Go back
The

The "free gift"

Spirituality


@suzianne said
How kind of you to provide everyone with the narrative that you think they should believe.
Just calling it how I see it.


@Suzianne
What analogy best explains how the concept of the "free gift" works or what it means?

You are invited to offer one, Suzianne.

This is what I came up with.

The "free gift" of "salvation" is like a complementary plane ticket. It is free. You don't have to pay for it. It will take you to the ultimate destination. It will never be cancelled by the person who paid for it.

Obviously, if you don't think it is real and throw it away, despite it being a free gift, then there will be no journey to the destination.

To get to that ultimate destination, however, the invited passengers must still pack their bags, order a taxi, get to the airport, check their luggage in, make their way to the departure lounge, and board the plane.

Without the packing, the taxi, the trip, the check-in, the departure lounge, and the boarding, the potential passenger will never reach the "ultimate destination", even though the free ticket was there, gratis, available, and not rescinded or cancelled.

Does the fact that someone has a free ticket and can fly at no expense aboard a plane to the ultimate destination mean that they will necessarily or automatically take up the donor's offer of this free gift and do what needs to be done to catch the plane?

No, it doesn't. Some people will board the plane and some won't. Simply believing that the ticket is free and authentic and valid and that it could take you to the ultimate destination is not enough.


1 edit


Vote Up
Vote Down

@fmf said
Just calling it how I see it.
I think Dive would consider that lying.


@ghost-of-a-duke said
I think Dive would consider that lying.
I don't think divegeester would consider what I said to be "lying".


@fmf said
I don't think divegeester would consider what I said to be "lying".
In the controversial thread where I said 'Dive's fingerprints were all over this' I was, 'just calling it how I saw it.' Dive still considered that lying.


@ghost-of-a-duke said
In the controversial thread where I said 'Dive's fingerprints were all over this' I was, 'just calling it how I saw it.' Dive still considered that lying.
I think you consciously lied about that.

Vote Up
Vote Down

@fmf said
I think you consciously lied about that.
No I didn't. Like you, I was just calling it how I saw it. Why is that ok for you but not for me?


It would seem that Suzianne and Ghost of a Duke have turned up together to make off-topic remarks.

Vote Up
Vote Down

@fmf said
It would seem that Suzianne and Ghost of a Duke have turned up together to make off-topic remarks.
Or highlight your hypocrisy.


@ghost-of-a-duke said
No I didn't. Like you, I was just calling it how I saw it. Why is that ok for you but not for me?
I believe you were lying. I don't think that you saying you were calling it how you saw it alters this. The difference between us is that when I say I am calling something as I see it, it is not followed by a lie.


@ghost-of-a-duke said
Or highlight your hypocrisy.
You are not using the word "hypocrisy" correctly.

Vote Up
Vote Down

@fmf said
I believe you were lying. I don't think that you saying you were calling it how you saw it alters this. The difference between us is that when I say I am calling something as I see it, it is not followed by a lie.
I believe you have lied in this thread.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.