rhutchin

A person's acts (his sin) put him in the position where he cannot get into heaven. The person can then decide to do something about it himself (submit to God) or wait and let God determine whether to save the person. For those who decide to wait, God will have mercy on whom He will have mercy, and God will have compassion on whom He will have compassion. God's mercy and compassion relate to forgiveness for sin which allow a person to enter heaven. How God determines whom to save is not described in the Bible (at least, I can't remember that it does).

Johnny Skeptic

Rational minded and fair minded people are not able to love a God who refuses to disclose his methods of being merciful and compassionate.

hatsoff

That's a mighty big assumtion. I think it's dead wrong, myself.

Johnny Skeptic

If you mean my assumption, what is your interpretation of Romans 9:15?

aa5874

Forget it, you have a vivid imagination. Other believers in Gods disagree with you and call your statement fallacies and there are billions of them.

Johnny Skeptic

Message to rhutchin: Is it your position that God has made it possible for the world to become a Garden of Eden if everyone acted like they should act? If so, I find your position to be quite strange because ever since Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, somehow, whether through genetics or through some other means, God has ensured that everyone commit sins at least some of the time, meaning that it is impossible for anyone to always acts like they should act. Otherwise, Jesus would not have been the only perfect man. Even Job and John the Baptist were not free of serious problems. In the NIV, Job 1:1 says "In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil." Matthew 11:11 says "I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." God convinced the Devil to attack Job in a number of awful ways in spite of Job's excellent character, so why do you suggest that if people act right, God will treat them right? In spite of John the Baptist's excellent character, he was persecuted, and he was executed by King Herod, so again, why do you suggest that if people act right, God will treat them right? Now surely you will not claim that you act better than Job and John the Baptist did.

John 9:1-3 say "As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, 'Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?' 'Neither this man nor his parents sinned,' said Jesus, 'but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life.'" That is an example of a man being born blind who did not sin, and his parents did not sin, so your argument about people who do not act right who God for tangible blessings should not expect God to do what they ask does not work regarding John 9:1-3. This leaves you with the insurmountable problem of determining which people do not get their prayers answered because of their sins, including yourself.

James 2:15-24 say “Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that - and shudder. You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend. You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.”

James 2:15-24 most certainly does not mean that people who have extra food should provide food only to people who have good character, so your argument about the character of the one million people who died in the Irish Potato Famine, most of whom were Christians, doesn’t work.

Out of compassion, some Christian missionaries in third world nations provide food for non-Christians. Surely you approve of this. Providing food for hungry people is an excellent way to gain their love, admiration, respect, and acceptance. The same goes for God, but since he is a hypocrite, he is content to let some people starve to death.

While many Christians have starved to death, many evil people who never become Christians have plenty to eat, and many animals have plenty to eat. How do you account for this? Does God care more about evil people and animals than he cares about Christians?

Paul scolded the Corinthians for doing some things that even the Gentiles did not do, but he still called them brothers. In Galatians 6:10, Paul says “Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.” I assume that part of what Paul meant was that Christians should feed hungry people without first trying to determine whether or not they were acting like they should act.

Matthew 15:32-38 say “Jesus called his disciples to him and said, ‘I have compassion for these people; they have already been with me three days and have nothing to eat. I do not want to send them away hungry, or they may collapse on the way.’ His disciples answered, ‘Where could we get enough bread in this remote place to feed such a crowd?’ ‘How many loaves do you have?’ Jesus asked. ‘Seven,’ they replied, ‘and a few small fish.’ He told the crowd to sit down on the ground. Then he took the seven loaves and the fish, and when he had given thanks, he broke them and gave them to the disciples, and they in turn to the people. They all ate and were satisfied. Afterward the disciples picked up seven basketfuls of broken pieces that were left over. The number of those who ate was four thousand, besides women and children.”

I assume that it is not your position that everyone in the crowd had good character.

The New Testament teaches that Christians should help people IN SPITE of their faults, not withhold helping people BECAUSE of their faults. God should practice what he preaches.

So, if providing food for hungry people even when they have faults, which actually includes everyone, is a good and worthy goal, it is good for humans and for God. In this life, human effort alone will never be able to feed all of the hungry people in the world. In addition, in this life, human effort alone will never be able to let everyone sufficiently know the rules for going to heaven. Of course, you will claim that God treats everyone fairly, and that he has provided everyone with sufficient information, but that is true only if God is not willing to do everything that he can in order to help ensure that as many people as possible go to heaven, and as few people as possible go to hell. If God is not willing to do everything that he can in order to help ensure that as many people as possible go to heaven, and as few people as possible go to hell, decent people are not able to love him. If God exists, three fourths of the people in the world are not aware of it. If he exists, he is easily able to convince many if not most of those people that he exists. God could not possibly have anything to gain by refusing to do everything that he can to convince everyone that he exists, and that he has good character. It is a matter of how much God wants to keep people from going to hell, which appears to be not much. If God exists, skeptics refuse to tell people about him of out ignorance, not out of intent. God refuses to provide some people with information out of intent, not out of ignorance. Therefore, God is much more culpable than skeptics are.

If God provided me with more evidence of his existence, and answered some questions to my satisfaction about his character, I might become a Christian. I am not able to love a God who is not willing to do everything that he can in order to convince me that he exists, and that he has good character.

Why does God discriminate against all amputees, at least as far as we know? He doesn’t discriminate against everyone who has cancer, right?

If God exists, he is a being who has demanded that if people want to avoid going to hell, they must accept his arbitrary rules, and his frequently detestable and unnecessary conduct. If God’s chief goal is to save the elect, much of what he causes and allows does not contribute to that goal in any way. No loving, rational being ever does anything that is not intended to help himself, or someone else, at present, or in the future. It has not been reasonably proven that allowing people to starve to death benefits God or mankind.

God’s actions and allowances indicate that he is evil, or mentally incompetent. No mentally competent being helps people and kills people.

In your opinion, is it probable that God is who the Bible says he is? If so, why?

Johnny Skeptic

Message to rhutchin: Do you mind replying to my previous post?

rhutchin

At least one of us has a vivid imagination.

Let's see if I understand your argument -- If a billion flies agree then...

An interesting argument. You are so easily pleased.

rhutchin

We have --

I am not sure what this has to do with rational minded and fair minded people not being able to love God since Johnny Skeptic does not support or explain his assumptions. A rational and fair minded person could believe in, and love, God based on nothing more than that which he reads in the Bible.

rhutchin

Based on the information provided in the Bible.