A question for christians

[thenormalyears]

You believe in a God that is all knowing, he knows the past, present and the future, correct?

[Believer]

But you did use the rather unbiblical metaphor of Jesus the defence lawyer.

Not really unbiblical, and it was me who first used it, so blame me if you must. Either way it's not so unbiblical. I've given you the definition of the word advocate below. I got it from dictionary.com.

ad·vo·cate ( P ) Pronunciation Key (dv-kt)
tr.v. ad·vo·cat·ed, ad·vo·cat·ing, ad·vo·cates
To speak, plead, or argue in favor of. See Synonyms at support.

n. (-kt, -kt)
One that argues for a cause; a supporter or defender: an advocate of civil rights.
One that pleads in another's behalf; an intercessor: advocates for abused children and spouses.
A lawyer.

Now here's the verse I use to support my claim of Jesus Christ as an advocate(lawyer) to the father for our sins.

1John 2:1 "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous."

[Scrotum]

I so enjoy the presumptions you and your club members have of my Christian views. They are orthodox. They are rational. Clive and I will get along when we meet. I just wonder why the anti-Christian has to go to such lengths to go after us? Why not just walk away?

Tell me John, is ´Anti-Christian´ the same as the use of ´Anti-American´?

What i understand, Your ´Anti-American´ if you say things that are True, and not positive about the United States. Such as pointing out the massive amount of poverty in the country, and the poor education, this, i understand, makes you ´Anti-American´, am i correct in this?

So is "Anti-Christian´ the same? If you dont agree, or point out the slaughters, murders and destruction Christianity has brought upon us (anything thats True and show a good light) makes you "Anti-Christian"???


Just asking so i know wha you mean when you say it.

[Believer]

What i understand, Your ´Anti-American´ if you say things that are True, and not positive about the United States. Such as pointing out the massive amount of poverty in the country, and the poor education, this, i understand, makes you ´Anti-American´, am i correct in this?

I don't consider myself anti-American, and I'm constantly pointing out the stupid things we do. Do I acknowledge the good we've done? Yes, I can argue for either side good or bad, but that doesn't mean I don't look for ways to improve what we have.

I think recognizing that there are problems in America is the first step to fixing them. If we simply pretend they don't exist nothing gets done. Same can be true of Christianity. Are there some really bad people out there calling themselves Christians? Yes they are. And just like you can tell an American by their paperwork, you can tell a true Christian by his/her actions/fruit. Most people who profess to be Christians, even those not in the limelight are not really Christians. What are the prerequisites?

1. Faith in Christ as the saviour.
2. Repentance, or turning away from sin.
3. Fruit, outward signs of an inward change.

Most people who call themselves Christians today, don't follow Christ's teachings, or walk in those teachings. Most will simply call themselves a baptist, lutheran, catholic, pentacostal.... simply because thats' where mom and dad went, so I'm born into Christianity.

There is only one way to be born into Christianity, and that is to be born again. You cannot inherrit Christ like we inherrit our citizenship in the US.

So when someone points out the bad in Christianity I don't get upset, because I acknowledge that many have done things in Christ's name that should never have been done. Now I personally believe that if you have a current issue with true Christianity, then you should also have a solution, because if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

[Cephus]

Personally, I don't believe that you have free will. However, you don't know absolutely and without fail what you will do. It matters little whether someone else, be it a God or a computer with infinite computing power that knows your every atom. If you don't know what you are going to do, then you appear to have free choices to make.

But appearance of free will is not the same as free will itself, any more than having a chip implanted in your brain allowing aliens to direct your movements, yet you are utterly ignorant of it is free will.

Of course, without free will, then salvation and damnation are meaningless. If God knows for a fact that person X is going to be saved and person Y is going to be damned and there's nothing either of them can do about it, then it's pretty pointless for Christians to go around trying to save people, isn't it? No matter what they do, person Y is going to be damned and no matter what happens, person X is going to be saved. When you go hardline Calvinist, what difference does it make what anyone does, the lines were drawn before you were ever born. Why not just go rape, murder and pillage, you can't gain or lose salvation?

[Cephus]

If a man stands before a judge accused of a crime and says, "Your honor, I don't want to go to jail. I thought you were a kind and loving judge. I thought you'd understand that I just didn't know enough about the law to make a good decision on whether or not to follow it."

That's all well and good, but we know judges exist. We don't know that God exists. In fact, there isn't a shred of objective evidence to suggest that God is real and the Bible is laughably inconsistent. So if, after I die, God hauls me up and takes me to task for what I've done in my life, I'll spit in his face for being a sick, sadistic bastard, utterly undeserving of anything but scorn. It isn't that I didn't know enough about the law to make a good decision, the so-called "law" simply has no weight because it has no objective existence.

[Believer]

That's all well and good, but we know judges exist. We don't know that God exists. In fact, there isn't a shred of objective evidence to suggest that God is real and the Bible is laughably inconsistent.

Objective evidence? What about His creation? The world around us, the universe, ourselves? You wouldn't look at a car and think that it just happened over millions of years of metal, and cloth being placed beside each other. Anyone can look at a machine, and see that by it's complex nature there was a designer. How could someone look at God's creation and think that it just happened? Our universe, our bodies are millions of times more complex than anything we've designed, but we have the audacity to think that those things just happened. We have laws of physics, which imply order, how else can we get order and structure without someone to order and structure?

Sorry dude give me another argument, because I just don't buy the lack of evidence defense. We have the end result, heck we are the end result. We're the creation, so there must be a creator.

So if, after I die, God hauls me up and takes me to task for what I've done in my life, I'll spit in his face for being a sick, sadistic bastard, utterly undeserving of anything but scorn. It isn't that I didn't know enough about the law to make a good decision, the so-called "law" simply has no weight because it has no objective existence.

No objective existence? Where then did morality come from? Morality is a God thing not a man thing. Sure we can define laws to help better ourselves, but that is only because God first defined laws for us to govern ourselves. Look at the rest of the animal kingdom. It's kill or be killed survival of the fittest. If God's laws aren't written in our hearts, stamped into our conscience, then why aren't we like the other animals who kill the weaker so that only our bloodline survive?

These laws, for which you show so much contempt, are a direct result of our creator trying to get our attention. Trying to give us a better way to live our life. Keep imagining that you'll spit on Him, my bet is you'll be so awe struck that you'll piss your pants and drop to your knees begging forgiveness.

[McCulloch]

Personally, I don't believe that you have free will. However, you don't know absolutely and without fail what you will do. It matters little whether someone else, be it a God or a computer with infinite computing power that knows your every atom. If you don't know what you are going to do, then you appear to have free choices to make.

Of course, without free will, then salvation and damnation are meaningless. If God knows for a fact that person X is going to be saved and person Y is going to be damned and there's nothing either of them can do about it, then it's pretty pointless for Christians to go around trying to save people, isn't it?

Any Christian worth his salt would object that they do not and cannot save anyone. That is for God to do. They only attempt to be an agent of God's will. To a Calvinist Christian, evangelizing is a way to be a part of God's plan. He knows who will or will not be saved but He could use you to implement His plan or he could use someone else. A Christian would feel honoured to be used by God.

No matter what they do, person Y is going to be damned and no matter what happens, person X is going to be saved.

Another misinterpretation of Calvinism. According to Calvinist Christianity, God knows who will and who will not accept God's grace.

When you go hardline Calvinist, what difference does it make what anyone does, the lines were drawn before you were ever born. Why not just go rape, murder and pillage, you can't gain or lose salvation?

The same as any form of determinism. Since you do not know what will happen, you have the illusion of free-will. You are going to do what you are going to do, but from your own point of view, you choose your own actions. You choose to do bad things, then you will reap the consequences of those choices. The fact that an omniscient God or someone else could, in theory, know exactly what I will do, does not change the fact that I still must mull over what I know, make choices and act on them.

[melikio]

You believe in a God that is all knowing, he knows the past, present and the future, correct?

Intellectually, I cannot really fathom it.

Spiritually and emotionally, it tends to make sense.

All perspectives (underlined) listed above, are tools to help me get through this life, while retaining a modicum of what I think sanity is.

-Mel-

[Scrotum]

Where then did morality come from?

´Morality´ comes from the wish to have a stable society amongst Human beings. ´Morality´ changes from Society to Society, and may even reflect a ´superior´ morality depending on what you consider ´good´ in a society.

If you look at Swedish ´Moral´ as example, where the majority are Secular none-Religious, they have a society which almost lacks poverty, and all people leave very happy and healthy lives, as well as a huge player in the foreign market regarding peace keeping.

The U.S, as example, have a different moral, and the massive majority are Christians. They have problems and other issues regarding abortion, and problems with STD´s, HIV (0.6%), as well as poverty.

Which of these soceities would you prefer using a ´moral´ standard? The Swedish society is clearly healthier and ´better´ in an objective lens, but do NOT follow the Christian ´moral´ you seem to depict as the ´superior one´.

Well?

[harvey1]

If you look at Swedish ´Moral´ as example, where the majority are Secular none-Religious, they have a society which almost lacks poverty, and all people leave very happy and healthy lives, as well as a huge player in the foreign market regarding peace keeping. The U.S, as example, have a different moral, and the massive majority are Christians. They have problems and other issues regarding abortion, and problems with STD´s, HIV (0.6%), as well as poverty. Which of these soceities would you prefer using a ´moral´ standard? The Swedish society is clearly healthier and ´better´ in an objective lens, but do NOT follow the Christian ´moral´ you seem to depict as the ´superior one´.
Well?

We have to compare apples to apples. Sweden is one of the richest member states in the EU with about 9 million citizens--roughly 0.8% of the population of the EU--which matches the percentage of the number of millionaires in the United States. So, the population of Sweden as the "millionaires" of the EU might be doing fine at $29,800 per capita earnings, but their counterparts in the United States are real millionaires.