Was God's Intent To Be Cryptic?

[POI]

Was God's/Jesus's Word(s) meant to sometimes be vague/mysterious?

Are humans just too stupid to collectively associate the correct intended conclusions behind some of these claimed Bible passages?

Should the reader of the Bible's claims, be at mere face value, even if the seemingly axiomatic claim does not look to comport with later human discovery?

Should the reader conclude, if the claimed passage does not align with discovery, that this is not what God actually meant?

Why would God not want His message(s) to be abundantly clear, which is evident by the reality that we have many mutually opposing sects in Christianity?

I'll stop here....

Thank you in advance!

[POI]

.

Your points don't resolve my question.

But they do. If the disciples were going around preaching as Jesus was, then the folks that missed key elements of what Jesus said prior would have gotten it from the disciples at other times.

Okay, I guess this is worth repeating... It becomes quite the assumption to state the disciples circled back to the ones, who merely heard the sheep/goat story, to fill in all the missing blanks about the necessity for belief

If such a Jesus existed, He traveled from point to point. Not all followed Him. Hence, some would hear some stuff said by Him, and then He would moved on. Not all were getting all details consistently. And I doubt all other necessary messages were making their way back to the ones successfully and reliably, via oral tradition

Then those people will be judged by God based on the little (of the message) that they did receive, and not what they didn't receive.

Ignorance (willful ignorance) won't be held against us. But knowledge will.

This response is in direct contradiction to what you stated in post #49 (i.e.): "Accept his Son as Lord and Savior" So is belief/repent NOT a requirement now?

Negative. I've explained above...

Then I must of missed it.

Yes, you did.

You have given a false analogy.

In your argument, it would be that at least one of those two tasks is compulsory by all. If one does one task, and one does another task, one did not do the compulsory task.

Maybe they must BOTH wash a certain amount of dishes?

Did Mother say they must BOTH wash a certain amount of dishes? See, you are adding to the scenario and giving hypotheticals when it isn't necessary.

That is part of the problem...and the fact that you are even asking the question, is why there is so much confusion.

It is Satan inspired, which goes back to the event at the Garden of Eden where Eve would rather listen to sideline questions and scenarios instead of simply obeying God.

Is belief/repent an absolute requirement, or not? In your scenario, which one is about belief/repent? Is it the dishes, or is it the vacuuming?

The real question IS, what did Jesus really say? I know what the Gospel of Mark says here:

16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

But notice he did not say "whoever does not believe AND ISN'T baptized will be condemned".

Hmmm.

Hahaha. Are you serious? You asked me where the Bible asks that you be baptized... I gave you the Verse. And in regards to your reply... Seems like the Verse does indicate that belief is a requirement. And yet, you seem to be backing away from this 'requirement'? You are now trying to smuggle in the 'well, ignorance and/or lack in cognitive capacity may be exceptions.' Interesting indeed....

Negative. He tells would-be followers/disciples---

Luke 14 states:

33 In the same way, those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples.

Now, was this a metaphor of sorts, or, to be taken literal???? Maybe YOU have not given up 'everything'?.?.?.?.?.?.?

Obviously, Jesus was speaking in a hyperbole sense.

Because if you take it literally, then what is left after "everything". Nothing, correct?

So disciples of Christ wouldn't even have clothes on their backs, and that is obviously not what Jesus would have intended.

This scripture can be interpreted as you have to be willing to give up everything, even your life, for Christ.

Interesting... So how do you know you have given up enough for Him? Further, maybe many other assertions are meant to be 'hyperbole'? Is the necessity for belief/repent 'hyperbole'?

Well, it depends.... A true follower might give up everything? Maybe you do not qualify?

I don't believe it should be interpreted that way...but if I stood along side of you at the judgement seat of Christ, and the question was..

"Who has done more for my kingdom" and the question was posed to both of us..

I am confident that I will be looked at more favorably by God than you would be.

Well, since you know nothing of my works, I have no idea how you feel qualified to make such an assessment? Especially since you now admit belief/repent is not a necessity.

Seems you have missed my point. You stated you must follow His Commandments. Not lying is one of the 10. But you will willfully lie, until you die As a stated prior, I doubt ANY lie is deemed 'good'.

I got your point. As I stated, there is a difference between slipping up and lying every so often...and being a habitual liar.

One is a life long practice, and another one is a mistake you make (or simply walking off the tracks) every so often.

Big difference. Apples and oranges.

I already addressed this... Is there such a thing as a 'good' lie? Lying is not merely sometimes 'slipping up' You will likely have multiple encounters of willful lies; to preserve relationships, not tick off customers, and/or ticking off your boss, etc.... And yet, the 9th Commandment states not to lie, period, (no exceptions). This is impossible... Unless you want to end up alone and jobless. You stated to follow His Commandments. And yet, you will lie with full intent -- (believer or not). I trust you are smart enough to concede this point, and realize that such a given criteria is not possible by anyone. Which then instead begs the topic of "God's grace". Which then brings up yet another contradiction. (i.e.) Does 'grace' negate 'willful sin'? In other words, why mention a bunch of "thou shall not commands" when God's grace is going to cover you anyways?

Wait a minute? You stated belief is required. Now you want to argue for exceptions?

I shared with you the scriptural reason for the exceptions, which were the words of Jesus. It is his exception, not mines.

Great, so your assertion, in post #49, is not to be taken seriously. Belief is not an absolute requirement.

Interesting. Maybe your current faith is not enough? Dare not question the Bible too much more; for you may come away with >90%, moving forward

I said 100% is what we should thrive for, didn't I?

Well, you can strive for belief in Santa Claus, but without qualified evidence, no matter how much you want or strive, it won't matter My point is that you may not want to probe too much more into the pages of the Bible, as your faith in Jesus may continue to drop below 90%? And maybe 100% faith is required. For which, you may already be in trouble?

Nice unfalsifiable answer But as I noted above, you CANNOT abstain from sin. Please reference the prior 'lie' examples alone.

I also stated that (in my opinion) it is a matter of how hard we tried to abstain from sin. When sin attacks us, some people fight back. Some fight more than others.

However, some just take the butt whooping with no effort to defend themselves.

Big difference, and God can certainly distinguish between the two.

Well, again, you will not try to abstain from lying to preserve your relationships, your job, etc... And again, there is no such thing as a 'good' lie, according to the Bible.

I said it before, you do good posts. And you point up the points about the confusion, need to interpret and even make up doctrine to explain, define, interpret and even cherry pick to make sense of a cryptic tome which, if there was a god that wanted to save people that authored this Book, it would be a less cryptic book. I forgot last post Venom suggested that it's ok...the disciples went around filling in the blank (not deliberately but I never suggested they did, or even Jesus spoke all the missing stuff. But that was fine for the people then (who of course were Jews - who were damned en masse in Matthew 27.24 - on, the inscription on the statue to anti -semitism. So it didn't save them, and if it's not in the Bible, it can't save us. Venom may say that Jesusfaith is all you need, but Paul himself found out (in corinthians) that the Grace he preached in Romans is losable without good works, and the good works are set out in the gospels. Give your stuff to the poor. 'No, I love my stuff more than Jesus' so I'll just Interpret it to mean 'love Jesus and the rest is metaphor'. I just love to see believers rewrite the Bible suit themselves. I said this to theist apologist on my former board - that atheist apologists have more respect for the Bible than believers do; at least we take what it says as what it says, not what we'd like it to say.

Just a day ago I pointed out that Luke alters the message at the tomb... 'No, No'. But it's right there, in print. And no believer who knows their Bible by heart has ever noticed it. It's why I talk of the 'ghost Bible' they quote from - one that says what they would prefer it to say.

Thank you! (We_Are_Venom) likes to go blow for blow, which is fine. However, I bet many loose interest or stop reading... I would like to offer up a recap, for him/her to instead respond to, if (s)he so chooses....

Below are the presented contradictions for which (We_are_venom) continues to present:

1. You present the idea that belief is a must. However, there exists reasons why many may not believe (i.e.) cognitive inability, never being presented with the necessary/needed evidence - (ignorance), dying as an infant or younger (again in the ignorance category), once believing but then later no longer believing - (as we cannot control how we infer/apprehend new evidence), etc.... Thus, are all these individuals hosed, or do they get a free pass? If they are hosed, then is God truly 'just' and/or does might make right? If they are instead given a free pass, then belief is not a must, and it's better to leave as many as possible in ignorance - (to assure their guaranteed salvation). Or maybe belief is merely hyperbole, and the topic of belief is not a must for salvation at all?

2. You then stated to keep the Commandments. Well, which ones? Lying is among one of the top 10. Without lying, on a regular willful basis, many would/could be murdered, loose their relationships, loose customers, loose their job, loose their companions, destroy other's lives, etc... Any human, who chooses to interact with any other human(s), will need to rationalize their willful intent, which sometimes/often includes lies. Remember, a sin is deemed "a transgression against God". God hates all 'sin'. No 'sin' is a good 'sin'. Committing a 'lesser' sin to save against a greater sin is your own personal opinion. Again, God hates sin. So please stop trying to water down your response here, 'that he judges us for trying.' What do you think one of the primary reasons was, regarding the story of Jesus? It was for a 'prefect sacrifice.' Hence, all your continued 'sins' are now instead covered/atoned by His grace. He is/was considered the ultimate 'scapegoat'. Which then begs the question... What does His 'grace' not cover? You state that if you commit sin willfully, He will not like this... And yet, it's quite safe to say you will commit willful lies, which God also hates, over and over and over again; as explained above and in previous responses.

3. Jesus tells would-be followers they must give up everything if they want to be considered worthy. You state, "Oh, this is just hyperbole." Can you say this about any of His assertions, or just the ones which you do not like and/or cannot rationalize? Is it possible you do not possess nearly enough faith, unless you give away virtually everything you own to others, and keep just enough to remain alive to worship Him? Seems as though, on more than one occasion, Jesus does not seem to fancy the 'rich'. Maybe He deems you 'rich' --- being that it's safe to say you possess plenty of possessions for which Jesus may think you covet? Maybe it's better to get rid of virtually all your possessions, for which you hold any value, to assure you do not take any of your focus off of Jesus?

I'll stop here.... The point of this topic is as follows....

We likely have 2+ billion proclaimed Christians. Most of whom are earnest in their conviction, just like you. I have spoken to many, and have also debated many. Many of you are diametrically opposed to each other in your convictions?.?.?.? It's funny how (most/all) proclaim they know what it takes to be saved. And yet, it comes right back to:

Grace alone, vs. grace by faith alone, vs. grace by works alone, vs. grace by faith + works, vs. etc etc etc etc

Does God pride Himself in knowing He is the purveyor of confusion?

[Tcg]

I said it before, you do good posts. And you point up the points about the confusion, need to interpret and even make up doctrine to explain, define, interpret and even cherry pick to make sense of a cryptic tome which, if there was a god that wanted to save people that authored this Book, it would be a less cryptic book. I forgot last post Venom suggested that it's ok...the disciples went around filling in the blank (not deliberately but I never suggested they did, or even Jesus spoke all the missing stuff. But that was fine for the people then (who of course were Jews - who were damned en masse in Matthew 27.24 - on, the inscription on the statue to anti -semitism. So it didn't save them, and if it's not in the Bible, it can't save us. Venom may say that Jesusfaith is all you need, but Paul himself found out (in corinthians) that the Grace he preached in Romans is losable without good works, and the good works are set out in the gospels. Give your stuff to the poor. 'No, I love my stuff more than Jesus' so I'll just Interpret it to mean 'love Jesus and the rest is metaphor'. I just love to see believers rewrite the Bible suit themselves. I said this to theist apologist on my former board - that atheist apologists have more respect for the Bible than believers do; at least we take what it says as what it says, not what we'd like it to say.

Just a day ago I pointed out that Luke alters the message at the tomb... 'No, No'. But it's right there, in print. And no believer who knows their Bible by heart has ever noticed it. It's why I talk of the 'ghost Bible' they quote from - one that says what they would prefer it to say.

I used to suggest that each Bible come with a supply of white out so the user could craft it to match their preferences. As you've pointed out that's not really needed. Some are able to simply read right past the sections that present problems for their preferred interpretations.


Tcg

[TRANSPONDER]

Three points often made and as often the cause of frantic wriggling by Bible -beleivers.

Belief . The old story of the ..ahh...native Greenlander ... 'If I had never herad about Jesus, would I still go to Hell?' (missionary) "No, not if you didn't know."
"Then why did you tell me?"

A god who wanted to save everyone wouldn't tell them about himself and make that a condition for being saved.

What was the next?Damn' I already forgot. Old age....

[TRANSPONDER]

Oh yes, the commandments. But which ones? In the past the best answer was 'The ones that Jesus specifically endorsed' Otherwise this is all OT and doesn't matter. But Jesus specifically endorses all of them to the Rich young fellow. But of course he's a Jew. And if he keeps the commandments, he's Near' to the kingdom of heaven. Just one thing he lacks. But how hard it is for the Christian to give away even that which he hath and follow Jesus, when he's much prefer to keep it all and just damn' atheists online.

But what I like is another bit of Ghost Bible. David and the Shewbread which (aside that the argument is quite invalid and a clue that it was written by Christian apologists and Jesus could never have said it) is another example of Jesus saying the sabbath doesn't matter. Doing good rather than going to worship is better but even just strolling through a grainfield nibbling corn beats Sabbath attendance any day. I just love the denial that the Believers go into on that one. So far none have dared to try to argue that Jesus said the Saturday was unimportant. But Sunday worship is mandatory, but I live in hopes. We could all do with a laugh in these dark times.

[We_Are_VENOM]

Okay, I guess this is worth repeating... It becomes quite the assumption to state the disciples circled back to the ones, who merely heard the sheep/goat story, to fill in all the missing blanks about the necessity for belief

Um, no. Jesus was talking directly (and only) to the disciples when he gave the parable...and the disciples went out and preached the same message to all those who wanted to hear it, while also undoubtedly directing the listeners attentions towards Jesus.

This response is in direct contradiction to what you stated in post #49 (i.e.): "Accept his Son as Lord and Savior" So is belief/repent NOT a requirement now?

Bro, obviously "accept his Son as Lord and Savior" only applies to those who have HEARD THE MESSAGE and will in essence determine whether they want to accept or reject the message.

If you didn't hear the message, then you obviously can't accept/reject the message.

We have scriptural evidence of God not judging someone because of that person's ignorance of the situation.

So please, kill the nonsense.

Yes, you did.

Then I guess it is gone.

Is belief/repent an absolute requirement, or not? In your scenario, which one is about belief/repent? Is it the dishes, or is it the vacuuming?

The scenario was offered as a defeater of your false insinuation of "the Bible gives two conflicting accounts on salvation".

"The Bible gives two conflicting accounts on salvation".

"Mom gave two conflicting accounts on what we must do before she gets home from work".

I thought I made that point very clear.

Hahaha. Are you serious? You asked me where the Bible asks that you be baptized...

We are talking about salvation, correct? The question is; where does the Bible say that baptism is a requirement for salvation?

No where in the Bible does it state this.

Jesus said anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved. But anyone who does NOT believe is condemned.

He didn't say anyone who does not believe and isn't baptized is condemned, because baptism isn't required for salvation, and obviously Jesus knows this and neglected to make the statement.

I gave you the Verse. And in regards to your reply... Seems like the Verse does indicate that belief is a requirement. And yet, you seem to be backing away from this 'requirement'? You are now trying to smuggle in the 'well, ignorance and/or lack in cognitive capacity may be exceptions.' Interesting indeed....

Backing away from this requirement? Let me make this perfectly clear; BELIEF IS A REQUIREMENT FOR SALVATION.

Do I make myself clear?

Interesting... So how do you know you have given up enough for Him?

That is actually a great question. Like a MMA fighter once said (paraphrasing)...

"I can train hard day and night every day of the year..but once I step in the ring, I will always ask myself two questions".

1. Did I train long enough?

2. Did I train hard enough?

This is exactly how I feel at times.

Further, maybe many other assertions are meant to be 'hyperbole'? Is the necessity for belief/repent 'hyperbole'?

Well, tell me what the other assertions are, and perhaps we can add them to the list.

Well, since you know nothing of my works, I have no idea how you feel qualified to make such an assessment? Especially since you now admit belief/repent is not a necessity.

Without the acceptance of Christ, eternal life is a fantasy.

I already addressed this... Is there such a thing as a 'good' lie? Lying is not merely sometimes 'slipping up' You will likely have multiple encounters of willful lies; to preserve relationships, not tick off customers, and/or ticking off your boss, etc.... And yet, the 9th Commandment states not to lie, period, (no exceptions). This is impossible... Unless you want to end up alone and jobless. You stated to follow His Commandments. And yet, you will lie with full intent -- (believer or not). I trust you are smart enough to concede this point, and realize that such a given criteria is not possible by anyone.

Regardless of what the lie or the sin is, it is covered by Jesus' blood (except blasphemy of the Holy Spirit).

You are overanalyzing it, when it is simple. Do not lie, and if you do, ask for forgiveness and take efforts not to do it again. Plain and simple and no overanalyzing is necessary.

Which then instead begs the topic of "God's grace". Which then brings up yet another contradiction. (i.e.) Does 'grace' negate 'willful sin'? In other words, why mention a bunch of "thou shall not commands" when God's grace is going to cover you anyways?

Because people needed to know what NOT to do, thus, the commandments...and God's grace is going to cover us, but we may lose out on blessings that we would have otherwise reaped, had we followed the commandments.

Great, so your assertion, in post #49, is not to be taken seriously. Belief is not an absolute requirement.

Yeah, my bad. I didn't know that you were going to question as to whether or not infants/toddlers would be sent to hell because they were incapable of grasping the concept of belief in Christ and what it signifies.

If you have to question it, it goes to show that your critiques cannot be taken seriously and this is all just a sideshow.

Well, you can strive for belief in Santa Claus, but without qualified evidence, no matter how much you want or strive, it won't matter

So basically, without qualified evidence, X doesn't exist.

Non sequitur.

My point is that you may not want to probe too much more into the pages of the Bible, as your faith in Jesus may continue to drop below 90%? And maybe 100% faith is required. For which, you may already be in trouble?

Or maybe God/Jesus exists, and unless you accept Christ as Lord and Savior you may already be in trouble?

Well, again, you will not try to abstain from lying to preserve your relationships, your job, etc... And again, there is no such thing as a 'good' lie, according to the Bible.

Or, maybe I will tell the truth and deal with the consequences. Telling the truth is a game changer for this whole lie tirade you are going on, isn't it?

[Tcg]

Without the acceptance of Christ, eternal life is a fantasy.

There is no reason to conclude that eternal life isn't a fantasy even with the acceptance of Christ. It is a claim that is perfectly unprovable.


Tcg

[We_Are_VENOM]

Without the acceptance of Christ, eternal life is a fantasy.

There is no reason to conclude that eternal life isn't a fantasy even with the acceptance of Christ. It is a claim that is perfectly unprovable.


Tcg

.

Perfectly unprovable to you...perfectly disprovable to me.

So, it is just a matter of; either you believe it or you don't.

Plain and simple.

You don't, I do.

And we will see which prevails in the end.

[TRANSPONDER]

Without the acceptance of Christ, eternal life is a fantasy.

There is no reason to conclude that eternal life isn't a fantasy even with the acceptance of Christ. It is a claim that is perfectly unprovable.


Tcg

.

Perfectly unprovable to you...perfectly disprovable to me.

So, it is just a matter of; either you believe it or you don't.

Plain and simple.

You don't, I do.

And we will see which prevails in the end.

I keep posting smilies but you really make me laugh out loud. Your 'disprovable to you' is painfully obvious as a faith claim. You can't disprove it to anyone else and you know it. All you can do is what you did - the last resort 'believe or not'. Like logic and evidence doesn't count and it's just a Faith matter. We knew that but we also know it's a fail on any basis other than Faith -based denial.

That's why I posted the smiley. And I bet it won't be the last time. I could go on, but maybe we won't need to.

[Tcg]

Perfectly unprovable to you...perfectly disprovable to me.

So, it is just a matter of; either you believe it or you don't.

Plain and simple.

You don't, I do.

And we will see which prevails in the end.

Not likely. In the end we will be dead and being dead and all we won't see anything.


Tcg

[We_Are_VENOM]

I said it before, you do good posts.

Thanks. That's love.

And you point up the points about the confusion, need to interpret and even make up doctrine to explain, define, interpret and even cherry pick to make sense of a cryptic tome which, if there was a god that wanted to save people that authored this Book, it would be a less cryptic book.

"If there was a god that wanted to save people that authored this Book, it would be a less cryptic book".

Non sequitur.

I forgot last post Venom suggested that it's ok...the disciples went around filling in the blank (not deliberately but I never suggested they did, or even Jesus spoke all the missing stuff. But that was fine for the people then (who of course were Jews - who were damned en masse in Matthew 27.24 - on, the inscription on the statue to anti -semitism. So it didn't save them, and if it's not in the Bible, it can't save us. Venom may say that Jesusfaith is all you need, but Paul himself found out (in corinthians) that the Grace he preached in Romans is losable without good works, and the good works are set out in the gospels. Give your stuff to the poor. 'No, I love my stuff more than Jesus' so I'll just Interpret it to mean 'love Jesus and the rest is metaphor'. I just love to see believers rewrite the Bible suit themselves. I said this to theist apologist on my former board - that atheist apologists have more respect for the Bible than believers do; at least we take what it says as what it says, not what we'd like it to say.

I fail to follow any direction or point being made here.

Just a day ago I pointed out that Luke alters the message at the tomb... 'No, No'. But it's right there, in print. And no believer who knows their Bible by heart has ever noticed it. It's why I talk of the 'ghost Bible' they quote from - one that says what they would prefer it to say.

What altered message at the tomb according to Luke?