Faith, Logic, and Freedom

[Edgarcito]

1 minute ago, DarkBishop said:

 

I don't see how thats biblical. Generational sin didn't make it into the new testament. Well other than the normal sin caused by Adam's fall.

 

But do some research on that. Generational sin would be a good topic to have its own thread on. 

 

 

Can you please explain your reasoning so my bible knowledge can be refreshed please sir.  Thx.

[walterpthefirst]

29 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

I think it's both.  Epigenetic research, or at least what I am understanding to date, suggests that genetics are changed temporarily, maybe a few generations per the actions of a parent.  I am no expert, it's just what I had understood.  I would suspect education also moves the needle.    My personal conclusion suggests immortality still has a chance within those in the death group but would be few and far between given our propensity to sin.  And which begs the question, what happens when you compound sin over generations...

 

For the sake of argument, let's say that you're right here, Edgarcito.  That these changes do happen.

 

Well, what (or rather, who) is the ONLY way that the needle of a person's life can swing from death to life?

 

John 14 : 6

 

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

If you are saying that a person's needle can swing by any other way than Jesus, then that is salvation by works.

 

The death group has no other 'chance' of immortality except through Jesus.

 

So, even if epigenetics is right, how does that help those in death group who died before they heard of Jesus?

 

You see?  Epigenetics does nothing to plug the gaping hole in your argument.

 

Billions are consigned by god to hell, just because they were born in the wrong place and at the wrong time.

 

Is that fair?  Just?  Merciful?  Loving?  Good?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Edgarcito]

1 minute ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

For the sake of argument, let's say that you're right here, Edgarcito.  That these changes do happen.

 

Well, what (or rather, who) is the ONLY way that the needle of a person's life can swing from death to life?

 

John 14 : 6

 

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

If you are saying that a person's needle can swing by any other way than Jesus, then that is salvation by works.

 

The death group has no other 'chance' of immortality except through Jesus.

 

So, even if epigenetics is right, how does that help those in death group who died before they heard of Jesus?

 

You see?  Epigenetics does nothing to plug the gaping hole in your argument.

 

Billions are consigned by god to hell, just because they were born in the wrong place and at the wrong time.

 

Is that fair?  Just?  Merciful?  Loving?  Good?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I quoted Romans a page or two back.  Did you see that?

[Edgarcito]

4 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

For the sake of argument, let's say that you're right here, Edgarcito.  That these changes do happen.

 

Well, what (or rather, who) is the ONLY way that the needle of a person's life can swing from death to life?

 

John 14 : 6

 

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

If you are saying that a person's needle can swing by any other way than Jesus, then that is salvation by works.

 

The death group has no other 'chance' of immortality except through Jesus.

 

So, even if epigenetics is right, how does that help those in death group who died before they heard of Jesus?

 

You see?  Epigenetics does nothing to plug the gaping hole in your argument.

 

Billions are consigned by god to hell, just because they were born in the wrong place and at the wrong time.

 

Is that fair?  Just?  Merciful?  Loving?  Good?

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you will know my position, faith without works suggests that you really don't believe or that you do believe but keep on sinning.

[walterpthefirst]

2 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

I quoted Romans a page or two back.  Did you see that?

 

Yes, this.

 

12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned. 13 For sin was in the world before the law was given; but sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who did not sin in the way that Adam transgressed.

 

But the person who wrote your quote (Paul) also wrote this.

 

1 Corinthians 15 : 21 & 22.

 

21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 

22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 

 

He is saying that death came through one man, Adam.  And life will also come through one man, Jesus.

 

But Jesus did not live until billions had already died, making it impossible for them to have their sin taken away by him.

 

That's the problem, Edgarcito.  Nobody preceded or predated Adam, so his sin passes to all.

 

And his wife Eve was the mother of ALL the living.

 

But billions preceded and predated Jesus, so his life-giving sacrifice cannot pass backwards in time to them.

 

Do you see it now? 

 

 

[Edgarcito]

2 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

Yes, this.

 

12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned. 13 For sin was in the world before the law was given; but sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who did not sin in the way that Adam transgressed.

 

But the person who wrote your quote (Paul) also wrote this.

 

1 Corinthians 15 : 21 & 22.

 

21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 

22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 

 

He is saying that death came through one man, Adam.  And life will also come through one man, Jesus.

 

But Jesus did not live until billions had already died, making it impossible for them to have their sin taken away by him.

 

That's the problem, Edgarcito.  Nobody preceded or predated Adam, so his sin passes to all.

 

And his wife Eve was the mother of ALL the living.

 

But billions preceded and predated Jesus, so his life-giving sacrifice cannot pass backwards in time to them.

 

Do you see it now? 

 

 

Above my pay grade Walter.  I'm unclear what happens to this group.  I've had an old friend speculate years ago, but I don't remember nor having a feeling that his speculation was on target.  Maybe DB has an idea. 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

Can you please explain your reasoning so my bible knowledge can be refreshed please sir.  Thx.

I'm serious, that subject deserves a thread all of its own. We are already 28 pages into this topic. If we discuss it here anything valuable we might glean from the subject might be buried. 

 

I can think of a whole chapter in Ezekiel that pertains to this. We used it a lot for another subject. And some in Jeremiah that could be interpreted that it ends with the Messiah.

 

I'm assuming your talking about addiction and abuse tho right? That has all been studied out by psychiatrists. And doesn't have anything to do with a hereditary "sin". I'm not a psychiatrist so I can't tell you all the ins and outs of why people who are abused are more likely to be abusive. Or likewise people who have alcoholic parents are more likely to become alcoholics. Some of it is DNA. But a lot of it is psychiatric. None of it has to do with a generational curse from God. 

 

DB

[walterpthefirst]

43 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Above my pay grade Walter.  I'm unclear what happens to this group.  I've had an old friend speculate years ago, but I don't remember nor having a feeling that his speculation was on target.  Maybe DB has an idea. 

 

Well, all I know is this, Edgarcito.

 

If the sins of those who lived before the Law are not taken into account, then this constitutes a free pass to heaven, bypassing Jesus.  Which contradicts John 14 : 6.   “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

In this same way, if the sins of those who lived outside of Israel and who lived in ignorance of the Law are not taken into account, then this also constitutes a free pass to heaven, again bypassing Jesus and again contradicting John 14 : 6.

 

Even though 1 Corinthians 15 : 21 & 22 says that in Christ all will be made alive, this means that all rise from death to face judgment.  If the sin of those in that group are not taken into account because they lived before the Law or in ignorance of the Law, then how is this judgment?  Once again, they get a free pass to heaven, simply on account of where and when they were born.

 

This makes no sense to me.

 

 

   

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

53 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Above my pay grade Walter.  I'm unclear what happens to this group.  I've had an old friend speculate years ago, but I don't remember nor having a feeling that his speculation was on target.  Maybe DB has an idea. 

The Bible is pretty clear that anyone outside of God's people. Whether it was someone following the order of melchesidic before Abraham, Abraham's followers, followers of the mosaic laws. Or lastly followers of Jesus are not able to go to heaven. 

 

I do know that some churches believe that Jesus went to hell and even preached to the sinners which never had a chance. But I don't really see how thats justified. It would defeat the purpose of God's chosen people being loyal to him the whole time. They could of just been a heathen like the rest of the gentiles and still go to heaven. So that doesn't fit. 

 

Jesus said that No man cometh to the father but by me. 

 

There is a lot more scripture to support that. Its all over the new testament. 

 

So now biblically the only way is through believing on Jesus. 

 

I think that ultimately anyone who wasn't in any of those categories are lost. The Bible mentions some like Noah. But still God found righteousness in him and chose him. 

 

That is still a believer in the God of the Jews. 

 

Everyone outside of that line that believed anything else would have perished with all the other sinners. Like Walt said. 

 

Unless you take an extra biblical stance like the Mormons. They believe in the baptism of the dead. Thus is a ritual they do in their churches. Someone who is alive stands in proxy of a dead ancestor who maybe never heard the gospel. I had a good friend that was Mormon and the way he explained it was that after the baptism Jesus I guess visits them and gives them a chance to believe on him. It was very foreign to me. 

 

 

DB

[Edgarcito]

13 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

I'm serious, that subject deserves a thread all of its own. We are already 28 pages into this topic. If we discuss it here anything valuable we might glean from the subject might be buried. 

 

I can think of a whole chapter in Ezekiel that pertains to this. We used it a lot for another subject. And some in Jeremiah that could be interpreted that it ends with the Messiah.

 

I'm assuming your talking about addiction and abuse tho right? That has all been studied out by psychiatrists. And doesn't have anything to do with a hereditary "sin". I'm not a psychiatrist so I can't tell you all the ins and outs of why people who are abused are more likely to be abusive. Or likewise people who have alcoholic parents are more likely to become alcoholics. Some of it is DNA. But a lot of it is psychiatric. None of it has to do with a generational curse from God. 

 

DB

I think it certainly could.  I'll stop.  We can discuss that another time.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

2 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

I quoted Romans a page or two back.  Did you see that?

I have a question Ed. Considering all those people that never would have been influenced by the Hebrew God. And are now suffering in hell. 

 

How did they have free will having never heard of the Abrahamic God? 

 

DB

[TheRedneckProfessor]

16 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

I have a question Ed. Considering all those people that never would have been influenced by the Hebrew God. And are now suffering in hell. 

 

How did they have free will having never heard of the Abrahamic God? 

 

DB

Oh!  I know this one.  Roman's 1:20 says "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"

 

This means god's creation proves his existence and testifies to his glory.  This means people who never heard the gospel of jesus still don't have an excuse; because if they had been paying attention to the trees and snails and shit, they'd have found god, even without "hearing the word."

 

Turn or burn, bitches!

[walterpthefirst]

4 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned. 13 For sin was in the world before the law was given; but sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who did not sin in the way that Adam transgressed.

 

 

Ok, I've figured out what this Romans quote really means about sin not being taken into account where there is no law.

 

We fell into the classic trap of looking at this passage (Romans 5) out of its proper context.  The period of history Paul is referring to, when there was no law, ran from the time of Adam to the time when god gave Moses the Law on Mount Sinai.  But this is not world history.  This is the history of ONLY the Jewish people and their forbears.

 

So, the people who lived when there was no law were the likes of Cain, Abel, all of those listed in the account of Adam's family line up to Noah, the sons of Noah, all of those listed as descending from Noah's sons, all of those listed in Shem's family line up to Abram, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and his twelve sons who became the twelve tribes of Israel, whom Moses eventually lead out of Egypt.

 

These people are the ones Paul meant who lived without Mosaic law.  Therefore, it is their sins that are not taken into account by god.  Which means that the sins of everyone else in the world are taken into account by god.  

 

And so the gaping hole in your argument is still there, Edgarcito.

Everyone else in the world had no way of being exempted from their sins or of hearing about Jesus until Christian missionaries spread the Good News.  As the map I linked to clearly shows, for most of world history most of the world's population was damned to eternal hellfire just by being born in the wrong place and wrong time.

 

So, is that fair?  Just?  Merciful?  Loving?  Good?

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

On 10/29/2022 at 1:15 PM, DarkBishop said:

In our church we believed that this is where Jesus went while he was dead for 3 days. And that these people went to heaven with Jesus at his ascension. 

I've been thinking about what I said here on page 26. And it wasn't the Gospel Assembly church that taught this. It must of been one of the Baptist churches I went to. 

 

The Gospel assembly church believed the story of the rich man and Lazarus. And the story of the witch that conjured Samuel's spirit for saul were both visions. It didn't fit with their beliefs. I guess everyone has something they have to view as either a vision or metaphorical to make it all fit. 

 

DB

[TheRedneckProfessor]

5 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

Everyone else in the world had no way of being exempted from their sins or of hearing about Jesus until Christian missionaries spread the Good News. 

Oh, but they did, Walt, as the verse from Romans 1:20 shows.  All they had to do was pay attention to nature and it would have revealed the one true god to them.  If my scripture verse seems to contradict your scripture verse, it's only because it does contradict yours.  But if you had the holy ghost giving you the correct interpretation, it wouldn't seem like a contradiction at all.

[walterpthefirst]

2 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Oh!  I know this one.  Roman's 1:20 says "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"

 

This means god's creation proves his existence and testifies to his glory.  This means people who never heard the gospel of jesus still don't have an excuse; because if they had been paying attention to the trees and snails and shit, they'd have found god, even without "hearing the word."

 

Turn or burn, bitches!

 

Not quite, Prof. 

 

Nowhere in that section of Romans does Paul say that the creation spells out the name of Jesus.  All that the creation points to is the existence of a single, eternal god.  So, even if these wicked people acknowledged that there was this one god, because they don't know his name (Jesus) they cannot be saved.

 

If these people could be saved by simply acknowledging this one god, then Paul would be contradicting what he says later on in the same letter to the Romans, in chapter 10.

 

9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 

10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 

11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.”

12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 

13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

14 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 

15 And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!”

 

I've just seen your reply Prof.

 

The key verses are highlighted.  Understanding that there is but one god from looking at the creation will not save you from hell.  You have to first hear the Word preached and then believe on that in the name of Jesus.  There is no way biblical way around it.  

 

Do you follow?

 

 

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

And when you think about it, if anyone can be saved just by looking at the clouds and the rivers and realizing that there is just one god, that totally contradicts the Gospels.

 

John 14 : 6

 

I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except through me.

 

Therefore, when Gentiles hear the Word about Jesus preached to them, that is the first time they can be saved.

 

Which is exactly what Paul is saying in Romans 10.

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Well, damn.  We're right back to "god is evil," then, I reckon.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

7 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Well, damn.  We're right back to "god is evil," then, I reckon.

Seems like all signs point to yes

 

[walterpthefirst]

Posted 10 hours ago

  10 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Well, damn.  We're right back to "god is evil," then, I reckon.

Seems like all signs point to yes 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

If it's any help guys, there's a more modern and relevant way of understanding what Paul is saying in Romans.

 

You recall Christian apologists coming to Ex-C and arguing that the universe appears to be the work of a designer? Well, when they do that we respond by pointing out that their argument fails to identify who the designer is.  We point out that even if the universe actually is designed, whoever or whatever did this could be Allah, Krishna, ultra-intelligent aliens or something else. 

 

And this is the line Paul takes in Romans 1.  He is saying that even though it is obvious that one god was responsible for the creation and even though people should have seen this and even though these people should have given thanks to that creator - despite all of these things, god's wrath will come upon them.

 

They will receive his wrath because recognizing the designer of creation is not enough to save them.  Just as the designed-universe argument cannot identify Jesus as the creator, so simply recognizing that there was a creator doesn't bring people to Jesus.

 

In Romans 10 Paul then explains that people are only saved by hearing the Word of Jesus' blood sacrifice.   They must hear the Word preached, believe it and confess that Jesus is saviour and lord.

 

But before this, in chapter 9, Paul writes a chilling reason why so many people will receive ONLY god's wrath.

 

10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 

11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 

12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 

13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 

15 For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
    and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 

17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”

18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 

20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”

21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 

23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 

24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

 

From this we see that that god has created some people to be the objects of his wrath, prepared in advance for destruction.  God loved Jacob but hated Esau before they were born.  Therefore, Esau was one of those objects that god had prepared in advance to receive on his wrath and to go to hell.

 

Does Esau have the right to appeal his sentence?  No.  Does the pot have the right to talk back to the potter that made it saying, why did you make me for common use and not for a special purpose?  The pot has no right to do this.

 

From this we see that all of the people who lived and died before they had the chance to heard the Word preached are simply objects prepared in advance by god for destruction.

 

And this is... evil.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

8 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

From this we see that all of the people who lived and died before they had the chance to heard the Word preached are simply objects prepared in advance by god for destruction.

 

And this is... evil.

Given this, I think it's time we heard what @Edgarcito has to say about it.  Because it seems to me that, when it comes to salvation, "faith" is as limited as logic.  Salvation seems more controlled by the whim of a mysterious and inexplicable entity, rather than by any faith, works, or reasoning we can do.

[walterpthefirst]

2 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Given this, I think it's time we heard what @Edgarcito has to say about it.  Because it seems to me that, when it comes to salvation, "faith" is as limited as logic.  Salvation seems more controlled by the whim of a mysterious and inexplicable entity, rather than by any faith, works, or reasoning we can do.

 

Well, I would certainly like him to respond to the map I posted here on Saturday.

 

That gives a graphic representation of how many billions god has prepared in advance for destruction.

 

And I'd like him to tell us what he thinks about the morality of a god who would that.

 

A deity who controls who can be saved and who can't by where and when they are born.

 

Perhaps it would focus his mind if he realized that if he had be born in Texas at any time before the 15th century he would be doomed to hell, with no chance of salvation and no hope of appeal against his sentence?

 

Care to comment, Edgarcito?

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

3 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

From this we see that that god has created some people to be the objects of his wrath, prepared in advance for destruction.  God loved Jacob but hated Esau before they were born.  Therefore, Esau was one of those objects that god had prepared in advance to receive on his wrath and to go to hell.

 

2 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Given this, I think it's time we heard what @Edgarcito has to say about it.  Because it seems to me that, when it comes to salvation, "faith" is as limited as logic.  Salvation seems more controlled by the whim of a mysterious and inexplicable entity, rather than by any faith, works, or reasoning we can do.

 

Also @Edgarcito has talked about the "free will" Adam and Eve had to make the "right" decision. But as Walter just showed, the biblical God doesn't care about "free will". 

 

He hardens hearts as he wills, softens hearts as he wills, and sends people to hell as he wills. This scripture more supports those denominations that Believe in "Predestination". 

 

DB

[Edgarcito]

3 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Given this, I think it's time we heard what @Edgarcito has to say about it.  Because it seems to me that, when it comes to salvation, "faith" is as limited as logic.  Salvation seems more controlled by the whim of a mysterious and inexplicable entity, rather than by any faith, works, or reasoning we can do.

No, there's a difference.  Logic has formed a conclusion and acts on the conclusion until you know differently.  Religious faith, the conclusion is ultimately unknown, and acting as faithfully to a standard as possible.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

16 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

No, there's a difference.  Logic has formed a conclusion and acts on the conclusion until you know differently.  Religious faith, the conclusion is ultimately unknown, and acting as faithfully to a standard as possible.

Okay.  So what you're saying here is that absolutely nothing in your response is even remotely relevant to the topic currently under discussion, which is salvation via god's whim.  Gotcha.