Moderator: Moderators
1) Is the quote "Christianity tells us we are worthless" accurate? If not, how is it wrong?So then, religion tells us what we must do, but Christianity tells us we are worthless, and can do nothing!
Now, it is meaningless.. from square one. Not your 'choice', but the fact in this metaphysical argument, no one on any side can provide any evidence that they are correct. Can you demonstrate that choice is an illusion?? Can you demonstrate that it is not? I can't do either side. I just see word games being played.ElCodeMonkey wrote:Well, in the end, everything is just cause and effect. Destiny generally has more implied though than simply what is going to occur based upon a cause. I doubt many people will say it was my cup's destiny to fall on the floor just because I knocked it over. But since it DID happen then clearly the cause and effect since the beginning of time necessarily led up to that event. And since it DID happen, clearly no other option could have taken place given all the cause and effect leading up to it. Choice is an illusion. It simply becomes meaningless to call it destiny at that point though. When people say destiny, they generally mean a specific future event that they were meant to fulfill based upon someone else's design. The word loses any significance when described without design since destiny merely becomes whatever choices we make in life and we still feel completely free to make any ol' choice. I could clap my hands or stomp my feet right now. And whichever I CHOOSE, egads, it was my destiny! It's just meaningless.Goat wrote:Why does 'someone' have to predestine it?? Why could be just a matter of predetermined events, caused by a straight cause and effect , set in motion at the formation of space/time?
Jesus' Kingdom was certainly "not of this Earth" though I'm not sure I could say it failed entirely. The seeds still remain even if dormant so it could still take off (which is a goal of mine in lifepostroad wrote: [Replying to post 29 by ElCodeMonkey]
Exactly why I reject that Christianity is the new covenant. But the character in the story was referred to as the Christ The Christ is what came about from the failed promise of an everlasting monarchy through David.
The Kingdom is the result of the failed promise to Abraham regarding an eternal inheritance in the land of Canaan.
The two become the Messianic Kingdom brought about by God through the Christ.
The new covenant is the same as the old covenant except that complete obedience through the Spirit will ensure that the heirs of the kingdom will never again fall under judgement and get tossed from the land.
The failure of Jesus to accomplish all this means that the Kingdom was never of this earth anyway.
The failure of the elect to become perfect means that they will only do so in their glorified bodies in the spiritual kingdom.
The impossibility of reconciling the Old and the New Testament accounts gives us the concept of the Millennial Kingdom where some semblance of the OT accounts will be realised for a thousand years before the "real eternal kingdom will begin.
). He specifically said that the Kingdom was within everyone. It's not something you can say "here it is" or "it's over there." It doesn't exist physically for that kind of thing. The ruler is God (i.e. Love and Righteousness) as opposed to any physical man and the law of the Kingdom is merely that you reap what you sow. It's a virtual Kingdom overlapping all of humanity and you enter in via choice to serve Love and Righteousness. Whether or not this was the Kingdom promised the Jews, I cannot say (or if there ever was a real promise as opposed to false promises from false profits making the King feel happy). It's easy enough to look back though and simply say, "Oh, they just didn't understand the promise." A lot of good a promise is if it can be fulfilled in ways that were not understood or expected. In fact, it's just kinda downright shady 
.
