider]

36 minutes ago, Johnny said:

You clearly showed that it your stance. You're referring to the bible that God created everything. I already stated that. If God created everything that included satan and his angels that followed the same, then God would be the 'cause' by giving free will to follow Him or not. Adam and Eve also had that same free will but sinned that allowed evil to the humans God created. If God never created, there would be no source of evil. The God of the bible can't do the evil because the God of the bible says one of the things He is, is love. As I already stated all this. You don't get it both ways. You are clearly referring to the God of the bible. As I already showed, you want to use the bible for your case of evil, but you don't even know what the bible says. 

 

It's was shown before.....

 

You..."I had an epiphany this afternoon whilst arguing in the Twitter-verse.  When presented with Epicurus' Problem of Evil, most people want to say that god is able to prevent evil but free will blah blah... which amounts to able but not willing. 

 

Here's the lightening bolt, though.  When you present the Problem of Evil to a person, you are essentially asking them to choose between a god of power and a god of love.  And which god they choose speaks a lot about their own personal character.  Hmm...

 

What might it say that most choose the god of power?  Serious question, by the way; not rhetorical."

 

Me...What belief system says such things? The belief system based on the bible, as far as I know.

 

YOU..."It's almost as if, subconsciously, christians know the loving father routine is just a facade and god really is a tyrannical autocrat.  This is why, given the option of defending god's omnipotence versus defending his omnibenevolence, they almost invariably choose to leave god's power intact and try to explain evil away with mysterious ways, free will, or some other magical pile of apologist horseshit."

 

Me...What do Christians base their belief on? The bible.

 

YOU..."And the 10-year-old girl who gets raped, what about her free will?  What does god's refusal to intervene tell us about himself?  If he consistently enables evil, then he is also evil."

 

Then you have the gall to say....Not once have I said that god is the cause of our suffering.

 

You clearly took this from a biblical perspective, "choose between a god of power and a god of love," "christians know the loving father routine is just a facade and god really is a tyrannical autocrat," "most people want to say that god is able to prevent evil but free will blah blah...," "what about her free will?", "What does god's refusal to intervene tell us about himself?  If he consistently enables evil, then he is also evil."

 

What does the bible teach that you are clearly referencing from, that God created all. That God gave us free will. That from that there were those that didn't want to follow God and did evil. 

 

Then I supply a video that shows that God is not all-powerful to stop what was given in free will. You though still want to blame God. Then do that. Do it to your heart's content and IGNORE what the bible YOU are referencing to, actually SAYS. Ignore it. It's clear that is your desire, to make assertions on a book that you don't even know, but you want to claim you know no matter how you're shown to be wrong.

 

 

 

Per usual, a christian yaps about his imaginary friend while his imaginary friend is silent. 

[Wertbag]

A propoent of the freewill defence has several major problems to overcome.  The first is regarding natural suffering, disease, natural disasters, parasites, accidents or the like.  Events that have no component of freewill but still cause horrific suffering.  It is so simple to imagine a world with less suffering but exactly the same amount of freewill.  Perhaps parasitic worms don't exist, maybe ebola never made the jump between species, maybe fleas never carried the bubonic plague, perhaps the tectonic plates were stable and no earthquakes or tsunamis occur.  Any of these things reduce untold suffering and would be trivial for a god to do.  This is what the problem of evil questions, and why it is often reworded as the problem of suffering to point to where freewill is irrelevant.

 

The second question is what about heaven?  It is claimed god can create a place where there is no suffering but where we still have freewill.  Some say we would have the ability to commit evil, but you lose the wish to ever do so.  It is often said god doesn't just want robots, but if so then those in heaven must be as free as those on Earth, yet evil cannot exist in such a place.  If an all-loving god shows His power by creating a place without suffering, why would He not want the same for us?  

[Edgarcito]

On 6/27/2022 at 8:06 AM, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Sure.  If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.  But this brings us back to not really needing a god or a cross in order to accomplish the work of grace and trust, at least at the personal level, which is really the level that ultimately defines us as individuals.  Enoughness versus unwillingness.

Re-reading.... let's go back to this statement please as I have a different thought.  The contention is the waxing and waning of "enough".  One of my most early contentions when I entered the church, totally ignorant of any Bible teachings, was the argument, "enough" resides in everyone, by default, children and the unsaved.  A person didn't have to have some church designation to be enough.  

 

Without the continued dispensation of trust and grace throughout our lives, it's impossible to adequately accomplish those works you mention.  We can't do it for each other just as surely as we can't predict much farther than the end of our nose.  Certainly, we may move closer as individuals through practice, wisdom, experience, etc.  

 

So, two things to sum up this thought.  One, the dispensation is pretty much described in the Bible.  No proof of God mind you, but it's there.  Two, the point that our inadequacy is just that for several reasons.... our subjectivity, one.

 

I'm not writing well.... like I ever do, but the point is accomplished has a different meaning than practice.

 

Makes me think about "it is finished" on the Cross....ultimate Grace was accomplished through the works of Christ, the death and burial of sin, and the resurrection of new.  Granted it's theoretical, but what else are we going to do to explain our lack of omniscience.......science? (lol, that was a joke).

 

  

[TheRedneckProfessor]

25 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Two, the point that our inadequacy is just that for several reasons.... our subjectivity, one.

At first blush, I'd have to ponder if our perception of our own inadequacy is, in fact, subjective, then can we really say for certain that we are inadequate?  Perhaps a more objective observation would demonstrate that we are more than adequate. 

 

27 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

but what else are we going to do to explain our lack of omniscience.......science? (lol, that was a joke).

 

Damn funny one, too.

[RankStranger]

On 6/12/2022 at 4:38 AM, Robert_Tulip said:

Hi guys, sorry I have been out of touch for a while.  Just reading through some recent stuff this question caught my eye.  

 

The thing I dislike about this whole theodicy debate between power and love is that it wrongly presupposes that God could break the laws of physics.  Instead it makes far more sense to say God works solely through the laws of physics, and that any alleged departures from this rule, as Hume argued, involve deception or delusion.  I was chatting with my minister at church this morning, after she commented in her sermon that we are in the middle of a new reformation in which it is recognised that the real creed is that God is love, and that the official creeds make no sense, and are designed instead to support political control.  I commented to her that my view is that all supernatural claims should be read as allegory and that the whole of Christendom theology needs to be discarded as corrupt and incoherent.

 

If we take the line that the laws of physics are omnipotent and omnipresent, we then have the problem of omnibenevolence.  How this can be solved in my view is through the idea that if love rules the world, the extreme departure from this divine rule is due to the inability of humanity to integrate our lives with the laws of physics.  An enlightened scientific culture can gradually produce an enlightened ethical culture, enabling slow repair of the trauma that separates us from a life of love.

 

That's an interesting take on things.  What sort of church is this, if you don't mind me asking?

[Edgarcito]

I don't think we are inadequate in respect to our place within the overall scheme....i.e., existence vs. void.  We are adequate in that existence, a function of the larger picture.  That is very much different than being overall adequate....adequate per the entire picture.  

 

Really interesting stuff bc it appears as though Christ did a human level accomplishment as well as a God level cleansing/accomplishment.  In other words, provided a human example as well as an absolute accomplishment, or at least the start, of wiping out of sin.  

 

I hate when this happens to me....all this shit starts running together in revelation.  I always want to write it down but I never do.  My relationship is soured with the church through divorce and one really crappy elder.  Haven't been back.

 

Then there is "feed my sheep".  We have to consider that this is feed your neighbor the complete Grace of Christ if not only on our ability to do it or understand as say Johnny, but later on a level that is more absolute....like Christ.  I love you regardless of where you are as a place in existence or as you are somewhere more practiced. 

 

Very cool stuff for an old book....js. 

[Edgarcito]

Then, you realize enough doesn’t lie in material accomplishments, they don’t compare…

[walterpthefirst]

 

Edgaricto,

 

Six days ago the Professor elegantly took the idea of Occam's Razor and applied to how grace works between people and then how it applies between god and people.  Like this...

 

 

Another way of looking at Walt's suggestion above is to look at a scenario in which I have done you wrong.  In this scenario, we have two possible means of redressing the wrong I have done. 

 

The first way is for me to admit that I was wrong, acknowledge the specific wrong, and offer to make amends.  My grace, my enoughness, allows me to do this.  You, then, have a choice of forgiveness, absolution, both, or neither.  Your grace, your enoughness, will guide you to make the best decision.

 

Alternatively, I have done you wrong; but rather than seek to address the wrong between you and I, I appeal to jesus and the cross for forgiveness and absolution.  I may, or may not, come directly to you; because the grace and enoughness of the cross is enough for me and overrides whatever grace I might have otherwise shown.  You, in turn, go to the cross and jesus seeking to forgive.  You, also, may or may not come directly to me; and for the same reasons.

 

Which of these is the simpler solution to the problem at hand?  A meeting of grace between the two of us; or both of us having an inanimate intermediary between us that may not ever result in us talking about the situation and truly resolving it?  Which solution is more likely to result in the kind of grace and enoughness that you have been longing for and preaching about since I've known you?  

 

 

Now that the dialogue between you and the Prof has resumed I notice that his questions to you in the last paragraph have gone unanswered.  Assuming that he agrees, would you please be so good as to answer his questions?

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

6 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

Now that the dialogue between you and the Prof has resumed I notice that his questions to you in the last paragraph have gone unanswered.  Assuming that he agrees, would you please be so good as to answer his questions?

I agree.