You’re welcome!

Presupposing that God exists and He desires that none should perish but every human being repent and come to a point of salvation (yes, I know I’m asking a lot) … can you think of any good reason why He doesn’t do MORE to get our attention? I’ve wondered this so many times! Again, the flawed transmission of an ancient text just doesn’t seem like the most savvy way to save the whole world (provided that’s what He REALLY wants). I realize election makes God sound arbitrary and unfair, but doesn’t it make more sense than the alternative?

Neither option makes any sense to me, to be honest with you pj. That’s why I’m no longer a religious person. I found a third option – god didn’t create humanity, humanity created god(s). Yes, it’s a very radical idea – probably the most radical shift in thinking I’m likely to make in my lifetime. But there are all sorts of ways this option makes sense if you allow yourself to consider it. Problem is, most Christians are so frightened and conditioned not to question that they won’t let that ‘genie’ out of the box where it’s buried in their brains.

See, you are already clear-headed enough to recognize that god really hasn’t done a very good job of trying to convey his message. Most Christians confronted with the obvious evidentiary problems that mewho and others have pointed out crank up the “free will” argument. As if people wouldn’t still have a choice to accept or reject god if he gave humanity a clear message about his existence.

That’s just nonsense, as most of us apostates have concluded.

But for some reason, you see the problem clearly but you’ve chosen a different explanation than I have. For me, the issue became clear: No evidence, most likely no god. When I heard the concept of Occam’s Razor, it became even more obvious.

My take is that people who recognize the illogic of religion but cling to some version of it anyway are motivated by fear, emotional need and societal pressure. They are simply afraid to live in a world without the comfort and familiarity of a god. Now, I may be way off base on this, but I’ve come into contact with a lot of ex-religious people and a lot who are questioning, and that seems to be the prime issue they discuss.

You said: “Therefore, TA, your disbelief is very understandable … all you have to go on is an ancient book. I pray that someday God will reveal Himself to you in a personal and powerful way.”

What use is intercessory pray for the salvation of others in light of the doctrine of the elect? If God hasn’t already chosen TA for salvation, then your prayer is useless. If He has already chosen TA, your prayer is also useless. I’m not trying to catch you in a logic trap, or call your beliefs foolish; I expect this “problem” is something you’ve already worked out in your faith, and I’d like to understand your point of view.

An analogy.
The general has a complete and comprehensive plan for every area of the army’s operation; including all the logistics, nutritional considerations, and preparation of food in every mess tent. All the plans have been made and the provider contracts signed.
Three new privates are talking about the food they’ve just been served at the mess tent. One says he wrote a letter to the general about the menu he’d prefer, didn’t get what he wanted, but maybe someday he will. Another says he wrote a similar letter, and it was answered; he was served his favorite dish! Not exactly like mom used to make, but close enough. The third says he talked with the supply sergeant and, now knowing how things really work, the first two are just fooling themselves.

There’s more than one tangent that could be explored in my analogy, but, sticking just with the idea of predestination, I’d say the third private is the Calvanist. And as such, he wouldn’t bother writing any letters to the general about the chow.

Did Jesus really say this? Is it possible that some people been given the “mysteries” of the Kingdom while others are “on the outside?”

Or maybe the early Christians were as arrogant as today’s Christians. Early Christianity had nothing to do with a “personal relationship with Jesus Christ.” And people were not allowed to simply walk into a church building – baptism was an initiation, no baptism, no entry. Christianity was certainly turning things upside down – the new elite would be the humble, the last at the supper table. How you twist Mark 4 into some 20th century notion of spiritual elitism is incredible, although probably close to what the original author meant. This doesn’t make it true, but thanks for proving my statement:

But our genuine search for knowing our “God” forced us to ask questions that Christians don’t bother to answer and I am sorry to say, continue to do so as replies to our posts.

If you want to talk about the Bible, then don’t dismiss it as “some ancient text.” We can talk about it as literature set in a historical reality of the first and second century. But don’t keep switching your mind on the subject, you can’t have it both ways. The Bible is an ancient text that includes what just some early Christians thought about their new cult and attempted in a mythmaking project. But this has nothing to do with what I was asking. I could care less right now what Mark thought he was talking about. I care about what you are talking about. I want to know why you think I should care about what Mark thinks. From what I gather you say this comes from some “personal experience” and then you think I should take your word for it when I had been doing that for the majority of my life and found it to be a lie.

I wrote what I wrote because it is common sense, which is why it was predictable. You say 1+1=3, and then when I say “no it isn’t”, you say “that was predictable.” You appear as though you only care to win an argument. Fine. You’ve won. Does that satisfy you? Probably not. I don’t care to win an argument pj11. I constantly challenge the validity of the Christian belief because I eventually got to the point that I felt duped. [The majority of] Christians don’t take their own belief system seriously enough to study it with integrity. They are content with arguing it with diverted responses and rhetoric with little substance. You get defensive when someone asks you a “hard”, but common sense question and then divert into some hermeneutic dross.

Well, that’s not entirely fair. Yes, there is subjectivity to my belief system … is there any belief system (or non-belief system for that matter) that DOESN’T possess some level of subjectivism? But my faith is not solely rooted in “me” or my subjective experience, as you know. It’s attached to historical data, archaeological data, anthropological data, literary data, etc. It’s not a blind faith by any means. You are free to question it, investigate it, accept it or reject it … the Creator is not threatened by your inquiries and neither am I.

Presupposing that God exists and He desires that none should perish but every human being repent and come to a point of salvation (yes, I know I’m asking a lot) … can you think of any good reason why He doesn’t do MORE to get our attention? I’ve wondered this so many times! Again, the flawed transmission of an ancient text just doesn’t seem like the most savvy way to save the whole world (provided that’s what He REALLY wants). I realize election makes God sound arbitrary and unfair, but doesn’t it make more sense than the alternative?

I was hoping to get your thoughts on the Mark 4 passage. Did Jesus really say this? Is it possible that some people been given the “mysteries” of the Kingdom while others are “on the outside?” Seems to me if the so-called later editors wanted to remove any offensive passages, this might have been one suitable for editing. But there it is … seeming to support a cloaked message only given to the elect. Of course, it doesn’t stand alone … Paul spoke often of predestination and the elect. Peter too … oh, and John also. Come to think of it, election is replete in Scripture. What do you make of it?

Man, you must know some nasty “Christians.” I’m sorry that you’ve been so hurt by the people around you. I’m sure the Dalai Lama and Arius would be fascinating guys to hang with … truth be told, I’d love to meet them both. But I don’t think it’s the company which will make hell so unbearable. Sorry.

I pray that someday God will reveal Himself to you in a personal and powerful way.

Yea, I tried praying for that too – maybe “he” just revealed a little too much.

As for going on an ancient text, what else should I look to? Other Christians? The so-called “body of Christ”? Again, I would prefer an eternity in hell with the Dalai Lama and ‘Saint’ Arius than spend eternity in paradise with the majority of Christians.

Your evidence is anecdotal and thoroughly subjective, but it is the same evidence that the majority of de-converted Christians have felt. We want to believe, we have lived in the place where we were told not to doubt because doubt is [often] the enemy of faith, and so we did not doubt. We have all been there. But our genuine search for knowing our “God” forced us to ask questions that Christians don’t bother to answer and I am sorry to say, continue to do so as replies to our posts. We tend to get the same tired cliche answers we ourselves gave or the same apologetic spewage that we were taught, memorized, and believed in seminary or bible college. You take away your ancient text and you are just another Deepak Chopra or Joseph Smith.

Ah. I’m sure glad you’re one of the chosen, then. It would be uncomfortable to be one of those whom Jesus didn’t want to be saved. It’s interesting, as I think I’ve mentioned before, how everyone who believes in this pre-destination thing is always IN the club, and not outside of it.

Real nice god you’re worshipping there!

I had a nice idea of heaven being a place where I could indulge all those hobbies and interests I have now but just never have time to pursue, due to having to work for a living.

And I also figured that we just WOULD be happy. No ifs, ands or buts – god would see to it that we were happy, and we would be. The idea that we’d be sort of automatons programmed to “happy mode” didn’t really bother me, because I figured if we didn’t know we were robots, we wouldn’t care.

Weird, huh?