I'm engaged!! !

Post Reply New Topic

Usually in ways you're not well aware of, like setting a precedent for yourself toward lusting, which makes it easier to do next time.

um could you explain that again in smaller words

So, evil actually exists.
It doesn't precede God,
is it co-temporous?
Or something that God
willed?

Ah, maybe I was foolish in confusing
original sin with evil. I'm really interested
here, as this is why the Church ended up
coming to the conclusion that evil doesn't
really exist - following the lines that JohnnyB
laid out.

I must be evil then.
Awesome.

Anyone who wears an ostrich
feather is likely to be. Join the
club.

Hmm, well, if you truly denied every word of it -- didn't believe a single thing you read -- I don't see how any new understanding could be present. Plus, the spiritual understanding He gives me directly shows Bible truths far deeper than would be seen by a skeptical scholar.

It's very interesting, that.

How God places understanding just on the "affirmative" side of the will. Some people, just as you mention, read the Bible with the intent not to believe it. A lot of biblical scholarship in Germany took that approach. "Objective" is a term we humans throw around a lot, isn't it? But when it comes to absolutes, there's really no such thing as an objective human being -- especially when one is pretending to base his spiritual decisions strictly and solely on the earthly fact of how a text reads. (That's quite a self-deception indeed!) The reality is, calandale, that those who read the Bible and end up accepting it were searching for the truth (no pre-defined truth, just Truth -- whatever it might be). Perhaps I had oversimplified it, after all. God often seems to be doing very simple things, behind which seem to be infinitely-integrated mechanisms. If you must understand God before coming to faith, then, firstly, you will not come to faith, and secondly, you are erring in logic, in asking for an infinite quantity to be poured into a finite vessel.

For, as Romans 11:33-36 says:

33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who hath been his counsellor?

35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?

36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

A thorough description of His infinity. He simply is, in the way that everything and everyone else is not.



Those who choose to take Jesus' redemption almost entirely on faith are as redeemed and renewed as those who study fervently and believe -- for it is a spiritual decision, and a spiritual change. Now, for those who study very skeptically, they may understand the text well, and even see that much of it connects beautifully with its other parts as a literary document, but -- even within skepticism, there are two kinds. Those who seek the truth (as an as-yet undefined absolute they hope exists), and those who do not seek the truth (those who will reject it when they find it).

Glad to. Lusting once or twice can start a habit of lusting.

Yes, it's stimulating, and is also good practice. Answering these questions is part of my calling as a Christian. If gaining our own salvation was all we were here for, we'd all shortly thereafter take the Amish approach of "hiding our light" in peace, smug and secure in our salvation. God would be angry with us for selfishly wasting our lives, but, according to the Bible, He wouldn't deny us entry into Heaven for that.

Tried this before the evening update,
but I couldn't wait long enough.

It seems that with your last reply to me,
you stepped away from the statement
that it wasn't all faith. As you claim:

Which seems to imply that one must ALREADY have
willed faith, in order to get what is necessary. Likewise,



Implies that faith is sufficient, without learning.

however,

sounds as though it is a way out, but I contend that that
hope is itself a form of faith.

Nevermind though, I was rather hoping that you
had a belief which required learning, rather than
blind faith, as an absolute prerequisite. For though
this skeptic could never be convinced of anything,
it seemed that your reasoned views were such that
they might have indicated such a thing.

I truly respect the learning and effort that you've put
into your beliefs though, and when I was younger and
wiser, would have enjoyed this much more.

Still a bit confused about your conception of evil,
but since it seems to be a mere matter of faith,
I suppose it's not that important. I have my own
irrational beliefs, and find it difficult to defend them.

Well, God has no beginning or end. Perhaps, neither does evil.

I greatly emphasize "perhaps". I don't hold that evil existed eternally -- I don't think one could base that in Scripture.

Last edited by Ragtime on 30 May 2007, 1:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

You're confusing faith with will -- in this case, the will to know the truth (the truth being that as-yet undefined absolute reality, regardless of what it may be).

So, you might well be a dualist?
Always an attractive heresy. Seems
so well contained. The Church didn't
like it, because it seems to offer that
one can choose either side - and it becomes
difficult to distinguish right from wrong. Also,
in that it seems to deny the omnipotence.

You've made me regret not adding that God and good are always greater in strength than evil, but I don't want to try and get more metaphysical than that.

One would have to learn the basics, and as you said, "almost" entirely on faith.

You're confusing faith with will again. A desire to know truth is not faith.

I greatly emphasize "perhaps". I don't hold that evil always existed alongside God -- there's no particular reason it would.