DescentBB

Dravis wrote:Romans 6,23: "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life..."

When I die, my all sins will be "erased".

no, death doesn't remove sin, death is the pay given to sinners.

@Dravis.... There is no conflict. I believe the others are wrong.

If you want to specifically state that all mortal sins are unforgivable and venial sins are, then some in this forum and almost everyone at .com can never be forgiven and are all going to hell. However, interpreting the best I can, God will forgive all sins except one as long as you believe in Him. You may have to be punished for some of those sins and pay restitution, but you will not be denied entry into heaven. The unpardonable sin is not believing that Jesus Christ is the son of God and your Saviour. So, just remember that along with the chosen ones, heaven will also include murderers, child killers, rapists, torturers, pedophile priests, etc.. because as long as you truly believe and ask for forgiveness, you are forgiven. “There is no sin so great that God would not forgive”.

@Thorne.... I read a true story of a man and his son who went hunting with friends. Deep in the woods the man spotted a deer, killed it, then blew his whistle to call the others to help him carry it out. When the others arrived at his location they found the man cradling his son in his arms hysterically rocking him back and forth. He had fatally shot his only son. The others ran for help but when they returned with the police they found the father and son were both dead. The father shot himself in the head because, as his widow stated, she knew there was no way he could live without his son. So, is this man lost? Is God going to condemn this man to burn in fire and brimstone for all eternity?... Is this your God? My priest would disagree with you....

If people want to use words like “The Fall” or “Free Will” or “God's Plan” to explain everything away, then the bible can be condensed into just a few pages. What would be the point of the rest.

Bettina

Dravis, you need to find someone you trust to talk to. Maybe you can find a new perspective. Is it not treatable?

Dravis: Do you have a Bible? Have you read it much? Read Hebrews 9:27. Why would there need to be a judgment after death if death takes care of sin? Why did Christ die for our sins, if death is the end of it anyway?

Bettina wrote:You may have to be punished for some of those sins and pay restitution, but you will not be denied entry into heaven.

Where is that written?

Bettina wrote:The unpardonable sin is not believing that Jesus Christ is the son of God and your Saviour.

That is a very odd statement. Faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and Savior is the way by which our sins are forgiven. There is no forgiveness outside of that personal exchange anyway, so why invent a new unpardonable sin?

Bettina wrote:So, just remember that along with the chosen ones, heaven will also include murderers, child killers, rapists, torturers, pedophile priests, etc.. because as long as you truly believe and ask for forgiveness, you are forgiven. “There is no sin so great that God would not forgive”.

Where is that written? The Bible says...

1 Corinthians 6 wrote:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

If you give half a care for the Bible that your church claims to follow, Bettina, then you'd better read it for yourself. I don't need to tell you what it says, I just try to show you that it doesn't say what your priest says.

Why are you arguing, anyway? I thought you didn't believe any of this?

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

Bettina wrote:You may have to be punished for some of those sins and pay restitution, but you will not be denied entry into heaven.

Where is that written?

It's part of the catechism of the Catholic Church as the purification in purgatory. Just google purgatory.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

Bettina wrote:The unpardonable sin is not believing that Jesus Christ is the son of God and your Saviour.

That is a very odd statement. Faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and Savior is the way by which our sins are forgiven. There is no forgiveness outside of that personal exchange anyway, so why invent a new unpardonable sin?

I didn't invent anything. According to scripture it means exactly what it means. All sins can be forgiven but one.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

Bettina wrote:So, just remember that along with the chosen ones, heaven will also include murderers, child killers, rapists, torturers, pedophile priests, etc.. because as long as you truly believe and ask for forgiveness, you are forgiven. “There is no sin so great that God would not forgive”.

Where is that written? The Bible says...

1 Corinthians 6 wrote:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

Mathew 31 and 32: Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven but the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven. Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:If you give half a care for the Bible that your church claims to follow, Bettina, then you'd better read it for yourself. I don't need to tell you what it says, I just try to show you that it doesn't say what your priest says.
Why are you arguing, anyway? I thought you didn't believe any of this?

I don't... However, I don't deny that Jesus walked the earth with a message. When I look at my priest I don't see a man working for any deity. Instead, I see a warm loving person who gives hope where there is none. A great listener,counselor,grandfather, friend and physciatrist. The perfect empath who takes your pain as his and whose door is never closed. I've seen them work in a childrens hospital and the senior center at no cost to you and believe me that kind of help is priceless.

When I talk with the seniors in church, they have no clue about the complicated and often contradictory biblical interpretations that I've seen on this board. Some even believe that God and Jesus were separate and can't resolve the idea of the trinity. They simply come in, do the stations, light a candle, say the rosary, go to confession, or just sit and pray. Not once has anyone in that church ever asked me anything I couldn't answer with the fewest of bible pages. In fact, their bibles are always fixed to the same pages and I have to think that the older you get the more the bible becomes simpler.

And you didn't answer my questions in my previous post.

Bee

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Read Hebrews 9:27. Why would there need to be a judgment after death if death takes care of sin?

I believe that judgment after death is some kind of "final test" for those people who will be raised from dead. I mean, many people in our history haven't heard anything about God. And God will offer a second chance for them. They will have 1000 years here on Earth to become perfect again, and they will learn proper knowledge about God. After that period final test will come... That's my explaination for things from Bible.

Why did Christ die for our sins, if death is the end of it anyway?

Christ is the only way for second chance. Without him, we'll just die and pay for our sins. The end. But Christ gave his perfect life for all people. Now humankind can recover eternal life through Christ. Christ's perfect life was equivalent for perfect life which Adam lost...

However, I think God hates me and I'm not in his mercy. There won't be second chance for me. This short life is everything I got.

1 Corinthians 6 wrote:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

AKA Forgiven

but that's not just ANYONE all the time. They have to ask.

Yea, that’s an important point, I guess…

No the keyword is REPENT. That word does not just mean to say your sorry. In fact, it doesn't imply saying anything. If you notice, throughout the whole New Testament, that word repentance is used. We are not told to ask for forgiveness, but rather to repent. Many people have done things they feel bad about. They ask for forgiveness and think that's the end of it.

The word repent though means : \"A changing of the mind\"
When I was younger I though the very same thing. I'd do something and ask forgiveness. Then I walked away self deceived into thinking all was well. After awhile though, and many transgressions, I heard this:
Is this a repentance Phillip or are you just asking for forgiveness again.

Do you really think God does not know when someone is sincere? To serve God you must repent. That means to no longer walk according to your own lust and desires, but to take on the mind of Christ and do things as he would do.

There is no respect of persons with God Dravis. If you are sincere, Today is the day of salvation

Well…if you believers can’t agree, I think that puts you in a pretty poor position to convince anyone else.

I don't have to agree with any other believers , just the Word. I'm not trying to convince anyone either. I've said before I think pastors and christians think too highly of themselves. The Bible plainly says that no one comes to the Son except the Father draw them. I have no desire to argue my beliefs with unbelievers. It's a futile attempt and those kinda of arguments also does no good for anybody. I just speak of how I have read it and if someone can show me where I'm wrong in the word then I am fully prepared to correct myself.

I respect anyones choice to not believe and I judge none of them. It's none of my business what people choose to believe. It comes down to 2 sides of the coin. There is a God, there is not a God. Make your choice.

I guess it is only far to clarify, when I say “believers” I mean those who believe in the God of Abraham.

I believe in a “God” so to speak…just not the one you believe in.

So there must be another side on that coin.

Yeah your right. Let me clarify. I believe in the one that left a consistent record, err testament of himself.

And I believe in the God that I perceive in the here and now.

Ok. I actually have respect for you Spidey. Of all the posts I've seen, yours have been respectful and with reasonable arguments.(Not that there are'nt many others here I feel the same about, otherwise I wouldn't waste my time posting) Introduce me to your God. What is he like and can He and I have a personal relationship?

Dravis wrote:However, I think God hates me and I'm not in his mercy. There won't be second chance for me. This short life is everything I got.

Dravis... This may sound stupid coming from me but I wish you would go talk to a priest. You have questions that need to be resolved and I'm positive he can help you.

Bee

Thanks for your kind remark flip.

Someday when I’m ready, I’m going to put all my thoughts together concerning my concepts of God, and post them here.

Bet51987 wrote:Dravis... This may sound stupid coming from me but I wish you would go talk to a priest. You have questions that need to be resolved and I'm positive he can help you.

Why? A priest is just ordinary human. He can't save me from God's anger. In the eyes of God I am already dead. Forever. So I decided not to take my life. I'll fully enjoy my life while it lasts. God's abhorrence of me actually prolonged my life. How ironic...

Meant every word of it Spidey although looks like some here just argue for the sake of arguing =/

Dravis think on this. The bible says
\"A double minded man is unstable in all his ways and shall receive nothing of the Lord.\"

Work on your duplicity, if it is that you really believe. I don't know what it is you've done, nor do I care, the Bible simply states that if a man \"changes his mind\" he shall be saved. He must yes of course first believe. I always put it like this. Ask him to reveal Himself to you. That seems reasonable to me.

\"Lord I'd like to believe but I have skepticism and doubt. I would like for you to help me believe if it is that you really exist.\"

Give it a reasonable amount of time.

Dravis wrote:Why? A priest is just ordinary human. He can't save me from God's anger. In the eyes of God I am already dead. Forever. So I decided not to take my life. I'll fully enjoy my life while it lasts. God's abhorrence of me actually prolonged my life. How ironic...

You seem to believe in God so let me say this. A priest is indeed human but he's not ordinary. He's also a special bridge between where you are now and where you would really like to be. Don't live your life balanced on the edge. If you want spiritual guidance I would choose no one else.

Bee

@FOIL.. @DAKATSU.. A friend told me to take a peek so I did. I just want to say thanks for sticking up for me.

@Spidey.. I would also be interested in your God.

Bet51987 wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

Bettina wrote:You may have to be punished for some of those sins and pay restitution, but you will not be denied entry into heaven.

Where is that written?

It's part of the catechism of the Catholic Church as the purification in purgatory. Just google purgatory.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

Bettina wrote:The unpardonable sin is not believing that Jesus Christ is the son of God and your Saviour.

That is a very odd statement. Faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and Savior is the way by which our sins are forgiven. There is no forgiveness outside of that personal exchange anyway, so why invent a new unpardonable sin?

I didn't invent anything. According to scripture it means exactly what it means. All sins can be forgiven but one.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

Bettina wrote:So, just remember that along with the chosen ones, heaven will also include murderers, child killers, rapists, torturers, pedophile priests, etc.. because as long as you truly believe and ask for forgiveness, you are forgiven. “There is no sin so great that God would not forgive”.

Where is that written? The Bible says...

1 Corinthians 6 wrote:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

Mathew 31 and 32: Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven but the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven. Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:If you give half a care for the Bible that your church claims to follow, Bettina, then you'd better read it for yourself. I don't need to tell you what it says, I just try to show you that it doesn't say what your priest says.
Why are you arguing, anyway? I thought you didn't believe any of this?

I don't... However, I don't deny that Jesus walked the earth with a message. When I look at my priest I don't see a man working for any deity. Instead, I see a warm loving person who gives hope where there is none. A great listener,counselor,grandfather, friend and physciatrist. The perfect empath who takes your pain as his and whose door is never closed. I've seen them work in a childrens hospital and the senior center at no cost to you and believe me that kind of help is priceless.

When I talk with the seniors in church, they have no clue about the complicated and often contradictory biblical interpretations that I've seen on this board. Some even believe that God and Jesus were separate and can't resolve the idea of the trinity. They simply come in, do the stations, light a candle, say the rosary, go to confession, or just sit and pray. Not once has anyone in that church ever asked me anything I couldn't answer with the fewest of bible pages. In fact, their bibles are always fixed to the same pages and I have to think that the older you get the more the bible becomes simpler.

And you didn't answer my questions in my previous post.

Bee

Wow, that's really sad if you have more knowledge of Biblical issues than your church leaders. Perhaps you should consider visiting a different church or a different denomination of Christian church? I've been in over a dozen churches, and it really requires discernment to find the right place for you. Lucky for me, I'm in the Washington D.C. Metropolitan area, so I have my choice of a good handful of quality churches. I suggest you find a church with highly mature Christians, and talk to the pastor after the service and mention that you would like to discuss Biblical issues privately with he or another knowledgeable church member.

We have 7 pastors at my home church of Grace Baptist of Bowie, and I can tell you any of the them could tackle the problem of pain as well as any other believer. In fact, it was the subject for my adult singles class over the majority of the summer...

Jesus Freak wrote:Wow, that's really sad if you have more knowledge of Biblical issues than your church leaders. Perhaps you should consider visiting a different church or a different denomination of Christian church? I've been in over a dozen churches, and it really requires discernment to find the right place for you. Lucky for me, I'm in the Washington D.C. Metropolitan area, so I have my choice of a good handful of quality churches. I suggest you find a church with highly mature Christians, and talk to the pastor after the service and mention that you would like to discuss Biblical issues privately with he or another knowledgeable church member.

We have 7 pastors at my home church of Grace Baptist of Bowie, and I can tell you any of the them could tackle the problem of pain as well as any other believer. In fact, it was the subject for my adult singles class over the majority of the summer...

I know my place and I never said I knew more than my priest. Mine was an opinion but maybe you can point out where I'm wrong. And...welcome back. I remember you as being a pretty nice guy.

Bee

Bet51987 wrote:
You seem to believe in God so let me say this. A priest is indeed human but he's not ordinary. He's also a special bridge between where you are now and where you would really like to be. Don't live your life balanced on the edge. If you want spiritual guidance I would choose no one else.

Bee

Say that to certain young alter boys and see what they think of priests.

woodchip wrote:

Bet51987 wrote:
You seem to believe in God so let me say this. A priest is indeed human but he's not ordinary. He's also a special bridge between where you are now and where you would really like to be. Don't live your life balanced on the edge. If you want spiritual guidance I would choose no one else.

Bee

Say that to certain young alter boys and see what they think of priests.

FWEEEEEET!! 2 minutes cheap shot, 5 minutes generalization. Now, into the box with you!

flip wrote:"Lord I'd like to believe but I have skepticism and doubt. I would like for you to help me believe if it is that you really exist."

Give it a reasonable amount of time.

Would 20 years be considered reasonable?

If 20 years is the total sum of your age, then no.

I'm 35. So actually, more than 20 years.

LOL.

Lord! I want to believe! MAKE ME BELIEVE! Please? nothing? Oh yeah - you're a figment of imagination used for crowd control. Nevermind.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:If you give half a care for the Bible that your church claims to follow, Bettina, then you'd better read it for yourself. I don't need to tell you what it says, I just try to show you that it doesn't say what your priest says.

Why are you arguing, anyway? I thought you didn't believe any of this?

It appears to me that Bet is searching for the truth. That's why she's arguing. My current church pastor was an agnostic until college, but he was seeking the truth. However, for all those unbelievers out there, I want to be clear that just because I made a decision to follow Christ does not mean I'm "better" than you. Following Christ is simply where myself and others have landed, and by the grace of God we are who we are today.

In my opinion, some of your questions are best answered by the "pros". By that I mean the people that are clearly qualified to answer them; those who have spent years of their lives studying in seminary or Bible colleges. They tend to hold the title 'Sunday School Teacher' or 'pastor' or 'deacon' or 'elder'.

Jesus Freak wrote: It appears to me that Bet is searching for the truth. That's why she's arguing.

Not any more; I already found the truth and there are two...

Also I'm still waiting for answers to the questions I asked in this thread but I can understand that people may be busy in other forums.

So, I will write them down and post them again when the next biblical thread opens up...

Bee

Bettina wrote:and there are two...

What you mean is that you've found a pretty comfy spot somewhere between the Catholic Church and Atheism. There is only one truth, I believe that in itself points to God. It is humanity that is capable of being double-minded (believing two things at once).

Sorry it's been so long. I'm going to attempt to answer a few of your questions.

Bettina wrote:@Thorne.... I read a true story of a man and his son who went hunting with friends. Deep in the woods the man spotted a deer, killed it, then blew his whistle to call the others to help him carry it out. When the others arrived at his location they found the man cradling his son in his arms hysterically rocking him back and forth. He had fatally shot his only son. The others ran for help but when they returned with the police they found the father and son were both dead. The father shot himself in the head because, as his widow stated, she knew there was no way he could live without his son. So, is this man lost? Is God going to condemn this man to burn in fire and brimstone for all eternity?... Is this your God? My priest would disagree with you...

That's an extremely sad situation... I have to look at it objectively, though, rather than with my feelings. What we need to realize is that part of the answer has been provided, but that doesn't mean it's the right one.

Story wrote:because, as his widow stated, she knew there was no way he could live without his son.

That's a sadly beautiful sentiment, but it's not a reason. The fact is that the man could have lived without his son, and should have if he'd thought of his wife (how did she manage to live without either of them?). Let me take a stab at the real reason: he was overtaken by extreme remorse for the absoluteness of his mistake and his loss. He knew he couldn't take it back, and he couldn't face it, so he took his own life. Those of us who know sorrow would have a hard time saying anything against the man, I know. Was what he did right in the eyes of God? Shall God make a wrong situation right because the man loved his son? God cannot pervert justice for the sake of love, or His own Son would not have had to die for our sins.

It is a beautiful lie...

(read Job... he was probably the most righteous man alive, and he didn't take his life when he was afflicted. In fact he accepted it as being from God's hand. His wife counseled him to "curse God and die.")

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

Bettina wrote:and there are two...

What you mean is that you've found a pretty comfy spot somewhere between the Catholic Church
and Atheism. There is only one truth, I believe that in itself points to God. It is humanity
that is capable of being double-minded (believing two things at once).

Sorry it's been so long. I'm going to attempt to answer a few of your questions.

Believe me Thorne the spot isn't comfortable for me. I tell people things I consider not to be true because it's what they expect me to say. It's as simple as that.

And, there are two truths... The theistic truth and the humanist/naturalist truth. The
latter becoming more believable to me as time goes on. I know people here and "there" think of me as extremely naive, among other things, but I'm not numb. I see the truth all around me.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

Bettina wrote:@Thorne.... I read a true story of a man and his son
who went hunting with friends. Deep in the woods the man spotted a deer, killed it, then blew
his whistle to call the others to help him carry it out. When the others arrived at his
location they found the man cradling his son in his arms hysterically rocking him back and
forth. He had fatally shot his only son. The others ran for help but when they returned with
the police they found the father and son were both dead. The father shot himself in the head
because, as his widow stated, she knew there was no way he could live without his son. So, is
this man lost? Is God going to condemn this man to burn in fire and brimstone for all
eternity?... Is this your God? My priest would disagree with you...

That's an extremely sad situation... I have to look at it objectively, though, rather than
with my feelings. What we need to realize is that part of the answer has been provided, but
that doesn't mean it's the right one.

Story wrote:because, as his widow stated, she knew
there was no way he could live without his son.

That's a sadly beautiful sentiment, but it's not a reason. The fact is that the man could have
lived without his son, and should have if he'd thought of his wife (how did she manage to live
without either of them?). Let me take a stab at the real reason: he was overtaken by extreme
remorse for the absoluteness of his mistake and his loss. He knew he couldn't take it back,
and he couldn't face it, so he took his own life. Those of us who know sorrow would have a
hard time saying anything against the man, I know. Was what he did right in the eyes of
God? Shall God make a wrong situation right because the man loved his son? God cannot pervert
justice for the sake of love, or His own Son would not have had to die for our
sins.

It is a beautiful lie...

(read Job... he was probably the most righteous man alive, and he didn't take his life when he
was afflicted. In fact he accepted it as being from God's hand. His wife counseled him
to "curse God and die.")

I read the story of Job but this is not along the same lines. I asked you "Is this hunter going to burn in hell for all eternity"? and you said you would make an attempt at an answer and came up with "God cannot pervert justice for the sake of love". I would like a simple yes or no. You either believe that this person will burn in hell for taking his life because he couldn't bear to live without his son, or he will be forgiven. Which is it.

I can also understand the objectivity since to look at this any other way would require you to submit to emotion. That in turn would lead to a more humanistic and loving answer which would be inconsistent with the rules God has set down.

Bee

Bettina wrote:Believe me Thorne the spot isn't comfortable for me.

I wasn't trying to imply that your life was easy comfortable. What was it that drove you to where you are? Was it truth? Was it conviction? What was it (not to say that it was always the same thing)? What is it now? To a lot of people truth is survival--it is what they believe in order to survive. It is a convenience to life. Nevertheless, and despite convenient truths, truth is absolute. Truth is the reality of things--the way things really are, no matter what anyone says about them. There is only one truth. Claiming that there are two is just laziness in being unable to resolve two apparently conflicting points of view.

Bettina, I answered by way of explanation--by thinking it through (in a very abbreviated manner) from an objective, Biblical perspective. I'm trying to point out the problems with your assumed "no", based solely on the idea of a loving God, and leaving out God's justice, not to mention God's history and explanation for why things are the way they are--why the man, his son, and everyone else deserves to be apart from God for all eternity, and the legal (if you will) stipulations of salvation, through Christ, which are fulfilled by faith. If we leave all of that out, then apart from what some church establishment tells us, or assuming that God is so much like you or I that we can tell the outcome, how are we supposed to know what God would do?

Emotion is not bad, but it tends to cloud thinking. I think I made that pretty obvious when I explained what was wrong with your story. The reason the widow gave was emotionally satisfying, but it was not true. It's not that it was "humanistic" or "loving", it was a fantasy!! Emotions play a very important part in life, but that part is not to decide truth.

And don't toss out what I said about Job just because it didn't help you nail me to a "yes". That was a commentary on the subject of suicide in general, and is worth some real consideration.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

Bettina wrote:Believe me Thorne the spot isn't comfortable for me.

I wasn't trying to imply that your life was easy comfortable. What was it that drove you to where you are? Was it truth? Was it conviction? What was it (not to say that it was always the same thing)? What is it now? To a lot of people truth is survival--it is what they believe in order to survive. It is a convenience to life. Nevertheless, and despite convenient truths, truth is absolute. Truth is the reality of things--the way things really are, no matter what anyone says about them. There is only one truth. Claiming that there are two is just laziness in being unable to resolve two apparently conflicting points of view.

Bettina, I answered by way of explanation--by thinking it through (in a very abbreviated manner) from an objective, Biblical perspective. I'm trying to point out the problems with your assumed "no", based solely on the idea of a loving God, and leaving out God's justice, not to mention God's history and explanation for why things are the way they are--why the man, his son, and everyone else deserves to be apart from God for all eternity, and the legal (if you will) stipulations of salvation, through Christ, which are fulfilled by faith. If we leave all of that out, then apart from what some church establishment tells us, or assuming that God is so much like you or I that we can tell the outcome, how are we supposed to know what God would do?

Emotion is not bad, but it tends to cloud thinking. I think I made that pretty obvious when I explained what was wrong with your story. The reason the widow gave was emotionally satisfying, but it was not true. It's not that it was "humanistic" or "loving", it was a fantasy!! Emotions play a very important part in life, but that part is not to decide truth.

And don't toss out what I said about Job just because it didn't help you nail me to a "yes". That was a commentary on the subject of suicide in general, and is worth some real consideration.

Thorne, I won't press you for an answer but if the bible was indeed the word of God, you wouldn't be struggling to give me a yes or no. If God really existed and gave us rules to live by, those rules would have been crystal clear instead of the grossly contradictory and confusing scripture we have today. Don't you think the creator of the universe would have been able to write something I could read? Or, wouldn't you think that even today He would come down and correct those contradicions so his children could have at least an idea of what the rules are?.... He doesn't seem to have a problem talking with his chosen few but for the rest of us we just have to plod through all the contradictions and hope we pick the right one because we will burn in hell for the wrong choice.

Now, the hunter. I can say that because of the close relationship I have with my dad I know exactly and without doubt what the hunter was going through. No, he didn't think of his wife or what God would do to him, all he knew was that his son was gone forever and he couldn't live without him. It was really that simple and in a similar situation I would have done the same thing in a heartbeat. Honest.

And, as for the implication of comparison of God not saving his own Son and allowing him to die on the cross is not a good example. Didn't God already know that He would see his Son again in three days?

Thank you Thorne for trying to come up with an answer to a tough question and I'm not trying to insult you in any way. Thanks again..

Bee

Bettina, one of the biggest problems with your thinking with regard to God or Christianity is that you assume that all things are equal (as in the saying, "all things being equal..."). From Genesis to Revelation it is clearly demonstrated that all things are very much not equal, so when you end up having a problem with the methods or conclusions of scripture, that's why.

This is not struggling, it's just that a simple "yes" or "no" does not do such a clouded and controversial subject justice, particularly in this case where all you were looking to do is write me off as somehow unloving or cold. The fact is that the Bible never says that "anyone who commits suicide goes to hell", but that doesn't help the opposition because the whole of scripture is very much stacked against the idea of salvation through suicide, and certainly never in favor of it. One of the more basic arguments I've heard against suicide is that it is, essentially, self-murder, and the Bible says that no murderer has eternal life. The evidence against suicide in the Bible is huge, though not all of it is so obvious, and if I thought it would make any difference at all, I would do a study and post it for you. But you've got your assumptions, and, in noted Catholic (and Atheistic) fashion, they insulate you pretty well from the plain truth of the matter.

Here's your "yes", so that you can relax. I don't believe that man would be saved. I wouldn't want him condemned to hell, but I'm not the just judge. I believe in the scriptural idea of consequences to actions, and no amount of wishing will change those, so we ought to be sure we know what they are, and not let anyone deceive us about them. The scriptures are not a picture of an easy salvation that cannot be lost, but of an escape--a struggle wherein we may side with God and receive help from the same. Salvation is not automatic, or we would not have been counseled to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12).

Aside from that, I've got two problems with what you've said:

1) You still maintain that the widow's assumption is right. But how can love be the motivation for violence? I can't reconcile that. I think that anyone who thinks that love could have been the motivation does not understand love, and is perhaps subscribing to some romanticized notion of love, based in part upon a denial of the emotional complexity of the situation. Something else had to come into play in order for him to take his own life! I don't doubt in the least his great love for his son, but I don't believe at all that it was what prompted his actions.

2)

Bettina wrote:And, as for the implication of comparison of God not saving his own Son and allowing him to die on the cross is not a good example. Didn't God already know that He would see his Son again in three days?

You think our concept of loss in death degrades God's sacrifice? You don't know what you're talking about. But the point, again, was that He wouldn't have done it if there were another way--if an exception to justice could have been made. Both God's love and perfect justice are shown in that he made the ultimate sacrifice to accomplish our salvation. He undid what Adam did with his initial disobedience/sin.

A lot of people like to throw around the statement that there are contradictions in the Bible. That's just not true. As far as the confusion you speak of, there is nothing particularly confusing about the scriptures themselves, it's the way that many people deal with them that is confusing.

I finally have just a little time today to try and catch up with this thread...

Looks like it's taken a direction away from \"Why does God allow evil?\" more toward \"Why does God send some to eternity of suffering?\". I think this is interesting, because both of the questions ask something deep about God's core nature.

I wish I could take the time to respond to everything that caught my attention (especially some of the exchange a couple pages back with Drakona and Jeff250), but I just want to throw in a couple of observations:

------------

On the topic currently being discussed between Bet and Thorne (\"From a Biblical perspective, does suicide necessarily condemn a person to hell?\"), I've heard lots of different answers from various theological perspectives. This is one of those clear points of division between Christians, and I think the answers people come to is largely determined by their perspective on scripture.

For those who see scripture very strictly and literally, they see this issue in terms of requirements for salvation combined with the directives about the taking of life.

For those like me who see this in terms of intent and what scripture says about God's nature, it comes down to a belief that God knows the heart of people. (As Thorne said, God is the final judge, not us.)

Personally, I think the most complete answer I've heard was in this \"Q&A\" session from a local church a few months ago. There are only a few examples of suicide in scripture, and the one that I think is the most telling is that of Samson; he intentionally took his own life, yet he is listed among the 'Heroes of Faith' in Hebrews. That tells me that the issue is not whether someone takes their own life, but something deeper about why. (Again, back to an earlier topic in this thread, I believe the \"why questions\" are some of the most important.)

----------

If it's okay, I'd like to jump back to the original question about why God allows evil for a moment again.

I mentioned that I don't think much of the \"God knows best, so we shouldn't question it\" answer, especially when it's used to avoid or skirt around the difficult questions about God's nature.

Similarly, I don't think too highly of the \"God created evil so that there would be more good\" answer, either. Drakona argues it well, but I still have to question the basis of the argument: that good would be lessened in the absence of evil. I agree that good is strengthened in the face of evil, but the concept that it requires evil doesn't mesh in my mind.

Drakona mentioned forgiveness as an example of a virtue that absolutely requires evil... I have to admit, that one took me aback. I'm still thinking about that one, but I think the answer lies in that forgiveness is more the term for restoration of relationship than a virtue in itself. That's probably a whole other topic (and it could likely end up bogged down in semantics, heh) - but maybe it's a discussion worth having.

----------

So, something I have to admit I've avoided because I'm not sure my answer does the question justice... Why do I believe God allows evil?

Well, from my perspective, it goes back again to what we know of God's nature. Per I John, we know that at his core, God is love; that is, everything about who he is and what he does reflects a love.

So there are a couple of things about love that help answer this question for me:

Love requires free will - love isn't the same when it's not chosen.

Love requires a relationship - I think this says a lot about why God wanted to create us in the first place.

So the reason I believe God gave us free will (which then introduces the possibility of evil) is simply that he wants us to have the ability to love, freely.

True, I don't have a rigorous philosophical or theological reason to say why love couldn't be just as good without freedom, or why love couldn't be just as good without an other; those are just observations from experience, I suppose.

------------

With that said, I do feel that I should mention a couple of questions still in my mind, that I don't yet have a good answer for:

1. God clearly has free will; we see in various places in scripture that he is dynamic, he can change his mind. Yet scripture says God is always the same, consistent in his nature. So when he created us in his image, why don't we have the same consistency? Why weren't we designed to choose the good more often?

2. What about natural evil (natural disasters, disease, etc... all the causes of pain and suffering not caused by us)? There are some 'pat Christian answers' I've heard, referring to various scriptures about sin and/or the earth, but most of them are really a stretch at best. Honestly, this is the one that gives me pause the most often.

---------

Man, I wish I had more time. I'm pushing it as it is; maybe I'll get back to this in two or three more weeks. Again, sorry for jumping back to earlier topics in this thread... I just wanted to try and put some of my thoughts out there, because this subject is a major one for me.

Side Note.

The Link is now fixed. If you want to listen to the lesson.

Foil wrote:1. God clearly has free will; we see in various places in scripture that he is dynamic, he can change his mind. Yet scripture says God is always the same, consistent in his nature. So when he created us in his image, why don't we have the same consistency? Why weren't we designed to choose the good more often?

2. What about natural evil (natural disasters, disease, etc... all the causes of pain and suffering not caused by us)? There are some 'pat Christian answers' I've heard, referring to various scriptures about sin and/or the earth, but most of them are really a stretch at best. Honestly, this is the one that gives me pause the most often.

Listen to the link. And Genesis pretty much answers those questions solidly.

It just postpones the problem. Sure, Genesis says that there are natural disasters because someone sinned 8,000 years ago. But it's not clear why someone sinning must cause natural disasters. It doesn't seem to be true a priori that someone sinning must cause natural disasters. So then this rule, that sinning must cause natural disasters, must be a contingent feature of our universe. But then why did God create this rule? Why didn't God create a universe where people sinning didn't cause natural disasters?