Spirituality
10 Jan 22
11 Jan 22
@fmf saidI realize that for you it is not believable, nor can you understand it, nor do you want to.
If a person who was not responsible for something is held responsible, regardless, and then punished for it, then one can say an injustice has been done. Morally speaking, the concept is nonsense, the imperative that humans must believe it notwithstanding.
Imagine a time and place where everything was "very good", and something happened that marred it.
Sure, God knew it would happen. God wouldn't be God if He didn't.
But even before God created everything He already had devised a plan to redeem His creation.
You are finite. God is infinite.
Some things you're just going to have to settle with God on your own.
11 Jan 22
1 edit
@fmf saidBut why?
Not at all. I am simply engaging you on whether the ideology you espouse is nonsensical or not.
It's what the scriptures teach.
Because you don't believe it you label it "nonsensical"?
Maybe it's you that's nonsensical. I think it must be you, since the language of the scriptures is perfectly clear.
@josephw saidI haven't said it's not "clear". I am questioning its moral coherence.
Maybe it's you that's nonsensical. I think it must be you, since the language of the scriptures is perfectly clear.
I get that you have rote learned this concept of "substitutionary atonement", that you have internalized it, and that you are now reciting it.
And that's OK if it's your private deeply seated belief. But you are speaking about the concept in public.
And responding to the question while so obviously wearing the fact that you are regurgitating a rote-learned belief upon your sleeve is, I think, not the way for you to proceed.
11 Jan 22
@josephw saidA person who's not responsible being held responsible and punished is not justice. It's injustice. The concept seems to be that your God figure is unable to grant everlasting life to humans unless he unjustly punishes his son and then insists that those humans believe it was justice [and, indeed, that it happened at all].
Justice.
The wages of sin is death.
God took full responsibility for man's "failings" and suffered the judgment that was rightfully ours.
But one must believe it. If one has no faith, then the atonement can't be applied.
11 Jan 22
@fmf saidSo, what you're saying is, is that believing that "in the beginning God created...", is incoherent even though you understand what it means.
Of course I understand what you are saying you believe. My view is that it is incoherent. What you are describing is injustice, not justice.
That seems incoherent.
I might add that it is incoherent to presume to know and understand what God's justice is contrary to what God says it is.
The marring of God's creation was the result of the act of volition on the part of man.
Suddenly, for the first time in all eternity, a will was lifted up against the will of God.
It will be punished, eradicated and utterly destroyed.
What flips your lid is how God metes out justice.
11 Jan 22
1 edit
@josephw saidIt will be punished, eradicated and utterly destroyed.
The marring of God's creation was the result of the act of volition on the part of man.
Suddenly, for the first time in all eternity, a will was lifted up against the will of God.
It will be punished, eradicated and utterly destroyed.
If this means you are now an annihilationist, then good for you.
11 Jan 22
@fmf saidHave you ever died?
It will be punished, eradicated and utterly destroyed.
If this means you are now an annihilationist, then good for you.
It is incoherent of you to discount the veracity of scripture, and at the same time affirm an interpretation of what "perish" means relative to its use in scripture.
The next time you die and are resurrected please come and tell me all about what's on the other side of death.
11 Jan 22
@josephw saidDoes something that you say is destroyed then continue to exist?
Have you ever died?
It is incoherent of you to discount the veracity of scripture, and at the same time affirm an interpretation of what "perish" means relative to its use in scripture.
The next time you die and are resurrected please come and tell me all about what's on the other side of death.
11 Jan 22
@fmf saidIf I answer that question with something you disagree with, how would you understand?
Does something that you say is destroyed then continue to exist?
Take for example something Jesus said in Matthew, "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."
And later, "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."
Aionios - without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
without beginning
without end, never to cease, everlasting
Aionios - both the words everlasting and eternal are the same and have the same meaning.
Never ending.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28784
11 Jan 22
1 edit
@C-J-Horse
I like Jesus and everything, but apparently he loves me.
It's a bit awkward.
11 Jan 22
@fmf saidThe one most wronged by every sinful act is God, without exception. He in order to justify the sinner paid the price in full Himself. Those who reject the divinity of Christ suggest that Christ another created being was made to be killed for others. I believe that would be a great injustice.
A person who's not responsible being held responsible and punished is not justice. It's injustice. The concept seems to be that your God figure is unable to grant everlasting life to humans unless he unjustly punishes his son and then insists that those humans believe it was justice [and, indeed, that it happened at all].