(March 21, 2013 at 9:40 am)Esquilax Wrote: I meant you and I.

But let's not trade baseless assertions again, neither of us seems to have any evidence for our positions, so... whatever.

I know who you meant, that's why I was contrasting him to you (it was implied I know, I thought that was obvious, sorry if it wasn't).
I find it funny though, I'm quite sure he already knew about the "eternal" translation issue, as he didn't bat an eye nor deny it.
But hey, if you think dictionaries, lexicons and etymology in general is baseless, I guess there's nothing left to discuss with you regarding words and word-meanings....

(March 21, 2013 at 9:57 am)catfish Wrote: But hey, if you think dictionaries, lexicons and etymology in general is baseless, I guess there's nothing left to discuss with you regarding words and word-meanings....

Oh, I like all of those things, and I think they're important. But in this argument specifically, neither of us can hope to know what the original word use was supposed to be, nor do we have any way of properly finding out. Any exchange we have about it- and the previous ones have borne this out- will be nothing more than "Is too!"/"Is not!" from both sides until one of us tires.

Not really worth discussing this word meaning, in the end.

(March 21, 2013 at 10:18 am)Esquilax Wrote: Not really worth discussing this word meaning, in the end.

What are you talking about?!?!?
This one word means everything to the objections presented by atheists and the condemnation of others by fundies.
Their entire view of "hell" hinges on the duration if they can't admit that as a Greek myth, Hades and Tartarus don't belong in a Jewish sect. So even if someone presents an argument for the existence of "hell", it sure as Hades didn't mean eternal.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: What if he chooses Hot tar to your company? or more likly What if this bad seed wanted to be in your company just to torment his brothers and sisters?

The former, if I couldn't stop him from jumping in, in the first place, (at least explaining the danger to him personally), I'd still pull him out when he realizes hot tar is worse than me. The latter would be a problem I suppose if I was powerless to prevent him from tormenting his brothers and sisters.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: The pit of Hot tar is actually the emptiness or lack of anything created by God.

So the damned aren't created by God? God isn't omnipresent?

I

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: t's kind of an either or thing.

Only if God makes it one.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: Either you want to be a member of creation or you do not.

I think I'm a 'member of creation' whether I want to be or not. If there's a God who is responsible for all creation, I'm a member of that creation by definition.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: If you are apart of creation then God being omnipresent you would be with God. Hell is the absence of God.

If there's an abence of God, God cannot be omnipresent.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: That what makes it hell that's what makes you burn with loathing and regret. Because you will have full knoweledge of what God offered, and you will lement your desision to have been seperated from it.

So I get full knowledge of what God offered AFTER his limited-time get-in-free-if-you-don't-ask-too-many-questions deal expires? If I lament my decision, why not take me back? Does God hold a grudge? Am I magically unable to change my character once I'm dead, although if I changed my mind 5 minutes before my death I'm in like Flynn?

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: Hell is the emotion or the experience of being consumed by the emptiness or the void of creation. Hell is hell because there is no God. Or at least for me.

If God is omnipresent, there is no such thing as a void of creation.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: Because once I was knew what God offered I lemented my choice to be seperated from God. That said I do not think everyone will think the same way about Hell.

Maybe some of us would like it?

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: At some point in eternity future the children of God will mature just like the children you are trying to focous your arguement on. If the heart of the child is on loving the parent then that child will grow love and honor the parent. However if their is resentment or discontentment in that child's heart given enough time (A trillion years or so) that discontentment will manifest into hate and eventually a fight or even on a large enough scale war. Then what?

I acknowledge your point here, as I noted, God has already demonstrated an inablility to keep his own house in order, so that's a real danger. If only he were powerful enough to build a wall between the potential troublemakers and the good kids without putting them into a 'void of creation'.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: This has already played out once and the highest ranking angel and 1/3 of his brothers were lost. we do not know the cost of this conflict nor how it effects anything else on that side of eternity. We just know that we have been given this life without the imeadiate knoweledge of God's glory so we can make a honest heart felt decision about where we want to spend eternity. Persumably so it does not blow up into another conflict.

Because over trillions of years, none of the pro-God kids will ever change their minds, because humans are so constant. Seriously, God couldn't even keep the angels in line, and we're no angels. No way this ends well.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: Which BTW is the reason I believe that God orders the complete destruction of those who apposed Israel, and in somecases where they did not obey we see the long term consenquences being played out. For instance acouple of women and a few children were allowed to live after God had told them to kill everything. The Jews let them live instead thinking the were more compassionate than God, think they knew better than God. In just a few short generations those people came back and nearly wiped out the children of Israel and enslaved the rest.

Because God has to do things a certain way to get the results he wants, just like us. He doesn't have options like making the survivors sterile, or killing them off with a disaster, he needs humans to do his dirty work for him, and he needs them to not let little things like conscience stop them, and if they're not brutal and ruthless enough, he can't protect them from the consequences.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: I do not know how that all would play out on an eternal scale, but I know God's desision to destroy those who appose Him is what is best for His followers in the long run.

You don't know as much as you think you do.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: Again God's love is not unconditional.

Well, it's Tex's love I was talking about. I agree, it's a neat solution to theodicy and the POE. Most people get out of it by limiting God's power or omniscience, you choose to do it by limiting his benevolence. What confuses me is that you also still limit his power with frequent claims that God has to do things in certain ways. You seem to have chopped both legs off the tripod of theodicy for no good reason. If God is limited in benevolence, you don't need to limit his power to explain his actions/inactions. If you limit his power, you don't need to limit his benevolence.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: It is boundless to those who accept it but it is coonditional in that one must accept what He offers in the way He offers it.

Like a gunman's boundless mercy in letting you live if you hand over your wallet.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: I think this happened to show us what would happen if malcontents were allowed to rome heaven for eternity. In essence why people are thrown into a 'tar pit.' rather than be forced into God's service.

Right, because God can't keep order in his own house, and people who choose God in this life will never in eternity act out in the next.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: We do not know exactly what it meant for Jesus to be nailed to that cross to take on the sins of the world.

You seemed to be pretty confident that YOU knew what it mean when you told us what it cost God.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: May say because He is God he took what the Father had to give on the chin and bounced right back. I am not so sure. I can't say one thing or another but to me Christ dying words tells the whole story. (My, God My God. Why have you forsaken me?) or Why have you left me? To me and what I read Jesus traded His righteousness for our sins. Meaning there was a literal trade. In that we took a peice of His righteousness to cover us in excange for our sin. Leaving Him as sin before the Father. Where does that Leave Christ? I don't know for sure, even though revelation says He is at the right hand of the Father. Meaning He his position is one of power and authority, but is it the same as before where He was on Par with the Father himself?? That is yet to been seen.

Whatever, if he's who you say he was, his choice was fully-informed. That's more than humans get.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: In conclusion our redemption may have cost Christ far more than His mortal life. to me it does not makes sense to say: God gave his only son, just to physically die. There is more that we have not been given to understand I am sure.

Personally, I hope if Jesus was divine, he got to fully recover. He seems to have been a decent chap, mostly. Being human seemed to have a good effect on him.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: Again it is not up to his 'missionaries to convince yoou of anything. God has taken on that task Himself if you will only A/S/K. Our job is to only point you to A/S/K.

Oh, I know the conversion scam depends on people convincing themselves. Christianity is just like the other prosyletizing religions in that regard: believe first, and you will receive the evidence you need to keep believing. Whoever came up with that was a real student of human nature.

[/quote]Then you do not understand the options or the reasons He has stated that only two options have been given.[/quote]

It's 'all-powerful' that I understand. If you don't think he can do it, just admit it.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: Isn't that the point though? for if we had divine backing then that would not leave you with much choice other than to believe. That is what your own arguement states does it not?

It's very much to the point that the God you believe in uses exactly the same tactics a God that doesn't exist would.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: So.. God the creator of everything is supposed to Humble himself before you and you will lift Him up and worship him on your terms...

God the creator of everything parts seas if the story is old enough but hides from skeptics if there's a chance of confirming it. I expect God to be smart enough not to expect people to believe in him if he doesn't let them know he exists. I'll take whatever terms he wants to set, but I'm not bowing down to your imaginary friend because you're so sure he's real.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: If I were God I would tell you to pound sand, that I did X,Y and Z and have provided you a way to reach me, and you did nothing except demand that I approach you...

At least if he told me to pound sand, I'd know he exists.

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: If the president of the united states had one of his aids or interns say to you if want to be wants to come to a state dinner do X,Y,Z and the president will personall come and welcome you, would you intern say to the Aid have him invite me himself and I will come and be honored?

You know that I can actually check to see if someone represents the president, so this analogy is critically flawed right?

(March 20, 2013 at 1:33 pm)Drich Wrote: If this happened to you what do you think he would do? Who he come to your house and grovel for you to be honored, or will he extend the offer to someone more willing to do as he was asked?

Let me improve your analogy for you. A guy on the internet tells me the president has invited me to a state dinner. I don't believe. He says a bunch of stuff about the president to show he knows him, but some of what he says is at odds with what other people who claim to know the president have said. He can't even send me the paper invitation on presidential letterhead, I have to decide merely on his words.

BUT...it turns out that he actually is in touch with the president and tells him that I turned the offer down because I don't believe it. Is the president a smart enough man to understand that it's not unreasonable to with hold belief when someone claims something with nothing to back it up, or is he offended that I wouldn't believe a stranger who claimed to speak on his behalf?

@ catfish

I've never found the aionios argument convincing. The word is used in the same verse to refer to both the afterlife of the saved and the torment of the damned. I've never heard anyone argue that the afterlife of the saved goes on for a finite period of time and then ends.

(March 21, 2013 at 7:26 am)catfish Wrote:

(March 21, 2013 at 7:18 am)Texas Sailor Wrote: So, let me ask you this: What difference in opinion or mistake outside of cold hearted murder or rape, would it be okay to send your child to eternal pain and suffering? As a Christain you must know of several right?

The Bible doesn't say "eternal", only the English translations...

aionios- perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well)- eternal, for ever, everlasting, seems to me that aionios means eternal. Matthew 25:46 "And these will go away into eternal(aionios) punishment, but the righteous into eternal(aionios) life. As John V said, I've have not seen anyone argue the point of eternal life having a limit.

---

@ Tonus, I've read your reply, need time to look it over carefully, will get back to it soon.

(March 20, 2013 at 9:14 pm)Tonus Wrote:

(March 20, 2013 at 8:55 pm)Drich Wrote: What I am asking/saying is that we do not know what it cost God/Christ to be our sin sacerfice. So to say Christ died for us big whup." Is foolishness, because again we do not know nor are we told the complete extent of Christ's sacerfice.

That is an interesting approach. I admit that while I was taught that the ransom sacrifice of Christ was the basis of Christianity (it is how humanity is redeemed) I had never thought about what the cost was to Jesus or god until I'd long left religious belief behind. Had I ever been asked to consider that, it would have vexed me something awful, because that's the whole idea of sacrifice-- giving up something of great value to yourself in order to gain something greater for others. And Jesus considered it the greatest expression of love, to give your life for your friends.

I would consider it imperative to understand the actual cost, because that's what the faith is based on, that the sacrifice was necessary to save humanity. If we don't even understand what has been lost, how can we know what has been gained?

We know what was gained because the bible specifically tells us. We do not know what was lost because the bible doesn't tell us. There was a price all we know of it is it began on the cross, it doesn't mean it ended there. Which is the only thing I am pointing out when someone says Jesus died on the cross big deal He was raised from the Dead.

---

(March 21, 2013 at 7:18 am)Texas Sailor Wrote: You and I have completely different ideas of what imminent immediate life threatening danger means. Perhaps my 3 combat deployments in 7 yrs have made party girls seem less threatening, but I digress. It doesn't matter anyway.

Indeed.

Quote:You and I are in agreement over letting my son make the choices he wants to make. There is no issue there. If his life was in danger and it was within the limits of my human abilities to save him, then yes, I would. I accept that giving him the right to choose makes him vulnerable to mistakes. This is where you and I split ways...In your response, you forgot to follow one little rule in our thought experiment. All powerful, limitless potential...remember?

To what end? What if the only way to change the mind of your son was to rewrite his personality, to basically lobotomize him and make him a different person? What if he love "x" more than anything you could offer him? What if 'x' was Heroin and not just a party girl? What if one lead to the other? Do you suppose 'reason and understanding' has anything to do with how a Herion addict thinks? Even when they are not chemically dependant on the drug they still crave it.

It is with a similar craving some of us want to keep our sins. This is what seperates those who want to be with God and those who are activly seeking Hell. (whether they know it/can admit it or not)

Quote: If I were God, there would be nothing beyond my abilities. My son could live and make mistakes as many times as he wants and learn all sorts of lessons.

Which is what this life is all about.

Quote: There would be lots of them I wouldn't like or agree with.

Which is why Christ had to die on the cross.

Quote: Here is the second place we split roads...I WOULD NOT VULGARLY SUBJECT HIM TO TORTURE FOR A DIFFERENCE IN OPINION. That's the sick part. You don't seem to agree.

Hell is only torturous to those who lament their misspent life and want to be with God in the end. Not everyone in Hell will lament their life's choices. Even if they did so what? Eternity set aside for the living, those who are in Hell chose death over life. So why should they be allowed to infect the living with what made them choose death?

I look at it kind like The walking Dead/Zombie apocalypse. Where the living are alive and can be consumed by the dead. The dead being the malcontents or those who resent being under the authority and control of God.
-or- if you prefer:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/civilians-i...e-movement

I don't know how long since your deployment but evidently they are having trouble reestablishing the middle class, as the prominent are leaving in droves creating a social vacuum providing the "dead" an opportunity to forge documents and try and take a position of power and authority. (Doctors lawyers and other government officials)Giving "the Dead" or Resistance fighters/Terrorist, a Strong foot hold in winning back the hearts and minds of the people, forcing the current occupying force to eventually withdraw or re-engage.

Now Imagine what a little resentment will do to the population of Heaven over an eternity. This leaves God two options Cast those who look to destroy and corrupt His creation, or to lobotomize them. As Lobotomies are not an option it looks like the seperation of the "Wheat and the Weeds, the Sheep and the Goats" are his only real option. Then the question becomes Do it before our eternities begin? Or Wait a Trillion years or how ever long to do it then (Which would mean some of the orginally living would be infected with this Spiritual Zombie virus forcing God to get rid of someone who spent his life in service of Him.)

Quote: So, let me ask you this: What difference in opinion or mistake outside of cold hearted murder or rape, would it be okay to send your child to eternal pain and suffering? As a Christian you must know of several right?

It's not about any given act that should disqualify one from Heaven. It is about being able to accept the authority and Control of God. If you can then you qualify to work and live in what God has created for you. If you can't then you need to be seperated from those who can and may Otherwise infect the living with what has gotten ahold of you.

Remember this has already happen. The "zombie virus" started with one angel and moved to 1/3 of the population of Heaven's Angels. So the question should be is, Why should I go through all that I have gone through to get to where ever that takes me into Heaven and then have God allow a spiritual Zombie infect me? How tragic would that be? Especially if God knew this would happen, and could have stopped it with a simple quarantine measure?

Why Are your questions and indignation focused on protecting the spiritually dead? What about the Living? Don't the Living have rights in your world?

(March 21, 2013 at 1:32 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: The former, if I couldn't stop him from jumping in, in the first place, (at least explaining the danger to him personally), I'd still pull him out when he realizes hot tar is worse than me. The latter would be a problem I suppose if I was powerless to prevent him from tormenting his brothers and sisters.

..for eternity? God is to baby sit every d-bag in the History of the whole world, because YOU can not understand that some do not want anything to do with God or His people? What about those guys who flew those planes on 911? What about everyone like that? Or are you just talking about those who just do not want to completely commit to God in this lfe because they think they will have to give up too much?

Quote:So the damned aren't created by God? God isn't omnipresent?

That's my point. What God creates is consumed (at some point) by the nothingness and all will eventually be void.

Quote:If there's an abence of God, God cannot be omnipresent.

The bible only points to God being completely present in what He has created. Your idea of 'omnipresents' is not biblically supported.

Quote:So I get full knowledge of what God offered AFTER his limited-time get-in-free-if-you-don't-ask-too-many-questions deal expires?

I do not think there is a limit on the questions you can ask God. I have asked everyone that I can think of and all the ones you all ask that I can not answer, But essentially yes. It is my understanding that we will be given to an understanding of how 'things work' When we enter heaven Through Christ.

Quote: If I lament my decision, why not take me back?

That was a Question I asked, my answer: Would you lament your choice because your imediate goal would be self perservation? Or would you lament because you Truly Love God? If you truly Loved God then why didn't you Love Him in this life?

Quote: Does God hold a grudge?

I'm sure some would say so.

Quote:Am I magically unable to change my character once I'm dead, although if I changed my mind 5 minutes before my death I'm in like Flynn?

Only one person in the History of the world has actually been confirmed to do this. (The theif on the cross) I honestly would not bank on the Idea that God is a fool or would be powerless to refuse you if you said the sinners prayer a min before you die.
I would say the Theif would be the exception and not the rule.

Quote:If God is omnipresent, there is no such thing as a void of creation.

The bible seems to differ from your 'theology.' Hell is refered to The pit, The Grave, The Void.

Quote:Maybe some of us would like it?

Lucifer chose it over God, I am sure some of us would too.

Quote:I acknowledge your point here, as I noted, God has already demonstrated an inablility to keep his own house in order, so that's a real danger. If only he were powerful enough to build a wall between the potential troublemakers and the good kids without putting them into a 'void of creation'.

For what reason? So those on one side can gain hatred and resentment till they decide to breach that wall? Instead of a wall God kept a pit unfilled. It's kinda like your wall in that all who do not want to be with Him will go there. Except there is no collaberation or escape.

Quote:Because over trillions of years, none of the pro-God kids will ever change their minds, because humans are so constant.

If they did why do you think their minds would change? Was it because God turned his back on them they learned to love Him anyway? Or did they change their minds because they saw what God offered His children and being selfish wanted to maniuplate God to give them what the living have?
I mean really, How can we learn to love God when He has turned His back, when we will not love Him when the Full power and Authority of the Holy Spirit is at our beckon Call in this life?

Quote: Seriously, God couldn't even keep the angels in line, and we're no angels. No way this ends well.

Why should God be made to keep anyone inline on that side of eternity? Shouldn't we all want to simply be there with Him to the point of complete willing compliance?

Quote:Because God has to do things a certain way to get the results he wants, just like us. He doesn't have options like making the survivors sterile, or killing them off with a disaster, he needs humans to do his dirty work for him, and he needs them to not let little things like conscience stop them, and if they're not brutal and ruthless enough, he can't protect them from the consequences.

Why do any of those things when the ultimate lesson in all of this would be lost? Israel's short commings and failures are there for us to learn from. In an effort that we do not make the same mistakes. It is also there so as to answer our questions as to the nature and reasoning of God.

Also why would God deflect the consenquences of our choices? Isn't that the result of Free will He has given to us?

Quote:You don't know as much as you think you do.

But you know better than God?

Quote:Well, it's Tex's love I was talking about. I agree, it's a neat solution to theodicy and the POE. Most people get out of it by limiting God's power or omniscience, you choose to do it by limiting his benevolence.

God's absolute benevolence is The only thing on that list is not biblically supported in any way shape or form. Matter of Fact we are expressly told not all of us are His children. The bible even goes so far as to List those that God hates. It even says He hates those with certain character traits. One has to ignore all the bible actually says, in favor of this doctrine of omni benevolence. This is what I am talking about building your own picture of God, rather than worship the picture the Bible has made.

Quote: What confuses me is that you also still limit his power with frequent claims that God has to do things in certain ways.

Indeed He does things in accordance to His Nature/Character.

Quote:You seem to have chopped both legs off the tripod of theodicy for no good reason. If God is limited in benevolence, you don't need to limit his power to explain his actions/inactions. If you limit his power, you don't need to limit his benevolence.

The the problem you are having is a philosiphical one of the God you have created. While I on the other Hand am repersenting the God of the bible without the benfit of the filter you use to view what 'god' should look like.

Quote:Right, because God can't keep order in his own house, and people who choose God in this life will never in eternity act out in the next.

Actually in Revelations After the judgement God allows us to live 1000 years under Christ, and then He will open the gates of Hell to let Satan out to 'test' us, one last time, and appearently some of the 'questionable' people (Maybe death bed converts and the like) side with satan and the remaining will be further seperated. So some who will be let into Heaven will ultimatly end up in Hell.

Quote:You seemed to be pretty confident that YOU knew what it mean when you told us what it cost God.

Appearently you are no better at reading me than you are God/Christianity. Fore I have said over and over we did not know the Cost of our salvation. I only pointed to passages that said the Cost was deeper than the physical cross.

Quote:Personally, I hope if Jesus was divine, he got to fully recover. He seems to have been a decent chap, mostly. Being human seemed to have a good effect on him.

I hope He is fully restored as well, I hate to think of what my salvation truly cost.

Quote:Oh, I know the conversion scam depends on people convincing themselves. Christianity is just like the other prosyletizing religions in that regard: believe first, and you will receive the evidence you need to keep believing. Whoever came up with that was a real student of human nature.

Or the creator of it

Quote:It's 'all-powerful' that I understand. If you don't think he can do it, just admit it.

It does seem like you do not understand the basic nature of God. For the Term All Powerful Means God has the final word on what is to be done. Not that He will use his power to go against His nature to satasify a few bockers.
All powerful=I said so and it Will be Done. Not that I will entertain other options.

Quote:God the creator of everything parts seas if the story is old enough but hides from skeptics if there's a chance of confirming it. I expect God to be smart enough not to expect people to believe in him if he doesn't let them know he exists. I'll take whatever terms he wants to set, but I'm not bowing down to your imaginary friend because you're so sure he's real.

Then Take him up on His promise and find out for yourself.

If a man told you there was Free Gold to be had if you wait in this line between the hours of 1pm and 5pm and everyone who waited as instructed Got (some even more) what was promised . would you not wait in that line, just because your peers tell you this line looks like other lines that produce nothing? Why not speak to those who waited in that line?

Quote:You know that I can actually check to see if someone represents the president, so this analogy is critically flawed right?

You can also Check on the existance of God yourself, so no.

Quote:Let me improve your analogy for you. A guy on the internet tells me the president has invited me to a state dinner. I don't believe. He says a bunch of stuff about the president to show he knows him, but some of what he says is at odds with what other people who claim to know the president have said. He can't even send me the paper invitation on presidential letterhead, I have to decide merely on his words.

BUT...it turns out that he actually is in touch with the president and tells him that I turned the offer down because I don't believe it. Is the president a smart enough man to understand that it's not unreasonable to with hold belief when someone claims something with nothing to back it up, or is he offended that I wouldn't believe a stranger who claimed to speak on his behalf?

It breaks my heart you see things this way. Because 'the guy on the internet' is not the only resorce you have. Unless you live in a country that has bann Churches You have a 'local affilate/atashe' you can check with and you have a direct line because the guy on the internet (and if you would check with the local office would confirm) Gave you the president's cell number. Even if it was just the guy on the internet and you lived in one of those countries that has bann the church, you can always just call and see if he picks up. It won't cost you anything it's a toll free line. (Because He paid all the charges)

(March 21, 2013 at 9:34 am)Tonus Wrote: [quote='Godschild' pid='418204' dateline='1363845849']There are things we do know that Christ gave up ie. sacrificed. Christ being part of the Holy Trinity gave up His separation from sin to become sin. So God suffered knowing sin instead of the purity He had always know, this was done for all people. Christ gave up His great powers when He came as Jesus, Jesus relied on the Father's power, this means He had to trust instead of always being trusted, this was done for all people. As Drich said, Christ gave up His righteousness and became sin, this in itself should be proof of His love, this was done for all people.

Tonus Wrote:That's an interesting take on it. That has some real potential. If you don't mind, I'm going to theorize a bit here...

I can see where this can work with the concept that humanity's fallen condition is the result of god's design, and therefore he is the cause.

Why do you insist that God is at fault, Adam and Eve were the one's that sinned, they were not forced. My parents did a great job of raising me, yet when I was out on my own I made many bad choices, choices that lead to the result my parents told me they would. I do not blame them, I made the choices that I was taught not to and the resulting consequences belong on my shoulders and mine alone.

Tonus Wrote:Having creating everything and found it to be "good," he presented Adam and Eve with a simple challenge, and they failed miserably. At first, god refuses to accept that his design could be that faulty. He makes some ambiguous promises for the future, but for a while he allows things to develop. Here we see Yahweh, the OT god: resentful, capricious, uncompromising, and harsh. At some point, he arranges to become human for a time and experience the human condition personally.

Let's determine when this choice was made, scripture tells us that this was determined before creation, and the choice was not to experience the human condition, it was to be the perfect sacrifice through the human condition. I agree that God seem hard on His people, just as a child believes it's parents are harsh when they are being punished, He asked them to trust them and obey so He could protect them, when they did they prospered greatly, when not they were punished. One description you used "uncompromising", why would the Creator ever need to bargain with His creation.

Tonus Wrote:After growing up human, he becomes conflicted. Seeing it from 'our' vantage point, he understands better why those first humans fell so quickly and easily, and is unsettled (if not outright repulsed) by his own treatment of humanity in the intervening centuries. He begins his ministry conflicted by his two natures: the arbitrary, cruel, demanding Yahweh versus the empathetic Jesus.

Christ, the Father, nor the Holy Spirit has ever been conflicted, they are the omniscient God, Yahweh knows all for all time and eternity.

Tonus Wrote:The Sermon on the Mount gives evidence of this conflicted nature. Jesus blesses those who struggle and suffer through the pains that Yahweh has visited upon them, and promises them rewards as if he recognizes the unfairness of their condition. Then Yahweh comes forth, cursing their weakness by implying that the law wasn't encompassing enough. That they simply need to be more perfect (just like god) and more humble (not so much like god). This kind of back-and-forth continues through to the end, and it's not clear who is winning.

I'm not sure how you can come up with this through the Sermon on the Mount, man is responsible for his condition. The the struggling and the suffering people of that time generally were put in that position by the supposed righteous and upstanding people or they were born into a poor position. Jesus was giving them hope for the future. As far as the struggle you say God is going through, Jesus said himself that a house divided can not stand, Jesus also says that He and the Father are One. Through scripture we see God hard at work to redeem those who will except His extended hand.

Tonus Wrote:This struggle continues throughout the gospels. Jesus wins out; he is so burdened by guilt at what Yahweh put humanity through, that he feels the only way to compensate is to put himself through cruel punishment. He arranges for men to mock him, assault him, scourge him, curse him, and finally kill him in a way that was humiliating, painful, and slow. But first he faces his conflict one last time, asking to be spared his fate, a moment of human weakness that quickly passes. Just before he dies, he cries out to Yahweh in anguish and regret that he has been forsaken. Perhaps he referred to himself as a representative of humanity, so that at the very last, he understands the crime that god committed against man. Jesus' last act is to judge god's work as faulty, and in doing so he diminishes god.

You have a big imagination, but why imagine, the truth is in the scriptures you are trying to mock. Christ does not judge himself, there's nothing to judge His plan is perfect, which by the way can only come from a perfect God. Jesus had no regrets on the cross, He did suffer through the horror of all sin being placed upon Him, but no regret.

Tonus Wrote:And the deed is done. God has connected with humanity and understands them as he could not have before. Chastened, he opens the gates of heaven and offers salvation to humanity, not because they are right but because he was wrong. Just as he had moved closer to them, so he provides for them to move closer to him. God makes up for his misstep by offering humanity godhood.

Again some imagination, totally wrong. God never needed to identify with man, he completely understood, this is why he knew the only way to restore man to himself was to give his Son as a sacrifice for man, to give man a way to have his wrongs righted by God.

Tonus Wrote:I can imagine that this is the kind of road map that Christianity will require as time marches on and the Bible continues to be deconstructed and people come to understand it better. We can come full circle, to the times when gods were very human in their actions and attitudes and not so distant from the people that they pretended to condescend to. We will make real progress towards accepting that god is us, and we are god. And hopefully, that will help us to realize the real dream of the Bible: that we can create heaven right here, instead of slogging through this world as if it were a rest stop on the way to something better.

Jesus said that the word of God would never change not one little bit Matt.5:18. If people do not come to God through the provision he has given, then they will suffer their choice. This life is not a rest stop by any means, it is a time to walk in a faithful relationship with God through Jesus Christ for the coming eternity.
I do not mind you theorizing but shouldn't you do it with what is actually in scripture, making things up does not help the argument.
What I wrote does not in any way support what you theorized, Christ's suffering could never be associated with such.

(March 21, 2013 at 2:23 pm)John V Wrote: @ catfish

I've never found the aionios argument convincing. The word is used in the same verse to refer to both the afterlife of the saved and the torment of the damned. I've never heard anyone argue that the afterlife of the saved goes on for a finite period of time and then ends.

Personally, I don't find the Greeth myth(s) very convincing.

Some see the aeonian issue as indicative of the 1000 year reign of Christ. Some will be raised to rule, others will stay behind until the "final" resurrection.
You should also be aware that the Greek word which actually means eternal(aidios) is used in the Bible too. So, if aeonian was meant as "eternal", why wasn't the same word used everywhere?

But there's another issue that goes against the notion of eternal punishment, and that "should" be the purpose of punishments...