Forums → WEPR → The Religion Debate Thread
| 704 | 250656 |
So yeah, our threads on religion have long since died out, so I figured it would be time to start afresh here!
Do you believe God exists (I know almost all of you don't)? Do you feel religion is important today? Is it a force for good? Discuss everything related to that here!
I'm going to start the ball rolling:
We all know about the rise of ISIS and the terrible acts it perpetuates. Does that show that Islam and religion in general is an awful concept? Is it the people who twist it? Or is it fundamentally an evil force?
Roping in the WERP frequenters
@MageGrayWolf @Kasic @Hahiha @FishPreferred @Doombreed @09philj
- 704 Replies
@lozerfac3 Well you asked for questions of others so I will try to resume but don't forget to read their post when you have more time ^.^ they put time for writing you so it's correct to carefully read their arguments.
. Hahiha Question was: Why the gender of the bear who was unknown suddenly be female ?
And then a good remarks:
if the author pulls that one out of his hat for no reason and with such ease, I can only wonder what else he pulled out of it
. I asked you how can God be perfect If he committed awful action in the past, they weren't justifyed at all, he want all to forgive but he can't forgive itself ?
Perfection doesn't exist because
1) It's subjective to the perception.
2) Even God who's said as " perfection" make really crual things, and doesn't follow all of his laws
A perfect being if it was real, isn't judging anything or punishing (wiping in that case) anything
3) People doesn't changes by force, they need to understand their errors and think deep to a way of how can they learn with their experimentations, it make more or less time depending to the persons. So a creator couldn't show up and said ! You were bad I will destroy you, that not makes cense as a "Father" you don't kill your child because he's doing bad stuff you can just try to show him the way but it's depend of him, Killing them for not been the things you wanted makes you a psychopath, egomaniac and a Dictator.
Last question for me how can someone couldn't accept any Sins ? And being a sin by himself ? Jealousy, Wrath, Pride seems God is all of that even maybe more by what I've see. At least is how the people seems to present him in the story. So his just values to have for people ? God is like all politicals far upset the law ? Sounds incorrect for me, it's like disguised Dictature at least it's what I think.
. Fish preferred asked:
So please explain what you mean by " perfectly holy", as at this point it appears to be synonymous with "tyrannically depraved".
Others stuff was counter arguing, read them they were interesting at least it's my opinion ^^
One thing who makes me sad is: Religion tend to makes peoples waiting for a better life, but in my opinion if we want a better world we just need to built it, we don't need to waiting for be saved after dying, instead we must save us now and enjoy our life as much as possible ^^ !
@lozerfac3
About that quote you posted last. I'll try to make my point compact and concise.
We modern, "enlightened" men, as the website puts it, have what is called a judicial or legal system based on an idealistic and humane notion of justice. It identifies a crime, and gives an appropriate sentence taking into account the perspectives of both the accused and the accuser. This system is meant to protect people from abuse, but otherwise does not judge if no one is harmed.
As opposed to that, the Christian God appears to operate on a very indiscriminate premise of "an eye for an eye" or worse, and is based on His own personal, arbitrary notion of justice. He is not content to merely give appropriate judgment to the culprit; He frequently punishes a whole group of people by killing them in various horrible ways, even condoning the killing of innocents in the process. His reactions are not what we would call appropriate, instill a climate of fear (arguably on purpose?) and He even punishes people for not acting the way He would like them to act.
Does it make sense now why some of us see it justified to criticize God's behaviour as portrayed in the Bible?
I will make sure to read it again because it means a lot share the truth. I appreciate it your effort.
Hahiha Question was: Why the gender of the bear who was unknown suddenly be female ?
I actually have no idea haha. Maybe it was gendered in the original texts and translated to "just" bears and the author forgot to mention it? Never mind idk.
I asked you how can God be perfect If he committed awful action in the past, they weren't justifyed at all, he want all to forgive but he can't forgive itself ?
He wants all to forgive because He has forgiven them. Themes about love and forgiveness are especially made in the New Testament when Jesus gave himself up on the cross. In the Old Testament, we get to see God's justice in action.
About that quote you posted last. I'll try to make my point compact and concise.We modern, "enlightened" men, as the website puts it, have what is called a judicial or legal system based on an idealistic and humane notion of justice. It identifies a crime, and gives an appropriate sentence taking into account the perspectives of both the accused and the accuser. This system is meant to protect people from abuse, but otherwise does not judge if no one is harmed.
As opposed to that, the Christian God appears to operate on a very indiscriminate premise of "an eye for an eye" or worse, and is based on His own personal, arbitrary notion of justice. He is not content to merely give appropriate judgment to the culprit; He frequently punishes a whole group of people by killing them in various horrible ways, even condoning the killing of innocents in the process. His reactions are not what we would call appropriate, instill a climate of fear (arguably on purpose?) and He even punishes people for not acting the way He would like them to act.
Does it make sense now why some of us see it justified to criticize God's behaviour as portrayed in the Bible?
Remember that God is all-knowing and perfectly just. Because He is omniscient, He sees from all perspectives and is able to judge perfectly. Now, I'm not saying because God is omniscient, God is perfectly just. He has the potential to judge perfectly. Nevertheless, God is righteous and fair in judgment. He will deal with all sin accordingly (unless He decides to demonstrate his love and mercy for His glory).
We can all agree that we have all sinned, right? Even the best of people, the kindest people, have sinned. To illustrate, think of your conscience. If you have done anything against your conscience, you have violated a moral law. This is a sin. But ultimately, when we sin, we sin against God. God hates sin because he is holy and righteous and just. He is morally perfect so He can't stand moral imperfection. He wants His creation to act according to his preceptive will, but we turn our backs on Him. He is just so justice will be dealt. I hope I have made myself clear.
Perfection doesn't exist becausePerfection is a real concept. Perfection also exists where it can be found in God. We might think it doesn't exist because we don't experience it in this lost and dying world.1) It's subjective to the perception.
2) Even God who's said as " perfection" make really crual things, and doesn't follow all of his lawsIn your definition, a perfect being does not hurt others. In fact, if that were the case, why should we, people created by God who deny God in His holiness and wage war and hate others and even just call people bad names for being ugly or stupid, deserve exemption from punishment? And before you claim that God also does these things without reason (for example wage war), know that God will use the sin of a people to punish the sins of others. He uses our sin, our decisions, in His plan.
A perfect being if it was real, isn't judging anything or punishing (wiping in that case) anything
3) People doesn't changes by force, they need to understand their errors and think deep to a way of how can they learn with their experimentations, it make more or less time depending to the persons. So a creator couldn't show up and said ! You were bad I will destroy you, that not makes cense as a "Father" you don't kill your child because he's doing bad stuff you can just try to show him the way but it's depend of him, Killing them for not been the things you wanted makes you a psychopath, egomaniac and a Dictator.You are only a child of God when you accept Christ as your Savior from sin and punishment. Therefore, He still has the obligation as a holy judge to punish anyone outside of the kingdom of God. However, since all my punishment has been payed for on that cross, I don't have to worry about punishment. Instead, God will discipline me (like a "Father" ) when I sin. The difference is that discipline is done out of love and out of hope that the receiver of discipline will grow in righteousness.
Last question for me how can someone couldn't accept any Sins ? And being a sin by himself ? Jealousy, Wrath, Pride seems God is all of that even maybe more by what I've see. At least is how the people seems to present him in the story. So his just values to have for people ? God is like all politicals far upset the law ? Sounds incorrect for me, it's like disguised Dictature at least it's what I think.
These things aren't bad in and of themselves. Envy is a sin, but not jealousy. The difference is that envy comes from the desire to have something someone else has. God's jealousy comes from the inclination to have something that rightfully belongs to Him. God is jealous because He deserves our praise. Alternatively, we practice idolatry, giving more time and effort to your own cause rather than to God's preceptive will.
God also has the right to His wrath because he uses it for good. He uses it for justice. God's wrath and divine punishment go hand and hand.
Finally, God is prideful and rightfully so because He created the entire universe and He created beautiful creatures like you and me. God also has pride in His holiness, righteousness, love, compassion, mercy, and grace.
The reason we cannot be prideful is because either 1) we don't have these attributes 2) if we do have these attributes, it comes from God or 3) we did not create time and space in which all things exist. We don't have the right to wrath because God tells us to put away our anger because He knows we have selfish motives. We cannot be "jealous" because we do not deserve the things we long for.
One thing who makes me sad is: Religion tend to makes peoples waiting for a better life, but in my opinion if we want a better world we just need to built it, we don't need to waiting for be saved after dying, instead we must save us now and enjoy our life as much as possible ^^ !
That is very true, but we have to trust in God and follow His will. In this broken world, only a perfect God can save it.
P.S. I feel like I wrote a book haha and there's still plenty to talk about. I will try to get to the rest of your questions, but in the meantime thanks for your patience.
Nevertheless, God is righteous and fair in judgment. He will deal with all sin accordingly (unless He decides to demonstrate his love and mercy for His glory).
If he decides to demonstrate His love and glory then He is not always dealing with all sin accordingly. And that does not make Him just.
The circumstance of their upbringing (but also what Emp said). Christian children raised in Christian families have an all-expenses-paid pass to salvation that equally dedicated Hindu, Muslim, Hebrew, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, whatever children are denied. All the Christians have to do is not question the beliefs indoctrinated into them, whereas everyone else would be required to reject their own faith and teachings to take up Christianity, and in order to do that, they have to actually know about it.
Yet, Christians are called to share the gospel to those people but more importantly to love them. This is not the fault of anyone because maybe it is not in God's decretive will that some of those people are saved.
Because bacon is greasy and delicious, and therefore serves as the ultimate pizza topping. It makes just as much sense, when you think about it.
If bacon was perfectly greasy and absolutely delicious, I would agree with you.
See, this is the part that actually matters. It just has absolutely no relation to the crucifixion and suggests that the sins people commit only affect Jesus; not themselves. It's also handwaving the fact that Almighty God shouldn't need any convoluted workaround to absolve sins in the first place.
All of God's wrath was poured out on Jesus during his crucifixion. He suffered our punishment for us.
If he decides to demonstrate His love and glory then He is not always dealing with all sin accordingly. And that does not make Him just.
Except He demonstrates His love and mercy through Jesus's death. He is just because the justice for our sins was satisfied.
To bring forth the issue of Jesus, people were asked to believe in him without any proof. But claiming to be God is a sin. How were the people supposed to know that Jesus is, well, who he claimed to be? It seems that his trial was actually pretty just when put into context. He did not reveal Himself as God, nor did he offer anything as a proof. The people had no way of knowing he really is the son of God. Does that mean we are supposed to believe in the next person who claims to be god without any sort of proof and love him/her unconditionally? Just to be on the safe side? This is absurd.
and also, about your linked article from gotquestions.org It is blatantly false. I am reading into the original text right now (privileges of being Greek xD) and it actually does not even mention the word 'boys'. It says "...παιδία μικρά" which directly translate into 'little children'. So we cannot assume that they were close to adults. As for the bears being female, it is another part of the original text. In Greek (and in ancient Greek), the bear is female (η άρκτος) and that's the word used in that verse.
To bring forth the issue of Jesus, people were asked to believe in him without any proof. But claiming to be God is a sin. How were the people supposed to know that Jesus is, well, who he claimed to be? It seems that his trial was actually pretty just when put into context. He did not reveal Himself as God, nor did he offer anything as a proof. The people had no way of knowing he really is the son of God. Does that mean we are supposed to believe in the next person who claims to be god without any sort of proof and love him/her unconditionally? Just to be on the safe side? This is absurd.
It is up to God to reveal Himself. I think he made it pretty clear also when he performed all those miracles. People still chose to disbelieve. This just goes to show that a person can only come to know God through revelation.
and also, about your linked article from gotquestions.org It is blatantly false. I am reading into the original text right now (privileges of being Greek xD) and it actually does not even mention the word 'boys'. It says "...παιδία μικρά" which directly translate into 'little children'. So we cannot assume that they were close to adults.
Aha thank you. I don't think it removes from the fact that they sinned though. It seems really bad but we must understand the severity of our sin. As adults, people are accountable for even the smallest of sins like envy or dishonesty. Question: "Where do I find the age of accountability in the Bible? What happens to babies and young children when they die?" I haven't read it all but I'd be happy to answer any questions for you.
As for the bears being female, it is another part of the original text. In Greek (and in ancient Greek), the bear is female (η άρκτος) and that's the word used in that verse.
Yeah, I heard that ancient Greek is a lot closer to present-day Greek than Old English is to present-day English. But hey! I was right! (Right?)
Remember that God is all-knowing and perfectly just. [...] I hope I have made myself clear.
You haven't addressed my point. His actions are far from being just by human standards. Any person doing only a fraction of what he did would land in jail immediately. The way I'm interpreting your reply, you're telling me He had a just reason to kill vast quantities of seemingly innocents in tremendously painful ways along with those who sinned against Him? And that whatever He does, it is just by definition, even if it is horrible and abject by our standards?
If you have done anything against your conscience, you have violated a moral law. This is a sin.
That is the first time, I think, that I hear sin being defined that way I thought the seven sins are defined in the Bible (sloth, greed, all that), and whatever my conscience tells me is irrelevant.
There's also the problem that in some occasions, one may do something against one's conscience without going against a moral law. Or go against a moral law and have no problem with one's conscience. Worse yet, my moral standards are not automatically equal to someone else's moral standards, and definitely not in line with what the Christian God would expect me to follow.
@Doombreed
and also, about your linked article from gotquestions.org It is blatantly false. I am reading into the original text right now (privileges of being Greek xD) and it actually does not even mention the word 'boys'. It says "...παιδία μικρά" which directly translate into 'little children'. So we cannot assume that they were close to adults. As for the bears being female, it is another part of the original text. In Greek (and in ancient Greek), the bear is female (η άρκτος) and that's the word used in that verse.
Hmmm. If the author knew about the female bears, can we assume he also must have known about the 'little children'? And yet he tried to argue they were over 20? That would be a pretty bad thing to do, misleading the people like that
Hmm, minor correction. The original text of that book is in (ancient?) Hebrew but it was translated into Greek back then (Septuagint). So to call it the original text is not accurate, I am technically reading the Koine (common during that Era, so ancient) Greek translation. But still, there has to be a reason it explicitly calls them 'little children' in Greek like that.
Perfection is a real concept. Perfection also exists where it can be found in God. We might think it doesn't exist because we don't experience it in this lost and dying world.
Through the history God wipe entire civilization, if it was this perfect I don't think he need to do that because as a creation of him we should be as perfect as him x'D how can someone perfect don't do perfect things ? It's a bit paradoxal if you want my opinion.
In your definition, a perfect being does not hurt others. In fact, if that were the case, why should we, people created by God who deny God in His holiness and wage war and hate others and even just call people bad names for being ugly or stupid, deserve exemption from punishment? And before you claim that God also does these things without reason (for example wage war), know that God will use the sin of a people to punish the sins of others. He uses our sin, our decisions, in His plan.
There is always the same problem here, First of all not all people are like that, it make no sense to punish all people for the actions of a minority, it's like throw a fruit basket because of one rotten it's doesn't make sense, instead "the perfect" was to "heal" the rotten one, love and destruction cannot be mixed if you love you don't hurt anything, idea of a punishing God is really weird and in my opinion just created by some mens for controlling others by fear.
You are only a child of God when you accept Christ as your Savior from sin and punishment. Therefore, He still has the obligation as a holy judge to punish anyone outside of the kingdom of God. However, since all my punishment has been payed for on that cross, I don't have to worry about punishment. Instead, God will discipline me (like a "Father" ) when I sin. The difference is that discipline is done out of love and out of hope that the receiver of discipline will grow in righteousness
Really the thing I could probably never accept with this, it's by thinking like that people just do bad things and think I've just to pray and say I'm sorry and that's good ! Honestly I'm for the forgiving but it could never be a thing to do bad thing and save you by just say I'm sorry I'm belive in you.. It's a really non sense for me.. In my opinion if someone who do atrocities want to be forgiven he needs to makes great actions for people for many years, we can have a second chance but it need to be merited.
Alternatively, we practice idolatry, giving more time and effort to your own cause rather than to God's preceptive will.
Again all people are not like that, and we don't need to worship anyone to be a great person,
I personally don't care of the religions of people, whats really matters is who they are, if they are good person and Muslim, Christian or whatever you want it's what matter. Religion can be a way to earn values, but it's not the only ones and you can being someone good even if you don't worship anyone. Else it's just a way to divide people, we need to be unite and not being divided by such things, our differences makes us stronger at least it's what I think.
3) we did not create time and space in which all things exist. We don't have the right to wrath because God tells us to put away our anger because He knows we have selfish motives. We cannot be "jealous" because we do not deserve the things we long for.
Sorry but time is a human concept x'D Wrath isn't always bad in my opinion, sometimes the Wrath of a group of people against some crual person make some great change for the world.
That is very true, but we have to trust in God and follow His will. In this broken world, only a perfect God can save it.
For me we doesn't need to wait a savior, if we want a better world we just have to do the right things and create it by ourselves, just waiting and don't find solutions to our problems doesn't help at all, and remember that even of religion stand to say that we will have a better life after.
We could spend more than 100 years in this world, and don't forget than you will let your childs and their child in this world for many years too ? Don't you think it will be cool to leave them a better world to live than the one in which we live actually ? Just waiting for death for being "saved" is really not the right thing to do in my opinion !
Thanks for answering, thanks for reading and arguing too !
It is up to God to reveal Himself. I think he made it pretty clear also when he performed all those miracles. People still chose to disbelieve. This just goes to show that a person can only come to know God through revelation.
But it wasn't. He did not make it clear but only after he acquired some followers and only to them. They had to start believing first, following and being taught, for Jesus to eventually start revealing to them that He is god. The miracles were not performed in front of an audience that was not already a part of His following in most cases. To the rest, He mostly taught and answered their questions but that was it.
The passage you linked about the age of accountability says "The Bible tells us that, even if an infant or child has not committed personal sin, all people, including infants and children, are guilty before God because of inherited and imputed sin. Inherited sin is that which is passed on from our parents." Which is completely unfair and should have nothing to do with a religion that preaches love and forgiveness.
It also says "The very sad fact that infants sometimes die demonstrates that even infants are impacted by Adam’s sin, since physical and spiritual death were the results of Adam’s original sin." Why do some infants die and others do not? Considering that the initial bloodline from which we ALL came was Adam's, then that same sin is passed down to everyone. Why are some held more accountable of it than others? The passage mentions that infants that die on birth and people who never had the chance to choose to be saved through faith in God are saved regardless but if that's the case, why did they have to die? Moreover, if salvation is the goal, then babies that die when being born are automatically saved and accepted into heaven, so how is this fair for people who have to live the entirety of their earthly lives in regret, asking for forgiveness and believing and loving god with all their beings?
It also suggests the age of accountability is generally 13 but it also varies from child to child. Which is problematic to say the least for so many reasons. If the 'little children' mentioned in the verse are younger than each of their age of accountability, then they cannot obviously be held accountable. So why did they have to die?
If the children are older than the age of accountability, the punishment is very severe to befall a child mocking a man for his baldness.
It even says "Christ’s death is presented as sufficient for all of mankind. First John 2:2 says Jesus is “the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” This verse is clear that Jesus’ death was sufficient for all sins, not just the sins of those who specifically have come to Him in faith. The fact that Christ’s death was sufficient for all sin would allow the possibility of God’s applying that payment to those who were never capable of believing." Which brings up the previous issue that was posted by Ha. Doesn't that put people who lived BEFORE the coming of Jesus at a disadvantage? It means those who could not believe were, before the coming of Christ, banished to eternal ****ation if they were killed before they could make their choice.
I personally don't care of the religions of people, whats really matters is who they are, if they are good person and Muslim, Christian or whatever you want it's what matter.
For me we doesn't need to wait a savior, if we want a better world we just have to do the right things and create it by ourselves, just waiting and don't find solutions to our problems doesn't help at all, and remember that even of religion stand to say that we will have a better life after.
This is why it matters. Even though someone may be a good person, their beliefs can influence actively or passively harmful attitudes. "Why try to help the world if God will fix/destroy it anyway?"
Is it okay if we stick to one topic? Haha I know I brought up many questions but I can't answer them honestly and completely if I were to answer them all at the same time. I'm sure we will get to the rest of the issues. Let's continue with God's wrath.
You haven't addressed my point. His actions are far from being just by human standards.
Already I can tell you that we are far from God's standards. So yes, I do understand why a God so seemingly unattainable is easily rejected.
Any person doing only a fraction of what he did would land in jail immediately. The way I'm interpreting your reply, you're telling me He had a just reason to kill vast quantities of seemingly innocents in tremendously painful ways along with those who sinned against Him? And that whatever He does, it is just by definition, even if it is horrible and abject by our standards?
In God's holy eyes, nobody is perfect. So in cases when God dealt punishment on many people, He punished all of them for their own sins. And because our standards don't match up to God's standards, not even by a long shot, we cannot judge God in His actions.
That is the first time, I think, that I hear sin being defined that way I thought the seven sins are defined in the Bible (sloth, greed, all that), and whatever my conscience tells me is irrelevant.
You can define sin as an action that violates God's precepts. If you think something is wrong, it is probably wrong.
There's also the problem that in some occasions, one may do something against one's conscience without going against a moral law. Or go against a moral law and have no problem with one's conscience. Worse yet, my moral standards are not automatically equal to someone else's moral standards, and definitely not in line with what the Christian God would expect me to follow.
The conscience thing was an example. You're right. I should have been more clear. Even though someone doesn't violate moral law but goes against their conscience, it is still a sin because they think that it's wrong but they do it anyway. Just because your conscience doesn't warn you about violating a moral law, you are still accountable for it. Like if you didn't know that stealing was bad but you stole anyway. And again, our moral standards, by your understanding, are not in line with God's standards so it won't matter to compare the standards of each other.
Hmmm. If the author knew about the female bears, can we assume he also must have known about the 'little children'? And yet he tried to argue they were over 20? That would be a pretty bad thing to do, misleading the people like that
In the article, it also says that "the King James version has done us a disservice by [translating] the term as 'children'." The same can be said for the translation that @Doombreed read.
Through the history God wipe entire civilization, if it was this perfect I don't think he need to do that because as a creation of him we should be as perfect as him x'D how can someone perfect don't do perfect things ? It's a bit paradoxal if you want my opinion.
God did not make us perfect because then we would be like Him. Only He will be glorified. God also created us with a free will, with the decision to disobey Him, because He wanted to create a people who loved Him because He loved them.
There is always the same problem here, First of all not all people are like that, it make no sense to punish all people for the actions of a minority, it's like throw a fruit basket because of one rotten it's doesn't make sense, instead "the perfect" was to "heal" the rotten one, love and destruction cannot be mixed
All of them disobeyed God. He threw away a basket full of rotten fruits. He wants perfect fruits.
if you love you don't hurt anything, idea of a punishing God is really weird and in my opinion just created by some mens for controlling others by fear.
Also, if you are just, you won't let any crime go unpunished.
Really the thing I could probably never accept with this, it's by thinking like that people just do bad things and think I've just to pray and say I'm sorry and that's good ! Honestly I'm for the forgiving but it could never be a thing to do bad thing and save you by just say I'm sorry I'm belive in you.. It's a really non sense for me.. In my opinion if someone who do atrocities want to be forgiven he needs to makes great actions for people for many years, we can have a second chance but it need to be merited.
When you are saved, you are believing that Jesus died for your sins and that all the punishment that was meant for you went to Him. He gives us plenty of chances everyday to trust in Him considering that we aren't dead.
Again all people are not like that, and we don't need to worship anyone to be a great person,
All people sin. Therefore, they turn away from God. When you turn away from God, you can't worship Him. When I worship, I'm not worshiping to make myself great, but to glorify someone who is already great.
Sorry but time is a human concept x'D
Exactly. God lives outside of time.
Wrath isn't always bad in my opinion, sometimes the Wrath of a group of people against some *cruel person make some great change for the world.
I agree. But only God knows how to handle it perfectly.
The passage you linked about the age of accountability says "The Bible tells us that, even if an infant or child has not committed personal sin, all people, including infants and children, are guilty before God because of inherited and imputed sin. Inherited sin is that which is passed on from our parents." Which is completely unfair and should have nothing to do with a religion that preaches love and forgiveness.
Everyone inherited the sin of Adam so we all have a sinful nature. Since conception, a person is condemnable by God. The way He deals with those who are incapable of knowing their sin, I can't be for certain.
It also says "The very sad fact that infants sometimes die demonstrates that even infants are impacted by Adam’s sin, since physical and spiritual death were the results of Adam’s original sin." Why do some infants die and others do not? Considering that the initial bloodline from which we ALL came was Adam's, then that same sin is passed down to everyone. Why are some held more accountable of it than others? The passage mentions that infants that die on birth and people who never had the chance to choose to be saved through faith in God are saved regardless but if that's the case, why did they have to die?
Some infants don't die because God is demonstrating His mercy. Everyone is held accountable the same. The passage also says we cannot be dogmatic so they might not be saved regardless. They have to die the same reason all believers have to die. It's part of life.
It also suggests the age of accountability is generally 13 but it also varies from child to child. Which is problematic to say the least for so many reasons. If the 'little children' mentioned in the verse are younger than each of their age of accountability, then they cannot obviously be held accountable. So why did they have to die?
If the children are older than the age of accountability, the punishment is very severe to befall a child mocking a man for his baldness.
I don't know. I guess the age of accountability is determined by God. He determines to whom His mercy extends. After all, the Bible doesn't specifically mention an age of accountability.
It even says "Christ’s death is presented as sufficient for all of mankind. First John 2:2 says Jesus is “the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” This verse is clear that Jesus’ death was sufficient for all sins, not just the sins of those who specifically have come to Him in faith. The fact that Christ’s death was sufficient for all sin would allow the possibility of God’s applying that payment to those who were never capable of believing." Which brings up the previous issue that was posted by Ha. Doesn't that put people who lived BEFORE the coming of Jesus at a disadvantage? It means those who could not believe were, before the coming of Christ, banished to eternal ****ation if they were killed before they could make their choice.
Like I said, God will be merciful to those He will be merciful. We are already at a disadvantage because we are all sinners. We are put at an advantage by God's own grace and mercy.
Some infants don't die because God is demonstrating His mercy. Everyone is held accountable the same. The passage also says we cannot be dogmatic so they might not be saved regardless. They have to die the same reason all believers have to die. It's part of life.
Why to some and not to some others? Everyone held accountable the same but only some die before they get the chance to make that choice while others get lots of chances to repent and ask for forgiveness and as such, be accepted into Heaven? How is this logical in a world 'ruled' by a just and merciful god?
Also, why do the parents have to suffer? what if they are honest believers who believe and love god with all of their being? why do they have to watch their child die in those occasions? What if they had repented, asked for forgiveness but got punished because God invariably chose to make that child pay for Adam's sin while not some others?
And we don't even know if those who cannot make their choice are saved? all of this in a world ruled by a merciful and loving Father? All of this is described in the religion of love and forgiveness?
Everyone inherited the sin of Adam so we all have a sinful nature. Since conception, a person is condemnable by God. The way He deals with those who are incapable of knowing their sin, I can't be for certain.
If we cannot even be sure of the way a supposedly just being would deal with those who died before they could make their choice, then we cannot talk of the mercy or fairness of such a being -_-
I don't know. I guess the age of accountability is determined by God. He determines to whom His mercy extends. After all, the Bible doesn't specifically mention an age of accountability.
By what standards? the scriptures talk of bears mauling and eating children for mocking a man for his baldness! And not even all of them, 42 of the children and the wording implies there were more. This is not just or fair. It is only cruel and even selectively cruel, given that the rest of the children were not mauled by the bears.
You see, you said that god is just because god Himself defines Justice. You said He is perfect and holy in all His ways so He inadvertently decides what is just and good. But He doesn't and that is, if I may use the term, due to language. We define what's just, what's fair, what's good and what's holy. We made those words to describe appropriate sets of characteristics in each occasion. We, the human beings. So if God wants to be what we call 'Holy' or 'Just' but all indications point otherwise, then He simply cannot be just. Not with our definition and use of the word. He is something else. But definitely not just.
You must be logged in to post a reply!