THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE

[pantheory]

To Have a "fun" discussion, I would like to play the "Devils Advocate."

Even though I am the purest of atheists IMO and would bet my immortal soul against a six pack of beer , I don't laugh at religion since IMHO everyone has a right to their own beliefs as long as they don't infringe on the rights or psychological well-being of others. That being said, I am going to pretend I believe in the Christianity of my own making,, and play the devil's advocate, if anyone is interested . You cannot argue with me personally in this thread, only  with my persona non grata. Realize that you can't talk to pantheory in this thread. If you want to talk to me personally in this thread for some reason, message me instead.

 

By doing this please realize that everything I say below this line I don't believe in, don't believe, don't believe, don't believe, don't believe.

 

As a Christian (called Non Grata),  I don't believe in the Bible word for word, especially some parts of the old testament. But I do believe that Jesus was a real man who performed miracles and rose from the dead to help save us from our sins. I do not believe in the original sin idea of the old testament. Do I believe in the possibility that some of the new testament could be wrong? Yes, but I believe that nearly all of it is correct but I question the truth of Revelation . I believe in heaven and hell and of the goodness of Jesus and the goodness of his message, such as the golden rule, and helping others as others would help you, such as the good Samaritan, and all the good deeds that Christians and others have done since humans have existed. I believe in evolution of the species and of mankind, but not the entire theory.

 

Does anyone want to argue against the above paragraph?

[◊ Weezer ◊]

5 hours ago, pantheory said:

 

Does anyone want to argue against the above paragraph?

 

I will not argue against it, but will say you described some of my relatives and friends.

[walterpthefirst]

 "Do I believe in the possibility that some of the new testament could be wrong? Yes, but I believe that nearly all of it is correct but I question the truth of Revelation."

 

 

 

Do you believe that Romans 11 : 32 is correct?

 

For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

 

If not, please disregard this post.

 

 

But if you do then please justify, from the Bible, your claim that Jesus (God) is good.

 

You will need to address the logic of God imprisoning everyone in disobedience (sin) - which is a clear violation of our free will.

 

Not as a reaction to anything anyone had done, but having decided BEFORE CREATION and BEFORE ANYONE EXISTED, to imprison all of us in sin.

 

How can a god who violates everyone's free will be good?

 

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

[pantheory]

"Do you believe that Romans 11 : 32 is correct?

 

For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all."

 

Yes, I agree. It doesn't make a lot of sense. Maybe something was lost in the translation. Maybe the meaning of it should read something like this:

 

"God, through his allowance of disobedience (free will)," looks so that he may have mercy on them all.

 

Even the original transcription could have likely been  in old Hebrew, and the translations from word of mouth through many different language translations might have slightly distorted the original meaning, we likely could never know.

[walterpthefirst]

5 hours ago, pantheory said:

"Do you believe that Romans 11 : 32 is correct?

 

For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all."

 

Yes, I agree. It doesn't make a lot of sense. Maybe something was lost in the translation. Maybe the meaning of it should read something like this:

 

"God, through his allowance of disobedience (free will)," looks so that he may have mercy on them all.

 

Even the original transcription could have likely been  in old Hebrew, and the translations from word of mouth through many different language tramight have slightly distorted the original meaning, we likely could never know.

 

 

Your reply causes me to take issue with you on three points, Pantheory.  The words of the text itself, the illogic of your counter argument and the worked example of Jacob and Esau in Romans chapter 9.  I'll deal with the first here and now.

 

1.

Scripture4All Interlinear: Romans 11  

The original Greek passage can be found here.  I will copy it down here, but please click on the link and scroll down to verse 32 to confirm what I am writing. 

TOGETHER LOCKS (locks up together) for the god the all into Un-Persuadableness (stubbornness) THAT THE ALL He-SHOULD-BEing-MERCIFUL-to

If god had locked everyone (all) into a condition of unpersuadeableness, then he is not allowing anyone anything in terms of free will.  So, we do not disobey god by exercising our free will to do so.  Instead, before creation god chose to cause us to disobey him, so that he could be merciful to us.

 

Consider the role and powers of a judge.  A judge has no power to have mercy upon an innocent person because they are not guilty of any wrongdoing.  But because god wanted to have merciful on us all he rigged the game by violating our free will, making it impossible for us to be innocent in his sight.  You say that you don't accept Revelation?  But what about Exodus?  

 

Exodus 32 : 31 - 33.

30 The next day Moses said to the people, “You have committed a great sin. But now I will go up to the Lord; perhaps I can make atonement for your sin.”

31 So Moses went back to the Lord and said, “Oh, what a great sin these people have committed! They have made themselves gods of gold. 

32 But now, please forgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book you have written.”

33 The Lord replied to Moses, “Whoever has sinned against me I will blot out of my book.

 

What book is this?  The very same Book of Life seen by the apostle John and described by him in Revelation.  

So, if it were possible for a human being to be found innocent in god's sight of their own free will, then Jesus' blood sacrifice upon the cross would be of no value to them and his sacrifice would then NOT be for everyone.  By imprisoning everyone in disobedience god has ensured that everyone requires Jesus' blood to become innocent.  

 

You see how it works?  God condemns everyone before anyone lived to become disobedient sinners so that Jesus is the one and only means of entering heaven.  But to do that he had to override and violate everyone's free will.

 

The logic of this argument decapitates your counter argument, Pantheory.  My argument is Biblical and exactly conforms to orthodox, historical Christian beliefs.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[walterpthefirst]

Now to deal with point # 2, the illogic of your counter argument.

 

Let's ask ourselves a number of simple Yes/No questions.

 

Q.  Is an imprisoned person free to leave their place of imprisonment because they choose to do so?

A.  No.  Their free will does not permit them to do this.  Their freedom is under the control of someone else.

 

Q.  Is a slave free to leave their slavery because they choose to do so?

A.  No.  Once again. they cannot choose to become free because their freedom is under the control of someone else?

 

Q. Is a hostage free to leave their place of captivity because they choose to do so?

A.  No.  For the same reason as before.

 

Imprisonment isn't freedom, its the total opposite.  Slavery isn't freedom, its the total opposite.  Captivity isn't freedom, for the same reason.  Therefore, claiming that people bound into a condition of disobedience by god are still free to obey him is a nonsense.  Bondage is not freedom.  

 

But, playing devil's advocate here, what if your are right?  What if, whenever the Bible says that someone is imprisoned, they actually aren't?  What then?  Well, then you start bumping up against contradictions and non sequiturs in the Bible.  Like this...

 

When the Egyptian Pharoah imprisoned Joseph for (allegedly) trying to have sex with Potiphar's wife Joseph could choose to leave to that prison?  Uh...no.  He couldn't.

When John the Baptist was imprisoned by King Herod he could have avoided being beheaded because he could just choose to leave any time he wanted?  Again, no.

When Samson was caught, blinded and imprisoned by the Philistines he could have just chosen to walk out of the prison.  Really?  Nope!

 

And finally the apostle Peter and the writer of the book of Jude tell us that god has imprisoned the fallen angels in chains of darkness to await their fate on Judgement Day.  But why can't they just exercise the same free will they used to choose to rebel against god and side with Satan?  Just choose to have those everlasting chains drop off and be free to roam where they please?  Ain't gonna happen.

 

Calling imprisonment freedom is illogical, unbiblical and contrary to the rules of language we all use, Pantheory.  Case closed.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

Finally let's look at the worked example of Jacob and Esau.

 

Paul describes how god treated them in Romans 9.

 

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—

 

I've highlighted the key verse.

 

Before Jacob and Esau were born god loved Jacob and hated Esau. Neither person could exercise their free will before they existed.  Yet god chose to hate one and love the other.  Where's the free will here?  The answer is - nowhere.  The decision as to who went to heaven and who went to hell was made by god FOR THEM before they existed.  

 

This example focuses on only two people.  But Romans 11 : 32 tells us that god treats EVERYONE the same way he treated Jacob and Esau.  Before any of us were born god had decided to make us all into disobedient sinners.  Why?  So that everyone would be found guilty in his sight when he judges the whole world.  

 

Therefore, god himself is the true cause and origin of our sin.  Not Satan and not Adam and Eve.  God.  He imprisoned every one of us in disobedience, denying us the chance of choosing to be anything other than sinners.  That is not good, that is evil.  That is not just, that is unjust.  

 

I rest my case, having shown in three posts, that Jesus is not good.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[pantheory]

1 hour ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

 

Your reply causes me to take issue with you on three points, Pantheory.  The words of the text itself, the illogic of your counter argument and the worked example of Jacob and Esau in Romans chapter 9.  I'll deal with the first here and now.

 

1.

Scripture4All Interlinear: Romans 11  

The original Greek passage can be found here.  I will copy it down here, but please click on the link and scroll down to verse 32 to confirm what I am writing. 

TOGETHER LOCKS (locks up together) for the god the all into Un-Persuadableness (stubbornness) THAT THE ALL He-SHOULD-BEing-MERCIFUL-to

If god had locked everyone (all) into a condition of unpersuadeableness, then he is not allowing anyone anything in terms of free will.  So, we do not disobey god by exercising our free will to do so.  Instead, before creation god chose to cause us to disobey him, so that he could be merciful to us.

 

Consider the role and powers of a judge.  A judge has no power to have mercy upon an innocent person because they are not guilty of any wrongdoing.  But because god wanted to have merciful on us all he rigged the game by violating our free will, making it impossible for us to be innocent in his sight.  You say that you don't accept Revelation?  But what about Exodus?  

 

Exodus 32 : 31 - 33.

30 The next day Moses said to the people, “You have committed a great sin. But now I will go up to the Lord; perhaps I can make atonement for your sin.”

31 So Moses went back to the Lord and said, “Oh, what a great sin these people have committed! They have made themselves gods of gold. 

32 But now, please forgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book you have written.”

33 The Lord replied to Moses, “Whoever has sinned against me I will blot out of my book.

 

What book is this?  The very same Book of Life seen by the apostle John and described by him in Revelation.  

So, if it were possible for a human being to be found innocent in god's sight of their own free will, then Jesus' blood sacrifice upon the cross would be of no value to them and his sacrifice would then NOT be for everyone.  By imprisoning everyone in disobedience god has ensured that everyone requires Jesus' blood to become innocent.  

 

You see how it works?  God condemns everyone before anyone lived to become disobedient sinners so that Jesus is the one and only means of entering heaven.  But to do that he had to override and violate everyone's free will.

 

The logic of this argument decapitates your counter argument, Pantheory.  My argument is Biblical and exactly conforms to orthodox, historical Christian beliefs.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

[pantheory]

1 hour ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

 

Your reply causes me to take issue with you on three points, Pantheory.  The words of the text itself, the illogic of your counter argument and the worked example of Jacob and Esau in Romans chapter 9.  I'll deal with the first here and now.

 

1.

Scripture4All Interlinear: Romans 11  

The original Greek passage can be found here.  I will copy it down here, but please click on the link and scroll down to verse 32 to confirm what I am writing. 

TOGETHER LOCKS (locks up together) for the god the all into Un-Persuadableness (stubbornness) THAT THE ALL He-SHOULD-BEing-MERCIFUL-to

If god had locked everyone (all) into a condition of unpersuadeableness, then he is not allowing anyone anything in terms of free will.  So, we do not disobey god by exercising our free will to do so.  Instead, before creation god chose to cause us to disobey him, so that he could be merciful to us.

 

Consider the role and powers of a judge.  A judge has no power to have mercy upon an innocent person because they are not guilty of any wrongdoing.  But because god wanted to have merciful on us all he rigged the game by violating our free will, making it impossible for us to be innocent in his sight.  You say that you don't accept Revelation?  But what about Exodus?  

 

Exodus 32 : 31 - 33.

30 The next day Moses said to the people, “You have committed a great sin. But now I will go up to the Lord; perhaps I can make atonement for your sin.”

31 So Moses went back to the Lord and said, “Oh, what a great sin these people have committed! They have made themselves gods of gold. 

32 But now, please forgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book you have written.”

33 The Lord replied to Moses, “Whoever has sinned against me I will blot out of my book.

 

What book is this?  The very same Book of Life seen by the apostle John and described by him in Revelation.  

So, if it were possible for a human being to be found innocent in god's sight of their own free will, then Jesus' blood sacrifice upon the cross would be of no value to them and his sacrifice would then NOT be for everyone.  By imprisoning everyone in disobedience god has ensured that everyone requires Jesus' blood to become innocent.  

 

You see how it works?  God condemns everyone before anyone lived to become disobedient sinners so that Jesus is the one and only means of entering heaven.  But to do that he had to override and violate everyone's free will.

 

The logic of this argument decapitates your counter argument, Pantheory.  My argument is Biblical and exactly conforms to orthodox, historical Christian beliefs.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

Walter, remember my name for replies is "non-grata."

 

Although there was some Hellenistic culture  in the Hebrew lands to start with concerning the educated elite , it was amplified by the Macedonians conquering Egypt. Most or all of the old testament was written in Hebrew, then much later translated into Greek. Free will is a given in the old testament and I believe that the Roman's quote you exemplified above was a misinterpretation,  as I said above. 

 

"Bondage is not freedom."

 

Freewill is the right to chose right from wrong, according to the Bible. Your decisions in bondage also allow for freewill, but not freedom from one's bondage.   

[walterpthefirst]

10 hours ago, pantheory said:

 

Walter, remember my name for replies is "non-grata."

 

Although there was some Hellenistic culture  in the Hebrew lands to start with concerning the educated elite , it was amplified by the Macedonians conquering Egypt. Most or all of the old testament was written in Hebrew, then much later translated into Greek. Free will is a given in the old testament and I believe that the Roman's quote you exemplified above was a misinterpretation,  as I said above. 

 

"Bondage is not freedom."

 

Freewill is the right to chose right from wrong, according to the Bible. Your decisions in bondage also allow for freewill, but not freedom from one's bondage.   

 

 

You're setting the Old Testament and the New Testament against each other,  Pantheory.

 

 

That's a tactic adopted by people who can't stomach reading the OT in the light of the NT.  Doing that destroys free will.  Why do you think the issue of Predestination has been a thorn in the side of Christianity for so many centuries?  Because there are those who simply cannot accept god's grand plan for making everyone guilty and so making the blood of his son, Jesus Christ, the only way to be come innocent.  And yet, the Bible says what it says.

 

Furthermore, according to the NT, relying exclusively on the OT is no way to be saved.  The Law of Moses saves nobody from their sins.

 

Cherry picking, by excluding Revelation for example, is another tactic used by those who can't stomach what the Bible really says and what the Bible fully says.  That and falling back on the old excuse of mistranslation.  If the all-powerful, all knowing and infallible god of the entire universe can't successfully get his message of salvation across to us properly without his Word being corrupted, garbled and mistranslated, then why look to him to save you from your sins?  Why look to him, praise him and worship him? He can't even ensure that we receive his message properly, let alone understand it.  Not much of a praiseworthy, adorable god!

 

Furthermore, if you want to use those tactics, why believe anything the Bible has to say?  Why not just take a pair of scissors and just cut out the verses, passages and whole books you don't like?  In the OT God commanding the Israelites to rape women and smash children's heads against walls?  Cut it out!  In the NT inconvenient disagreements between events, places and names the gospels?  Just cut them out!  

 

Finally...

 

Freewill is the right to chose right from wrong, according to the Bible. Your decisions in bondage also allow for freewill, but not freedom from one's bondage. 

 

If that's so Pantheory, then how can a person imprisoned in a condition of disobedience choose to do what is right?  The answer is that they can't. 

 

That's the crux of this whole debate.  

 

 

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

In the book of Exodus god hardens the Pharoah of Egypt's heart against Moses and against the Israelites.  This leaves the Pharoah unable to do what is right and let the Israelites go free from their bondage.  The man's free will was violated, nullified and overridden by god.  He could not choose of his own free will to obey Moses and to obey god. 

 

If you don't believe me Pantheory, check out Exodus 4 : 21,  7 : 3,  8 : 15,  8 : 32,  9 : 12,  9 : 34, 10 : 1, 10  : 20,  10 : 27,  11 : 10,  14 : 4 and 14 : 8. 

 

To add insult to injury, god then blamed Pharoah for his disobedience - even though it was god himself who had caused it.  This is clear evidence that your claim is false.  Free will is not a given in the OT. 

 

A perfectly good god does not do evil.  And yet here, in the book of Exodus, we have god snuffing out the Pharoah's free will.  Surely an evil act?

 

Unless you can argue otherwise?

[pantheory]

On 5/9/2024 at 6:35 AM, walterpthefirst said:

In the book of Exodus god hardens the Pharoah of Egypt's heart against Moses and against the Israelites.  This leaves the Pharoah unable to do what is right and let the Israelites go free from their bondage.  The man's free will was violated, nullified and overridden by god.  He could not choose of his own free will to obey Moses and to obey god. 

 

If you don't believe me Pantheory, check out Exodus 4 : 21,  7 : 3,  8 : 15,  8 : 32,  9 : 12,  9 : 34, 10 : 1, 10  : 20,  10 : 27,  11 : 10,  14 : 4 and 14 : 8. 

 

To add insult to injury, god then blamed Pharoah for his disobedience - even though it was god himself who had caused it.  This is clear evidence that your claim is false.  Free will is not a given in the OT. 

 

A perfectly good god does not do evil.  And yet here, in the book of Exodus, we have god snuffing out the Pharoah's free will.  Surely an evil act?

 

Unless you can argue otherwise?

 

Walter,

 

I guess you can't remember. as I requested, to address me as "non-grata" in this thread, or don't use any name at all like Weezer did in his posting, Until you can do this I don't have time for your "good" arguments. Also please pace yourself. If you want me to answer your questions just  ask them one at a time, or make limited statements at a time please. I only have a limited time for this forum, generally the same for most all of us here I would expect.

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

Very well.

 

 

Let's go back to the statement you made earlier.

 

Freewill is the right to chose right from wrong, according to the Bible. Your decisions in bondage also allow for freewill, but not freedom from one's bondage. 

 

Earlier I showed from scripture that god took away the Pharaoh of Egypt's right to chose right from wrong by hardening his heart against Moses and the Israelites.

 

My sole question to you is therefore this.

 

Do you accept that god did this, as is written in the book of Exodus?

 

 

 

[pantheory]

7 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

Very well.

 

 

Let's go back to the statement you made earlier.

 

Freewill is the right to chose right from wrong, according to the Bible. Your decisions in bondage also allow for freewill, but not freedom from one's bondage. 

 

Earlier I showed from scripture that god took away the Pharaoh of Egypt's right to chose right from wrong by hardening his heart against Moses and the Israelites.

 

My sole question to you is therefore this.

 

Do you accept that god did this, as is written in the book of Exodus?

 

 

 

Yes, I believe Moses was chosen by God to lead the Jewish slaves out of bondage in Egypt to search for a land promised to them by God. On the mountain Moses was given the 10 commandments by God to deliver to the Jews he was leading.  I know there is no archaeological  record of this since they built no cities in their journey, just wondered in the desert for 40 years where Moses finally died at age 120, supposedly within sight of this promised land.

 

During those 40 years of wondering new generations of Jews were born familiar with the ten commandments and the teachings of Moses concerning their mono-theistic religion with a spiritual God who was the one and only God and creator.

[walterpthefirst]

2 hours ago, pantheory said:

 

Yes, I believe Moses was chosen by God to lead the Jewish slaves out of bondage in Egypt to search for a land promised to them by God. On the mountain Moses was given the 10 commandments by God to deliver to the Jews he was leading.  I know there is no archaeological  record of this since they built no cities in their journey, just wondered in the desert for 40 years where Moses finally died at age 120, supposedly within sight of this promised land.

 

During those 40 years of wondering new generations of Jews were born familiar with the ten commandments and the teachings of Moses concerning their mono-theistic religion with a spiritual God who was the one and only God and creator.

 

That's not an answer to the question I put to you.

 

My question was about god violating the Pharoah's free will.

 

As I wrote...

 

Earlier I showed from scripture that god took away the Pharaoh of Egypt's right to chose right from wrong by hardening his heart against Moses and the Israelites.

My sole question to you is therefore this.

Do you accept that god did this, as is written in the book of Exodus?

 

My focus was only on what god did to the Pharoah's free will.

 

Not about anything else.

 

Now please answer only the question I put to you, as it is written.

 

Earlier I showed from scripture that god took away the Pharaoh of Egypt's right to chose right from wrong by hardening his heart against Moses and the Israelites.

My sole question to you is therefore this.

Do you accept that god did this, as is written in the book of Exodus?

[pantheory]

2 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

That's not an answer to the question I put to you.

 

My question was about god violating the Pharoah's free will.

 

As I wrote...

 

Earlier I showed from scripture that god took away the Pharaoh of Egypt's right to chose right from wrong by hardening his heart against Moses and the Israelites.

My sole question to you is therefore this.

Do you accept that god did this, as is written in the book of Exodus?

 

My focus was only on what god did to the Pharoah's free will.

 

Not about anything else.

 

Now please answer only the question I put to you, as it is written.

 

Earlier I showed from scripture that god took away the Pharaoh of Egypt's right to chose right from wrong by hardening his heart against Moses and the Israelites.

My sole question to you is therefore this.

Do you accept that god did this, as is written in the book of Exodus?

 

I'm not familiar with this passage in Exodus, and if it is there then I don't think it is a valid interpretation. The Pharaoh's heart was likely hardened by Moses's actions and the Plagues that occurred at God's will at about the same time, but as to God directly hardening the Pharaoh's heart removing his free will I think is another play on words since it doesn't make sense to me. As I said before, interpretations through many languages, word for word are not always valid IMO -- maybe close but no cigar.

 

From what I have read, Exodus was likely written close to its present form, from 3-5 hundred BC requiring many re-writings and language reinterpretations, finally into English and the many dozens of other languages. Before that there was another thousand years before the time of Moses, so almost countless re-writings by countless hands.

[walterpthefirst]

There is little point in continuing this.

 

You and I are proceeding from two mutually exclusive positions.  I take what the Bible says at face value whereas you seem to run everything it says through the filters of personal interpretation and whether something makes sense to you.  Therefore, we cannot meet on any kind of common ground here.

 

Anything I present that challenges your views in any way can be summarily dismissed by you as mistranslation and/or misinterpretation.  As such you can never be brought to the point of really defending what the Bible says, because you will simply brush it aside by claiming that the Bible doesn't actually say that.

 

Well, since you are unfamiliar with the passage in Exodus where god hardens the Pharoah's heart, I suppose I could quote it here for you. 

 

(Rhetorical question).  But what would be the point of that? 

 

You've already declared that it would probably be an invalid interpretation.  An example of your strategy of dismissal at work - even before you've read the passage in question.

 

Quite how you intend to play Devil's Advocate by dismissing something before you've read it is beyond me.

 

But I now see that this thread is a waste of my time and I heartily recommend anyone else reading this to not waste their time with it either.

 

[pantheory]

On 5/9/2024 at 6:34 AM, walterpthefirst said:

 

 

You're setting the Old Testament and the New Testament against each other,  Pantheory.

 

 

That's a tactic adopted by people who can't stomach reading the OT in the light of the NT.  Doing that destroys free will.  Why do you think the issue of Predestination has been a thorn in the side of Christianity for so many centuries?  Because there are those who simply cannot accept god's grand plan for making everyone guilty and so making the blood of his son, Jesus Christ, the only way to be come innocent.  And yet, the Bible says what it says.

 

Furthermore, according to the NT, relying exclusively on the OT is no way to be saved.  The Law of Moses saves nobody from their sins.

 

Cherry picking, by excluding Revelation for example, is another tactic used by those who can't stomach what the Bible really says and what the Bible fully says.  That and falling back on the old excuse of mistranslation.  If the all-powerful, all knowing and infallible god of the entire universe can't successfully get his message of salvation across to us properly without his Word being corrupted, garbled and mistranslated, then why look to him to save you from your sins?  Why look to him, praise him and worship him? He can't even ensure that we receive his message properly, let alone understand it.  Not much of a praiseworthy, adorable god!

 

Furthermore, if you want to use those tactics, why believe anything the Bible has to say?  Why not just take a pair of scissors and just cut out the verses, passages and whole books you don't like?  In the OT God commanding the Israelites to rape women and smash children's heads against walls?  Cut it out!  In the NT inconvenient disagreements between events, places and names the gospels?  Just cut them out!  

 

Finally...

 

Freewill is the right to chose right from wrong, according to the Bible. Your decisions in bondage also allow for freewill, but not freedom from one's bondage. 

 

If that's so Pantheory, then how can a person imprisoned in a condition of disobedience choose to do what is right?  The answer is that they can't. 

 

That's the crux of this whole debate.  

 

 

 

 

 

You seem to never remember my name, either I go unnamed, or my pseudonym for this thread is "Non Grata," can't you remember that?

 

As I said in my beginning post, I don't believe in the Bible word for word. It has been translated through many different languages and many or most biblical scholars who believe in Jesus think the bible is also filled with parables and metaphors as I do. If any part of bible doesn't sound logical in light of the other parts of the bible, mis-translations may be involved. 

 

I think God and Jesus were logical spirits and the man Jesus. Although Jesus was chosen by God to help redeem our souls, Jesus, and also his apostles said that we are all sons of God as was Jesus.

 

(Galatians 3:26-29) For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
 

(1 John. 3:2-3) Apostle John: "Beloved, we are all the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be in the hereafter, but we know that when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure"

 

We look to God through Jesus as God's messenger, to follow the same path as men, that God asked Jesus to follow. To respect his fellow man, love thine enemies as thyself, and do nothing but good in this world, ask forgiveness for any transgressions one might make without proper thought of the word.

 

Your quote: "....how can a person imprisoned in a condition of disobedience choose to do what is right?  The answer is that they can't."

 

I person imprisoned or enslaved for disobedience did not follow the laws of men, but that same man could be obedient to the laws of God, they are sometimes or often not the same.
 

[walterpthefirst]

Surely the whole point of offering to play Devil's Advocate is to take up and hold to a position that you DON'T believe in?

 

Rather than holding to what you do believe, as you seem to have done in this thread?

 

The irony is that you seem to have offered to play Devil's Advocate and then failed to do so - holding only to your own personal beliefs.

 

On the basis of that I won't be responding to what you say are your own beliefs, in your latest response.

 

Because, by the definition of Devil's Advocate, your personal beliefs are off topic.

 

 

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

Oh and btw, whoever you are...

 

 

I can see a very great irony in your personal approach to evidence.

 

 

But, I won't present it unless you ask me to.

 

 

 

 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

On 5/7/2024 at 5:06 PM, pantheory said:

On 5/7/2024 at 5:06 PM, pantheory said:

 

On 5/7/2024 at 5:06 PM, pantheory said:

As a Christian (called Non Grata),  I don't believe in the Bible word for word, especially some parts of the old testament. But I do believe that Jesus was a real man who performed miracles and rose from the dead to help save us from our sins. I do not believe in the original sin idea of the old testament. Do I believe in the possibility that some of the new testament could be wrong? Yes, but I believe that nearly all of it is correct but I question the truth of Revelation . I believe in heaven and hell and of the goodness of Jesus and the goodness of his message, such as the golden rule, and helping others as others would help you, such as the good Samaritan, and all the good deeds that Christians and others have done since humans have existed. I believe in evolution of the species and of mankind, but not the entire theory.

 

Even though I am the purest of atheists IMO and would bet my immortal soul against a six pack of beer , I don't laugh at religion since IMHO everyone has a right to their own beliefs as long as they don't infringe on the rights or psychological well-being of others. That being said, I am going to pretend I believe in the Christianity of my own making,, and play the devil's advocate, if anyone is interested . You cannot argue with me personally in this thread, only  with my persona non grata. Realize that you can't talk to pantheory in this thread. If you want to talk me personally in this thread for some reason, message me instead.

 

It seems to me that since we haven't had any christians to tussle with, pantheory was just filling in for the lack. He's PRETENDING just like he stated right away. Not to mention he wanted to make it clear he was 'persona non grata' in other words, UNWELCOME on our forum. Thus, the 'Devil's (in our case, christians) Advocate.

 

Then he stated this:

 

By doing this please realize that everything I say below this line I don't believe in, don't believe, don't believe, don't believe, don't believe.

 

And even though I can't get these quotes to work in the right order  

 

I think he was just imitating a free range xtian, and doing about as fair a job as I've seen so far.

Maybe we've already de-converted all the xtians and that's why they don't come here anymore! 

[pantheory]

6 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

Oh and btw, whoever you are...

 

 

I can see a very great irony in your personal approach to evidence.

 

 

But, I won't present it unless you ask me to.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks anyway Wolter, As you may already know,  I don't like to argue. I've encountered a number of Christians that I have described by my Persona Non Grata beliefs.  My own family followed this type of belief  and it made more sense to me then than more dogmatic beliefs when I was still a Christian as a child and teenager, speaking as pantheory

[walterpthefirst]

Whatever his antics and whatever he calls himself, I find it deeply ironic that his approach to evidence is to judge its validity only according to his own understanding.

 

So if he cannot understand it on his own terms he then deems it invalid.

 

The possibility that there are things beyond his understanding but which are well understood by others never seems to enter into the equation.

 

 

How ironic that Non Grata's mode of dismissal of evidence in this thread exactly matches Pantheory's mode of dismissal of evidence in other threads.

 

 

 

 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

I am trying to put myself into the shoes of someone coming to this forum seriously looking for information about the validity of Christianity, and perhaps considering leaving the faith.  Or wanting support for doing so. 

 

We have many guest coming daily and reading from our archives, so we know there is an interest.

 

So why are they not joining the discussions on the forum???

 

PLEASE consider whether the nit picking, obsessive/compulsive arguments, and "talking down" to others, about stuff you don't even believe in, is actually inviting them to join in the conversations, or driving them away!! 

 

We all like to think our ideas are important, and we do have a lot of good ideas and information from studies we have done, and experiences we have had, but I think we need to think long and hard about how we present them.  Is it coming from our self centered egos to drive home our points and prove someone else wrong??  Or a sincere and thoughtful desire to be helpful to who ever comes here?  And to each other?? (these thoughts are also directed to myself)

 

If you are a mother, HAPPY MOTHERS DAY!!

[walterpthefirst]

4 hours ago, Weezer said:

I am trying to put myself into the shoes of someone coming to this forum seriously looking for information about the validity of Christianity, and perhaps considering leaving the faith.  Or wanting support for doing so. 

 

 

 

If they are seriously looking for information and support then how about these Pinned threads?

 

The Failed Cosmology of William Lane Craig - Lion's Den Pinned Articles - Ex-Christian.Net

The Failure of the Fine Tuned Universe Apologetic Argument - Lion's Den Pinned Articles - Ex-Christian.Net

William Lane Craig and the BGV - Lion's Den Pinned Articles - Ex-Christian.Net

 

Or these threads in the Lions Den?

 

How can a timeless and unchanging god appear to react and change when interacting with humans? - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

The Shameful Exploitation of a Child by Christian Apologists. - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

Reconciling Genesis with Science : The Sticking Plaster Argument - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

1 John 3 : 9 & 10. Truly Reborn Christians Cannot Continue To Sin - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

Some examples of astronomically unlikely odds for Fish153 to consider. - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

Proof that Allah Created and Fine-Tuned the Universe ;) - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

Ten Questions for Theistic Evolutionist Christians - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

I can explain it without you having to click any link, Austin Austin. - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

The Intelligent Design Dilemma : Which God? - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

Care to comment, Georgia? - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

Please join me here, PittsburghJoe. - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

Does this explain the impasse between Christians and no-Christians? - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

 

The common denominator for all these threads is that I created them for the express purpose of providing the information and support you are talking about, Weezer.

 

Not to mention my many, many contributions to other threads in the Den, in the Science vs Religion area and elsewhere.

 

walterpthefirst

Regular Member

Joined June 27, 2021

 Online now

Posts

2.5k

Reputation

767

Badges

10

Grand Master

July 31, 2023

• 
• Rare
• Rare
• Rare
• Rare

 0 warning points