Does it really matter what people believe?

[thomas t]

God is unconditional Love. When we accept that, we will know forgiveness.

According to you, you don't even need to ask for it, it seems.
This is your hypothesis. However, in my opinion there is no Bible verse that would substanciate your claim that accepting God's love results in God's forgiveness. So it stays presumption.

God's invitation is rather depicted in Matthew 22:11-13 when somebody gets thrown out. No unconditional love there.

The way I might choose to put that is more like it's something you already have, but don't realize it.

ah this is your theory again. You don't have a single Bible verse to back this idea up, I think.

We face ourselves, and surrender to that Divine Love. That is knowing forgiveness

This again doesn't have anything to do with the Bible.
The Bible speaks a lot about facing ourselves and surrendering to that Divine Love. However, this does not mean that it is understood to be the same as knowing forgiveness.

It's a matter of simply choosing to accept the Divine, or run from it.

Simply choosing to accept the divine does not save you according to James 2:19 (my interpretation).

I prefer not to think of God, or Spirit, in terms of masculine or feminine.

oh yes, I should have said "God can accept a no!".

 

[PureX]

I do not believe that Jesus was just a character in a story. I believe that Jesus really existed as a person who walked the earth, and that is the consensus among scholars, even nonreligious scholars.

To us, now, he is a character in a religious story.

I fully agree. It is not belief in Jesus that matters, it is living the life Jesus taught.

I do not believe in the stories and the characters in the New Testament, and I do not think that is important either.
It is the teachings of Jesus that come through the parables and such that guide us in life. For example:

Matthew 6:19-21 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

Matthew 7:24-27 Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.

If the stories help us to recognize and follow that divine spirit within us, then they are doing their job. If they do not help us do that, but instead have become religious idols and dogmas, 'standing in' for that divine spirit within us, and causing us not to recognize it, then it's become an impediment to Christ within, and should be discarded.

Too often organized religions want to become the god their supposedly helping people relate to. They want to be the only "legal" go-between, between humanity and God. And they try and force people to make them into false idols (their dictims, and texts, and rituals, and leaders, and so on) by equating these with God, Itself.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Baha'u'llah did not want us to have unequivocal proof of God or of the afterlife, but rather faith that they exist.
My beliefs have been checked with all the evidence that is available but I do not want to beat that dead horse.

As I see it, Bahaollah wanted leadership of a group. He had no proof even of existence of Allah, what to talk of his own mission. Yeah, I know about thy evidence, and which the mainfestation, your Lord, provideth.

 

[Nimos]

Just because Baha'u'llah is not accepted as a Messenger by the other religions that does not mean He was not a Messenger, since what people believe does not determine reality. But I understand what you mean; you are more inclined to believe the older more established religions.

No that is was not what I meant with what I wrote, it's not about taking sides. Simply that people change their view based on what they believe to be true and that these views are not compatible. A muslim is not going to accept Baha'u'llah, simply because that is not what they believe. So their views on this will be vastly different than yours due to that fact.

For me personally, I don't care who is who or which believe what. I care about evidence and proves and so far none of them have done any better than the others in my opinion.

I believe in God even though I am not close to God, so at least I will have some advantage. Hopefully, God will forgive me for questioning His goodness owing to all the suffering I see in this world. I cannot believe in something that makes no sense to me just because it is written in scriptures.

Following from the last, and I completely agree with you on this, except I take it one step further, meaning I can't believe in a God just because it is written in scriptures.

But since you do believe in one, and so many other people believe in a different version of this God, which do not forgive these things according to their scriptures, it simply becomes a matter of who is right, assuming that God exist in the first place? If their version is correct, you have little to no hope of forgiveness, but if you are right, you probably won't have any issues.

The atheists view is to simply say, that what if you are wrong about a God all together, which would mean that you are wasting your only life seeking something that doesn't exist and letting that control your life?

And don't get me wrong, all atheists would probably agree, that if we are wrong there is probably not a bright future waiting us.

Yes, salvation and getting to heaven (or being raised from the dead and living forever in paradise on earth, depending upon the beliefs) is what is most important to Christians but it is more than that. Christians also believe that God and Jesus are “there for them” guiding their way in life.

Yes, but ultimately, since they hold the bible true, It is about salvation from this life into the next one. Whether or not Jesus is with them to guide them on this trip or not, doesn't really change that. If you think about it, assuming you are a Christian and you live a good and decent life, when you then finally die you end up no better off, than an atheist or one of wrong faith. Then the bible is rather pointless and could be reduced to a single line "Be a good person and you will be saved by God" I think most people even Christians would feel slightly mislead to be honest, taking in account the amount of suffering religion have caused people throughout history.

So ultimately the end goal is to be saved and be better off than those that chose wrong.

Yes, I agree. It matters what we believe about the purpose of our existence because that will determine our behavior. If I did not believe in God and my religion for example, I could just as easily take all my money and go somewhere nice and live a happy life, but I can’t because I don’t believe that enjoying this life is really that important.

I think that is one of the flaws about religions and what they teach people. Does enjoying this life make you are worse Bahai? I don't mean you should ruin the lives of others in achieving this, but I fail to see how this is connected? Because following that logic, if you gave away all your money and went to live on the street in a cardbox, then you would be a perfect Bahai or what?

There is no doubt that money in many cases can make you better than some without, that is the curse of being poor A person with lots of money can give to charity, buy a home for the children, send aid to those in need and people will look at them as being good people, even though they might be horrible people.

A poor person will constantly be reminded of how they are not living up to the "standards" of being good. I can't help to bring up those examples of TV shows where you collect to those in need and people can call in an donate money to a cause. That to me is one of the worse examples of people stroking their own ego and feel good about themself. Everyone gets so exciting being able to donate and be part of this glories mission to save the world for a day. But for a poor person it is yet another slap in the face, that they are not good enough, because they barely have enough money to make it already and even though they might really want to help others, they are not able to, so they can get reminded of that once a year.

I understand that “live a good life” is far too general and open-ended. When I said that I meant the second commandment, as noted below. I did not mean following all the laws in the Bible.

The Great Commandment (or Greatest Commandment)[1] is a name used in the New Testament to describe the first of two commandments cited by Jesus in Matthew 22:35–40, Mark 12:28–34, and Luke 10:27a.

In Mark, when asked "which is the great commandment in the law?", the Greek New Testament reports that Jesus answered, "Hear, O Israel! The Lord Our God, The Lord is One; Thou shalt love thy Lord, thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind",[2] before also referring to a second commandment, "And the second is like unto it, thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."[3] Most Christian denominations consider these two commandments to be the core of correct Christian lifestyle.[4]

I can understand these saying from a general point of view or as an overall idea. But they really don't make a whole lot of sense. The first one we can ignore, if you don't believe in God then you don't believe in him.

The second one to "love thy neighbour...", is just not a reflection of reality as much as it is just a nice saying. Because not even Christians live by it, take the amount of priests that have been busted for exploiting kids or whatever people do and then call themself religious and true believers. And to fix or excuse it, we get the bull**** that we are all born sinners. It's just one excuse after another, rather than accepting that these issues exist in the world and then we figure out, how do we best solve them.

To me most religions is about throwing away responsibility or not wanting to look at the "bad" things. We don't solve these issues by praying or reminding people that they need to be better. It hasn't worked for the last 1000s of years, it should be enough evidence that it is never going to work. Just want to point out that luckily a majority of religious people can figure out that more is needed. But still this is basically what religious nonsense keep reminding people that the solution is.

It is not that clear in the Baha’i Faith, as I said. For one thing, we do not believe in hell as a geographical location, as a place we go for eternity. We believe that hell is distance from God, which is a state of the soul, and heaven is nearness to God. It is not based upon beliefs except to the extent that we believe that the way we can be close to God is through Baha’u’llah, just as Christians believe that Jesus is how they get close to God. I know I felt closer to God when I read the Writings of Baha’u’llah and said prayers, but I have a resistance and maybe you could even say I have a disinterest in myself being close to God, although I care very much about other people.

Yes but in the end all that matters is who is right?

If you are wrong, and Christians that believe in hell is right you are going there to. I think it's great that the Bahai doesn't teach people about hell at least, because I would assume that people truly believing in this must be scared almost constantly.

 

[Audie]

I do not follow Jesus, I follow Baha'u'llah, but for non-religious people I am sure there is no difference.

However, for me and other Baha'is, the difference is that Baha'u'llah brought the remedy humanity needs in this new age.

And to me, it's flypaper.

 

[Windwalker]

According to you, you don't even need to ask for it, it seems.
This is your hypothesis. However, in my opinion there is no Bible verse that would substanciate your claim that accepting God's love results in God's forgiveness. So it stays presumption.

I thought I had specified that "When we accept that, then we will know forgiveness". That forgiveness is already there, but if we don't accept it, we will never know what that is. We continue to live in a state of separation from God. So, yes, you need to ask. But you don't need to do that for God to forgive you already, without you asking.

"Father forgive them, for they know not what they do". God's love and forgiveness is unconditional. It's not contingent upon us recognizing it. But if we don't participate in it, we don't know it, and it has no effect. Think of it terms of the door is always open, but you need to return home to go inside and commune with the Divine. Think of the story of the Prodigal Son. The son did not "earn" his father's love. He returned to it. When he saw him coming home, he ran out to meet him.

God's invitation is rather depicted in Matthew 22:11-13 when somebody gets thrown out. No unconditional love there.

One of the things I've encountered when talking with many Christians about God's unconditional love, is my surprise how many of them imagine it as conditional instead. When I typically probe deeper, it usually comes to how they grew up thinking about their relationships with their parents. They will speak of their parent's love for them, as conditionally based. And perhaps it was for them.

Some people do not know what the experience of unconditional love is, and so that is projected onto God. Yet others do know what unconditional love is from their parents. I am one of the latter. And my personal experience of God, is overwhelming, unconditional love. It really has to do with life experiences.

As far as the passage you cited, I don't read that as "you have to do something to earn God's love". I relate that to the other passage in Matthew where he says, "many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not do great works in your name..... and he shall respond depart from me, you workers of iniquity". That is not referring to Christians that weren't "good enough". In both passages, it's referring to those who claim to know God's love, yet do not demonstrate that they actually do, because they are hypocrites and liars, using God's name to hide their sins behind.

Tie that back to what I said before. Those are insincere souls using religion for self-gain. They do not know God's Grace, because they, like that thief in another parable, "came in another way". They did not accept God's Love, because they did not come through the door of surrender. They climbed in another way. Yet, God still loves them and forgives them, but they will bear no spiritual fruit, because they are not sincere before God. They cheat, and they lose by cheating. They did not avail themselves of Grace, because they came in some "other way".

ah this is your theory again. You don't have a single Bible verse to back this idea up, I think.

I've just given several examples from scripture. And no, this is not my "theory". This is my lived experience.

This again doesn't have anything to do with the Bible.
The Bible speaks a lot about facing ourselves and surrendering to that Divine Love. However, this does not mean that it is understood to be the same as knowing forgiveness.

Yes it does. Come back to the story of the Prodigal Son. The Father never quit loving him. But the son separated himself from the father. When he decided to come home, he received everything the father had to offer, and more.

Simply choosing to accept the divine does not save you according to James 2:19 (my interpretation).

The whole passage needs to be quoted.

"But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless"​

This fits perfectly with what I said. You do not benefit from God's Grace and forgiveness, if you come in for your own ego. You come in another way, like the thief. Now tied this to what Jesus said about people who claim religious faith, and tie it to this passage in James. "By their fruits you shall know them". Or as James says, "show me your faith by your works".

It's not the works that saves you, but the Grace you avail yourself of. Then, with that Grace growing within you, you produce good works, or you bear spiritual fruit. Fruits, or works, are the evidence of an inner work. Hypocrisies and lying in the name of God on the other had, bears evil fruit, which is cast into the fires, citing another parable from Jesus.

As you can see, I have plenty of scriptures I can relate this understanding of God's Love to. I believe it is what scripture is attempting to communicate about the unconditional nature of God's Love.

 

[Trailblazer]

Jesus doesn't agree with the bible?

In some cases, no, depending upon what part of the Bible you are referring to.
The OT was written before Jesus walked the earth, so why would Jesus agree with it?

As for the NT, it was written by men who did not even know Jesus, so Jesus might not agree, if He never even said what they write that He said.

 

[Trailblazer]

And to me, it's flypaper.

Your choice.

 

[Trailblazer]

To us, now, he is a character in a religious story.

People have different beliefs. To me He was more than that.

I believe that Jesus was a Manifestation of God, a Messenger if God and a Servant of God.
Stories were written about Jesus and some might be true, but I believe some of them are not true.

 

[PureX]

People have different beliefs. To me He was more than that.

I believe that Jesus was a Manifestation of God, a Messenger if God and a Servant of God.
Stories were written about Jesus and some might be true, but I believe some of them are not true.

But Jesus is gone, now, and only the stories are left. The stories of who he was and what he did and said, as told by others; according to what they determined to be significant. And from these, we then determine for ourselves what we deem to be significant.

 

[Trailblazer]

But Jesus is gone, now, and only the stories are left. The stories of who he was and what he did and said, as told by others; according to what they determined to be significant. And from these, we then determine for ourselves what we deem to be significant.

What I deem to be significant are not the stories but the teachings.

 

[PureX]

What I deem to be significant are not the stories but the teachings.

For me, it's the overall ideal, and the promise of salvation that results from it, if we are willing to embody that ideal.

 

[Trailblazer]

For me, it's the overall ideal, and the promise of salvation that results from it, if we are willing to embody that ideal.

The promise of salvation has no significance for me since I do not believe in original sin.

 

[PureX]

The promise of salvation has no significance for me since I do not believe in original sin.

Interesting. I see humanity's 'original sin' still being manifested in us all, all the time. It's the sin of hubris: of thinking that we can, should, and have the innate right to judge everything and everyone we encounter according to our own needs and desires, as if all creation exists for the sole purpose of serving ourselves. And it is this very 'sin' through which we continue to enslave ourselves and each other and the whole world in a perpetual battle to get what WE want from them. When all we ever really needed to do was choose to live for the well-being of each other, as opposed to just for ourselves, and we'd all be healed and saved from this horrifically destructive and punishing 'insanity of the self'. And yet century after century passes, and we just can't give that selfishness up, ... and return to "Eden".

 

[thomas t]

I thought I had specified that "When we accept that, then we will know forgiveness".

well yes, I thought that was what I commented on

So, yes, you need to ask.

ah

But you don't need to do that for God to forgive you already, without you asking.

how so? Bible does not teach that. It's presumption, I think.

"Father forgive them, for they know not what they do"

ah - but this can't be your proof verse that God forgives just anything without getting asked, I think.
Firstly, this verse referred to a very specific situation, in my opinion. And secondly, even at that very occasion there were some who were not forgiven, as I see it: Mark 12:9.

So Jesus differentiates between groups, as I see it. To the one group he said "they know not what they do"... but the other group knew very well what they did: Mark 12:7.

Suffering torture he just did not have the time to work this out in a detailed statement, I think... that's why Bible gives more detail about it before.

"you have to do something to earn God's love"

that wasn't what I said. To be clear: I'm against works-based salvation which is a farce in my opinion. I'm rather convinced only Jesus saves, not own works.

I said, some get thrown out. For misbehavior. They do something and then get thrown out.
So it's the other way round: they "earn" being thrown out.... so still: no unconditional love there.
It is as Bible says (see passage in provious post).

And no, this is not my "theory". This is my lived experience.

You say that's your experience. Bible only please.
Christianity cannot change the rules as laid out in the Bible just for someone claiming experience, I think.
Using your justification, anyone could go ahead and try to impose no matter what theology based on what they think is experience.

I've just given several examples from scripture

but I refuted your point... namely that your verses would show that God's forgiveness is unconditional.

I stay with my opinion. Even if the Bible speaks a lot about facing ourselves and surrendering to that Divine Love..., this does not mean that it is understood to be the same as knowing forgiveness.
The prodigal son is not a story that says that knowing ourselves and surrendering to that divine love is enough for knowing forgiveness, I think.
The prodigal son had
* the mindset of a loser.
* come all the way back home
* offered to help work (if I remember right)
and certainly much more
and then the father said "welcome".

Even if the prodigal son also faced himself...

This fits perfectly with what I said. You do not benefit from God's Grace and forgiveness, if you come in for your own ego. You come in another way, like the thief.

so that's interesting now.
On the one hand you said: God's love is unconditional ( a stance you don't have scripture for as I see it).
On the other you're saying that God's love depends on which way you "come in". If you come in like the thief... then you miss. Also you say that those who use religion as self-gain somehow miss out.
But you can't have it both ways.

I don't want to argue here. It's rather that I tend to agree with what you're saying in the sentence highlighted in blue color. It's just that it doesn't describe "unconditional love".
If you say unconditional love in a sense that God's love can only be a gift and not a commodity.... yeah I agree with the concept but not with the wording.
But If you say.... in order for someone to receive God's grace they don't even need Jesus ... then I protest. In the mechanism you laid out for receiving forgiveness, you left out Jesus and merely said that they need to accept God's forgiveness that's there already, to put it in my words.

Long story short: instead of pointing to Jesus for forgiveness, and the Bible does speak about Jesus - you named an alternative concept that the Bible does not know, in my opinion: unconditional love.

edited to add brown paragraph.

 

[Marcion]

I wonder about this a lot. If people lead a good life and follow what Jesus taught, does it really matter if they believe in Jesus or in God?

As a Baha’i, I believe it matters if people recognize Baha’u’llah, because otherwise Baha’u’llah would not have enjoined us to proclaim that He has come, but why does it matter if people recognize Him, as long as they lead a moral life and follow His teachings? What’s the big deal if they do not follow the Baha’i laws? If they are living by the teachings as I see most people on this forum are doing, why does it matter what they believe? Why does it matter if they adhere to another religion or no religion at all? Why does it matter if they believe in God? What difference is it going to make what religion they adhere to or if they adhere to any religion at all or believe in God?

I once posted this on a Baha’i forum and no Baha’is were able to answer my question, so that is one reason why I am posting it here. If Baha’is believe it matters so much that people of other religions or no religion become Baha’is, I want to know why they think it matters.

Of course I also want to know if other people think it matters what people believe. For example, if Christians believe it matters that people believe in Jesus, why does it matter?

I have my own ideas why I think it matters what people believe. I believe it matters that people know what reality is, the purpose for which they were created and where they will spend eternity.

Do you think it matters if people know what reality is, the purpose for their existence and what will happen after they die?

If there is no afterlife, I do not think it matters that much what people believe as long as they follow the teachings of Jesus and live a good life, caring about other people and all living creatures and the environment. But will it matter what they believed in this life if there is an afterlife? That is the hundred-dollar question. I am sure some people will disagree, but I do not think this question is answered definitively in any scriptures.

In the Writings of Baha’u’llah we are told the destiny of a believer, but He does not specify what religion they believed in, and it leaves the destiny of everyone else wide open.

“They that are the followers of the one true God shall, the moment they depart out of this life, experience such joy and gladness as would be impossible to describe...” Gleanings, p. 171

“Death proffereth unto every confident believer the cup that is life indeed. It bestoweth joy, and is the bearer of gladness. It conferreth the gift of everlasting life.” Gleanings, p. 345

I'm not religious so perhaps it is not very appropriate for me to partake in this debate.

Belief in some type of philosophy of life is necessary to choose a certain life style that helps you grow mentally and spiritually. Otherwise you might just as well do as you please being merry and enjoying life for enjoyments sake.
If you don't believe that the chosen philosopy is true or not enough so, it will be harder to follow the discipline to keep up the prescribed life style.

But the real question is perhaps whether it matters which exact philosophy of life you choose and which type of life style you practise as a result of that choice.

I think it does matter.
But I don't think that choice needs to be tied to one particular teacher or one particular set of teachings as long as it does the job of lessening the karmic burden and freeing your consciousness of burdens and fetters that keep you from realising who you really are.

I personally don't believe that you can find out the proper teachings of the historical Jesus by merely reading the New Testament but that is another subject matter.

 

[Windwalker]

how so? Bible does not teach that. It's presumption, I think.
ah - but this can't be your proof verse that God forgives just anything without getting asked, I think.

Again, this is not a presumption. It's experience. Experience teaches us a whole lot more than what we speculate by trying to reason something. All it takes is one experience, to lay waste to all our cognitive presumptions and speculations. I don't know if I've pointed you to this cleaver cartoon I came across sometime ago, but it speaks directly to this. If you start with a lack of experience, all you have is speculations.

The eyes we use to read scriptures, will determine how we read it. If you have the experience of unconditional love, you will read scripture though those eyes. If all you have the experience of is conditional love, that will determine how you read scripture.

Firstly, this verse referred to a very specific situation, in my opinion. And secondly, even at that very occasion there were some who were not forgiven, as I see it: Mark 12:9.

So Jesus differentiates between groups, as I see it. To the one group he said "they know not what they do"... but the other group knew very well what they did: Mark 12:7.

All of these verses fit in with what I said previously, and I could have cited them as supports as well. It's about the religious hypocrisies of those who claim to be faithful to God, but betray their insincerities by the rotten things that they do. "By their fruits you shall know them".

Suffering torture he just did not have the time to work this out in a detailed statement, I think... that's why Bible gives more detail about it before.

That's speculation. That is not what scripture says. See? That can go both ways. I honestly think you should drop all this language of saying my thoughts are theories, speculations, assumptions, etc. That goes equally, if not more for you. It does not contribute anything to the discussion. Thank you.

that wasn't what I said. To be clear: I'm against works-based salvation which is a farce in my opinion. I'm rather convinced only Jesus saves, not own works.

But here's the thing. The minute you say God is conditional love, you make it about works. It's that simple. If you don't do something right, God does not love you. If you do something right God loves you. That's a salvation of works. You're promoting that by saying God love is conditional. I don't think you can reconcile that with saying salvation is by Grace.

I said, some get thrown out. For misbehavior.

They get thrown out because their bad works betray their lack of faith. "By their fruits you shall know them". It's not the works that did that, because we all do bad things from time to time. It's their insincerity that get's them in hot water, so to speak.

When you say, they get thrown out for misbehavior, that is plain and simple a salvation based upon works, not Grace.

They do something and then get thrown out.

So, do you believe if you do something bad, you get thrown out? God will not accept you unless you obey all the rules, to the letter of the law? That is conditional love. Was this what it was like for you with your parents? For me, it was not like that.

So it's the other way round: they "earn" being thrown out.... so still: no unconditional love there.
It is as Bible says (see passage in provious post).

So then you "earn" being included. Exactly what you just said. Thomas, you are preaching a salvation of works here. That is what is not Biblical.

You say that's your experience. Bible only please.

I can't, and you can't. Our experiences, will determine how we read the Bible and relate to the Divine. I am using the Bible, but I am sharing my understanding of it, based upon my experiences, as well as my extensive studies of it. You are not doing "Bible only" yourself. You are projecting yourself and your experiences, of what sounds like conditional love (which is not true love, IMO), into scriptures. You are trying to understand what love is from scripture, as is illustrated in the cartoon figures above.

Christianity cannot change the rules as laid out in the Bible just for someone claiming experience, I think.

To be sure, Christianity changes the meaning of the Bible all the time. How do you account for the 40,000 plus different denominations out there? But to be clear, in my view, what I am saying IS what is laid out in the Bible. Many years of study, faith, and experience teaches me this.

Using your justification, anyone could go ahead and try to impose no matter what theology based on what they think is experience.

First, that is what already happens with you and everyone else out there. You are imposing conditional love upon God, based upon your apparent experiences. However, and this is key, even though people may have different ways in which they understand scripture, Love is Love.

Jesus made quite clear how we are to distinguish truth faith where it exists. It's very simple. "By their fruits you shall know them". Not by their doctrines or beliefs or theologies, but by their fruits. You cannot fake fruits, but you can certainly fake faith. And that is what all those other passages about being "cast out" are about. Not works, but insincerity before God.

but I refuted your point... namely that your verses would show that God's forgiveness is unconditional.

No you haven't refuted my point. Those verses coincide with other ones I cited previously. There is no inconsistency, which I can see. That you have to "earn" God's love, is not what those verses are about. But that is how you applied them by saying the "earned" God's rejection.

The reality is, the denied themselves God's Grace, through a lack of faith and a lack of surrender. It's not God withholding Love from them. It's them denying it for themselves. Big difference. God is always there, unconditionally. I like to say it this way. God is always there just waiting for us to be done doing everything but coming to him. That's unconditional love. We don't have to measure up, but we have to want it sincerely within our hearts.

I stay with my opinion. Even if the Bible speaks a lot about facing ourselves and surrendering to that Divine Love..., this does not mean that it is understood to be the same as knowing forgiveness.

Maybe this is part of the source of your confusion about this. "Forgiveness", to me is another word for receiving God's Grace. We don't deserve it, but it's there for us nonetheless. And when we accept it, then the floodgates open and we are received as we are, repentant, but not perfect. Surely you must understand this?

I have to take a break at this point in responding to your points, as it's pretty much repeating what I've covered above. I'll be happy to continue this with you, as it seems such a puzzle to you understanding the nature of unconditional love. May I ask, have you ever experienced unconditional love in your life from any other human being?

 

[Audie]

In some cases, no, depending upon what part of the Bible you are referring to.
The OT was written before Jesus walked the earth, so why would Jesus agree with it?

As for the NT, it was written by men who did not even know Jesus, so Jesus might not agree, if He never even said what they write that He said.

Why not agree? Even with parts that are phony?

 

[nPeace]

I believe in God even though I am not close to God

We believe that hell is distance from God

So which part of hell are you in?

 

[Trailblazer]

Why not agree? Even with parts that are phony?

Why would Jesus agree with fictitious stories that were written about Him?