The Reasons why "Just Following Jesus" Doesn't work

[Redbeard The Pink]

Everything that every came into existence needs a reason to exist but God never came into existence He always was and is and always will be.

Let's suppose that everything that begins to exist has to have a reason to do so. You're now saying that Gaud didn't have to begin to exist. If that's true, that means it's possible for things to exist without having to begin existing. If that's true, it means that some form of material reality may have always existed, and is just constantly changing forms. Because it never "began" as such, it wouldn't need a reason to exist. If your Gaud is the only thing that has no beginning and therefore no reason, then you are once again guilty of Special Pleading, and your argument crumbles into the fallacy bin.

He does know everything and your individual existence has consequences beyond yourself and God know that as well. You are a part of God's plan regardless of your choice. Also Your choice to sin implies that you have an option to give your life over to God and obey Him.

Not if every choice I make is predestined and predetermined, which it would have to be if Gaud has foreknowledge of it. Because I have no choice in whether I exist, and because none of my choices can change the predetermined unfolding of my existence, I effectively don't have free will according to your narrative. If Gaud is omniscient, then free will is impossible.

No one is neutral and we all have the same evidence and come to different conclusions based on our presuppositions. There is evidence for God but your presuppositions reject it in favor of what you declare is correct.

No. Theists and theistic groups are notorious for misconstruing, ignoring, and fabricating evidence to support those claims, and for presenting arguments rather than actual evidence (which is basically all you've done here). We're not looking honestly at the same evidence, and you're treating things as evidence that aren't, really.

I vaguely remember hearing dispensationalist but not covenant theology. I am aware of the trains of thoughts though. I like to follow God and trust that He will guide me. I also listen to a wide range of Christ followers. Those who are excited about loving God, glorifying Him and stick to the bible are the people I listen to.

Dispensationalism is the idea that Gaud only imparts information and morals on a level that humanity is able to understand and cope with. Covenant theology is the idea that relevant rules and morals evolve/are adjusted as Gaud makes new covenants with man throughout the Babble.


Dispensationalism fails as a model because Gaud has no issue with the outright prohibition of long lists of weirdly specific behavior, so there's no reason to believe that he would, for instance, allow us to have slavery until we were far enough along as a race to realize it wasn't ok. If he was willing to forbid murder, eating pigs, and working on Saturdays, then he certainly would have banned slavery if he thought it was wrong. Incidentally, slavery is endorsed, celebrated, and regulated in both the Old and New Testaments, which means your Gaud thinks it's wrong to eat shrimp but not to own other humans as property. What the fuck?


Covenant theology fails because the most recent covenant between Gaud and man would probably be the one with Jesus, and Jesus himself stated that he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it, and that not one letter of it was to be erased or ignored. Jesus does not ever officially excuse anyone from any of the Old Testament rules, and neither does Paul, really. If you work on Saturdays, then you're an unrepentant sinner and your salvation wasn't real.

I have addressed this before. You didn't believe me then so why would your now? Are you honestly seeking an answer or are you just testing my knowledge?

If you addressed this before, I either didn't notice or wasn't aware of it. As far as I know I haven't asked you this before. At any rate, do you have an answer or not? Why are seemingly harmless behaviors named as sins if Gaud is only trying to dissuade us from harmful actions?

(You should have more respect for yourself.)  If there is no proper or intended function to the world then all your previous evaluations on everything I have said thus fare are null and void. Humans evaluations on what is healthy and sick is arbitrary. There is no good or bad/ right or wrong.

Ok, we really have been over this part. Just because the Universe doesn't have inherent forces called "good" and "evil" that fight each other constantly, doesn't mean humans haven't invented ideas like "good" and "bad" to categorize the things they experience that they do and don't like, respectively. All this Gaud business is really just an attempt at passing one's personal, unsupported opinions off as proven metaphysical truths.


As for me respecting myself, I treat people with exactly as much respect as they earn. I don't take kindly to being called a moron when I don't deserve it, but if I'm actually acting like a moron then I can't exactly fault someone for calling me one. In fact, if I'm acting like a moron I generally want to be corrected so I can improve as a person. It is because of my self-respect that I'm willing to admit my own stupidity if it's merited. That's the biggest difference between you and me, I think.

 

You have just said that there is no intended purpose nor a proper function to the world. Therefore according to your world view there is no incorrect because that would require a proper way of doing things. In order for you to actually be able to make the claim of right or wrong there has to be a real standard by which to evaluate my world view.

Man, you Gaud people love to muddy up language and definitions. Even though there's no metaphysical meaning to anything, facts still exist, and it's possible to hold beliefs that are contrary to those facts, and if you do then your beliefs are factually incorrect. Not incorrect in the sense that you're doing the wrong thing for believing them, but incorrect in the sense that you simply believe wrong things.

Because He is real and gives purpose to life and all things. He also gives you a standard by which you can judge anything.

Gaud does not meet even the lowest standard of evidence. There is no reason to believe he exists.