The Bottom Line

[_Sethbag]

The appeal to divine authority is utterly vacuous first and foremost because it is never, ever the Divine himself who is claiming it. It is always some human being attempting to assert this authority on behalf of their own argument or claim.

You get God to come down and appeal to all of us himself, and I'm sure you'll see many of us change our tune. So long as the best you can do is tell us what you think God wants us to hear, forget it.

A claim of divine authority, and three bucks, will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

[_Sethbag]

Franktalk, I have a conversation here that better captures "the bottom line" of this thread.

Man1: God revealed to me such and such. You must believe it, because it's God's truth, and he would know.

Man2: Nope, sorry, but God revealed to me that you're wrong. He actually wants such and such.

Man3: Oh please. You're both wrong. God revealed to me the real truth, and it's different than what both of you are saying.

Man4: Revelation from God? Really? One shouldn't rely on what one perceives to be revelations from God. One will almost certainly be wrong in this.

Man1, Man2, Man3: Heathen! How dare you question revelation from God? You just need to try it, as I have, and you'll know too.

[_jo1952]

Hello LittleNipper!

All Jews WILL be saved. Those who are not waiting in Paradise for their resurrection are spending "time" in spirit prison until they have paid the last farthing.

Christians do not have exclusivity to what Christ accomplished. Also, contrary to what misguided members of the LDS Church believe, the LDS Christians do not have exclusivity to what Christ accomplished.

Blessings,

jo

Hello LittleNipper!

When someone listens to the Gospel message, this does not mean they have received the message from the Holy Ghost. Thus the teaching, "He that has ears let him hear." If the person does not have the ears to hear, then he has not heard. Now, the person sharing the message can be speaking with the power of the Holy Ghost. In other words, they are being a vessel for God to give His inspired message. However, the listener must be hearing the message with the power of the Holy Ghost in order to "hear" what the Holy Ghost is saying.

Please note the words which Jesus uses when He talks about the unpardonable sin:

Mark 3:29 (KJV) (emphasis is mine)

But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

In other words, the sin against the Holy Ghost puts a person in danger of eternal damnation.

There is no time long enough to pay one's own debt. There is an unpardonable sin. That is the rejection of the Holy Spirit's leading to repentance and the Savior. Good works may be a sign of one's salvation but it is not the way one is saved. That is called putting the cart before the horse. There are no self made men in heaven only the righteously forgiven.

The belief you have just stated denies what Jesus taught in Mark 3:29. This same teaching regarding forgiveness is also taught elsewhere in the New Testament. Notice that a person who commits the unpardonable sin NEVER receives forgiveness. YET that same person is only in danger of eternal damnation. You will need to reconcile how it is that this most grievous sin which CANNOT be forgiven can be committed, but a person who commits it does not reap eternal damnation.

I think you to look at your basic belief concerning what eternal damnation looks like, as well as your basic belief concerning the forgiveness of sins in general.

Something else to keep in mind is that we all receive only those parts of Truth which we are ready for; and not before we are ready. As Paul explained to the members of the church in Corinth, they were not yet able to receive any more than a milk (temporal) understanding of the Gospel. So, they had not received a great deal of Truth - only milk parts of All Truth. Now consider how we are also taught that from him whom much is given, much is expected. I would say that the members at Corinth had not yet been given much because they could not bear it. I believe that if any of them were to fall away, they would not have far to fall because they had not yet received much. With only temporal knowledge and Truth having been revealed to them from the Holy Ghost (that is all they were able to "hear"), this could not be blaspheme against the Holy Ghost since they had not yet received any spiritual understanding (meat) from the Holy Ghost. At this point, I believe they can be forgiven.

Now, the more parts of Truth which an individual receives from the Holy Ghost, the closer they will get to receiving the meat/spiritual understandings. Only that person and God will know how much spiritual Truth they have received; i.e., to whom much has been given. The more they receive, then the further they have to fall should they fall away. Yet, even if they have received enough for it to be considered unpardonable, they are only in danger of eternal damnation.

I would like to comment about Saul/Paul. We know he had his part in being responsible for having Christians killed. He had been working hard for God because he believed that Christians were committing blaspheme. The punishment for this crime was death under the law. God counted Saul's works as righteousness because Saul was serving God; even though Saul was kicking against the pricks and was persecuting Christ in doing so. I have no doubts that Saul had listened to the Gospel message (he witnessed what happened with Steven and Steven was preaching the Gospel message when he was put to death); but Saul had not "heard" the message. Paul's works both before and after his conversion were considered righteous by God.

Since God counted Saul's works as righteousness, God did not count Saul's works as "sin". Any feelings of guilt or sorrow or sin were born in Saul's own mind; for which I believed he suffered a great deal. This "punishment" came from Saul's own mind; it was not punishment which God meted out.

The Plan of Salvation is not as cut and dried as most believers think that it is.

Blessings,

jo

[_jo1952]

I don't recall that post, but many LDS still believe in God and view the flood allegorical.

Dear Themis!

It doesn't matter whether or not you remember that post. It also doesn't matter how many people do or do not believe the flood was global. What matters is our love for one another. If we have love for one another, we also have love for God - even if we don't think we believe in God. You do not need to defend yourself to me. It does not matter to me that you have such a great need to prove you are correct and/or to prove me wrong. We already know where we both currently stand. I love you.

Blessings to you!!

jo

[_Tobin]

Tobin, if I were to go kneel down and pray to God, even if I perceived some kind of influence or message in my mind, there would be no good reason for me to interpret this as the communication to me of truth from some Divine power who could be trusted to know such truth.

Why do I say this? Because I know that I am probably unremarkable as a person in this world. Looking around the world, it is fairly obvious that this method doesn't work for millions of other people who rely on it for truth, and I can think of no good reason why the method would be anymore reliable for me than it is for them. Apparently it is very easy, as a human being, to become convinced that one has received revelation from God, but be wrong about it.

I didn't state that. I said speak with God, not with yourself. You speak to God like you do any other man. If that isn't what you are doing, then how do you know you are speaking with God? So, please don't equate feelings, or feeling like you are talking with God with ACTUALLY talking with God.

[_Gunnar]

Franktalk, I have a conversation here that better captures "the bottom line" of this thread.

Man1: God revealed to me such and such. You must believe it, because it's God's truth, and he would know.

Man2: Nope, sorry, but God revealed to me that you're wrong. He actually wants such and such.

Man3: Oh please. You're both wrong. God revealed to me the real truth, and it's different than what both of you are saying.

Man4: Revelation from God? Really? One shouldn't rely on what one perceives to be revelations from God. One will almost certainly be wrong in this.

Man1, Man2, Man3: Heathen! How dare you question revelation from God? You just need to try it, as I have, and you'll know too.

Excellent! I wish I had thought of that one!

[Guest]

I think a repeat of the last paragraph of my OP is apropos at this point:

But surely, one might argue, God is infallible. Unfortunately, this entirely misses the point! While it may be inconceivable that a being worthy of the appellation "God" could be fallible, it is certainly not inconceivable that we humans could be mistaken or dishonest about having received divine inspiration or revelation--or even about there being any such thing. Obviously, that is true of at least the vast majority of the mutually contradictory religious convictions and claims, is it not? There is a glaring dilemma here. If you are going to admit, nay, insist that we humans are all fallible, and therefore need divine guidance, you can't then turn around and claim that any of us can infallibly determine which (if any) of these numerous, mutually contradictory claims are really a product of divine revelation!

One analogy I like to use is one from simple arithmetic. In binary math there are just two numerical symbols: "1" and "0". If you have the "1" along with the "0" you have "10", the binary equivalent of two, which is twice as much as the "1" by itself. If you do have only the "1", however, you still have something, but if you have only "0", you have the representation of nothing, no matter how many of them you have. Similarly I assign a value of "1" to confirmation by observable, objective evidence and sound reason, and a value of "0" to spiritually fulfilling confirmation or feelings (in other words, "faith"). If we have both of those, I am willing to concede that we have more than if we had the evidence and reason alone. Yet, if we have only the "1" of evidence and reason, we still have something of tangible value. But if we have only the "0" of faith, we really have nothing--no matter how many "zeros" we have.

by the way, there are only 10 types of people in the world--those who understand binary math, and those who don't.

[_Gunnar]

I didn't state that. I said speak with God, not with yourself. You speak to God like you do any other man. If that isn't what you are doing, then how do you know you are speaking with God? So, please don't equate feelings, or feeling like you are talking with God with ACTUALLY talking with God.

Do you deny that there are literally millions of people in the world who mistakenly believe (and often even adamantly insist) they are speaking with God, when they are really only speaking with themselves? Given that fact (if you acknowledge it), how do you know for sure that you are really speaking with God?

It seems to me that you are stubbornly making yourself oblivious to any distinction between questioning the Word of God, and questioning whether your deeply cherished convictions really are the Word of God.

[_Tobin]

I didn't state that. I said speak with God, not with yourself. You speak to God like you do any other man. If that isn't what you are doing, then how do you know you are speaking with God? So, please don't equate feelings, or feeling like you are talking with God with ACTUALLY talking with God.

Do you deny that there are literally millions of people in the world who mistakenly believe (and often even adamantly insist) they are speaking with God, when they are really only speaking with themselves?

I made no such assertion. That is between them and God. However, I would think it isn't terribly unreasonable to actually state one should interact with someone as a verification that you are actually speaking with someone in the first place.

Given that fact (if you acknoledge that), how do you know for sure that you are really speaking with God?

We haven't established that "fact". I don't know what virtually all other people have exerienced (or not experienced). And I know I spoke with God and that God is real. And you can determine that too BY experiencing the same thing.

Again, your problem is you are continually relying on what other people may have (or may have not experienced) - including myself. Who cares?!? Go do it yourself if you are really interested. If not, then you can wait and waste your time as you are doing right now. From what I gathered, you only have a few more years to live as it is, so it isn't like you will have to wait much longer. It is as simple as that.

[_Drifting]

And I know I spoke with God and that God is real. And you can determine that too BY experiencing the same thing.

The difficulty is that other people, equally vehement that they too have experienced God, believe different things as a result. Given that God is supposedly consistent, some of you are claiming a witness of God that isn't a witness of God.

The fact is, you have no discernible way of identifying which of you is wrong.