To Sum It All Up

I don’t think you’d be too happy if you had no freedom. Being all knowing doesn’t mean God should take away our freedoms and do things in a better way. God did make something much better than what we have, but in His perfect justice He gave us the choice to destroy it all if we wanted, and that’s what we chose. So because we have suffering, then God is responsible for making us suffer? God is responsible for giving us free will and freedom of choice. Our suffering is a consequence of our own doing. We can choose what we want to do, but we can’t choose the consequences. So this dovetails into answering your next point.
Per my earlier comment, everyone now suffers the consequence/penalty of death and separation from God because of this choice that was made. But that’s not what God wanted, so He personally paid the price for everything that everyone has and ever will do wrong in order to give us the ability to eliminate this consequence. [quote=“Apathy, post:20, topic:45347”]
How does that save anyone?
[/quote]

In order to eliminate the consequence/penalty for what we do wrong, God paid the price for all of it for us. So if we accept who He is and what He has done for us, then we don’t have to suffer being separated from God forever.

You see me. I’m here, and I’m saved.

I’m not suggesting to have no freedom at all. I’m suggesting if you see that free will people are unhappy vs no free will people are unhappy, wouldn’t an “all-knowing” God have something better in mind?

You reference the Garden of Eden and the forbidden fruit. He gives us a perfect place, with perfect everything plus the chance to destroy it all? Are you nuts? That’s some sadistic deception. Of course eventually someone was gonna be curious enough to eat it and ruin everything. That’s how free will works, people tend to explore and experiment. So how could an all knowing fellow put that there in the first place, and let your followers be all like “well it’s our fault” even though someone else put the tree there.
EDIT: How can you revere that person? How can you look up to him? I don’t see you coming from a very good place if that’s your definition of perfect.

Eliminate penalty? So he saw it as wrong to have consequences and penalty? How does penalty solve anything then?

If he paid the price then why should we have to accept him and what he did if he’s already done all the work? And what does that even mean, separated from God? I heard that a lot when I was young and nobody really explains it. It just seems like a placeholder for logic to invoke emotion to me. If I sum this all up to what I think it means, then it’s accept God or suffer?

It was invented by psychotics before the time of hospitals

You were invented by psychotics before the time of hospitals? Oh wait, I see what you’re referencing now. lol

1 Like

Well the universe is God, no man can meet him before death I believe but I like to think of life as being like being a child in his mothers womb, not sure if anything exists once your born!

That’s interesting. But I can see and touch and experience things. What would exist if I couldn’t touch it? Things would still exist, I just wouldn’t be touching them. Things I can see and touch and experience have to be real, or else I’m just derealized from reality. Seeing, touching, that’s just how I measure things. Even the vacuums in space have particles popping in and out of existence, I can’t see them right now. But I know it happens.

I think man’s job is to tame the universe.

1 Like

Good and evil is a way too simple way of thinking of everything. Things just are what they are. Black and white thinking is not something one should strive to achieve as it really limits the ability to look at the world objectively, among other things.

1 Like

Very good questions. I’m glad you’re thinking through this. It sounds like you’ve heard some of this before. So I’ll do my best to answer all your questions.

Our present state isn’t what God had in mind. Per my previous comments, this is what we chose.

Yes, that’s what I’m referring to. He didn’t deceive them. He gave them all the facts and let them choose. You are correct that of course we chose to ruin everything, but it was still our choice. We didn’t have to do it. If He had given us no freedom/no free will, then we wouldn’t be living in the mess we’re in now. But even if you would rather have no free will than to live in our present mess, that wasn’t a choice God could make. God is perfectly just, and He is limited by His character. He had to give us a choice. Not to mention that He didn’t want to make a bunch of robots. He wanted to make us and have us choose to be with Him.

He didn’t see it as wrong to have consequences/a penalty, but that’s not what He wanted. The penalty wasn’t meant to solve anything. The penalty was just a result of what we did. God wanted us to choose to be with Him, not to choose the wrong thing and get penalized.

If we don’t accept what He’s done for us, then it can’t count for us. If we reject a gift that we’re given, then we don’t have it.

God is perfect and the source of everything that is good. If you are separated from God, then you are separated from everything that is good. If you remove yourself from light, then all you have left is darkness. If you choose to reject light, then the result is that you live in darkness. People want to reject God, have no suffering, and be able to continue forever doing wrong things. Considering that the mistakes we make hurt other people, then that concept can’t work for everyone anyway. We have physical death in order to prevent us from forever living in this mess that we’ve created. So, per your question, if we choose light, then we choose to eliminate all suffering and evil, and God has provided that for us. If we choose to reject that, then we choose to live in darkness - the opposite of everything God is. What we have now is the closest thing even possible to something in the middle, and that’s only temporary until we die. And if you don’t like any of this, then you have free will so you can choose to reject all of it if you wish. Again, you can choose to do what you want, but you can’t choose the consequences for that. Absolute fact and truth do and will always exist whether or not someone chooses to believe in them.

I think there is some confusion here. God put the forbidden fruit within out grasp, regardless if he told us what would happen or not, we would still eat it out of pure curiosity. That is how people learn, so to say we have free will is an illusion because we really have no choice in the matter.

It’s like if I roll a glass ball off a table and tell the person standing where the ball will drop that as long as they choose to catch the ball, it will keep rolling. If they don’t catch it it will break and I will lock them in the room with it and make them clean it up. That puts an enormous stress on the person because they will eventually tire of having to keep the decision of letting the ball roll for infinity. Eventually they will be tired of one decision and go to the other. But you don’t have that choice one the ball breaks and God knows that, he knows everything. So it is all an illusion of choice, given to you by God, until you have no choice.

I didn’t think it did. So it sounds as if there was a period of complete pointless penalty put onto people until Jesus arrived and did stuff that I don’t understand, to which there is still the consequences that don’t solve anything unless you choose God. This whole idea can be summed up as black and white thinking, and living in it is unhealthy. It has been proven to be unhealthy by evidence of people who think there is a solid right and wrong in life that cannot be challenged. Al Qaeda, ISIS, any racist, are some good examples.

EDIT: While I agree there is some middle ground that people tend to take, and then extremes to the other sides, the middle ground was created to get away from the mind frame that everything was in black and white, because it was affecting people negatively.

Interesting. I guess I would say that at some point we need to take responsibility for our actions, and blaming God, curiosity, or from getting tired of one decision doesn’t somehow turn your free will and choice into an illusion. So I guess I’ll just have to disagree on that one.

So I think we might be getting somewhere on this penalty thing.
You are correct that on the surface there would seem to be a period of pointless penalty put onto people until Jesus came, but if you read carefully you find that from the beginning they were told that Jesus would come and save them, and all they needed to do was have faith in Him and what He would do. This was demonstrated by the regular sacrifice of a lamb showing that they believed that Jesus’ blood/death would pay for what they had done wrong. So people were looking forward to Jesus coming from the beginning, and the Bible says that when Jesus came, those that had faith in Him, looking forward to Him coming, were saved. God paid the price for all of time, not just for those who came after His death.

We went over this already, so let me try giving more detail to see if that helps. In order for us to live in heaven with God, we must be absolutely perfect since He is perfect. No pain, sorrow, death, or anything negative or wrong is allowed in heaven. - Once some of the angels followed Satan to try to overthrow God, so they had to be removed from heaven. So a place of total darkness where there was no aspect of God was created for these angels (which we now call demons). - When we chose to reject God, we also could no longer be with God and therefore were headed for this same place separated from any aspect of God which wasn’t even originally created for us. The result of everything done wrong required us to die here on earth so the things we’ve done wrong will not continue forever. This also prevented us from being with God, and it took God’s blessing from this earth and our bodies.
The only one who could pay the price for all of what we have ever done over the course of all time by dying for us was our creator who also had to be perfect. But this did not remove the consequences on this earth or our bodies, and no one is perfect, so it did not remove physical death. It did however make it possible for us to be perfect and live forever with God in heaven if we accept Him and His death for us.

I don’t consider myself to have black and white thinking. I do believe in a definite right and wrong, but that doesn’t mean there’s nothing neutral. And I’m only human, so just because I personally think something is wrong doesn’t mean that I can’t be challenged. I might not have all the facts or might not have them correctly, so I might be wrong. There are lots of gray areas in my life, so then how does all that I have said sum up to black and white thinking? Please explain further. I agree only black and white thinking is unhealthy. Al Qaeda, ISIS, and racists don’t have any belief or message even remotely resembling anything that I have said.
I hope this helps more with understanding these concepts. I think I’m doing a little better understanding where you’re coming from.

1 Like

I agree with some things here and there with what you’re saying. However, I don’t agree with orthodox Christianity which suggests that we must “accept” the Lord as our Savior and that’s it - case closed. I don’t even know what this means. Is this like some kind of invisible thread that has been severed and we’re seeking to be reconnected?

The reason I don’t like that thinking is because it stifles a lot of people’s growth and my family certainly shows the danger of accepting things like that without question. I also don’t agree with the idea that Jesus was killed for atonement and would like to know when and where this idea originated. From what I understand, he was murdered by despotic entities who hated him. He’s also not the only one who was murdered for claiming divinity or having spoken of hearing the word of God (or even having messages from beyond) – Joan of Arc comes to mind.

The Gospel of Thomas certainly puts the whole lot of orthodox Christianity into question however since it’s clear (at least to me) that what Jesus is teaching is something more than “saving people by a simple word of acceptance”.

Take these things for example from the Gospel:
His disciples said to him, “When will the kingdom come?” "It will not come by watching for it. It will not be said, ‘Look, here!’ or ‘Look, there!’ Rather, the Father’s kingdom is spread out upon the earth, and people don’t see it."
Jesus said, “Images are visible to people, but the light within them is hidden in the image of the Father’s light. He will be disclosed, but his image is hidden by his light.” "If you do not fast from the world, you will not find the (Father’s) kingdom. If you do not observe the sabbath as a sabbath you will not see the Father."
Jesus said, “I will give you what no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, what no hand has touched, what has not arisen in the human heart.”

Anyway, I think what Apathy is saying is that religion can make people radicals and extremists because of misinterpretation of scriptures or blind adherence to religious leaders.

1 Like

42…andbeond

2 Likes

This has been a fascinating discussion but I have learned over the years that when it comes to religion that if you believe strongly enough in your viewpoint no one can make you believe otherwise and you’ll always have a reason to hold on to it. The opinion that I gave is just a guess at best because I really don’t understand God. I understand that since the idea of eternity is much longer than our life spans so I understand why the believers want to be on the right side of things. I also understand the standpoint of the doubters who wonder if the things that are not so wonderful are really created by a loving God or what is really our faults when our “free will runs us astray”. I also understand the views of the believers who don’t want there to be a Heaven that is no better than Earth which is maybe why they will hold on to their beliefs no matter what happens in the World. I fear that is the case though even though I hope otherwise. So I don’t believe everybody will ever be completely converted to either side of the issue. I do believe in an amusing way that if every non-believer saw convincingly that there was indeed a Hell they would all eventually start praying for forgiveness then and there and it would be a shame if God didn’t choose to hear it.

Yes I agree to disagree on the topic of God and original sin.

I don’t see why they would have to wait then. And the butchering isn’t what God had in mind I see, so how does the butchering of himself/Jesus come to happen? I think people are smarter then that now days. People use foresight to see danger ahead and make something better. This idea that God just volunteered to butcher himself by his own people demonstrates that he has no foresight, or that he doesn’t do properly do anything for it. If it’s so important, why not just forgive? Why put people to butcher himself? And how does a blood sacrifice end in forgiveness?

Yeah I see that as black and white thinking. So maybe you do have some neutral areas and I don’t detect a wicked bone in your body. So I’m not about to dive into that because that’s not what I was getting at. Although as personal as it sounded, I meant only the idea of chosing between God and suffering. I’m still getting that impression from what you’re telling me and I know that being imperfect beings that we cannot always make the right choice. So how can one say that you have to choose me or suffer? Some people are bound to never make the right choice, some people are bound to switch back and forth. There is alot of opportunity for failure. But I see this coming back to original sin so I think we can just agree to disagree here?

@Genbu, thanks for your opinion, but you’re a long way from anything Apathy was saying. I was only trying to answer Apathy’s questions and help him understand where I’m coming from. I was speaking of more than “saving people by a simple word of acceptance.” Those weren’t my words.
The Gospel of Thomas is not part of canonized scripture.
I believe in straight forward historical-grammatical hermeneutics rather than open misinterpretation of scripture or blind adherence to religious leaders.

@Blizzard, it’s impossible to fully understand God since God is infinite and we are finite. If we want to understand God, the best we can do is read his Word.

Religion, something we debate on other sites.

2 Likes