God's choice: quick question for Christians

[Dicky Underpants]

]Sassy,
No! that means stop making stupid remarks as an excuse for your lack of edcuation on the subject being
discussed.


The statement is not contradictory to those who have studied OT law and teachings of the Prophets
and understand the covenant with Christ being like that of Abraham but sins removed.How do you hope to learn
anything if even the basic christian beliefs are not understood by you.

One basic Christian belief has for a long time been the Trinity, in which you do not believe.

the covenant with Christ being like that of Abraham but sins removed

I presume you're referring to St Paul's idea of "By faith, Abraham was counted righteous" - the only part of the Law that St Paul didn't dispense with. I suggest he only clutched at the reference to Abraham because the Roman authorities would only give any credence to a foreign religion if it had some kind of ancient pedigree, and he knew his new religion would never make headway without providing some.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

321

Which of these contradictory statements do you think to be true: are atheists " not saved" because
 they are atheists, or are they "judged according to their works"?

You can have either one, but not both.

The statement is not contradictory to those who have studied OT law and teachings of the Prophets
and understand the covenant with Christ being like that of Abraham but sins removed.How do you hope to learn
anything if even the basic christian beliefs are not understood by you.

Does works save a christian or Jesus Christ?
You see the answer to that question would show the way to the answer to the questions already answered which
you cannot understand.

To be honest as you never learn from the many posts by Christians why should we believe you will learn
anything by us once again giving you answers you will just ignore?

Well said Sassy. Bluehillside will never accept that his worldview is the problem.

[torridon]

321
Well said Sassy. Bluehillside will never accept that his worldview is the problem.

Eh ?

Do we take it from this that you endorse Sassy's vision of a supposedly benign god that operates a twin track to salvation system with christians being fast tracked through without murmur whilst everyone else is subjected to judgement ?

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

Well said Sassy. Bluehillside will never accept that his worldview is the problem.

Eh ?

I responded to bluehillside's post by saying he was making the mistake of assuming the alternatives he presented were mutually exclusive. He disagreed.

Sassy's post gave some detail. There was nothing stopping bluehillside finding this out for himself.

To be honest as you never learn from the many posts by Christians why should we believe you will learn
anything by us once again giving you answers you will just ignore?

As evidenced by e.g. the Are we nearly done here thread.

[Sriram]

Eh ?

Do we take it from this that you endorse Sassy's vision of a supposedly benign god that operates a twin track to salvation system with christians being fast tracked through without murmur whilst everyone else is subjected to judgement ?

The belief of being special and the 'only chosen people' of God, has in some ways been the bane of the Jewish community all these centuries. And perhaps the Muslims also. I hope Christians don't fall into this trap.

IMO no one is special and everyone  is evolving towards a more enlightened life....both individually and collectively.

[floo]

321
Well said Sassy. Bluehillside will never accept that his worldview is the problem.

And yours isn't?

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

And yours isn't?

Since I am at liberty to consider both natural and non-natural explanations, I would suggest that it is less biased than one that assumes only natural causes and explanations; certainly one that assumes the truth of their position by accusing another poster of doing the equivalent of claiming 2+2=5.

[floo]

Since I am at liberty to consider both natural and non-natural explanations, I would suggest that it is less biased than one that assumes only natural causes and explanations; certainly one that assumes the truth of their position by accusing another poster of doing the equivalent of claiming 2+2=5.

You appear to have 2+2=5 on the brain!

[torridon]

I responded to bluehillside's post by saying he was making the mistake of assuming the alternatives he presented were mutually exclusive. He disagreed.

Sassy's post gave some detail. There was nothing stopping bluehillside finding this out for himself.
As evidenced by e.g. the Are we nearly done here thread.

Evasion.

Let's try this again :

Do we take it from this that you endorse Sassy's vision of a supposedly benign god that operates a twin track to salvation system with christians being fast tracked through without murmur whilst everyone else is subjected to judgement ?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sassy,

No! that means stop making stupid remarks as an excuse for your lack of edcuation on the subject being discussed.

The “No true Scotsman” fallacy is a failure in logic, and moreover one that you attempted. If you want to argue the point you need first to understand it, and second to explain why that’s not what you attempted.

Using playground insult instead is just white noise.

The statement is not contradictory to those who have studied OT law and teachings of the Prophets
and understand the covenant with Christ being like that of Abraham but sins removed.How do you hope to learn
anything if even the basic christian beliefs are not understood by you.

Does works save a christian or Jesus Christ?
You see the answer to that question would show the way to the answer to the questions already answered which
you cannot understand.

To be honest as you never learn from the many posts by Christians why should we believe you will learn
anything by us once again giving you answers you will just ignore?

Again, you’ve missed the point entirely. We’re told that the way into the life after is to believe the “offer” to be true. We’re also told however that the way in is to behave well. I merely ask which version of the story you think to be the correct one.

Why is this difficult for you to understand?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sword,

Well said Sassy. Bluehillside will never accept that his worldview is the problem.

You're seriously returning with your "worldview" nonsense despite having it falsified and thrown at your feet countless times now?

Why?

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

Evasion.

Let's try this again :

Do we take it from this that you endorse Sassy's vision of a supposedly benign god that operates a twin track to salvation system with christians being fast tracked through without murmur whilst everyone else is subjected to judgement ?

I don't believe that this is what Sassy believes. I certainly don't get this from reading her posts. No doubt she'll correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't endorse the vision you have outlined.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sword,

Sassy's post gave some detail. There was nothing stopping bluehillside finding this out for himself.

Yes there was - you can't find out something that's incoherent.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

Sassy,

...

Again, you’ve missed the point entirely. We’re told that the way into the life after is to believe the “offer” to be true. We’re also told however that the way in is to behave well. I merely ask which version of the story you think to be the correct one.

They are not mutually exclusive. See if you can figure out why!

[Gordon]

Since I am at liberty to consider both natural and non-natural explanations

I look forward to hearing the details of the latter, and on what basis you've critiqued them.

I would suggest that it is less biased than one that assumes only natural causes and explanations; certainly one that assumes the truth of their position by accusing another poster of doing the equivalent of claiming 2+2=5.

I would suggest you stop posting the same unreconstructed bollocks you've been corrected on before.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

Sword,

You're seriously returning with your "worldview" nonsense despite having it falsified and thrown at your feet countless times now?

Why?

Try explaining/interpreting evidence without one!

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

I would suggest you stop posting the same unreconstructed bollocks you've been corrected on before.

Another one who assumes the truth of their position, then makes deductions from it.

The truth (or otherwise) of a statement doesn't change by calling it unreconstructed bollocks by the way.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sword,

Since I am at liberty to consider both natural and non-natural explanations,...

How would you consider "non-natural explanations" exactly? What tests or methods would you apply to the claims?

I would suggest that it is less biased than one that assumes only natural causes and explanations;

Then you would suggest wrongly. Some of us assume naturalism as a working paradigm (rather than as an absolute) because there's no way to test claims of the supernatural. It's a simple enough point I'd have thought. 

...certainly one that assumes the truth of their position by accusing another poster of doing the equivalent of claiming 2+2=5.

Stop lying - it's dull. When someone attempts an argument for "God" (or for leprechauns for that matter) that relies for its force on a logical fallacy, that argument is equivalent to 2+2=5.

[torridon]

Since I am at liberty to consider both natural and non-natural explanations, I would suggest that it is less biased than one that assumes only natural causes and explanations; certainly one that assumes the truth of their position by accusing another poster of doing the equivalent of claiming 2+2=5.

Likewise I could claim to be at liberty to believe that the planets rotate around the Sun because they are pulled by teams of invisible magic pixies.  The difference is that gravitational theory based on the inverse square law has evidence on its side.  There is no evidence for magic pixies, and in fact, there never could be because, they are errm, magic.  So, what value is there in the liberty to believe nonsense ?

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

Sword,

...When someone attempts an argument for "God" (or for leprechauns for that matter) that relies for its force on a logical fallacy, that argument is equivalent to 2+2=5.

And the charge of logical fallacy is dependent on your worldview.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

Likewise I could claim to be at liberty to believe that the planets rotate around the Sun because they are pulled by teams of invisible magic pixies.  The difference is that gravitational theory based on the inverse square law has evidence on its side.  There is no evidence for magic pixies, and in fact, there never could be because, they are errm, magic.  So, what value is there in the liberty to believe nonsense ?

I think you need to ask that question of those who believe in magic pixies.

Seems like a statement about religious belief that assumes the conclusion of that it is claiming. I'd leave that to bluehillside and Gordon if I were you...

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sword,

They are not mutually exclusive. See if you can figure out why!

Scenario 1:

St Peter: "Well done for all those good works old son. Sadly though you didn't accept the offer, so on your bike it is I'm afraid."

Scenario 2:

St Peter: "Not much sign of good works there I'm afraid, but on the plus side at least you believed in the offer. Come on in!

QED

[Stranger]

And the charge of logical fallacy is dependent on your worldview.

Not unless you think logic itself is a 'worldview'.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

Your analogy shows you haven't understood how biblical salvation works or the role of good works

Try again. I'll give you a week. If you need more time, let me know...

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sword,

And the charge of logical fallacy is dependent on your worldview.

Perhaps we should mark this as the very moment Sword finally gave up even the attempt to engage meaningfully here. You can have any "worldview" you like, but logic is logic whichever way you look at it. You're entirely welcome to the "worldview" that if you jump out of the window you'll float to the ground, but a subjective opinion is all it will remain (and probably not for long if you want to test it).