How Do Christians Reconcile The Following Question Regarding Their Faith?

[prometheus11]

Romans 5:12-14 (ESVST) 12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned — 13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

Sin has been in the world from Adam until this very day. For all sin to have been removed from the world, the 8 people on the Ark would have had to been killed too. It's not the earth that has sin, but the world, the human flesh carries the sin nature.

So why the flood?

 

[djhwoodwerks]

I was a devoted Christian for a very long time, 25 years or more - a Trinity believing Protestant taught that our creator God is omniscient (all-knowing) omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time). This creator designed and created men and women fully and completely all by 'himself'.

What I don't understand, is if this creator purposefully designed and unleashed upon the earth a creature capable of rape and murder, why isn't 'He' to blame for these atrocities? Why would you construct a being with the potential to do so much harm to his fellow humans? What was the motive?

If my son murdered a human and I supplied the gun knowing ahead of time he'd shoot someone, I'm held accountable for my part in the homicide. How much more so should God be held accountable for DESIGNING a creature that he KNOWS ahead of time (he's omniscient, remember) will murder a fellow human?

This is why God let's the things happen that happen in the world,

Gen 1:26 (ESVST) 26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion (to rule and reign) over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."

Gen 1:28 (ESVST) 28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, (to bring into subjection) and have dominion (to rule and reign) over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth."

God gave mankind authority over the earth and everything in it.

Take the USPS for instance. How many disgruntled mail carriers have gone into a post office and killed people? Is the government held responsible for their actions? Did they totally get rid of the mail service after the first shooting? Why isn't the government held accountable for the shootings?

The government "KNOWS" that some mail carriers will rob people and steal their mail. Why do they keep the mail service active? They know mail will be stolen. Should the government be held accountable when a mail carrier robs someone of their mail? Do you think every time something bad happens in a post office that a member of the government comes in and handles it? Should Obama go to every post office that has a theft or a shooting and take control? He doesn't.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

So why the flood?

Maybe you should read Genesis and find out!

 

[prometheus11]

Maybe you should read Genesis and find out!

I have. God killed a bunch of bad people so that he'd be dealing with different bad people instead of the same ones. It makes so much sense.

 

[Deathbydefault]

I believe both are true. Its a tough job but He is the only one who can do it.

Authority is a choice.
I choose not to turn to a god for one.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Actually, it does take an entire human history, but not because He is trying to remove evil from this present time and place of human history and can't. Rather He is allowing plenty of time for those millions and millions who desire to be saved and delivered from evil to live a changed life in the eternal new creation. All of which was/is God's purpose in the first place. If when you say, "Hasn't He tried to remove it before?" you are referring to such things as the flood, I think you are not realizing that was only a temporary halt on the wickedness of humanity, which had reached the point of self-destruction, to allow for more humans to be born, live, survive, and be saved for the eternal new creation.

He regretted making humanity. It says so in the story. After obviously failing (Noah goes on a drunken bender right after the Flood, having learned nothing), God just shrugs, admits we have issues, and promises never to destroy the earth again (via water, anyway). Why bother with Revelations' apocalypse if He said He understood we were just screw-ups?

Also, if God knows not everyone will choose His message, then there's really no need to mess around. Just get on with it.

The entire account reveals that God gave over 100 years for any who would listen to Noah, who obeyed God, could have repented, yet they did not choose to do so. It was those who would not repent of their evil who were destroyed. Noah and his family who choose to live life apart from evil in God's righteousness were saved to repopulate the earth.
Of course it was only a temporary halt because as long as there are humans who choose self over God, rebellion and evil there will be wickedness. Even some of Noah's own family began to display sinful choices and behavior after the flood.

Noah: Repent and get on my boat!
Spectators: When's it gonna rain?
Noah: A century from now!
Spectators (murmuring): Uh ... we'll all be dead by then. That's stupid.
Noah: God told me you have to repent to be saved.
Spectators: But, seriously, what does repenting have to do with getting on your stupid boat? If we repent, why not just cancel the rain?
Noah: God told me to build a boat and invite all the animals of the world!
Spectators: Sooooo ... you don't really have room for us, but in order to not look like a dick, you're just toying with us and giving lip service to caring if we live or die, right?
Noah (sighs): Just ... shut up ...
Spectators: No, really ... where in your message is the fact God wants us to come along?
Noah: I ... I ...
Spectators: So, we weren't going to be saved anyway, just your drunk self and your stupid kids. Like we told Ken Ham: no tax breaks for you. Build the boat yourself. *leave*

Everything in the Bible, especially all the prophetic scriptures about the promised Messiah, show that wickedness was bound to come again. Thus the necessity of a Savior to redeem humanity from sin and wickedness.

Yeah, but in Hinduism, it can be argued that time is cyclical and that's why any solution never sticks. Harder to claim that with a perfect deity ... either He wants to fix it or He doesn't, and either He can actually fix it, or He can't...

Even after Jesus appears, apparently he has to return AGAIN, all because it didn't stick with HIM either. Is there no one who can get the job done?

Take the USPS for instance. How many disgruntled mail carriers have gone into a post office and killed people? Is the government held responsible for their actions? Did they totally get rid of the mail service after the first shooting? Why isn't the government held accountable for the shootings?

The government "KNOWS" that some mail carriers will rob people and steal their mail. Why do they keep the mail service active? They know mail will be stolen. Should the government be held accountable when a mail carrier robs someone of their mail? Do you think every time something bad happens in a post office that a member of the government comes in and handles it? Should Obama go to every post office that has a theft or a shooting and take control? He doesn't.

If you don't give a rat's behind about your employees, whether public or private, yes, you are partly responsible at the very least. I was nearly suicidal after my grandfather died, and my work provided me with a therapist. THAT'S the standard we should have.

 

[InChrist]

You're not fairly dealing with the scenario I present.

What scripture would you cite if the world appeared to be sinless since the flood?

I can't site any scripture about the world appearing to be sinless after the flood because there are none and I don't believe the world was or is sinless since the flood, nor does the Bible indicate it ever was. I guess I don't understand your scenario or what point you are trying to make.

 

[InChrist]

Actually, the Bible is one of many texts that articulates sin....
I understand you do not hold other texts in the same regard as you hold the Bible.
The problem here as far as I can see is that I do not hold the Bible to any higher regard as all those other texts.
So while you are taking all the other texts that articulate sin and comparing them to the Bible, I am not bound by that restriction.

Thank you for you thoughts. I can understand that our views concerning various texts and the subject of sin would make a difference in our perspectives. Is there any certain religious text which you believe more accurately addresses or explains the issue of sin than the biblical scriptures do?

 

[djhwoodwerks]

If you don't give a rat's behind about your employees, whether public or private, yes, you are partly responsible at the very least. I was nearly suicidal after my grandfather died, and my work provided me with a therapist. THAT'S the standard we should have.

That's awesome they helped you, but was it the president/CEO of the company that came personally and handled everything for you, or was it from within your office? I don't know where you work, so I just used that scenario.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

I have. God killed a bunch of bad people so that he'd be dealing with different bad people instead of the same ones. It makes so much sense.

Why don't you get on your knees and ask God to make it make sense! Why does it matter what God did with His own creation? If you have a problem with something God has done, why not go to Him and ask, instead of other humans that have no idea why He does what He does? Who are we to judge God for what He does with His own things? Are you as concerned with parents that let their kids do drugs and get drunk? Are you that concerned about parents who could care less what their kids do? It's just another trick of satan, raising questions in peoples minds like that to keep them from trusting God.

 

[Kartari]

Hi Hockeycowboy,

"You can be a mass murderer and find scriptural support, and you can be a total pacifist and find scriptural support."

I don't know, at least not for those wanting to be a follower of Christ. (1 Peter 2:21) (if you want to be an Israelite, maybe).

Dealing with this specific subject:
Christians must even 'love their enemy'. (Matthew 5:44) And it's important, for those wanting to be Christian, to obey Jesus! (John 15:14)

The following is what I posted under the thread, "Is Jesus God?" It fits this specific subject:

There are over one BILLION trinitarians professing Christianity, the vast majority of the 43,000 sects of Christendom. And how many of these really follow Jesus' command, to "love your enemy", or even to 'love their brothers'(John 13:34-35; John 15:10)? For the past 1600+ years, trinitarians have joined with their respective countries, and KILLED others, even their brothers! They've considered their national "heritage" more important than their spiritual "heritage", supporting their 'brothers-in-arms' over their spiritual brothers.....Catholics against Catholics, Protestants against Protestants.

Interesting that at John 13:34-35, Jesus said "all will know" His disciples, not by what they teach (although that is important), but by how they act -- how they love their brothers! How strange, the ones worshipping Jesus as God are, for the most part, less obedient than those who don't, who rather solely worship His Father, through Him!

It's difficult to be politically neutral, especially in the face of nationalism during a war, but obedience to God, and Jesus, doesn't stop just because it's unpopular, and causes hatred among others! Jesus said it would be a cause for hatred(John 15:17-19).

Reminds me of a G.K. Chesterton quote: "Christianity hasn't been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried."

Take care.

Well, on the one hand, yes. People, regardless of religious background, can deviate, have deviated, and continue to deviate from their backgrounds' ideals all the time. They may do so for reasons which can have little to no bearing on the traditions themselves.

That said, Christianity seems to be among the worst offenders in world history for the most religiously-inspired atrocities and violence. It's right up there with Islam, but that's another topic.

I think this poorly reflects on Christianity as a whole. More specifically, I point to the nebulous teachings themselves. Because, speaking as a Buddhist, when we couple the power of the mind to imagine patterns where they do not actually exist, with the lack of Christian teachings which provide insight into honestly looking inward with diligence to unravel our ignorance and self-made delusions (e.g. meditation practice), we have a recipe with great potential for disaster. We can also look to the history of the Roman Empire, and how its political influence over early Christendom shaped the religion and its scriptures. And in the worst of scenarios, these factors have bred extremist views.

Granted, Jesus did mirror among the best qualities found in other traditions when he advised loving one another, even your enemies. Clearly, anyone who calls themselves a Christian yet spews harmful words and actions against others cannot claim to honestly follow in Jesus' example, in this and some other scriptural cases at least.

Still, the NT has serious flaws. Along with the nuggets of wisdom we can find, we can also find plenty of lumps of charcoal: support for slavery (in Paul's letters) for instance, or the all sorts of crazy found in Revelations. The theme of obedience to God as of paramount importance in life is also something I find very disturbing. For me, possessing a discerning mind capable of correctly identifying and watering the seeds of compassion and wisdom should be of primary importance to living a good and moral life. Placing obedience to God on the highest pedestal instead is lazy; it merely defers personal moral responsibility and halts moral maturity. Interestingly, deferring to authorities in other facets of life is what we expect children to do, not grown adults. The rational among us don't expect God to give us money, for instance: we instead get jobs and earn a living for ourselves. Likewise, we should imo strive to work out our own salvation by watering the seeds of compassion and wisdom within us, not expect God to save us from ourselves.

This is among the main reasons why I find Buddhism far more appealing. By comparison, the Buddhist scriptures are very clear cut and generally make sense even to logical minds. They don't require jumping through extensive apologetic hoops and maintaining significant cognitive dissonance in order to "correctly" interpret or make some kind of sense out of their meaning. They instead straightforwardly and consistently encourage compassion, kindness, wisdom, and making a discipline out of the deep examination of self and reality itself.

Bringing this back to the OP, the problem of resolving the very clear contradiction inherent in professing belief in an omnipotent and omniscient God that is also benevolent simply serves to demonstrate my point: the teachings are nebulous.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Hi Hockeycowboy,



Well, on the one hand, yes. People, regardless of religious background, can deviate, have deviated, and continue to deviate from their backgrounds' ideals all the time. They may do so for reasons which can have little to no bearing on the traditions themselves.

That said, Christianity seems to be among the worst offenders in world history for the most religiously-inspired atrocities and violence. It's right up there with Islam, but that's another topic.

I think this poorly reflects on Christianity as a whole. More specifically, I point to the nebulous teachings themselves. Because, speaking as a Buddhist, when we couple the power of the mind to imagine patterns where they do not actually exist, with the lack of Christian teachings which provide insight into honestly looking inward with diligence to unravel our ignorance and self-made delusions (e.g. meditation practice), we have a recipe with great potential for disaster. We can also look to the history of the Roman Empire, and how its political influence over early Christendom shaped the religion and its scriptures. And in the worst of scenarios, these factors have bred extremist views.

Granted, Jesus did mirror among the best qualities found in other traditions when he advised loving one another, even your enemies. Clearly, anyone who calls themselves a Christian yet spews harmful words and actions against others cannot claim to honestly follow in Jesus' example, in this and some other scriptural cases at least.

Still, the NT has serious flaws. Along with the nuggets of wisdom we can find, we can also find plenty of lumps of charcoal: support for slavery (in Paul's letters) for instance, or the all sorts of crazy found in Revelations. The theme of obedience to God as of paramount importance in life is also something I find very disturbing. For me, possessing a discerning mind capable of correctly identifying and watering the seeds of compassion and wisdom should be of primary importance to living a good and moral life. Placing obedience to God on the highest pedestal instead is lazy; it merely defers personal moral responsibility and halts moral maturity. Interestingly, deferring to authorities in other facets of life is what we expect children to do, not grown adults. The rational among us don't expect God to give us money, for instance: we instead get jobs and earn a living for ourselves. Likewise, we should imo strive to work out our own salvation by watering the seeds of compassion and wisdom within us, not expect God to save us from ourselves.

This is among the main reasons why I find Buddhism far more appealing. By comparison, the Buddhist scriptures are very clear cut and generally make sense even to logical minds. They don't require jumping through extensive apologetic hoops and maintaining significant cognitive dissonance in order to "correctly" interpret or make some kind of sense out of their meaning. They instead straightforwardly and consistently encourage compassion, kindness, wisdom, and making a discipline out of the deep examination of self and reality itself.

Bringing this back to the OP, the problem of resolving the very clear contradiction inherent in professing belief in an omnipotent and omniscient God that is also benevolent simply serves to demonstrate my point: the teachings are nebulous.

Hello, Kartari!

You know, I agree with much of what you wrote. I'd like to discuss this with you, but I'm getting tired. I'll contact you later, ok? Hope so. Take care!

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Granted, Jesus did mirror among the best qualities found in other traditions when he advised loving one another, even your enemies. Clearly, anyone who calls themselves a Christian yet spews harmful words and actions against others cannot claim to honestly follow in Jesus' example, in this and some other scriptural cases at least.

To be fair, like God, Jesus has a mouth on him and can be incredibly insulting and sarcastic.

 

[lunamoth]

I was a devoted Christian for a very long time, 25 years or more - a Trinity believing Protestant taught that our creator God is omniscient (all-knowing) omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time). This creator designed and created men and women fully and completely all by 'himself'.

What I don't understand, is if this creator purposefully designed and unleashed upon the earth a creature capable of rape and murder, why isn't 'He' to blame for these atrocities? Why would you construct a being with the potential to do so much harm to his fellow humans? What was the motive?

If my son murdered a human and I supplied the gun knowing ahead of time he'd shoot someone, I'm held accountable for my part in the homicide. How much more so should God be held accountable for DESIGNING a creature that he KNOWS ahead of time (he's omniscient, remember) will murder a fellow human?

Hi Buttercup,

As others have said I don't think I have any answer that you would find satisfying. If God could have done it another way and have it be the experience we were meant to have, then he would have done it another way. And, maybe there are lots of universes out there with sentient beings experiencing other kinds of life, but I honestly cannot image them. And, for the record, I cannot imagine heaven. I can, however, entertain many pleasant thoughts of what I hope heaven is like.

Life as we know it involves change, movement through space and time. For there to be change, there must be differentials and a means to move from one place/condition to another. A physical example: for water to flow there needs to be a high and a low point (the differential) and gravity to cause it to move from high to low. This principle of disequilibrium applies to everything. If all is perfectly uniform and united, there is no movement, therefore no change, no growth, no life. So, out of the gates there is the basic fact that things cannot all be the same with only the choice between conditions that are otherwise perfectly equal.

I don't believe that human beings were designed. We, like the rest of the universe we inhabit, came into being via the long, gradual process of evolution, formed by the same forces that created mountains and oceans, stars and atoms, and all living things right down to viruses, those entities that are right on the border between living and non-living. Not only is the answer to "why murder, suffering, pain, death," is not just the 'free will' of humans, but the 'freedom' of the entire physical universe. A physical universe that can only exist with the concurrent processes of building up and tearing down, movement from high to low, organized to disorganized, and in some limited cases from disorganized to organized.

So, point 1 is that humans are part of this world that has many processes that have no regard for the happiness or well-being of humans. So there is suffering caused by the fact that we are part of creation, and we are subject to the same laws and processes as everything else.

Because we were created from nature by a combination of random events and selective pressures, we exhibit those same traits in our physical existence and in our behaviors. We grow, we decline. We individually die, but we also carry on forward via our children. We need to eat, so we sometimes kill. There is a competition and struggle for survival at times, so we sometimes kill other humans to preserve ourselves or our families. These instincts and choices are not wholly rational, yet they are part of our make-up because of the processes that formed us into sentient beings.

So now we get to my second point, which is that as sentient beings with higher levels of reasoning, we can now examine our own behaviors and decide if there are other ways to accomplish the same goals. For example, I think it is likely that humans will eventually all be vegetarians, if our species makes it that long. This is where free will comes into play. We are free to make other choices based upon experience and information gleaned from other sources (our education). We are free to chose actions that help or hurt others. Why might we choose actions to help others? Is the only answer for our own benefit? When we talk about values and existential meaning, we are no longer asking questions where the rules of logic help.

When talking about faith in God and free will, it is usually phrased as free will is required for love, and I agree. But love is not just a warm feeling of attraction and bonding to another; it is not even the free will to choose to 'love' God. It is the free will to make an active choice to do things that help, rather than hurt. It is wanting, and acting within your own power, the best for others. It is feeding, healing, teaching, listening, nurturing, supporting and having compassion for another, and for the rest of creation as well. Where does the impetus for love come from? I'd say it evolved in us along with all of our other traits as humans. In loving, we struggle against our baser, more selfish instincts. Life is process and process means change and change requires movement between differentials. Good is only 'good' when there is a choice that is 'less good.'

Murder, rape, starvation are not necessary. But to get rid of them we need to choose ever more 'love,' in the form of healing, feeding, nurturing, teaching, sharing etc.. Why do people murder, rape, and hoard resources? You know the answers better than I because of your education in psychology. Much of it lies in illness, much of it lies in fear, and much of it lies in cycles of hurt and pain. The suffering comes from being part of a world, formed by a world, where life emerges by struggle and things going wrong (from our perspective). Salvation comes from love, and love comes from God.

So, my third point is that is where God comes into play in our creation. God is the power that is attracting us out of the muck and mire of life. We are being formed in his image (the whole universe is), but it is still a work in progress. Could our own evolutional development have gone a different way, one in which we were already peaceful vegetarians not prone to violence? Sure, by chance, but it didn't. Could it have all been done a different way? I'd be interested to hear how that would be accomplished in a manner that did not leave us as puppets.

I'm not sure if that all makes sense, but going back to what I said in the beginning about not being able to imagine a different kind of existence, one that is perfect. To me, if something is perfect, then there can be no possibility of change, or life as we experience it. Following that, I agree with Katzpur's point, if one wants it be be less than perfect, to allow for life, where do you start drawing the lines between perfection and allowable imperfection? I don't see how one can be a little bit free, or a little bit part of this world.

 

[Buttercup]

Hi Lunessa! Happy to see you here.

As others have said I don't think I have any answer that you would find satisfying. If God could have done it another way and have it be the experience we were meant to have, then he would have done it another way. And, maybe there are lots of universes out there with sentient beings experiencing other kinds of life, but I honestly cannot image them. And, for the record, I cannot imagine heaven. I can, however, entertain many pleasant thoughts of what I hope heaven is like.

I don't believe that human beings were designed. We, like the rest of the universe we inhabit, came into being via the long, gradual process of evolution, formed by the same forces that created mountains and oceans, stars and atoms, and all living things right down to viruses, those entities that are right on the border between living and non-living. Not only is the answer to "why murder, suffering, pain, death," is not just the 'free will' of humans, but the 'freedom' of the entire physical universe. A physical universe that can only exist with the concurrent processes of building up and tearing down, movement from high to low, organized to disorganized, and in some limited cases from disorganized to organized.

These two paragraphs seem paradoxical to me in regard to theology and Christian doctrine. I'm not sure if your views in general have changed, but could you explain the origin of this exegesis? Or, are your thoughts more of an independent sort?

So, point 1 is that humans are part of this world that has many processes that have no regard for the happiness or well-being of humans. So there is suffering caused by the fact that we are part of creation, and we are subject to the same laws and processes as everything else.

Because we were created from nature by a combination of random events and selective pressures, we exhibit those same traits in our physical existence and in our behaviors. We grow, we decline. We individually die, but we also carry on forward via our children. We need to eat, so we sometimes kill. There is a competition and struggle for survival at times, so we sometimes kill other humans to preserve ourselves or our families. These instincts and choices are not wholly rational, yet they are part of our make-up because of the processes that formed us into sentient beings.

Agreed.

So now we get to my second point, which is that as sentient beings with higher levels of reasoning, we can now examine our own behaviors and decide if there are other ways to accomplish the same goals. For example, I think it is likely that humans will eventually all be vegetarians, if our species makes it that long. This is where free will comes into play. We are free to make other choices based upon experience and information gleaned from other sources (our education). We are free to chose actions that help or hurt others. Why might we choose actions to help others? Is the only answer for our own benefit? When we talk about values and existential meaning, we are no longer asking questions where the rules of logic help.

Agreed, again.

When talking about faith in God and free will, it is usually phrased as free will is required for love, and I agree. But love is not just a warm feeling of attraction and bonding to another; it is not even the free will to choose to 'love' God. It is the free will to make an active choice to do things that help, rather than hurt. It is wanting, and acting within your own power, the best for others. It is feeding, healing, teaching, listening, nurturing, supporting and having compassion for another, and for the rest of creation as well. Where does the impetus for love come from? I'd say it evolved in us along with all of our other traits as humans. In loving, we struggle against our baser, more selfish instincts. Life is process and process means change and change requires movement between differentials. Good is only 'good' when there is a choice that is 'less good.'

These are my thoughts as well, but the "God" word still has me a bit confused. I'll wait for the definition of who you think this being is.

Murder, rape, starvation are not necessary. But to get rid of them we need to choose ever more 'love,' in the form of healing, feeding, nurturing, teaching, sharing etc.. Why do people murder, rape, and hoard resources? You know the answers better than I because of your education in psychology. Much of it lies in illness, much of it lies in fear, and much of it lies in cycles of hurt and pain. The suffering comes from being part of a world, formed by a world, where life emerges by struggle and things going wrong (from our perspective). Salvation comes from love, and love comes from God.

So, my third point is that is where God comes into play in our creation. God is the power that is attracting us out of the muck and mire of life. We are being formed in his image (the whole universe is), but it is still a work in progress. Could our own evolutional development have gone a different way, one in which we were already peaceful vegetarians not prone to violence? Sure, by chance, but it didn't. Could it have all been done a different way? I'd be interested to hear how that would be accomplished in a manner that did not leave us as puppets.

I'm not sure if that all makes sense, but going back to what I said in the beginning about not being able to imagine a different kind of existence, one that is perfect. To me, if something is perfect, then there can be no possibility of change, or life as we experience it. Following that, I agree with Katzpur's point, if one wants it be be less than perfect, to allow for life, where do you start drawing the lines between perfection and allowable imperfection? I don't see how one can be a little bit free, or a little bit part of this world.

My question in the OP was direction at Christians who believe in the characteristics of God as I described. The Abrahamic God is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. I've read through the Bible and studied it in depth multiple times and can't imagine how anyone can come to any other conclusion than the God of the bible has all those big three "O" attributes and many more. I'm very open to hearing your definition and understanding of God and where you found the information to draw this conclusion.

I may not be back all week, though. I'm going to be very busy with work. I hope you can wait for a response!

 

[Yoshua]

What is the cause of sin?

Hi Red Dragon,

Based on the account in Genesis, disobedience to God is the cause of sin.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

The character of God in the bible (oft confused, I believe, with real deities) has powers that depend on the author, much like comic book superheroes. Early Superman could just jump really high. Then, he could fly. Now, he can go across the universe in seconds, etc.

Hi Kelly,

I don't think so. True salvation is far from the comic book superheroes. You will know the true salvation or your superhero if you trusted and have faith in your superhero.

Thanks

 

[InChrist]

He regretted making humanity. It says so in the story. After obviously failing (Noah goes on a drunken bender right after the Flood, having learned nothing), God just shrugs, admits we have issues, and promises never to destroy the earth again (via water, anyway). Why bother with Revelations' apocalypse if He said He understood we were just screw-ups?

Also, if God knows not everyone will choose His message, then there's really no need to mess around. Just get on with it.

.

Because not everyone will choose to reject His message.

 

[Yoshua]

Historical findings which match up with what was written in the Buddhist texts validate Buddhist interpretation and theology then?

Yes. Every beliefs has its own history.

So the depth of information, and the witness and testimony of the Buddha's primary disciples, as found in the Buddhist texts also validate Buddhist theology?

Yes, for Buddhist theology only, and not for Christian theology.

It means that Jesus' mission might be radically different than what the orthodox Christian church teaches about him.

I believed it should be consistent and can’t be contradicted with the orthodox Christianity.

In the Buddhist texts, it is also said that prophecies were made regarding Lord Buddha's birth, coming, mission, and his paranibbana. That fulfillment validates Buddhist theology, according to your standard.

Yes for Buddhist. They differed a lot with Jesus Christ. His birth, mission, ministry, crucifixion, death and resurrection is one and only.

Lexicographical evidence regarding "aeon" was provided here

The author of this source is John Wesley Hanson (1823–1901), a universalist—a belief that everyone will be saved. You may check this link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wesley_Hanson

http://www.gotquestions.org/universalism.html

We both have same Greek word that was used, but the author (J. Wesley Hanson) make a study based on his assumption from being a universalist which contradicts biblically.

Below are some good source of interlinear:

aiónios: agelong, eternal
Original Word: αἰώνιος, ία, ιον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: aiónios
Phonetic Spelling: (ahee-o'-nee-os)
Short Definition: eternal, unending
Definition: age-long, and therefore: practically eternal, unending; partaking of the character of that which lasts for an age, as contrasted with that which is brief and fleeting. Biblehub.com

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
eternal, forever, everlasting.

From aion; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well) -- eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).see GREEK aion

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 166: αἰώνιος

αἰώνιος, , and (in 2 Thessalonians 2:16; Hebrews 9:12; Numbers 25:13; Plato, Tim., p. 38 b. (see below); Diodorus 1:1; (cf. WHs Appendix, p. 157; Winers Grammar, 69 (67); Buttmann, 26 (23))) αἰώνιος, αἰώνια, αἰώνιον (αἰών);

1. without beginning or end, that which always has been and always will be: Θεός, Romans 16:26 (ὁ μόνος αἰώνιος, 2 Macc. 1:25); πνεῦμα, Hebrews 9:14.

2. without beginning: χρόνοις αἰωνίοις, Romans 16:25; πρό χρόνων αἰωνίων, 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2; εὐαγγέλιον, a gospel whose subject-matter is eternal, i. e., the saving purpose of God adopted from eternity, Revelation 14:6.

3. without end, never to cease, everlasting: 2 Corinthians 4:18 (opposed to πρόσκαιρος); αἰώνιον αὐτόν, joined to thee forever as a sharer of the same eternal life, Philcmon 1:15; βάρος δόξης, 2 Corinthians 4:17;............

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

Granted, Jesus did mirror among the best qualities found in other traditions when he advised loving one another, even your enemies. Clearly, anyone who calls themselves a Christian yet spews harmful words and actions against others cannot claim to honestly follow in Jesus' example, in this and some other scriptural cases at least.

Still, the NT has serious flaws. Along with the nuggets of wisdom we can find, we can also find plenty of lumps of charcoal: support for slavery (in Paul's letters) for instance, or the all sorts of crazy found in Revelations. The theme of obedience to God as of paramount importance in life is also something I find very disturbing. For me, possessing a discerning mind capable of correctly identifying and watering the seeds of compassion and wisdom should be of primary importance to living a good and moral life.

Hi Kartari,

Jesus does not promoted love (only) but with compassion if you’re familiar with the account in the Bible about helping the poor and needy. He also taught us to love our neighbor as ourselves--as well loving thy enemies. Jesus’ teachings are not limited to these good works originated from God.

Placing obedience to God on the highest pedestal instead is lazy; it merely defers personal moral responsibility and halts moral maturity. Interestingly, deferring to authorities in other facets of life is what we expect children to do, not grown adults. The rational among us don't expect God to give us money, for instance: we instead get jobs and earn a living for ourselves. Likewise, we should imo strive to work out our own salvation by watering the seeds of compassion and wisdom within us, not expect God to save us from ourselves.

Actually I can relate with you about good works. The good works of Christianity are not by his own effort (only) but from God. When we use our own effort to do something good for others with the obedience of God, this is not a lazy act rather this is what Christianity is. There is a maturity inside a Christian walk; trials and temptations; struggles between the flesh and the spirit that was one with the Holy Spirit. There is no age distinction for maturity here.

God also promised blessings will be upon to those who adhere His words. Working out of salvation in Christianity is not by one’s own effort.

Phil. 2:12-15
12. So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling;
13. for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.
14. Do all things without grumbling or disputing;
15. that you may prove yourselves to be blameless and innocent, children of God above reproach in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you appear as lights in the world,

This is among the main reasons why I find Buddhism far more appealing. By comparison, the Buddhist scriptures are very clear cut and generally make sense even to logical minds. They don't require jumping through extensive apologetic hoops and maintaining significant cognitive dissonance in order to "correctly" interpret or make some kind of sense out of their meaning. They instead straightforwardly and consistently encourage compassion, kindness, wisdom, and making a discipline out of the deep examination of self and reality itself.

If we will observe and look at what Jesus’ use in His ministry (in the Bible) like metaphoric statement and parables, the people who heard Him (truly) did not understand what Jesus actually meant. This is not what the whole Bible is saying. The Scriptures can be understand in its literal sense. The disciple of Christ understood what Jesus had done, thus it does not defeat the purpose of Christ's ministry for many believed and understand what Christianity is. One thing that is comforting and assuring is the promised Holy Spirit that was given for those who received Christ. This will be forever with those who trusted and believed in His name.

Thanks