Coco29:

@goodguy

like i said religion is some thing i no longer follow.

reason being every one has taken from the bible what they want, then disregarding every thing else.


i read Issiah and you would find that he did not create evil in the sense you are thinking.

however if he did, then to prove that the bible is a load of confusion read this.

first James v1:13-14.

I don't see how James 1:13-14 contradicts Isaiah 45:7.  Anyway, I'm not in the mood for any debate on that now.  But if you'll like to discuss it with others, you can check these threads:

# What is 'Evil' and Where Did It Come From?
# Who Created Evil? God? So He's To Blame?
# God Did Not Create Evil!

I may get in the mood later on.

davidylan:

It would be nice if you took your own advice sometimes. You have not exhibited any trace of wisdom in your misguided arguments.

Thanks.

trini_girl:

What are your reasons for suddenly following my posts . . . ?

I wasn't following your posts. I was reading through a thread which you happened to be a part of. Is there any crime in that?

trini_girl:

Even so, I'm quite sure that I'm careful not to contradict myself in my posts.

Don't be too sure. By the way, I didn't say you contradicted yourself in your posts. What I said was, your responses there contradict the kind of attitude you've displayed here. You gave good injunctions on a thread, but went against your own words in another.

What else can I say?

May God continue to increase your wisdom and understanding, bro.

God bless you too.

ayceee:

didnt u read the part of the rules of the nairaland forum which provides that u should be nice and respectful to others and u should not resort to personal attacks and name calling such as new type of fool and idiot?

She's just being the "good Christian" that she is.

I need more opinions and votes on this thread.

trini_girl,

From what I've gathered so far, you seem like a smart lady to me. But unfortunately, you don't apply your smartness correctly everytime.

Also, you always seem to contradict yourself in many of your posts. I just finished reading through a thread, and your responses there, though quite interesting, contradict the kind of attitude you've displayed here so far.

My dear, Wisdom is Profitable to Direct.

Peace.

I guess we may never have met before then.

I see. I was born in Lagos and still living in Lagos. Ever been to Lagos for a short stay? If yes, what part?

Thank you correct guy!

Tosin. Hmmm. . Surprisingly, he's my elder brother's namesake.


Yeah David. Where in Nigeria did you live? Maybe we can start from there.

I knew David and mrpataki had something in common afterall. This is getting interesting.

davidylan:

goodguy, sadly you exhibit traits of islamic fundamentalism, Since when did pointing out your delusion become "attacks" and "insults"?

Stop trying to sound like you point them out reasonably and maturely!  Perhaps, you should ask yourself why I never have problems with bari_kade who has pointed out my so-called "delusions" several times more than the rest of you here.

davidylan:

Stop going about under the cover of christianity, your inputs here have convinced me beyond doubt that you are merely wolf in sheeps clothing.

Good for you.  Suit yourself.  By the way, does your conviction take you to heaven?

mrpataki:

@ goodguy,
Labelling me to your taste can only satisfy me with the joy of knowing that I speak the truth at all times.

Oh please.  Stop deceiving yourself.

mrpataki:

There you go again of trying to twist davidlyans input which was directed at you to trini_girl!

I was not trying to twist his words.  I simply twisted it!

mrpataki:

Yet you indulge in the idiotic jabberings that you don't trade insults here! Or that we attack you for some of your baseless inputs here.

I was trying to be as calm as possible initially.  Everything was going calmly and smoothly, then all of a sudden, things changed when you came in.  You'd notice that I only started trading insults with you guys when I sensed so much ad hominem in your inputs.  I detest that, and I believe I already made this clear on another thread prior to this moment.

Afterall, bari_kade is also another member like you that fequently points out my errors, and if I acknowledge them, I usually accept humbly, and even thank Him for it.  That's because he points out those errors the way a mature human should.  He doesn't go about labelling me as ignorant, deluded or blind before finally correcting me.  That's what you guys do, and I told David already that an aggression on your part totally dissuades the other party you're admonishing.  How on earth do you expect me to reason with you after insulting me? (Incase you don't know, I take those as insults).

I have said it before, and I will say it again.  I don't have any problems with you guys at all.  But the moment you begin to insult me in the name of pointing out my delusions, then don't expect to see a coolheaded goodguy.

mrpataki:

Stop being hypocritical and learn to see issues as they point at your ignorance and supposedly "fake" knowledge acquisition.

I have always learnt, and will always learn to see issues that point out my ignorance, so far I'm not insulted with it.

mrpataki:

I quoted your statements above, yet you reply me that I have low comprehension ability towards English. Yet I pray, please explain the quoted statements above in my previous reply to you.

You did not ask for any explanations.  Your sole aim there was to make others believe I was 'deluded', as they already believe anyway.  Or how do you explain this statement made by you after quoting me? -  "You have loads of deluded thought patterns!"  That doesn't appear to me like you needed an explanation.  You already drew your conclusion!

mrpataki:

I have said it before, will say it again pray to the Holyspirit for grace of knowledge.

Thank you.  You should also do the same.  Nobody knows it all.

Thank you Sir.

trini_girl:

No one should be "boxed into" marrying anyone else under any circumstance.

I agree.  But the question posed at us was in the "What if" format.  No one here is in support of people being boxed into marriages.

trini_girl:

"Meant to be together" is an immature notion and a product of a youthful imagination.

I wouldn't think so.  Otherwise, why do you think Jesus told the Samaritan woman that her present man she was with is not even her husband?  Don't you think it's more like a "Both of you are not meant to be together" statement?  Note that Jesus didn't even call him her husband.  He simply referred to Him as "the one whom you now have".

TV01:

The Leviticus verse most certainly refers to the law regards adultery, but the one from Deuteronomy does not. That is the addendum which specifically captures the "hardness of heart" condition of some men.

So would we not conclude that adultery is still grounds for divorce, and cross-testament at that?

I think there are some important things you may be missing out here.

Note that the Leviticus verse refers to the punishment for the sins of both parties if found guilty of Adultery.  Punishment there, is the penalty inflicted for the offense of both parties.  But the Deuteronomy verse talks about the Laws given to govern the people, of which one of them is the Law concerning Divorce.  Note that in this case, the divorce is even one-sided, that is, only the man is allowed to divorce, not the other way round.

TV01:

Could you please expound more on this portion you posted previously. Earlier in the thread, you seemed to be insistent that divorce (even in the case of adultery is not permitted). You then appear to be saying thet "if the marriage was not sanctioned by God", it is. I'd appreciate your reconciling what appear to be divergent positions.

I guess I should have cleared this up earlier.  Anyway, my stance on this issue of divorce has been concerning the Believers.  Since a true believer is expected to have the Spirit of God for guidance in everything he/she does, that means whomever he/she chooses to marry is indeed the right person.  (That's why I've been emphasizing on "marriages based on proper foundation", "marriages with God's consent", etc).  Therefore, if they eventually get married and begin to have problems, they should not divorce under any circumstances because once a man and his wife are joined together by God, they are now ONE flesh (Mark 10:7-, and are meant to be together forever (Mark 10:9).

But as for the marriages not sanctioned by God, would the divorce even mean anything at all to God?  Afterall, it didn't have His consent in the first place.

TV01:

Also, I'd really appreciate a fuller expatiation regards your take on the "Samaritan woman by the well", as you seem top be suggesting that the Lord was endorsing seperation/divorce?

Thanks again.

God bless

I was using it to emphasize my point about couples that are not meant to be together in the first place.  But then, what do you really think Jesus was insinuating by making her realise that she was not supposed to be with the person she was with at that moment?  That seems to me like He was asking her to leave the marriage.  Or maybe I'm wrong?

mrpataki:

And you think you have a valid statement here You are more confused really.

Now you guys are beginning to bore me with these "You're blind", "You're deluded", "You're confused" talks.  These words have even become so synonymous with you and david, that each time I see them, I immediately assume one of you made the statement.  You are the only two that know the confused, blind and deluded Christians on Nairaland.  I guess Seun needs to give you both awards.

Atimes, I wonder how you both reason, especially you pataki.  If someone says something you don't understand or agree with, the person is automatically a "confused" person to you.  And let's even assume you're right about the person, rather than show the person the way you think he/she should follow, as a good Christian that you've been trying so hard to portray you are, you'd rather take delight in insulting the person more and emphasize more how "confused" he/she is.  I am not in the position to question your belief though.  I will not tell you how 'blind' or 'deluded' I feel you are, but I'll leave you to weigh yourself internally.  Do not forget that a good Christian is not determined by how big his Bible is, nor the number of Bible verses he can quote offhand.

Now to the issue you raised.  Isn't it funny how you never even said anything to the person that outrightly declared himself as a god, but you're so quick to accuse me of declaring myself a god that should be worshipped and also make me know how "confused" I am from a post, made 5 months ago, that was meant to be comical?

I honestly don't know the kind of Christians we seem to have around these days.  Frankly speaking, if I was a Muslim and it was "Christians" like you I encountered throughout my life time, God knows I will never convert to Christianity (I really don't blame the Muslims on this forum for not seeing the supposed truth you claim to be showing them), and I know He will never punish me for that, because if one was to choose a religion he wants to belong to by the attitudes of the members of that religion, your attitudes here are enough to make one totally denounce Christianity.  But thank God, I'm not a Christian because of anybody.  And if you're so unsure about my stance in Christianity, why don't you face much more pressing issues, starting with changing your own attitude?  If you think I am not a Christian, and you're aren't ready to show me "the truth" you claim to know either, why bother yourself then over something that will not even secure you a place in heaven, as that is the ultimate reason for our existence?

One more thing - If all you know how to do is nitpick my posts all over the forum, I'd advise you rather get a life.

davidylan:

a deluded individual who errorneously assumes s[/b]he is christian simply because [b]s[/b]he goes somewhere on sunday and owns a bible [b]s[/b]he does not read neither does [b]s[/b]he understand. 

I think you ommitted an 's' there.  abeg, don't mind that [b]trini_girl jare!

mrpataki:

Which is which now goodguy? Your two inputs here run contrary to each other.

If you have a problem with comprehending simple English, why don't you simply say so? 

mrpataki:

And who made you a Judge sef?

Did I declare myself as one?

mrpataki:

You have loads of deluded thought patterns!

                              Sometimes I take you for babs787!

Good for you.

mrpataki:

Imagine him subscribing to the idea that he is a god who must be worshipped by all!
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-23029.0.html

Check it there comprehensively

Now you're going too far.  If you want to attack me, do so.  If you want to insult me, feel free.  But what I will not tolerate is you accusing me of what I never uttered.  I'll meet you on that thread.

^{*** nods head in delight ***}

I love you too.

trini_girl:

If you claim to believe the same things true christians (not religionists) believe, by default it implies you see things the same way we do.

Now this is where you implicate yourself.

Let me first of all laugh at the fact that you also count yourself as a Christian!

Okay, I'm done .  Since you believe all true Christians (which you ridiculously believe you're also a part of) must see things the same way, then you're either implying that everybody that did not see things your way on that thread you created, are false Christians, or that you're are truly the deluded Christian.  Which is it?

For heaven's sake, this is common sense!  Even the most ardent Bible-quoting folks among us here still disagree on major issues.  That doesn't make anyone of them less than a Christian!

trini_girl:

To this day no one has shown me anything in scriputre that disproves my OPINION that sex between a man and a woman in a committed long term relationship is fornication.

And may I remind you that to this day, you also have not shown us anything in the scripture that proves your OPINION that blah blah blah blah.  It's even a good thing you describe it as "YOUR OPINION".

trini_girl:

Hypocrite (Pretender) I am not.  If anyone gives me just (scriptural) reason to change this opinion I will certainly do so.

See this girl sounding like she's one reasonable person now.  People have given you more scriptural reasons than you need to change your opinion, but you are soooo BLIND to the truth that you still cling on to YOUR BASELESS OPINION, and not GOD's OPINION.  Even mrpataki will agree with me on this one.

trini_girl:

We have shown you scripture and tried to explain why your position is wrong, and yet all you do is defend your folly with asinine temper tantrums.

Funny how you people that accuse me of being what I'm not, end up being subject to your own very statement.  God is great indeed!

trini_girl:

Grow up Goodchild! Spiritually and mentally!

Good advice for yourself.  Yeah Grow up trini_child!  Spiritually, morally, intellectually, and of course, mentally!

Coco29:

that was taken from a book,

That was taken from the Holy Bible!

Coco29:

which has been rewritten in so many languages, words have been change and misinterpreted.

We could also say the same for all the verses Davidylan and trini_girl have been using to respond to me you know?

Okay seriously, I agree that words might have changed and misinterpreted.  Perhaps, you may want to see some examples of such changes in different Bible Versions:

NASB: The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these.

GWT: I make light and create darkness. I make blessings and create disasters. I, the LORD, do all these things.

KJV: I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

ASV: I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil. I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things.

BBE: I am the giver of light and the maker of the dark; causing blessing, and sending troubles; I am the Lord, who does all these things.

DBY: forming the light and creating darkness, making peace and creating evil: I, Jehovah, do all these things.

JPS: I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am the LORD, that doeth all these things.

WBS: I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

WEB: I form the light, and create darkness. I make peace, and create calamity. I am Yahweh, who does all these things.

YLT: Forming light, and preparing darkness, Making peace, and preparing evil, I am Jehovah, doing all these things.'

Satisfied?

Okay, on a more serious note now, the original Hebrew version of that verse is this:

יוצר אור ובורא חשך עשה שלום ובורא רע אני יהוה עשה כל אלה׃

The word "Evil" as used there means ra'a' which could have a wide range of meanings that all depict something bad.  Check here:  http://original.biblebrowser.com/isaiah/45-7.htm and click on the word 'evil' to see the different hebrew translations for it.

Coco29:

so if your quote is true, that means, he, the one you call god can not be perfect.

That He created evil does not make Him evil.  God is perfect!

Coco29:

true ?

False!

Coco29:

i do not discuss "religion" however your post is quite thought provoking.

in what way did the MOST HIGH create evil.

I understand how you feel, but it isn't my own assertion either.

Isaiah 45:7 - "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."

@ trini_girl

Responding to your post will mean repeating myself all over again. Nonetheless, I will address the areas that really draw my attention.

trini_girl:

Okay I've stopped laughing enough at the fact that you think anything I write can be called a sermon (unless you're being sarcastic ) to say that I'm almost disappointed that you couldn't objectively see as a so called christian that what I said about freewill was true, or perhaps you do and don't want to admit it. Calling freewill defunct. Shame!

Sorry to disappoint you, but I only read the first few lines of that post. I called it a sermon because it's a long post. I just went through the whole thing now, and I have questions to ask you, but that won't be on this thread. I'm also learning here, and haven't claimed to know any better than anyone here, unlike the rest of you who assume that anyone that doesn't see things your way is blind, deluded and ignorant (using David's words now ), and isn't worth calling a Christian. No, I am not like that. I believe everybody cannot think and see things the same way, even though we believe in the same thing. This doesn't make anyone a "so-called christian" as some of you have been describing me here.

trini_girl:

quite entertaining. your ballyhoo responses almost feign wit, but unfortunately and expectedly show nothing to disprove our statements.

by the way, I think the contentions you think you raised were addressed, although again, im sure you're intellectuallyand spiritually incapable of seeing it, hence your silly little ad hominem remark.

. . . . . . .

1 Corinthians 2:14

The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Please get the hell out of my face with your self-righteousness!

You should not even be among the least of the last people that should be telling me this, as this very statement describes exactly your person, as well as the Bible verse that perfectly qualifies your character. Are you not the same person that believes that Premarital sex is not fornication? See you stylishly accusing one of not having the Spirit of God, with the Holy Bible. You are definitely "intellectually" and "spiritually" capable indeed. :roll eyes: Bloody Hypocrite!

TV01:

In post #160 of that thread I queried the fact that an absence of freewill somehow suggested that God was the author of our evil acts.

I wouldn't say God is the author of our evil acts, but what I know for sure is that He created evil.

For the first time David, I'm enjoying your words against mine, not minding the tone of your first and last paragraph though.

Now let me address the points you raised.

davidylan:

John 1: 11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Note the tone of verse 12, the decision to accept the message of salvation is a personal choice. As many as recieved Him and not as many as he forced to recieve Him.

In as much as this is very true, it still raises much more complex questions concerning the concept of freewill.  Note that I am not totally ruling out the possibility of humans having a freewill, but certain things supposedly done "out of freewill" seem to contradict the omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent nature of God (by human definition), and since I believe God possesses these three characteristics, I'm left to believe humans do not have a freewill afterall.

By the way, I believe the Bible verse you provided was to address the part of my post you emboldened.  But didn't it occur to you that the part you emboldened was an addendum to the rest of the post?  Because I don't see how the verse you gave connects with that statement as used in that context.

davidylan:

Those are NOT attributes of fallen man. Perhaps those may be regarded as human atttributes in the sight of fellow men but here is what God actually thinks of the nature of the unregenerated soul.
Jer 17: 9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

I don't really understand you here, perhaps you didn't get what I meant.  What I mean by Human definition is that everything we humans use to describe God is out of our own finite comprehension of Him.  I didn't want to risk being misunderstood (though that's what's happening now), that was why I added "by Human definition" to the post mrpataki referred to.   What I simply meant there was, if going by the human definition of God as being omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent, then it seems to contradict the idea of freewill.

davidylan:

On the last day, no one can claim to be unaware. Here is why:
Mark 16: 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Again, you seem to have overlooked what led to my response there.  mrpataki said "God has freely given us Salvation", and I replied with what you quoted there. 

davidylan:

Dont be confused dear about John's words. In the days of John, the bible was not a compilation as we know it today. The books of Moses were separate from the letters of Paul, the writtings of Isaiah, the psalms of david e.t.c. All such "books" where being read by the new testament believers then.

To assume that when John talks about "books" here, he is refering to the bible as ONE BOOK alongside other false religious manuals is not only erroneous but indicative of an individual who is resistant to wisdom and being economical with the truth in other to propagate his false doctrine.

I am not confused about anything.  I think you're the confused one here.  You accused me of insinuating that the other books referred to were the Quran and other religious books, when I wasn't even implying such.  Hence, my response that queries you on why you think the Bible was the "books" being referred to, because I don't think the books talked about there are any of what we read here on earth presently.  I wouldn't mind a concrete explanation though, if you think otherwise.

davidylan:

I frankly believe you are genuinely confused and do not understand the God you purport to worship/serve. Who are the atheists you mention here? Those who are not "convinced" of the existence of God but in your own "reasoning" will still make heaven because they can go on the judgement day to argue their case before God?

I frankly believe you are genuinely blind and do not understand simple statements made by a fellow human.  Where have I said here that those that are not convinced will make heaven?  Even in the same post you quoted, I never even uttered it.  My point, since the beginning of this thread, has been that they should not be threatened with the talk of eternal condemnation in hell.  I reapeat -- they may not enter heaven, but I don't believe they will rot in hell either.  God will judge everyone differently and put us all where He feels we belong.

davidylan:

I hope you are not trying to insinuate here that those "books" mentioned in revelations include the quran, book of the mormons and other lies of the enemy. If the books refered to by John here is the bible then your argument has no basis if indeed it can be called an argument.

Join the the emboldened parts of my post to make a complete statement, and you'll see what I was driving at there.  By the way, what makes you think John was talking about the Bible, when the verse clearly pluralizes the object - Book[b]s[/b]; and even referred to the Book of Life as another book that was opened before the judged ones?  You should read the complete verse for better understanding.  I was not insinuating anything.

davidylan:

Your shallow and tenous attempt to use human reasoning to understand spiritual things is really alarming. Are these the kind of "christians" in our midst now? No wonder Christ said at His appearing will he find faith on the earth?

Very typical of "christians" that always want to prove they know better.

trini_girl:

goodguy,

one thing I've learned about people who are wrong is that when you show them their error it shakes the very foundation of their belief system and they become confused.

This is rather interesting, because I have also learnt the same too.

trini_girl:

they also become defensive and will utter alll sorts of rubbish to defend their position.

This doesn't happen all the time actually. But I really do find it funny that YOU of all people are the one making this statement, especially when you are an epitome of guilt on this basis. Remember that thread you created?

trini_girl:

coming from an orthodox background i understand your spiritual blindness and it is pointless to expect you to entertain anyone else's truthful opinion even when you are given scripture to back it up. You rather hold on to your own pie in the sky notion that people who are given the opportunity to receive chirst, over and over again, even though they are not "convinced" will somehow have a chance after that to sit down and"reason" with God at the judgment. LOL!!

Now I'm seriously wondering if some of you can read at all. By the way, I noticed no one here attempted to answer Groupoint. Incase you missed it, here are the questions he put forward to you guys again: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-37590.0.html#msg886286

Maybe when you answer these, I may begin to reason with you. I hate it when people just draw baseless conclusions from my post and trying to make fun of them without even trying to understand my point.

trini_girl:

Explain what we christians like to call "conviction"? I'm guessing you mean "Godly sorrow"

Stop guessing. This is exactly your problem and that's why you've been misundserstanding me. My use of "Conviction" there was to depict "the state of being convinced". This should answer and put to end, the rest of your rambling, I believe.

trini_girl:

But even if he does all that, and he is still rejected on earth, what in the world makes you think that after denying him all this time and only because you are convinced after death that he is real and now your judge, that he will listen to "reason". What will you say "Lord, well I wasn't convinced you were real then, but I'm convinced now! So can I enter heaven"?? lol!!

One doesn't need to say anything to God. Why do you people picture the Judgement day as some kind of trial in United States Supreme court of law? God knows the state of heart of everyone and I believe he will judge us with that. I've not been typing Hausa here, madam!

As for your sermon on freewill, it will be nice if you transfer that to the right thread. We'll then take it from there.

Wow! So much Ad Hominems in hurr.

mrpataki:

I have just one question for you, did God force you to accept whichever religion you belong to now? Was it not of your own freewill?

Did he force you to eat the food you ate this morning? Did he force you to sleep at the time you chose to sleep? Did he force you to come on the internet at the time you chose to?

I thought you said you had just one question for me. Anyway, this issue of freewill has been debated already and there's no point restating my stance here. Notwithstanding, I will try to answer your questions in a nutshell.

God did not force me to do any of those things you listed, but He knew I would do them afterall. If He didn't want me to do any of those, he would have simply prevented me because He is omnipotent. But because He wanted me to do so, that was why they happened. Everything you do in life, good or bad, God already knows beforehand, and no matter how hard you try to avert them, you will still end up doing that which is expected. From this, this doesn't seem to me that we have a freewill. If God wants it to happen, it will happen. If he doesn't want it to happen, it won't happen - Freewill or no freewill.

mrpataki:

Stop using Human definition to define who God is.

Every definition applied to God by huumans is human-based. If you tell me God is loving, kind, merciful, etc, those are as well human attributes. So asking me not to apply Human definitions to God will simply require the same of you too.

mrpataki:

God has freely given us Salvation, the decision is now yours (freewill) to accept it or throw it away.

But what happens to those that are not aware? Does it still remain their decision to accept or reject that which they aren't even aware of in the first place?

mrpataki:

But remember we all will give account on the day of Judgment.

Exactly.

trini_girl:

I think the problem you are having is that you seem to think a person needs to be "convinced" into being saved.

Salvation is not a matter of being convinced, it is a matter of ACCEPTANCE.  One can only accept when they are open, willing and ready. The gospel is quite simple.

I think the problem you're having is that you seem to forget that CONVICTION precedes ACCEPTANCE.  How on earth do you expect someone you preached to, and wasn't convinced to just accept "because the Bible says so".  This is why I said earlier that everyone of us Christians holds on to Christianity because of what we have seen and experienced, hence our conviction, and subsequent acceptance.  I'm pretty sure Shahan and her siblings didn't get converted by just 'hearing' the Gospel, and then ending there.  There must have been something they all saw to make them go away from Islam to turn to Christianity.  Most of you that are against my notion here will not be saying these same things if you were ardent Muslims.  Imagine yourself being a conc. Muslim, and someone comes to preach to you concerning the Gospel, which is totally antithetical to what you've always believed in; and the person expects you to just accept, even if you're not convinced, and even threatens you that if you don't accept, you're doomed to hell.  Can you just imagine such?

Betterstill, are you trying to tell me now that God is being partial by making some people belong to a religion that is the "only way", while making billions of others that he knows will never be convinced, to belong to "false religions"?  And please, don't tell me the other billions of humans out there chose to belong to "false religions" out of their "freewill" because. . .

trini_girl:

That you choose to accept the gift or not is a matter of your free will.

. . . this idea of freewill has been debunked already, as it seems to contradict the omniscient and omnibenevolent nature of God (by Human definition).

davidylan:

Here is a puzzle for you mr. goodguy. What is the essence of evangelism if those who don't believe and are nt convinced still go to heaven anyway?

Here's a puzzle for you as well Mr. davidylan.  What is the essence of evangelism, since God knows fully well that there are people that still won't make heaven, no matter the amount of preaching?

By the way, I never said people that are not convinced will enter heaven, and I don't think they will go to hell either.  But what I believe is that God will judge everyone differently.

davidylan:

Why did Christ make this statement, . . . he that believeth not is condemned already? Was that a statement of an uncaring individual?

This would depend on the state of the mind of Jesus when He made that statement. "He that believeth not. . ."  Belief on what basis exactly?  Those that consciously chose to believeth not despite knowing the truth, or those that believeth not because of some of the reasons highlighted by Grouppoint?

Personally, me thinks the unbelievers Jesus talked about are the ones described in Hebrew 6:4-6 - "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."

Another case is that of Lucifer.  He knew the truth, but still went ahead to rebel against God.  I believe it is him and his likes that are condemned already.

davidylan:

going by your own rules, is it not possible to assume that for someone who thinks he wants to go to heaven it would be a priority to ensure you have adequately studied the rules and regulations (the bible) guiding heaven?

Again, you're missing out the fact that there are billions of others that believe in God, but do not see Him the Christian way.  In this case, I believe God will use whatever they associate with Him, to judge them.

davidylan:

Do you assume because God is not man then he also has no guidelines or codes of behaviour that characterize those that would be in heaven?

No.  Actually, I should be asking you if you assume God has just one particular set of guidelines for all mankind, irrespective of what religion they belong to.  If you admit that is the case, then you wouldn't be painting God as good.

davidylan:

Why do you assume that those who are not "convinced" about the message of salvation including those who scoff at the very idea of God and an after life should be automatically entitled to heaven on the excuse that they were not "convinced" enough?

Again, they wouldn't be the one to give excuses.  God will jugde everyone accordingly.

davidylan:

Why then should anyone bother to be a christian? why don't we all continue in sin and use the "not convinced" trump card on the day of judgement?

Only the truth sets one free (John 8:32).  For those who know the truth, and continue to sin, they shouldn't expect mercy.  But for those that really do not know, well, the God I serve is a Merciful One.

davidylan:

Unfortunately the God i serve does not run a sympathy party.

Your use of "unfortunately" here shows that even you expect God to be merciful to those that are genuinely ignorant, but you think He isn't.  Well, the good news is, He is Merciful.

davidylan:

Read this: Heb 11: 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

I believe this applies to the atheists alone.  Even then, I don't believe God will condemn the good ones among them to hell.  They may not enter heaven, I don't think they'll rot in hell either.

All in all, John tells us what was revealed to him in Rev 20:12 - ". . . and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works."