Which people are you speaking of, the Jews, the JWS, the Mormons, the Catholics ?
God works through people, not religions tto.
Goodnight.
GETTING SUCKED IN? Ask the right questions to get the right answers.
by Terry 145 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Perry
-
Terry
Perry extolled:
Terry,
Fact #1 You assume God exists
Fact # 2 Religion is innate to man since there has never been a society found that did not have one. EVER.
Perry, the way I argue this is to hold you accountable for consistency in YOUR assumptions. I don't need to hold those assumptions to demonstrate you aren't consistent with yours. The fact that man does certain things societally concerning superstition belief is hardly meritorious argument. Humans have worshipped giant dicks, trees and their dead grandmothers! Some gods are believed to have been formed from the excrement of previous gods. Does this actually PROVE something to you that you'd be proud to claim? If not, let's move on....
God has the authority to decide which religion is acceptable by virture of the commonly accepted definition of the word God, which you have already conceded..... even if you have a problem with Fact # 2. If you are going to chastise someone for assuming a correct way to approach God, then you must deny that God exists! (at least in the Judeo/Christian form)
Assuming an imaginary deity into "existence" does not grant that figment any authority at all. Illogical. Spock will be miffed at you. As long as you can imagine any sort of creature (bigfoot, loch Ness monster, Tinker Bell) into existence you can also imagine they have superpowers, can't you? How does Captain Marvel differ from Jehovah in this regard?? Not at all. Let's move on...
Here's your basic circle of darkness:
There is no right religion. How do I know this? Because there is no God. How do I know this? Because there is no right religion.
This is total darkness.
This is also Perry trying to frame my side of the argument so that a Staw Man can be tilted at ala Don Quixote!
Our discussion was about Grace and not "right religion". Grace is an invented doctrine which has been concocted by wretches. So, it is a wretched doctrine. I queried you as to your recognition of this. You vanished in a puff of Mephistophelan smoke!
So, notwithstanding the error....premise is the entire argument as you point out, and determines a whole chain of reasoning and questioning. You know this. Yet you pull this here:
On what basis could a Just God abandon Justice without self-repudiating every previous judgement against mankind from the destruction of Noah's day to the holocaust against Sodom and Gomorrah? That's the question worth asking.
Here you offfer two premises that are already at conflict before you even start to judge God.
1. God is Just
2. God Abandons Justice
Do you see a problem with your two premises here? First, on what possible basis could you assume God's Justice? Could it be perhaps your own sense of Justice that is at times arbitrary and subjective in areas of influence that are lawful for you? Think about that for a while ...will you?
It is apparent to me you are fighting two simultaneous battles unnecessarily. You aren't answering my question about YOUR consistency of belief. You are pulling a switcheroo. You are creating a dissonance about MY belief and arguing against MY consistency. Nice Try!
Let's get back to MY question for YOU, shall we?
YOUR God claims to be a god of attribtues which include Justice. The Old Testament Law is a law of nit-pickey obsession with JUSTICE (eye for eye, tooth for tooth, this sacrifice for that sin, etc.) Forgiveness under the Law is an act of legality. Do you deny this?
Christ has to die because of this God's legal requirement. SOMEBODY has to pay for mankind's sin! Why? God is a god requiring legal satisfaction!
Do you deny this?
GRACE doesn't fit any previous action on the part of your God because it vitiates His basis for condemning man IN THE FIRST PLACE. Can you not see this?
Secondly, please explain further exactly how God abandoned Justice?
If you say his mercy abandons justice, then you are forced to deny the cross where Christ died, took the believers' punishment and paid their debt. If you say God isn't just in his methods, then you deny your first precept above in this instance where you declare "God is Just". In that case, your reasoning is simply circular unfalsifiable tautology.
See the above. When you say Christ "paid their debt" you are talking LEGAL LANGUAGE. The law DEMANDS restoration. This is JUSTICE being demanded.
Here is how it works:
1. God places humans on a conditional waiver of life IF the humans meet God's legal requirement of NOT TRESPASSING on the Tree of Life.
2.When the humans tresspass they forfeit their right to continue living and God further requires penalty payment of death for all their offspring.
I am not required to believe any of this to demand that YOU acknowledge that YOU believe it and that it represents JUSTICE on the part of God.
See where this is going?
Here's the deal for the common guy on the street. Justice is what ever God says it is....or else you are forced to deny God's existence.
Yet, that Justice will not be so foreign to us, so as to vilolate our own subjective experience, else we would display a total disconnect from being in God's image (though fallen) . Now I ask, do we have experience with the kind of Justice that God purports to offer in the NT? You decide.
If a theif stands before a judge and his relative stands up on his behalf and asks the Judge for mercy stating that he will pay the offended party 10 times the amount stolen if he will release the thief into his custody.... the Judge is NOW faced with TWO POSSIBLE REMEDIES.
(1) He can accept the payment. In that case, the offended party pockets the cash and ALL go home satisfied.
(2) He can reject the offer & pass prison sentence. In this case only the offended party goes home somewhat satisfied.
In either case, Justice is served no? It is the Judges' call.
This long-winded scenario misses a simplicity. God ESTABLISHED the law ahead of the punishment and named the penalty. JUSTICE required God to hold humanity accountable in the Garden of Eden. If God had granted MERCY to Adam and Eve He would have violated his STANDARD of behavior named in his legal warnings. Right? I turn it around on you and ask: WHY could God not have granted mercy to Adam and Eve?
The same answer applies across the board. God does not violate His perfect standards or He stops being God!
You are trying to describe a God that reinvents His OWN NATURE on a whim!! This is a Deuces Wild God!
Further, in the various parts of the law of Moses which describe in achingly obsessive detail all the various sin-offerings there is NO PROVISION for any Levite Preist to waive any part of it----IS THERE? Why not?? Could it be it would violate God's perfect standard of JUSTICE?
There was no relative with a ten time payment for Sodom and Gomorrah, hence the Judgment was just then as it is now.
Is it hypocritical to critize God for showing mercy when we enjoy receiving it and at times enjoy giving it?
Well, is it?
Perry, is not hypocritical to invent a Deuces Wild God who violates His own standards? The penalty for sin is only just because it is on a firm foundation: Man is a wretch who falls far short of God's standard. Otherwise, this "Jesus" character could have jumped up in Eden and offered to"pay" the fine right then and there, couldn't he? What difference would it make since it would save thousands of years of sinning and death for mankind?
Postponing the MERCY (as you call it) several Millennia doesn't work.
-
GLTirebiter
"I believe" is not the same as "It is proven". We have no way to know the Bible is divinely inspired, inerrant, and has been faithfully translated through the millenia (or that oral teachings preceding the earliest written scriptures were accurately preserved until they were placed in writing). Some believe these things as a matter of faith, some believe those claims are absolutely false, and some have no particular opinion on these matters. There is no conclusive proof either way. What's important, imo, is to be honest with yourself about what is faith and what is fact.
GLT
-
Terry
Now that we've set fire to Perry's Straw Man argument (Terry has to believe thus and so) I'll repeat my question that you abandoned before:
The Christian decides to believe on Jesus Christ? No.....it is the wretch who decides BEFORE conversion. That is my point.
The worthless sinner somehow makes this decision? This is not a wretch-like decision is it?
I asked the question of you:
Is it not logical that:
1. A real wretch (worthless sinner) would want an unearned free ticket from condemnation rather than justice (getting what he deserved.)
2. Logically then, the wretch comes up with his own plan: God gives him UNDESERVED GRACE!
Where does the decision to believe in Jesus Christ come from but a desire for unearned pardon? A wretch has no basis for faith or belief in and of himself. Logically then---the GRACE must be his delusional answer to his problem of death and judgement.
I asked you clearly: Is this not logical?
I'm asking YOU to be consistent with YOUR belief system. I don't have to buy in to ask the question of you.
-
Perry
Some believe these things as a matter of faith, some believe those claims are absolutely false, and some have no particular opinion on these matters. There is no conclusive proof either way. What's important, imo, is to be honest with yourself about what is faith and what is fact.
Well said Tailbiter!
Terry, must admit that I didn't read all your polemic but just skimmed to the part where we could pick up our discussion. I believe that about 3/4 of the way down you finally lightly brush the argument at hand. If I have missed a main point, please point that out.
If a theif stands before a judge and his relative stands up on his behalf and asks the Judge for mercy stating that he will pay the offended party 10 times the amount stolen if he will release the thief into his custody.... the Judge is NOW faced with TWO POSSIBLE REMEDIES.
(1) He can accept the payment. In that case, the offended party pockets the cash and ALL go home satisfied.
(2) He can reject the offer & pass prison sentence. In this case only the offended party goes home somewhat satisfied.
In either case, Justice is served no? It is the Judges' call.
This long-winded scenario misses a simplicity. God ESTABLISHED the law ahead of the punishment and named the penalty. JUSTICE required God to hold humanity accountable in the Garden of Eden. If God had granted MERCY to Adam and Eve He would have violated his STANDARD of behavior named in his legal warnings. Right? I turn it around on you and ask: WHY could God not have granted mercy to Adam and Eve?
The same answer applies across the board. God does not violate His perfect standards or He stops being God!
You are trying to describe a God that reinvents His OWN NATURE on a whim!! This is a Deuces Wild God!
Further, in the various parts of the law of Moses which describe in achingly obsessive detail all the various sin-offerings there is NO PROVISION for any Levite Preist to waive any part of it----IS THERE? Why not?? Could it be it would violate God's perfect standard of JUSTICE?
And you call me long-winded? Wanna do a word count to establish fact?
Above, you simply invent an imaginary scenario where God viloates his own Justice. And then go on from this patently FALSE ASSUMPTION to declare that God plays willy-nilly with the Law.
Lets' Review the FACTS, not your beliefs OK?
God said sin requires death; Right?
All men die; Right?
Either I'm missing something or you are living in an alternate universe of sorts.
What in the world is your point?
-
Terry
Terry, must admit that I didn't read all your polemic but just skimmed to the part where we could pick up our discussion.
Perry, let me be up front and honest with you. Until now, I respected your sincerety. But, your words betray you. This is a DISCUSSION BOARD.
I took the trouble of replying to EVERYTHING you said out of honest respect for the discussion. It would be rude otherwise.
You say you "didn't read" and "skimmed". Well, that tears it, Buddy!
I no longer respect your sincerety.
When you present your "arguments" to me I read them and re-read them. I think about them. I engage them. This is RESPECT.
But you Perry, are like the kindergartner who sticks his fingers in his ears while somebody is talking and says "Nanner nanner nanner nanner" until they stop.
Why are you WASTING MY TIME?
You are wasting your time as well.
-
Terry
Lets' Review the FACTS, not your beliefs OK?
God said sin requires death; Right?
All men die; Right?
Perry, I have no beliefs. We can't review what I don't have. Stick to the point which is the Topic. (see the Title window above?)
Talk about NOT asking the right questions and getting sucked in! Your questions are a bog, my friend, a virtual sump.
Let's clear the air. Please state your premises on these simple questions.
1. Sin requires death and all men die. Jesus died FOR our sins. IS MANKIND PAYING TWICE?
2. When the Israelites offered their sacrifices to cover their sins--did they die anyway? Why?
3.Are we actually talking about physical death, spiritual death, a combination of the two?
4.In the Garden of Eden did Adam die "on the day you eat of it you will surely die?" ON THAT DAY? Or, do you invent a Jehovah's Witness rubbery "day" that lasted a thousand years?
5. Did God warn Adam and Eve that disobedience would not only kill THEM but millions and millions of unborn descendants as well or was that just an afterthought?
Now why am I asking those particular questions? Because they are basic premise questions. We will test your answers for consistency. It doesn't matter what I think about them because we are searching YOUR BELIEFS as to whether they stand up to INTERNAL logical consistency.
The nexus of what you are avoiding really dealing with is GRACE, by the way. You are so busy moaning, groanind and dodging the issude of GRACE I have to pin you down with these specifics.
Honest enough to answer those 5?
-
Perry
Is it not logical that:
1. A real wretch (worthless sinner) would want an unearned free ticket from condemnation rather than justice (getting what he deserved.)
2. Logically then, the wretch comes up with his own plan: God gives him UNDESERVED GRACE!
Where does the decision to believe in Jesus Christ come from but a desire for unearned pardon? A wretch has no basis for faith or belief in and of himself. Logically then---the GRACE must be his delusional answer to his problem of death and judgement.
I asked you clearly: Is this not logical?
Terry,
No it is not. Correlation does not imply causation, remember? A person may want a new car as a gift from a rich uncle. But, he is completely unable to produce that rich uncle, much less the new car.
The testimony of hundreds of millions of people is that when they surrender their will to Christ, that God enters into his true temple....the hearts of men. He makes a home there. It is very personal. "Daddy's home" is the feeling.
This of course is repulsive, offensive, and seemingly EXTREMELY DANGEROUS to unbelievers because every time they ever surrendered themselves to anyone but themselves they ALWAYS found themselves in a pile of stinking dung. I understand this.
My testimony to YOU, is the same testimony as hundreds of millions of other believers:
Rom. 10: 11 - For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
The problem we had as Witnesses is that we rejected the NC and Jesus. God simply could not reveal himself to us. Now that Christ lives inside of me, I can PERSONALLY testify to the TRUTH of the above scripture. All I ever knew as a JW and an agnostic was shame. Now I know a part ot the divine Himself. ..... the real deal.
Anyone can trade their shame for a crown.....ANYONE
-
Terry
The testimony of hundreds of millions of people is that when they surrender their will to Christ, that God enters into his true temple....the hearts of men. He makes a home there. It is very personal. "Daddy's home" is the feeling.
So, your rebuttal consists of how you FEEL?
Thanks for sharing that devasting argument.
What about these questions--can you take the time to answer them directly?
Let's clear the air. Please state your premises on these simple questions.
1. Sin requires death and all men die. Jesus died FOR our sins. IS MANKIND PAYING TWICE?
2. When the Israelites offered their sacrifices to cover their sins--did they die anyway? Why?
3.Are we actually talking about physical death, spiritual death, a combination of the two?
4.In the Garden of Eden did Adam die "on the day you eat of it you will surely die?" ON THAT DAY? Or, do you invent a Jehovah's Witness rubbery "day" that lasted a thousand years?
5. Did God warn Adam and Eve that disobedience would not only kill THEM but millions and millions of unborn descendants as well or was that just an afterthought?
-
PSacramento
1. Sin requires death and all men die. Jesus died FOR our sins. IS MANKIND PAYING TWICE?
The death of Jesus is what allows manking access to God's grace, through Jesus.
Death of our bodies is payment for the "original sin" that took away our immortality and while we still die after Jesus's death, our death is only physical and our salvation is based on God's grace, not any type of sacrifices or whatnot. If you believe in original sin.
2. When the Israelites offered their sacrifices to cover their sins--did they die anyway? Why?
One thing had nothing to do with the other.
3.Are we actually talking about physical death, spiritual death, a combination of the two?
Even in the OT, when the body died, the spirit returned to God.
4.In the Garden of Eden did Adam die "on the day you eat of it you will surely die?" ON THAT DAY? Or, do you invent a Jehovah's Witness rubbery "day" that lasted a thousand years?
Adam;s death was obviously metaphorical, his innocence died, his immortality died, the Grace that God had given him "died".
5. Did God warn Adam and Eve that disobedience would not only kill THEM but millions and millions of unborn descendants as well or was that just an afterthought?
Not sure what you mean...