₦airaland Forum

Jesus said:

"Do not call me good, only God is Good."

Chikena.

Deep Sight:
Well Pastor, we need to bring this to a close, so is it safe to conclude the following:

1. You believe in God, a supernatural creator of the universe, et al

2. You also believe in the Christ, and draw essential christianity therefrom

3. This Christ you believe to be love, harmony and order inherent in creation, and not necessarily knowledge of the Earthlife of Mr. Jesus from Nazareth and as such -

4. Any person of any religion, tribe or philosophy who can key-in with that love inherent in creation is well placed therein, and may experience the "harmony" that results therefrom, and this may in part be understood also as spiritual salvation.

5. Guidance comes through the spirit, which provides contextual ethics for man: that man may know right and wrong on a situational basis, each situation being different, as opposed to codified and rigid laws.

Pastor, you confirm that the above are accepted by you?

Noetic -

My deepest instinct tells me that in your heart of hearts, you already see the point, and you know very well the truth regarding this matter.

I verily fear that your dogma (and also your pride) may not permit you to accede.

Thus, rather than engage you in long-spiralled desertations, i will now change tactics.

I shall, for the next few posts, only give you little morsels for thought. . . FROM YOUR OWN BIBLE.

The first morsel has already been given in the quote by KunleOshob above -

KunleOshob:
Matthew 25:31-40:

The Final Judgment
31 “But when the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit upon his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered in his presence, and he will separate the people as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will place the sheep at his right hand and the goats at his left.
34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry, and you fed me. I was thirsty, and you gave me a drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me into your home. 36 I was naked, and you gave me clothing. I was sick, and you cared for me. I was in prison, and you visited me.’
37 “Then these righteous ones will reply, ‘Lord, when did we ever see you hungry and feed you? Or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 Or a stranger and show you hospitality? Or naked and give you clothing? 39 When did we ever see you sick or in prison and visit you?’
40 “And the King will say, ‘I tell you the truth, when you did it to one of the least of these my brothers and sisters, you were doing it to me!’

Although its pretty obvious what the text above indicates, you felt so done-in by it that you chose to evade explaining it. Yes, i know you will try, but believe me, your explanation would not resonate within your own soul.

But here's the second morsel for thought:

Acts 10:34 - 35: "Of a truth i perceive that God is no respecter of persons, but in every nation, he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. . ."

Go on Noetic, knock yourself out coming up with an explanation for this one.

Problem is Pastor may refuse to make a categorical statement on the identity of the individual called Jesus of Nazareth. . . that would have helped us on Nos. 2 & 3 above. . .

[quote author=m_nwankwo link=topic=335826.msg4740392#msg4740392 date=1255628606]Deepsight. I do not think that you have actually found out what are Pastor AIO convictions. He is certainly not a deist. Look very closely to his reply on your argument of a primer mover and you may probably come close to what are his convictions. Cheers.[/quote]I thought these below form a pretty good summary?

Deep Sight:
Well Pastor, we need to bring this to a close, so is it safe to conclude the following:

1. You believe in God, a supernatural creator of the universe, et al

2. You also believe in the Christ, and draw essential christianity therefrom

3. This Christ you believe to be love, harmony and order inherent in creation, and not necessarily knowledge of the Earthlife of Mr. Jesus from Nazareth and as such -

4. Any person of any religion, tribe or philosophy who can key-in with that love inherent in creation is well placed therein, and may experience the "harmony" that results therefrom, and this may in part be understood also as spiritual salvation.

5. Guidance comes through the spirit, which provides contextual ethics for man: that man may know right and wrong on a situational basis, each situation being different, as opposed to codified and rigid laws.

And please note that by Diest, i do not necessarily mean the strict interpretation of one who accepts a Supreme Deity exists, but is apathetic to worship and matters of the Spirit. . . I mean one who accepts that existence without the baggage of religion or dogma, and possibly with certain recognitions of universal truths as well. . .

Deism is quite flexible in concept. . .

KunleOshob:
It must be really lonely being the only deist on Nairaland hence your attempt to co-opt another "believer"

^^^ Successfully, wouldn't you say?

^^^ Good, so we can conclude, that you are now officially the second Deist on Nairaland (or actually the first, since you pre-date me)

We must celebrate this.

_{Don't worry, these days there is even Christian Deism.}

Noetic, are you running away?

^^^ I did see this, but wanted to exhaust the "PASTOR AIO" thread first.

I guess we see eye to eye now! (if my last surmise in that thread is at home with you. . .)

wirinet:
Deep sight,

I appreciate you style of writing and your vast knowledge, it shows you have read extensively and deeply. Your introductory style is strikingly similar to Lobsang Rampa. I suspect he has some influence on your views and writing style, please correct me if i am wrong. I used to be a fan until i found so many inconsistencies in his postulations.

Anyway i think you will make a good author.

Thank you my man, writing is actually my fisrt love in life, and i do poetry and prose. . . have a book in the pipeline. . . no, i am not into Lobsang Rampa, though i have come across teh writings a number of times. . . and knowledge. . . knowledge is absolutely deficient in all men!

Well Pastor, we need to bring this to a close, so is it safe to conclude the following:

1. You believe in God, a supernatural creator of the universe, et al

2. You also believe in the Christ, and draw essential christianity therefrom

3. This Christ you believe to be love, harmony and order inherent in creation, and not necessarily knowledge of the Earthlife of Mr. Jesus from Nazareth and as such -

4. Any person of any religion, tribe or philosophy who can key-in with that love inherent in creation is well placed therein, and may experience the "harmony" that results therefrom, and this may in part be understood also as spiritual salvation.

5. Guidance comes through the spirit, which provides contextual ethics for man: that man may know right and wrong on a situational basis, each situation being different, as opposed to codified and rigid laws.

Can you contextualize the history of the development of the Trinity Doctrine within the events at the Council of Nicea?

^^^ Does it not strike you that the myths have a common denominator, to wit: that a "Supreme being" created the world?

Is it not pedantic to labour over the obvious fact that each tribe would embellish that common denominator with side-tales to suit its cultural fancies

How does that matter at all??

Mazaje/ Jagunlabi -

Is it your expectation that all the peoples of the world would have the same word for the Creator, regardless of their different languages

@ Noetic -

Thank you for your responses. However i need you to be clear on a few things.

  1. You have made it clear that those who never hear of Christ will be judged based on their morality or "holiness".

  2. You made it clear that those who hear of Christ must unconditionally accept him.

Might i ask you this: Consider two morally upright men, living in different parts of the world.

Would you not agree that the one who does not hear the gospel will have a HUGE advantage over the one who hears it (according to your analyses). Because the one who hears it is suddenly caught between the devil and the deep blue sea: he must unconditionally accept it (whether it makes sense to him or not), along with the burden of dogma. Failure to do so will, according to you, lead to the torment of eternal hell fire. You have made it clear also that it is absolutely irrelevant that he happens to be a very good person, sincere, kind, generous, charitable and humble. In fact, according to you it is irrelevant if, in addittion to all these things, he actually has a conception of the Almighty Creator (Olodumare, Chineke etc) and actually worships and prays to God.

All of these things (goodness, kindness, love of fellow man & worshipping God) will earn him hell-fire, so long as someone tells him about Jesus, and he does not accept Jesus.

Does this not seem absurd to you? How do you marry this with your vision of a just and merciful God?

Do you really think that Jesus would have reasoned in this fashion?

Is it lost on you that Jesus clearly states that he will welcome people to heaven who did not even know that they were his followers? Yes, people who did good all their lives. . .

By contrast, the man who never heard the gospel, according to you, is free from the burden of dogma, and can live according to his conscience and yet be confident of Salvation. If this is the case, is it not safer for all men of good conscience to avoid ever hearing the gospel, as it will thrust upon them a terrible dogmatic weight, failure to accept which, will result in eternal torment in hell fire. I ask you in all good conscience, Noetic, does this sort of reasoning make sense to you?

It may be lost on you why i used the particular story in the intro. I wanted to exemplify the fact that many many people in the world today are so different from we who were by colonialism born into christianity, that they cannot by any means understand it. Imagine the old Monk in my example, he has been good and kindhearted all his life, honest and humble. Within your analysis, he is saved already untill he hears of the "gospel"! After he hears it, he becomes damned, because he cannot understand it! What a laugh, Noetic - think about this - the fact that your analysis clearly indicates that morally upright men who have not heard the gospel are saved, but that they may become damned once they hear the gospel! How interesting!

Let me ask you. Do you have any idea how bizzare and absurd the "gospel" would sound to many strangers of far - off cultures. A Jewish man is God. He is also the Son of God. He is killed. That death erases sins. We must accept him as "Lord" or face hell-fire.

It's actually comical, Noetic. Importantly, to the Buddhist monk, it will just sound like another foreign folk myth. For this, the otherwise righteous man will now be sent to hell.

My final question on this post is this:

If at all we agree that all persons must "accept" Jesus to be saved. Let me ask you, what does it take to "accept" Him? Is it by screaming in Church "Jesus is Lord"! Or is it by obeying the commandment of Love? Do you not recognise that obeying that commandment amounts "accepting" him?? Because he stated: "If you loved me, you would do my commandments!" He also stated that many who call "his name" would be turned back at the pearly gates.

What could be the reason for that, i wonder, since they have already "accepted" him as lord? Is it not clear that that "acceptance" was not required, but that a good life led by a pure conscience and love for fellow-man, is what was required?

Interesting arguments, Noetic, please continue, i am listening.

Huxley, you havent even quoted it fully, because he said - "not the angels, nor the son, but only the father. . ."

^^^Krayola, the Pastor is brilliant. But we need him to get more specific because brilliance is often a conumburation (does this word exist) of multiplicity. . .

Pastor sir, my respect grows. . . i think we are getting there. . .

We are learning, i am so glad about this thread.

But in the next episode, can i respectfully request that we take up the issue of christ -

Pastor AIO:
Love comes from the experience of Christ.
You don't earn Christ by Loving.  that is the wrong way round.
Being Good/righteous comes from the divine influence in your life not the other way round whereby if you are good then you earn divine favour.

This dovetails with Noetic's position, curiously.

What really, do we mean by the experience of Christ?

Because i would have thought that those who have love in their hearts, have "Christ" however defined. Thus, it could be said that a loving muslim, hindu, buddhist, agnostic. . . all have christ in their hearts, once they have charithy and empathy with their fellow men. . .

And this tallies perfectly with -

Pastor AIO:
I find the idea that some are ignorantly worshipping God very powerful. Jesus said that some will be surprised when he welcomes them and tells them that they served him when he was hungry, when he was homeless etc.
Perplexed they will ask him, 'lord when did we do these things?'
To which Christ answered, 'whenever you did it to the least of these, you did it also to me'. (I'm paraphrasing).

This is fine by me so far.

But before we proceed, just a few posers.

1. In Category A - Those who lived before Christ - how come Elijah was taken up into heaven without any need for Christ going to Hades first? Also note that he appears with Moses beside Christ at the Transfiguration, thus showing that Moses, too was not "in Hades" or "in the Grave". Clearly these guys had been risen to eternal life even without the sacrifice on the cross.

2. Why would God have one rule for the goose and another for the gander? Is God not immutable, unchangeable, adamantine? Does the Bible not say that he is the same, yesterday, today, and forever? That accords with his perfection, for that which is perfect cannot change? Why would he give different criteria for salvation at different times? Is that not something like shifting the goal post?

Purist - Don't worry, Noetic is doing a thorough analysis of the initial question the the thread titled "The Noetic Interview - Questions on Humanity and the Quality of Goodness."

noetic15:
. . . .Continued

Category B . . .
To understand what awaits those in category B, one must understand the essential reward attached to the gospel of Christ. The crux of His reward was a place in eternity. . .which was a promise no one was ever given (as far as the bible and xtianity is concerned).
Prior to the coming of Jesus . . . .if a man dies, his life is over. . .both the body spirit and soul go to the grave, . .suggesting that there is no human life as weknow it after death.
this is butressed by:
a. psalm 115:17-18 17 It is not the dead who praise the LORD,
those who go down to silence; 18 it is we who extol the LORD, both now and forevermore. Praise the LORD.
b. psalm 88: 11-12 Is your love declared in the grave,
your faithfulness in Destruction ? 12 Are your wonders known in the place of darkness, or your righteous deeds in the land of oblivion?

It is deducible but debatable that the dead pre-Christ have no spiritual inheritance with God. The purpose of the gospel is to biuld a bridge between man and God o ensure that life does not end right here on this planet. That explains why
a. hell was not originally made for man. . .but for fallen angels.
b. The gift of eternal life CANNOT be obtained by works or self-righteousness. It is a Gift beyond comprehension that explains why it is obtained by grace and mercy.

Conclusively members of category B get the judged on the same basis of those in category A . . , simply because they NEVER got to hear about the gospel. They were not aware that Christ came and died. They do not know of the promise of eternal life. . . . That explain why the last earthycommand of Jesus was that the gospel be preached to all nations.

Thank you. Do i understand you to be saying that for Categories A & B, those who lived before him, and those who lived after him but never heard about him, judgment will rest in the measure of their moral "holiness" according to works?

Hi Noetic - Top of the day to you. Thank you also for accepting this interview. And also for the great categorizations.

Let me understand what you have said so far. Your Category A - People who lived before christ and therefore did not hear the gospel.

Is my understanding correct that you refer to this category as being taken care of by Christ's visit to the underworld, where he preached he gospel and made judgment?

Hi Pastor. . .wassup?

^^^ Duduspace - Like i said, let's not derail this thread.

I am still waiting for Pastor.

NOETIC -

Yes, please carry on. . . i strongly appreciate your categorization of the different groups. . .

But if you don't mind, i would like you address youR category (e) in three groups -

 1. Those who heard, understood, and rejected it and

 2. Those who heard, but could not understand on account of belonging to a foreign culture or belief system

3. The nation of Jews, still practicing Judaism and still awaiting the Messiah even today

I am listening.

^^^ I believe in Pastor, i really do. Together with Prizm, yourself (i mean no flattery) and a genlteman called EasyLogic, he ranks amongst the few on this forum who have genuinely "wowed" me and blown me away with the high quality of their minds.

It is for this reason that i have a need to understand him better.

I am sure he will help.

The old Buddhist Monk lay dying in his dark tent.

It was a rainy night and the clouds had gathered into a thick sultry fog. . . the grumble of the thunder was light, and here and there the wind stole into the tent, an envoy of the angel of death, already biding his time by the old monk's mat. . .

The old man coughed. A dry, throaty rasp, as the last embers of life began to float slowly out of his bossom. Around him, his nervous family cringed, and muttered pointless words of encouragement. . .

The entrance to the tent parted, as Amber, the monk's youngest son entered. Amber was a full fifty years old now. . .

"Papa, you have a visitor, he hails from afar, he has come to pray. . .

Suddenly the thunder rose to a defeaning pitch, the wind became a race, and the old man seemed unsettled. . .

Lightening lit the tent in a ghastly hue. . .another fearful blast of thunder, and the Minister of God entered. . .

He seemed to be in frightening rage as he darted to the old monk. . . he held a large dark book in his hands and he seized the old man forcefully by the shoulders.

At this there was pandemonium in the tent. . . the family rose upon the minister, a struggle ensued and in the midst of a terrible rage the minister cried out his name -

"I am Noetic, you old man! This is your last chance, accept Jesus Christ now or you will rot away in hell! Accept him! Accept him!"

Presently the tumult died down, as the old man motioned his famility to release the minister.

Noetic heaved a huge sigh of relief, gasped for air and slumped beside the old man.

In a quiet serious voice he said -

"Sir, your soul is important to God. Please accept Jesus now, the time is short"

"Who is Jesus. . . " the Old Monk enquired. . .

"He is the Son of God. He is also God. He came to the earth a long time ago to die for your sins" sputtered the fatigued Minister. "You must accept him as your personal Lord and Saviour now, the time is at hand. . ."

"I don't understand. . ." the old man whispered.

Noetic suddenly rose in a temper fit for Belzebub. "Then you are damned!" he cried.

The old man seemed about to say something, but just then, the Angel cut the thread of life and lifted the gentle soul of Sidhartta Gautama to peace.


_{Oya, Noetic tell us why you insist that People who dont know of Jesus or accept him as lord must go to hell.}