Hakluyt's Voyages.......

[Hakluyt]

........just in case anyone fancies continuing them.

We were, I think, discussing the issue around dating dinosaur bones........among other things.

I've not been keeping up, but this quote reminded me of something.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life

What did happen to those who died before Jesus was born?

If belief in Jesus is essential to salvation then previous generations were doomed.

If previous generations were not doomed then belief in Jesus is not essential.

Oh you can say (some have) 'it's ok cos they were taken aside and introduced to Jesus in heaven and then they got to decide', but it makes nonsense of the whole thing doesn't it.

Supposing I said to you: Ebola is coming to the UK, and you need to receive a painful injection to save yourself from dying if you get it. Would you accuse me of psychologically manipulating you? Hopefully not.

Suppose I said to you, 'give me the contents of your handbag, and I might deign to not kill you. Though I might kill you anyway, and if I do it will be all your own fault because you've displeased me' - would you consider me worthy of worship, or would you consider me a thug and a bully?

GerundTheBehemoth Sat 08-Nov-14 21:36:15
All 10,000 extant bird species are ONE 'kind'?
The Evolutionary model is about changing kinds, so, whales evolving from land animals, for example. We see no such evidence, and people trying to say natural selection proves evolution is wrong. It's still a bird. Yeah maybe it might have adapted slightly, but that's not evolving into a different "kind". Likewise humans from some common ape ancestor. Or "goo to you".

JassyRadlett Sat 08-Nov-14 21:39:14
WHO themselves say they're misleading and used for comparison,

All of that was in the wiki article, let alone reading further. Yeah but I gave two links, the other was the WHO site itself. What a lovely balanced picture I presented

I think your theory was bullshit, now, now, lets play nice, shall we? I don't agree with what you're saying either, but I don't feel the need to start getting snippy about it.

JassyRadlett Sat 08-Nov-14 21:43:01
You're right, you did allow that 'true Christians' can commit suicide - how nice that you get to be the arbiter of who's a true Christians and who's not!

I said before, but I will say it again, I cannot say who is saved or who isn;t. That is between God and the individual. But what I CAN say is what the bible clearly tells us, which is that no one can work out their own salvation, it is not through our own works, but by HIS grace alone.

BackOnlyBriefly Sat 08-Nov-14 21:47:12
I've not been keeping up, but this quote reminded me of something That's a shame because I've missed you! But also I have already covered the answer earlier today.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life. What did happen to those who died before Jesus was born? If belief in Jesus is essential to salvation then previous generations were doomed. If previous generations were not doomed then belief in Jesus is not essential.

You ask a very intelligent question. in the OT, before Jesus, they looked FORWARD to the cross and believed in HIM, that He (the Messiah) WOULD come as a sacrifice to pay for all the sins of the world. That's how they were saved. But in the NT AFTER Jesus died, they looked BACK to the cross and "believed in HIM", that He (the Messiah) DID come as a sacrifice to pay for the sins of the world.

Oh you can say (some have) 'it's ok cos they were taken aside and introduced to Jesus in heaven and then they got to decide', but it makes nonsense of the whole thing doesn't it.

That absolutely is not the case, you are right. We decide to "believe in Him" (or not) before we die, not after. No one is present spiritually at the end of life except from the person dying and God, and who knows what happens in those last few moments of lost consciousness, and what change of heart may come about in those final moments. But I wouldn't suggest waiting to find out! The bible says: "choose you THIS DAY...." (Joshua 24:15).

HouseofBamboo -
Suppose I said to you, 'give me the contents of your handbag, and I might deign to not kill you. Though I might kill you anyway, and if I do it will be all your own fault because you've displeased me' - would you consider me worthy of worship, or would you consider me a thug and a bully?

You see, you really don't get it. God isn't saying "I might kill you, but I might not". He's made it completely clear, and given you a way of escape. One that will be advantageous to your personal Wellbeing. Thoughts and plans "to give you a hope and a future", as we read in Jeremiah.

That is a clear situation with no room for doubt:

1. You've sinned
2. The wages of sin is death
3. The free gift of God is eternal life
4. Whosoever "believes in Him" shall not perish but have eternal life
5. The moment you first believe you are sealed by God's Holy Spirit irrevocably and forever.
6. There is nothing unclean in heaven
7. No sinners will enter heaven
8. God paid the price through His son Jesus, so you don't have to

Hmm so everyone in say Noah's time knew Jesus was coming, was going to die on the cross for them and exactly what he was going to say while alive?

If not then they didn't really have the same basis for their decision that the generations after Jesus was born had.

Back, you are absolutely right. We read it in the first few chapters of Genesis:

So the LORD God said to the serpent: “Because you have done this, you are cursed more than all cattle, and more than every beast of the field; on your belly you shall go, and you shall eat dust all the days of your life. And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.” (Genesis 3:14–15)

After sin, God fulfilled His warning just as He had foretold. The serpent was cursed and mankind was to return to dust (i.e., die). God said to the serpent (Satan), “I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head and you shall bruise His heel” (Genesis 3:15).

God promised that through the Seed (i.e., descendant) of a woman (Eve) would come one who would crush the head of Satan. This is the first promise of the Messiah and the first great act of God’s grace.

After the first act of sin and the promise of a saviour, God demonstrated the great sacrifice that would occur on our behalf also by provided animal skins for clothes, which obviously required the shedding of blood to cover sin, and pointed to the substitutionary atonement that would take place by Jesus on the Cross.

I said before, but I will say it again, I cannot say who is saved or who isn;t.

Then I suggest you stop talking about 'true Christians'?

And I'm not sure how balanced it is to use two links to statistics you know to be misleading but not mention they are misleading in your use of those stats. The links say the same thing. You implied otherwise. Should we take everything else you say on face value?

Saying I think something is bullshit isn't 'snippy' - what a beautifully belittling word. It just means I think it's bullshit.

Nope

That's not the same information the people had after Jesus was born and it's silly to pretend it is.

Noah's come up again. Just checking your view of the Epic of Gilgamesh, mentioned earlier, Pickled?

Back - I said the OT was about looking TOWARDS the Messiah and believing He would come,and the NT was about looking back and believing He Had come. As a result, you were then talking about whether a Messiah was predicted before Noah.

A son (seed) through the human race that would be broken but would also break satan's power, fits exactly with Jesus who died (was broken) and who conquered satan and death by rising again.

It's throughout all of the OT but I only used that verse because it's the very first one, which is what you appeared to be speaking about.

No Jassy, I won't stop talking about "true Christians" because the bible does. We see false prophets and false gospels warned about, and of course people trying to save themselves through their own works which is called a false gospel in the bible.

That's fine - just so long as you're aware that you sound like you're deciding who's a true Christian and who isn't.

I've been giving some thought to why I find your argument that Christ was born in the Middle East, and the instructions given to the early evangelists, as a counter to the uneven playing field so problematic. Here it is, based on the literal reading of the bible you've been explaining.

God loves each individual and considers them individually precious.

God enabled everyone to have knowledge of the (early) OT by only leaving Noah and family alive, and later sent the apostles and evangelists to spread Christianity.

So here's my issue. Let's take a young man and a young woman - say an Aztec and a Murri Australian, in the year 1200 AD, assuming a literal biblical history.

They have no idea about a Hebraic or Christian God. Their ancestors turned from God so long ago that their societies have developed their own, wildly different creation stories. Their cultures are built around those beliefs.

The apostles sent to spread the word had no idea their homelands even existed in the north, south, east and west to which they'd been sent. Neither God nor Christ had seen fit to tell them.

So God, who holds each of this Aztec man and Murri woman as individually precious to him, and as deserving of redemption as anyone living closer to Rome at that time, is regretfully content to see them and millions like them suffer for eternity because (a) their ancestors turned away from God and/or (b) the people sent to spread the word were fallible and went towards Rome, Byzantium and Carthage rather than places that weren't on a map, or perhaps set to go further afield but gave up/drowned/got eaten by bears.

That's what I can't reconcile.

Sorry pickled, but if you think that all extant birds evolved from a single common ancestor over the last few thousand years, then you think evolution is a much, MUCH, faster, more dramatic and more powerful process than I or any evolutionary biologist does! You'd think that recorded history might have something to say about this fabulous breakneck-speed proliferation of avian life?

So if all birds are one 'kind', why not all mammals? They are at the same taxonomic level (class). How come whales evolving from land mammals is a change of 'kind' but (for example) penguins evolving from flying landbirds is not, but merely 'slight adaptation'? It's starting to sound like 'kind' is lacking in rigour as a useful scientific concept, not reflecting actual evolutionary distance at all...!

true christian can mean anything though can't it. Without a clear and definitive list the bible can be used to justify the likes of the Westboro' baptists and all other denominations. You'd think god would have cleared up such confusion instead of leaving it so wide open considering how vitally important it is. The false Christian's think they're right, as you do. And because of it will end up in hell.

Now compare that to how clear and accurate information is about how to administer CPR to someone who has had a heart attack. You don't have some paramedics sprinkling rose petals over the victims head, while another one rubs lavender oil into the soles of their feet, nope, they all go for heart compressions and assisted breathing.

Because it's so important the information is universal and clear, you could even pass the information on by pictures. We know how important it is not to be misunderstood. Which is so far removed from gods approach to something supposedly even more important than just a physical death.

You see, you really don't get it. God isn't saying "I might kill you, but I might not". He's made it completely clear, and given you a way of escape. One that will be advantageous to your personal Wellbeing. Thoughts and plans "to give you a hope and a future", as we read in Jeremiah.

You are quite right, I don't get it, because the model you describe makes absolutely no sense. According to your point:

"5. The moment you first believe you are sealed by God's Holy Spirit irrevocably and forever."

Then anyone can get to heaven as long as they have once 'first believed' - even if they then go on to disbelieve, or live a life of crime? Really?

Sorry, but it just smacks of Mafia-style 'be in my gang and you'll be alright, but if you're not in my gang then your life (and afterlife) won't be worth living'.

Incidentally, the 'free gift' you describe isn't quite so free when you consider that you have to do the intellectual equivalent of selling your soul to perform the mental contortions to get it all to make sense.

Referring to the genesis story, how did the serpent get into the garden? Why do you assume it was satan? Why did god hold Adam and Eve accountable for something they did before they knew the difference between right and wrong. Seems highly immoral. Like sending babies to prison. And why punish all their descendants. That's grotesque. Imagine a judge sentencing a murderer to a life sentence, along with his children and grand children. Not only would it make no sense but it would also strike you as incredibly cruel and unjust.

and given you a way of escape

That's chilling. Imagine my husband said 'because you burnt my dinner I should actually punch you, but I'm so nice that I'm going to give you a way to escape being punched by me, aren't I lovely?'

Pickled - also, I really don't understand your position with regard to the lack of uncertainty. Are you certain that you are 'saved'? According to your 'belief not deeds' model, you ought to be pretty certain (not that I'm saying anything about your deeds, I'm just assuming you have belief). If every believer can be smug in knowledge that their belief will save them, then what is it that God is supposed to be judging as being the qualifier for your entry to heaven?

Supposing I said to you: Ebola is coming to the UK, and you need to receive a painful injection to save yourself from dying if you get it. Would you accuse me of psychologically manipulating you?

We know Ebola exists, you don't have one single shred of evidence that hell exists. Suppose I said there was a god called Hyagfywgfgw and that you will be tortured for EVER if you don't believe that Hyagfywgfgw exists. I have AS MUCH evidence for Hyagfywgfgw as you do.

If you break the law, you deserve the punishment. Only in this case there is a wonderful free gift available if you will accept it. And that's the difference.

You're contradicting yourself. Imagine a jury found you guilty of murder, but said they would serve the time for you, I wouldn't be happy about that, and I doubt the family of the murder victim would either

you are an eternal being, you will live for eternity

evidence?

None of us can escape, we're all guilty

except we can get away with it if we believe in Jesus, that's what you're advocating

Would you really honestly prefer there to be no justice

There is nothing just about god letting people off if they just believe he wants to let them off. Where is the actual logic and justice in that. There is no logical connection between the two key elements. Of course i am not saying i would prefer there to be no form of justice, it's not a dichotomy. I believe in a judicial system and a government that seeks to prevent crime and punish those responsible, those responsible being key, not someone else on their behalf, that would be immoral and nonsensical.

Surely it would take a special kind of sociopath to enjoy an eternity in heaven anyway, knowing that others are being hideously tortured for that same eternity? Anyone with even a shred of empathy would quickly find that knowledge intolerable. Or does the going-to-heaven makeover include a sneaky memory wipe?