The Messiah

[Wrangler]

Well well well. Your true Christian colors have finally shone forth.

the stupid Cross of Christ.

Well well well. Your true reverent colors have finally shone forth.

 

[Wrangler]

Because the Cross of Christ is related to FAITH.

God requires FAITH in CHRIST before He will take you as His own.

The millions and millions and millions of people who lived and died in the Western hemisphere before the arrival of Europeans in the 15th century would never have had the opportunity to hear about Jesus or the Bible or the Cross of Christ. So according to you God will have to damn them all to hell as well.

You have made your God in your own image-- that of a total bigot.

Not exactly what Behold said now, is it?

You obviously have an axe to bear against Christianity. I'll pray for you - AGAIN!

 

[ScottA]

Did you bother to read my initial posting on this thread? I stand by everything I said in that posting and I don't see any value in restating what I already said.

See my very first posting on this thread.

I did already and I replied, but you didn't reply back or answer my question. Then I commented again twice, and now you point me back to the beginning having dropped the ball yourself. So I was listening but you apparently were not. That may be your problem. Whatever.

Anyway, I did address your first post, and had much to offer if you would have answered. Your choice.

 

[ScottA]

Well well well. Your true Christian colors have finally shone forth.

God determined that Noah and the seven members of his immediate family were worthy enough that he allowed them all to survive a flood that killed all other humans on the planet. But Noah lived 2500 years before Jesus and therefore could not possibly have known anything about Jesus or the Bible or the stupid Cross of Christ. So according to you he could not possibly have earned the benefits of your beatific faith-- and therefore God will have no choice but to damn Noah and all those who lived before the time of Jesus to hell.

The millions and millions and millions of people who lived and died in the Western hemisphere before the arrival of Europeans in the 15th century would never have had the opportunity to hear about Jesus or the Bible or the Cross of Christ. So according to you God will have to damn them all to hell as well.

And today there are millions and millions of people on planet Earth who have heard little more than rumors or lies about Jesus and who have never had a chance to read a copy of the Bible in their own native language. So they too would be incapable of acquiring faith in Jesus and again your God would have no choice but to damn them all to hell as well.

You have made your God in your own image-- that of a total bigot.

On behalf of all those whom you have so cavalierly denigrated and dismissed I say: THE HELL WITH YOU.

Retract your asinine statement and apologize.

Indeed, there are many who make god in their own image...or simply misunderstand.

Yet, I see by what you have written that you too misunderstand. You are thinking too small, there is nothing supernatural accounted for in your rationale. Most of what you said is just wrong...nor have you considered all that is written, for your "no choice but to damn them" dilemma assumption speaks directly against things also stated that clarify each of those issues. In particular, all those are accounted for by Jesus not only ascending, but also descending doing the same for those who went before as those after. As for those who would never hear of Him, God has written the gospel in the things of nature, leaving none with such an excuse. As for Noah, he was saved by faith in God who spoke to him.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

As for those who would never hear of Him, God has written the gospel in the things of nature, leaving none with such an excuse.

Huh? Let's consider a man living in the city of Ur, about 2500 BCE. That person would never have heard of Jesus, or Yahweh, or the gospel. So what "things of nature" could that person have observed or experienced that could possibly have made him aware of the gospel? Give me a specific example.

 

[ScottA]

Huh? Let's consider a man living in the city of Ur, about 2500 BCE. That person would never have heard of Jesus, or Yahweh, or the gospel. So what "things of nature" could that person have observed or experienced that could possibly have made him aware of the gospel? Give me a specific example.

All who are born see or hear or otherwise are shown the wonders of God, whether it is the heavens above, a newborn child, or love, which cannot otherwise be explained, only received or denied.

Faced with death, one says in his heart "there is evil in the world", another "there is good", and still another says "there is both." Each are correct. Such is the promise of judgement.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

All who are born see or hear or otherwise are shown the wonders of God, whether it is the heavens above, a newborn child, or love, which cannot otherwise be explained, only received or denied.

Gee that's really swell. But what does that have to do with the Cross of Christ? According to @Behold it is absolutely necessary to have a specific belief in the Cross of Christ to be saved. Are you saying that @Behold is wrong?

You said that the "things of nature" will inevitably lead one to a belief in God. By "God" do you mean Yahweh, the God of the Bible? Because the people of Mesopotamia of 4500 years ago never heard of or worshiped Yahweh. They worshiped other gods and goddesses, but not Yahweh. Is a belief in Yahweh specifically a precondition for salvation? Or just a belief in a divine being of some sort that is conceived to be responsible for that which cannot be explained?

 

[Behold]

Gee that's really swell. But what does that have to do with the Cross of Christ? According to @Behold it is absolutely necessary to have a specific belief in the Cross of Christ to be saved.

When we say "the Cross of Christ"... this means...............The Blood Atonement... The shed blood and death of Jesus (on the Cross) that is our forgiveness for our sin.

This is 'Salvation"
This is "Redemption"

Christ came to die for our sin, because its our sin that separates us from God.
Christ came to deal with that, so that by His Sacrifice, on the Cross... for our Sin, ....God can have us as His own.

 

[ScottA]

Gee that's really swell. But what does that have to do with the Cross of Christ? According to @Behold it is absolutely necessary to have a specific belief in the Cross of Christ to be saved. Are you saying that @Behold is wrong?

Not at all. Jesus/God paid the price, and anyone who receives the gift of salvation receives Him who paid for it.

Have you never received a gift even without knowing who sent or gave it? The gift of salvation is no different for some...except that they will not wonder who sent it forever, but when forever comes to them they will indeed know.

You said that the "things of nature" will inevitably lead one to a belief in God. By "God" do you mean Yahweh, the God of the Bible? Because the people of Mesopotamia of 4500 years ago never heard of or worshiped Yahweh. They worshiped other gods and goddesses, but not Yahweh. Is a belief in Yahweh specifically a precondition for salvation? Or just a belief in a divine being of some sort that is conceived to be responsible for that which cannot be explained?

Have you not read of the centurion who because he was a man under authority believed that Jesus could simply say the word without having to go to him and his servant would be healed? There are many wrong would-be authorities. But whether in life or in death, the same is true of all who have been under the wrong authority who come to believe in the One true God. By their faith they shall be saved.

And have you yourself not searched your whole life for the One true God and not found Him, while the promise still remains that when and if you do, you will be saved from death even in the last hour? I tell you the truth, if you come to sit at His table, you will sit with many you did not know were even invited.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

Have you never received a gift even without knowing who sent or gave it?

Sometimes, yes. But what does that have to do with the specific case we were discussing of a man living 4500 years ago in the city of Ur? Are you suggesting that Jesus gave everyone in that city the gift of salvation? If so when specifically did that happen? I've read quite a lot of literature from ancient Mesopotamia and there is not one mention of Jesus or Yahweh or the gospel. WHEN did they hear about it? Can you present even one shred of evidence that the people of that time knew anything at all about the gospel? Can you point to a specific place of worship that was built in that city at that time to either Yahweh or Jesus? I know of none.

 

[ScottA]

Sometimes, yes. But what does that have to do with the specific case we were discussing of a man living 4500 years ago in the city of Ur? Are you suggesting that Jesus gave everyone in that city the gift of salvation? If so when specifically did that happen? I've read quite a lot of literature from ancient Mesopotamia and there is not one mention of Jesus or Yahweh or the gospel. WHEN did they hear about it? Can you present even one shred of evidence that the people of that time knew anything at all about the gospel? Can you point to a specific place of worship that was built in that city at that time to either Yahweh or Jesus? I know of none.

Although I am a witness, this is not court. If you want evidence, go to court-- or die, and you will have it.

But I told you already. "Whether in death or in life" all who are born are presented with the truth from God. But to those to whom it is presented in life, more is required. By the same measure of being presented the truth in this life, it is also required that you also receive it in this life. Those to whom the truth is presented who do not receive it, do not attain it by their own choosing. For this reason, you need not be concerned about the Mesopotamians...nor did they have any reason to be concerned about you.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

Although I am a witness, this is not court. If you want evidence, go to court-- or die, and you will have it.

But I told you already. "Whether in death or in life" all who are born are presented with the truth from God. But to those to whom it is presented in life, more is required. By the same measure of being presented the truth in this life, it is also required that you also receive it in this life. Those to whom the truth is presented who do not receive it, do not attain it by their own choosing. For this reason, you need not be concerned about the Mesopotamians...nor did they have any reason to be concerned about you.

So you have no actual evidence for your beliefs. That's all the Non-Christians of this Non-Christian forum need to know. Thanks.

 

[Mr E]

So you have no actual evidence for your beliefs. That's all the Non-Christians of this Non-Christian forum need to know. Thanks.

Well, you know the saying.... Belief in God doesn't require evidence.

 

[ScottA]

So you have no actual evidence for your beliefs. That's all the Non-Christians of this Non-Christian forum need to know. Thanks.

I have plenty of evidence.

You misunderstand. Apparently you are not listening or comprehending what I have actually presented to you. Things don't work the way you are intent on controlling them. You are not in control...except in your own decision making. You don't get to state the terms. This is not a discussion.

I have given you the terms.

But really, what you hope to accomplish here is only to inform other Non-Christians of what you don't know? That's brilliant! What about eternal life--not interested?

And what I told you about nature revealing God, you should have considered the gopher and the mole, who live in the earth with no interest in what is above, except to push up what they don't want below, hoping the creek doesn't rise...and then they die. Meanwhile, you have pushed up earth and have [failed] to return with anything for your fellows, though it was offered to you.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

@ScottA :

What about eternal life--not interested?

I began this thread with a discussion of the garden of Eden and the fact that Yahweh deprived Adam and Eve of eternal life. Did you miss that part? I also mentioned the words of Psalm 88 which specifically says that Yahweh doesn't have the ability to either resurrect the dead or forgive their sins. The idea of eternal life is just a myth, not a fact.

 

[ScottA]

@ScottA :



I began this thread with a discussion of the garden of Eden and the fact that Yahweh deprived Adam and Eve of eternal life. Did you miss that part? I also mentioned the words of Psalm 88 which specifically says that Yahweh doesn't have the ability to either resurrect the dead or forgive their sins. The idea of eternal life is just a myth, not a fact.

Again--you are not paying attention. I addressed and gave an answer to all of that. And you're wrong, it doesn't even say that.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

Are you talking about this posting: #47

That posting doesn't explain your reasoning. Can you fill me in?

 

[Waiting on him]

Sometimes, yes. But what does that have to do with the specific case we were discussing of a man living 4500 years ago in the city of Ur? Are you suggesting that Jesus gave everyone in that city the gift of salvation? If so when specifically did that happen? I've read quite a lot of literature from ancient Mesopotamia and there is not one mention of Jesus or Yahweh or the gospel. WHEN did they hear about it? Can you present even one shred of evidence that the people of that time knew anything at all about the gospel? Can you point to a specific place of worship that was built in that city at that time to either Yahweh or Jesus? I know of none.

Check out a book called the witness in the stars.

 

[ScottA]

Are you talking about this posting: #47

That posting doesn't explain your reasoning. Can you fill me in?

That is because I am not trying to reason with you.

The simple fact is, Psalm 88 doesn't say what you said. You failed to provide a scripture that shows that "that God has neither the power to resurrect the dead, nor the ability to forgive their sins."

But no, I wasn't referring to that, but rather that I had plenty of evidence, while you have only stated things that were not true for the reasons and scripture you gave. In other words, you failed to make your case, and we are not communicating...because, as I said, you misunderstand, are not listening, not comprehending, and are not actually here in search of the truth, but rather to show the truth wrong with false claims. Even so, I answered each point and offered you what you were not looking for.

 

[Mr E]

That is because I am not trying to reason with you.

The simple fact is, Psalm 88 doesn't say what you said. You failed to provide a scripture that shows that "that God has neither the power to resurrect the dead, nor the ability to forgive their sins."

But no, I wasn't referring to that, but rather that I had plenty of evidence, while you have only stated things that were not true for the reasons and scripture you gave. In other words, you failed to make your case, and we are not communicating...because, as I said, you misunderstand, are not listening, not comprehending, and are not actually here in search of the truth, but rather to show the truth wrong with false claims. Even so, I answered each point and offered you what you were not looking for.

Scott-- to communicate with him, you have to think like him.

Belief in scripture does not require belief in the existence of scripture.

Or fill in the blank.... Belief in ___________ does not require belief in the existence of __________.

That's the kind of intellectual gigantism you are facing with only your slingshot.

As an atheist, he chooses to put 'God' in the blanks, but you could put "science" or "climate change" or anything you choose and it's still stupid.

All athiests have their own set of beliefs. They just don't believe they do.