-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What are the chances?
- Thread starter Evangelicalhumanist
- Start date
halbhh
The wonder and awe of "all things".
One of the few things we know about God -- even the most basic definition of God -- is that because of Him, death isn't real.
So, what happened then when God killed most all people in the Flood story (except for Noah's family)?
Well, here's what the texts say happened for those people --
"For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. 19 After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits— 20 to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built."
1 Peter 3 NIV
The people that 'died' in the Flood were all alive.
But more than only that -- they get Christ Himself coming to them to offer salvation, no less!
And we can see the generalization: it must be the same for anyone that died without hearing the gospel -- "For God does not show favoritism." (Romans 2)
So, you see, God is the one who cancels death.
Instead of 'killing', God...transports.
All death here, cancer, floods, war, you name it -- He undoes it.
(We understand He *could* destroy in a final real way, but when someone here dies, that's not it. To be extinguished in the real way, one has to knowingly reject God and love with full understanding and real choice.)
Last edited:
Have you heard of the term "exegesis?" That's the process of reading scripture carefully in order to understand -- to draw out of the words themselves -- what it says.
What you are doing here is the opposite, and the word that describes it is "eisegis." You are "reading into" scripture what you want it to say. The fact that it doesn't actually say it -- in any way, shape or form -- doesn''t seem to bother you a bit.
Scott C.
Just one guy
A quick Google search says:
7,000,000,000 people believe in God(s).
500,000,000 are atheist. (Highest concentration in China)
While I'm Christian (Latter-day Saint), I believe non-Christians who believe in God(s) are correct in their perception of a divine source guiding and blessing their lives, and in their sense of accountability to higher power(s). So if there is no God(s), we have 7 billion people with an incorrect perception of reality and 500 million who got it right.
Last edited:
halbhh
The wonder and awe of "all things".
To understand a text well, one has to read fully without a prejudice, and really try to hear the text in a full complete way. (while you could not know this ahead of time, I'm someone that was able to simply test out of the university level freshman english course at a major university; am a competent reader, and tend to read fully and well)
The problem you are guessing at -- having one's perceptions controlled by having a doctrine or meaning you expected to see, and then seeing what you want the text to say -- is one that happens to anyone that brings a point of view to the text expecting to see it.
To avoid or undo that, you'd need to read fully through all of the texts with the intention of learning new things and seeing what you didn't know or expect.
I have, more than once. It's perhaps easy for someone that likes to read a lot to consider to just simply read through all the book fully, but I think most people would find the texts a lot more interesting than they expect, and would find it not so hard to just read through all 1200 or more pages.
With that full reading (with an openness to find new details and learn more), then you'd be better able to know/recognize that I'm simply reporting the a more complete content of the text when read fully.
I'm probably not like anyone you've ever talked with before, so perhaps it would serve us both better if you don't make any assumptions at all.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You misplaced a zero somewhere.
It's got nothing to do with chance. Its got to do with our choices....we all have them.
If you understand why the Creator has given us all "enough rope", only then can you see past your limited perspective......if you read Genesis, isn't it apparent that only those who do as God commanded would be in his good books and have his blessing. Remember that in the garden of Eden it was "obedience" that God required of the humans, not just "goodness" essentially.
If he was going to leave the planet in the care of humans, he had to be confident that they would do as he instructed them. When they disobeyed, he stepped back to allow them to see firsthand, what happens when we take matters into our own hands and ignore him. How are we doing so far? How well have we treated the planet, its many lifeforms and each other? Man's track record is rather appalling don't you think? All these thousands of years of recorded history tell one story.....how woefully inadequate we are at using the free will that was given us, in a positive and constructive way.
How quick some are to judge the Being who will ultimately judge us?
To assume that our limited knowledge and foresight could give us the big picture that is in the mind of God, requires some nerve. You think that the Creator of life cannot just as easily restore any life that he has taken? If you knew anything about this God, you would not be so hasty in assuming that he was wrong in anything he did. Its just that YOU might not have done the same because of your human limitations. He does not have any limitations....whatever he has done, has had the long term benefits in view....a view so lofty that we cannot possibly see the end result that he already knows will take place. You don't trust him because you simply don't know him IMO.
How do you know that the baby died in agony?
David learned important lessons from that experience and quite frankly what David did merited the death penalty for two separate crimes against God's law. David was not judged by the human judicial system in his case, but by God himself who made an exception of David because of his covenant with him. He did not protect David from the consequences of his actions however, but David's heartfelt repentance was acceptable to his God who willingly forgives. His other son by Bathsheba (Solomon) became one of Israel's most successful kings. His reign was one of prosperity and peace, but with a sting in the tail in his later life....another lesson in obedience for all of us.
You grossly misinterpret his actions viewed from a very limited perspective. Sometimes 'tough love' is what is needed.
Last edited:
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
What do you mean by right and wrong?
Just a quick reminder -- the fact that I don't happen to share your beliefs does NOT equate to my having a "limited perspective."
Two of them actually.
And 68% of Republicans think the election was rigged -- in spite of no court ever having been presented with a scintilla of evidence for that. Basing your world view on what other people believe (and trust me, a lot of people believe some really weird stuff) is not a sound way of learning anything useful.
Or true.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
As long as you don't believe you can have a world view based only on evidence, we agree.
Ponder This
Well-Known Member
I feel 90% confident that most people already know, in a general way, the odds argument(s).
And I feel 90% confident that of those people who know the argument(s)... it makes no difference what-so-ever what the supposed chances are.
But each individual has a unique set of information (set of assumptions).
Thus, probabilities are always re-evaluated on an individual basis.
For example, let's suppose the probability that a person makes a 3-point shot is 10%.
But then suppose Michael Jordan hears that an average person has a 10% chance to make a 3-point shot. He will naturally think that such a statistic does not apply to him.
But it gets better. Let's say someone tells Michael Jordan that Michael Jordan has a 37% chance to make a 3-point shot and shows him some charts with detailed information and calculations. Michael Jordan hears this... and dismisses it. Why?
Because Michael Jordan is going to be focused on making a 3-point shot and believing that he will make that shot at the moment that he makes the throw. He's only going to throw the shot when he feels he has a good chance to make the shot and there are so many variables not encompassed in a statistic that relate directly to this decision that it's mind boggling. So the 37% is actually not even important.
So statistics, in many ways, often fail to give people the information they need to make the best decisions.
Han Solo doesn't need to hear the odds of making it through the asteroid field, because his decision is based on information outside of C-3PO's considerations.
The natural response to hearing an odds argument about the correctness of beliefs is that the odds are simply based on what someone else believes and not necessarily on what "I" believe.
In order for many arguments to become convincing, the arguments can't be made for someone else. Unless a person walks through the steps and comes to a conclusion on his own... it's just another opinion held by someone else. And if "I" reject the conclusion, then it's almost trivial to come up with some reason why it's not valid.
....or everyone's right...
This is a common glib response.
Does this mean that religious human sacrifice is right?
When you call into question the actions of someone you don’t really know, but whom I know well, then I can say quite truthfully that your perspective is limited. Your assumptions are not based on all the facts, so how can they be accurate?
Since you have no belief in the God that I know, you are not really in a position to judge him or anything he has, or has not done. But he is in a position to judge you....so “what are your chances” if that is the case?
That's stretching a metaphor way beyond its meaning.
So all the worlds religions are not literally right? Then this is the issue. How does one sort the wheat from the chaff? What is to be taken as true? How are all the incongruities and conflicts between religions supposed to be reconciled? Millions have died throughout history over religious conflict. These conflicts rage today.
What people believe affects all of us and it is appropriate to evaluate and question these beliefs. We cannot simply say, "They are all right".
Scott C.
Just one guy
Scott C.
Just one guy
I meant to write 500,000,000 not 5,000,000. My BS in math I guess was too many years ago. The numbers you posted made me wonder what is the actual count of atheists and believers in God(s) worldwide. The number of believers does not prove God, but I find the numbers to be interesting. An awful lot of people are convinced God(s) is working in their lives.