Evidence for God from Science

RickD wrote:

Wolfgang wrote:KBCid, most definitely, do not be intimidated by anyone here. You're doing great, keep up the good work. Keep asking those valid questions, concerning certain verses about obedience, that need to be asked and answered. You are like a light in a dark forest. You acknowledge what your eyes see in the Bible. You and I (maybe Gman is with us) seem to be the only people on this forum willing to take seriously ALL SCRIPTURES, not just some preselected, easy ones. The verse, "Man shall not live by bread alone but by EVERY WORD OF GOD" is a verse certain people seem to insist on ignoring (Matthew 4:4, Luke 4:4, Deuteronomy 8:3).

So Wolfgang, because someone disagrees with your interpretation of certain verses that you use out of context, that means they don't believe all of scripture?
Be careful. You are walking a very fine line.

It seems to me that Wolfgang clearly believes in a theology wherein none can be saved (since none are righteous, nor can attain God's righteousness in their own right).

What wonderful Gospel that is. Must be music to Satan's ears. Me and my family will believe in the Gospel of Christ.

then you perceive my intent as deception.

I've addressed the reasons. If you continue down the same path, elephant hurling prooftext, and then claiming to want instruction, then yes, that is exactly how I will see your intent. What other rational conclusion would I make? Obviously Wolfgang sees it the same way. The difference is he doesn't have an issue because you are essentially arguing his side. Now, perhaps you don't see that you are doing this. Ok, I can then only pray that your eyes would be enlightened. I've been following your commentary in this thread for a good while. It seems clear too me that you are presenting arguments, not seeking answers.

jlay wrote:But see K, this is not what you are doing. You aren't presenting a scripture and then asking, what did this mean to the original audience...

That would be because such a question would involve me believing that someone alive today would know the exact truth of the meaning of those words from that time. It has absolutely been pointed out by me that there are a variety of Christians who don't have the same interpretation on these points thus it is clear there is not a definitive method to define original intent. I could have asked each of the other peoples from each of the other religions and each would define their perception of the original meaning quite differently. This is why I have sought to get the rationale that others have used to form their conclusion about biblical passages.

Then we might as well hang it up and go get pizza. What you have stated here is that a person CANNOT know. Different interpretation does not mean we cannot know. That would be equivalent to saying that because a room of 10 math students arrive at different answers that we can't know the right answer. Again, you've essentially begged the question. You are claiming on one hand to want to know, but presuming in the same breath that we can't. And you honestly can't see this?

It is unfortunate that you perceive me in this way. You see pride trying to prove itself and this is offensive. My intent was to test my conclusions not to pridefully prove them true and I obviously have failed to convey that position. I am sorry to have offended.

Jlay wrote to KBCid:
I've been following your commentary in this thread for a good while. It seems clear too me that you are presenting arguments, not seeking answers.

Jlay, I see KBC presenting what he understands. Then he's asking questions to see why and how I and others with different understandings from him believe the way we believe. At first I really thought KBC was presenting an argument and arguing a certain position. Now I see him understanding that scripture is saying something, and then trying to see if that is really what scripture is saying, by questioning others who have differing beliefs from what he is understanding.

Simply, he's trying to understand scripture the way he knows how. The way he has studied scripture is leading him to understand it in a certain way. KBC has not yet established a belief about this. He's just taking his understanding, and trying to understand others' beliefs, so he can put that together to better understand, then eventually come to a firm belief.

At least that's how I see what KBC is doing. He's much more organized and I guess, scientific, in his approach.

See what I mean? Looks like no one here, so far, will even "touch" Jude 1:22,23. Jude's entire epistle was initially addressed only to fellow Christians, not the unconverted, general public.

Kurieuo, now you should know that you can't really say I think no one will be saved. The Bible says repeatedly that many Christians will be saved. I'm probably a little sloppy sometimes myself trying to keep some Biblical laws. It's the big, more important laws that should instill a sense of fear of violating that are much more important, like choosing a career, or entering the armed forces, where you will be forced to work on Saturdays. Just think, by obeying the sometimes life saving, very protective Sabbath law thousands of young would-be soldiers killed in Iraq and Afganistan would now still be alive (because the military never would have accepted them in the first place by refusing work on Saturdays), happily raising families, getting ahead in therir careers, etc. Now those poor kids are dead, slowly rotting away in their graves. Those wars were unnecessary to begin with, too. Fabulous drones and missiles now protect America, not foot soldiers, anyway. Sometimes when I get super mad or super surprised the word "da_n" will explode out of my mouth. That word can mean judging someone in such a condemning way, though, that it is actually a sin, so I try to remember to confess that sin in my next prayer. That word, though, seems to come out of me much less often since I have begun disciplining my speech at all times now. The vast majority of the time now, just a loud, harmless grunt will come out of me when I am rudely startled by something. I go to bed each night most of the time not worrying about sinning. Trying to live a righteous life becomes almost automatic once you start doing it. It is extremely easy not to eat pork, etc., for example. No physical effort at all is required, just a quick mental decision, re-enforced by massive medical research condemning pork as a safe meat to eat.

Wolf,
What specifically would you like to discuss in Jude? I refuse to defend a position I don't hold.
It's fairly obvious that you attempt to accuse myself and others that we are advocating immorality or saying that grace is a license to sin. Well shame on you sir. As I said, if that is the measure you want to be judged by, then I'm sure our God will graciously oblige. And then we'll see how your self admitted sloppiness holds up. Shame on you and the judgment you heap on yourself.

Wolfgang wrote:See what I mean? Looks like no one here, so far, will even "touch" Jude 1:22,23. Jude's entire epistle was initially addressed only to fellow Christians, not the unconverted, general public.

Kurieuo, now you should know that you can't really say I think no one will be saved. The Bible says repeatedly that many Christians will be saved. I'm probably a little sloppy sometimes myself trying to keep some Biblical laws. It's the big, more important laws that should instill a sense of fear of violating that are much more important, like choosing a career, or entering the armed forces, where you will be forced to work on Saturdays. Just think, by obeying the sometimes life saving, very protective Sabbath law thousands of young would-be soldiers killed in Iraq and Afganistan would now still be alive (because the military never would have accepted them in the first place by refusing work on Saturdays), happily raising families, getting ahead in therir careers, etc. Now those poor kids are dead, slowly rotting away in their graves. Those wars were unnecessary to begin with, too. Fabulous drones and missiles now protect America, not foot soldiers, anyway. Sometimes when I get super mad or super surprised the word "da_n" will explode out of my mouth. That word can mean judging someone in such a condemning way, though, that it is actually a sin, so I try to remember to confess that sin in my next prayer. That word, though, seems to come out of me much less often since I have begun disciplining my speech at all times now. The vast majority of the time now, just a loud, harmless grunt will come out of me when I am rudely startled by something. I go to bed each night most of the time not worrying about sinning. Trying to live a righteous life becomes almost automatic once you start doing it. It is extremely easy not to eat pork, etc., for example. No physical effort at all is required, just a quick mental decision, re-enforced by massive medical research condemning pork as a safe meat to eat.

Don't you understand you are being burdened by this things that God Himself made a different way for?

Our works to like filthy rags to God. You can find that in Scripture. We can never please God. We can never fulfill His righteous requirement. One sin, is enough sin to stain us and condemn us to an eternity of Hell. Because it is one sin an eternally righteous God cannot accept.

Now on a scale of 1 to 10 in living life righteously, you might be a 10 and me a 0. Christ takes that scale and breaks it in two, because that 10 is just as filthy as the 0 to God who is infinitely righteous.

So if you say God accepts us on account of Christ and our works, you're saying God must accept us on account of Christ AND our filthy rags. This makes God out to be evil. Something I cannot accept. Either our filth is all cleaned in Christ, or it is not. If not, than a righteous God's only option is to condemn us all to an eternal death of Hell. None can be saved.

Jude 1:22,23: "And on some have compassion, making a distinction; 23 but others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire ......." (NKJV) According to internet commentaries the Greek here is a little murky about exactly who Jude is referring to that should be "pulled out of the fire." Many to most recognized commentators, though, say that it is the "doubting Christians, Christians weak in the faith" who are on the brink of eternal damnation that need and should be "pulled out of the fire." The words "pulling them out of the fire" indicate that if they are not pulled out of the fire, then they will remain in the fire, eternally lost. So those verses indicate, it would in some way seem, that

1) salvation can be lost, and

2) some type of active righteousness will restore salvation.

Question 1 to you, jlay, is, since you believe you cannot lose salvation, why do you think Jude is lying to us?

Kurieuo, yes, of course, our righteousness is like filthy rags to God, because He is super holy. But our lack of righteous law keeping is even a far filthier, far smellier, bunch of rags. You seem to forget, over 90 verses in the New Testament support mandatory righteousness (Mosaic law keeping). Why do you think you can get away with "junking" those 90+ verses?

Question 2 to you, jlay, if temporarily lost Christians can be saved by human behavior, exactly what kind of behavior is it that can restore salvation?

Wolfgang wrote:
Jude 1:22,23: "And on some have compassion, making a distinction; 23 but others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire ......." (NKJV) According to internet commentaries the Greek here is a little murky about exactly who Jude is referring to that should be "pulled out of the fire." Many to most recognized commentators, though, say that it is the "doubting Christians, Christians weak in the faith" who are on the brink of eternal damnation that need and should be "pulled out of the fire." The words "pulling them out of the fire" indicate that if they are not pulled out of the fire, then they will remain in the fire, eternally lost. So those verses indicate, it would in some way seem, that

1) salvation can be lost, and

2) some type of active righteousness will restore salvation.

So Wolfgang, you believe the writer of Jude is telling other believers to save other believers from losing their salvation?

So, according to you, not only can "weak in the faith" Christians lose their salvation, but other Christians, presumably the "strong in the faith" actually have the power to save the weaker ones?

And you wonder why we are saying you are not interpreting scripture correctly?

RickD, yes, what Jude is saying, or seems to say is amazing. Jude is literally saying the "weak in faith" can or may lose their salvation. "Weak in faith" may be a gross understatement for more serious sins. Yes, Jude is saying the "strong in faith," probably the more law abiding, can positively influence the weaker ones. If Jude is not saying that, then what is he saying? I would like to know that.

James 5:20 is additional proof that Christians can positively participate in the salvation of others, re-enforcing what Jude 1:23 says.

Wolfgang wrote:RickD, yes, what Jude is saying, or seems to say is amazing. Jude is literally saying the "weak in faith" can or may lose their salvation. "Weak in faith" may be a gross understatement for more serious sins. Yes, Jude is saying the "strong in faith," probably the more law abiding, can positively influence the weaker ones. If Jude is not saying that, then what is he saying? I would like to know that.

Wolfgang, the book of Jude is a warning against false teachings. Those of weaker faith are more susceptible to falling for false teachers. They need to be snatched out of the fire of false doctrine. Do you know what false doctrine was common at the time? Gnosticism. Do you know why Gnosticism was so dangerous? Because Gnosticism denied the incarnation of God as the Son. Your arguing against the deity of Christ is the very thing that the book of Jude is warning believers against. Isn't that ironic? The very book of the bible that you are attempting to use to bolster your argument, is the very book that condemns your belief that Jesus Christ is not God incarnate.

Wolfgang wrote:KBCid, most definitely, do not be intimidated by anyone here. You're doing great, keep up the good work. Keep asking those valid questions, concerning certain verses about obedience, that need to be asked and answered. You are like a light in a dark forest. You acknowledge what your eyes see in the Bible, and you seem to want to respect and value every verse. You and I (maybe Gman is with us) seem to be the only people on this forum willing to take seriously ALL SCRIPTURES, not just some preselected, easy ones. The verse, "Man shall not live by bread alone but by EVERY WORD OF GOD" is a verse certain people seem to insist on ignoring (Matthew 4:4, Luke 4:4, Deuteronomy 8:3).

Wolf.. When you say all scriptures, do you follow or do all Torah?

Wolfgang wrote:James 5:20 is additional proof that Christians can positively participate in the salvation of others, re-enforcing what Jude 1:23 says.

Are you sure that it's referring to us though? I'd be more inclined to think that it is God who is the ultimate cause of people turning from their sins and not us, but if I've taken what you've said the wrong way then I'll happily be corrected!

Wolfgang wrote:Jude 1:22,23: "And on some have compassion, making a distinction; 23 but others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire ......." (NKJV) According to internet commentaries the Greek here is a little murky about exactly who Jude is referring to that should be "pulled out of the fire." Many to most recognized commentators, though, say that it is the "doubting Christians, Christians weak in the faith" who are on the brink of eternal damnation that need and should be "pulled out of the fire." The words "pulling them out of the fire" indicate that if they are not pulled out of the fire, then they will remain in the fire, eternally lost. So those verses indicate, it would in some way seem, that

1) salvation can be lost, and

2) some type of active righteousness will restore salvation.

Question 1 to you, jlay, is, since you believe you cannot lose salvation, why do you think Jude is lying to us?

Kurieuo, yes, of course, our righteousness is like filthy rags to God, because He is super holy. But our lack of righteous law keeping is even a far filthier, far smellier, bunch of rags. You seem to forget, over 90 verses in the New Testament support mandatory righteousness (Mosaic law keeping). Why do you think you can get away with "junking" those 90+ verses?

Question 2 to you, jlay, if temporarily lost Christians can be saved by human behavior, exactly what kind of behavior is it that can restore salvation?

Question 1. Wolf, are you still beating your wife? This is a loaded question, and quite frankly a dirty debate tactic. If that is all you have, then you have shown everyone here that you have nothing to offer.
No one is suggesting junking verses. What we are suggesting is rightly dividing the scripture and applying it accordingly. There are over 150 verses which speak to salvation by faith. See how that works. If you won't follow your own quips through to their logical conclusions then why anyone else?

Question 2, I don't understand what you are asking. Rephrase.

KBCid wrote:
You make me smile every time G. You make me wish I was a better conveyor of english than mechanics.

God bless your path G

Thanks KBCid.. Likewise, I really enjoy reading your posts. I think you have great insight not only in science but also into the scriptures.