Radorth

Oh, and BTW, unlike you who wouldn't be caught dead finding such faults in skeptics, I'm just as critical of preachy, dogmatic Christians on Christian sites.

Rad

Christian

Philosoft,

Trust me, if I was inventing a religion it wouldn't feature something as hard to explain (and impossible to understand) as the Trinity. Mere unity in diversity is a sophisticated concept ... moving on to the Ultimate Vulcan Mind Meld is staggering. I would also write a sacred text that read like a systematic theology text.

But I'm not making this stuff up. I'm just glad that the God who exists reached out to me for some reason.

Respectfully,

Christian

HelenM

I agree with you, Rhea, which is why I posted what I did on the thread about Pat Robertson having cancer.

Having said that, I don't think it's true that Christians who believe God is justified in what He does (judging, punishing, etc) necessarily believe that therefore, humans are justified in doing similarly. The principle or axiom is not "if God does it we can do it too" but rather "whatever God does is right - but we can only be sure it's right when He is doing it - it doesn't imply we can, because we're not God".

Maybe you have counter-examples to this but what's important to me is that lnot all Christians assume they have the right to do what they believe God has the right to do.

Helen

Radorth

Why make this statement, when "Bible-toting" evangelical Christians have done so much to alleviate it? This question seems pretty self-righteous and simplistic to me, considering the author just preached on my personal faults.

I'm certainly not content with it and will put up my "good works" against 99% of all skeptics, though I am loathe to do so. Go adopt a mentally ill, severely abused older child and come back and talk to me.

Rad

HelenM

Maybe you did this solely because of your faith in God; maybe you wouldn't have done it were you not a Christian. And if you want to use it as proof of how real and committed your faith I respect that.

Nevertheless I believe that some non-Christians do similar things because they care about other people that much. (I don't think it's only Christians who adopt such children)

Helen

hezekiah jones

Or, to more completely express your compassion, adopt Radorth.

Radorth

Well Helen, of course I never said they don't. I'm saying that in toto I do as well as any of them, and I only say it in response to the silly implication that we are "content" with the suffering in the world. I assert that God isn't content with it either and that the Holy Spirit personally motivates Christians to do plenty about it. The suffering in the world grieves God and asking why he doesn't snap his fingers and fix it all begs some more thoughtful questions.

I suggest that a disproportionate number of skeptics love this world. I hate it, and so does God.

I suspect that most skeptics approve of partial birth abortion, which belies their humanistic assertions.

Jesus hated evil and suffering. Christians hate evil and suffering and pine for all that was lost when we chose autonomy over obedience.

The question here, never resolved or fully discussed, is what are the consequences of God fixing all the problems of the world when the majority steadfastly refuse to obey him. That doesn't solve anything. Should he prevent this or that tornado from damaging this or that town when no one will ever know the difference?

Case in point. If I alone ask God to stop all gang warfare in the Valley here, and he does so, how many people will thank and praise him for it?

Answer: Virtually none, and perhaps only me alone, and even I won't know for sure, will I? Even that I must do by faith.

No, we chalk 99% of all good happenstance up to ourselves, if anybody. Until God finally comes down and clears the earth of evil and bad people altogether, no one will know any difference except what they see by faith. Yeah, some will believe when they see him in the flesh, and yet a huge number will scream bloody murder and call God unjust, "too late" blah blah blah. It really won't matter what he does, to most skeptics you see. It's a character issue, and the "holier and wiser than your God" attitudes and assertions here only prove the point to me.

Rad

Radorth

How clever. HJ, you aren't trolling for opportuities to make mindless comments I hope. We haven't heard much from you.

Rad

HelenM

There are many beautiful things in this world. Maybe you mean you hate the pain and suffering in this world. I don't think skeptics like those either.

More precisely I expect they would grimace at the procedure but might say it is the choice of the mother, even so. You can believe in giving someone a choice without liking the choice they make.

And yet according to the Bible, Paul said:

2 Cor 12:10 Therefore I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities for the sake of Christ; for whenever I am weak, then I am strong.

and

Phil 4:11b I have learned to be content with whatever I have.

and James said:

James 1:2 My brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of any kind, consider it nothing but joy, 3 because you know that the testing of your faith produces endurance; 4 and let endurance have its full effect, so that you may be mature and complete, lacking in nothing.

I don't really understand your point. You mean, people wouldn't know He spared them so they wouldn't appreciate it?

Does God only do things that He will be thanked and praised for, though?

If only you knew then only you would thank and praise God specifically for that - that's true.

I don't say I'm holier and wiser than God, actually...were you addressing that comment to me or others?

take care
Helen]

Christian

Rimstalker,

True. I acknowledge both of those things. They don't negate the other factors I have given which do speak to the severity of Jesus' suffering.


And the foreknowledge of the suffering itself is synergistic with the actual torture and execution. He had the full details of his impending suffering to consider whenever He chose to. I also maintain that the fact He had an easy escape valve (one word and 10,000 angels would have rescued Him) made His ordeal more difficult. That had to be a tremendous temptation, and one that would need to be continually resisted during His torture and execution.

It's not good ... don't think I want to know what it looks like.

Fair enough ... eyewitness testimony is not evidence that the crucifixtion was also the atonement.

How about if I provided some quotes from Jesus on the topic and pointed to His resurrection to establish His credibility as a witness on such issues? I guess this thread would get pretty long if I attempted that.

Yes. See my last post to Rhea.

You're welcome.

It's not a direct contradiction. God is 3 in a different way than God is 1. Again, see my last post to Rhea.

How about this: 1 x 1 x 1 = 1

Frankly, I try to avoid analogies altogether when discussing and describing the trinity. They all fail ... I've never found one that doesn't. It's more clear to simply point to the three planks I have described and say "all three of those are true at the same time and I don't know how."

BTW ... if you want the foundational statement for "what is a trinity?" and "how can Jesus be fully God and fully man at the same time?" check out the Athanasian Creed . It's a pretty short read and it describes the historically orthodox position of the church on both of those doctrines better than I can.

I have some friends who were math majors who claim that it is possible to conceive of a trinity by considering extra dimensions. I think someone has even calculated that God would have to be an six dimensional Being in order for God to make sense. I'm really not equiped to understand or assess that theory, but those who are tell me it makes more sense out of the trinity than anything else.

Another point RE your analogy ... the oneness of God is not merely a oneness of attributes. It's also a oneness of being. God is ontologically one. He is not three beings, He is one Being.

That's fair. To tell the truth noone has ever asked me for evidence of the Trinity outside of scripture. This doctrine is challenging enough even assuming scripture is the Word of God!

I'll have to think about that one.

Your implication is that if Jesus hadn't been crucified He wouldn't have had a veritable army of devotees singing His praises. That's not the case. He had all that in eternity past. He temporarily gave the independant use of His diety to come and experience being human. (Phil 2) For that matter, satan offered Jesus exactly what you describe (Matt 4) and Jesus turned it down. There is also the fact that many of the people He suffered and died for will reject His offer of salvation and spend eternity separated from Him. That's got to hurt psychologically.

I grant that what He gained was His friends, and that that knowledge helped Him endure the suffering.

Jesus' death enables God to be both just and merciful. It was the only way to pull that one off. Perfect justice by itself has no room for mercy. And mercy can only exist against the backdrop of justice. But insert some additional "satisfied wrath of God" into the system and God has a basis for being merciful, while remaining just. Jesus' death was the pivotal event enabling the entire system of forgiveness and redemption. Now that is "paying for itself."

Respectfully,

Christian