"Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
Turning from sin is a work just like keeping the law. Sin is transgression of the law. Therefore when someone tells you that you must "repent of your sins to be saved", they are issuing you an Unbiblical requirement or good works. It might persuade God to change His mind about destroying a nation, but it's not a requirement He has for personal salvation from hell, if you get what I mean. Again, we know that it's not works of righteousness that saves us.
It’s as per my previous response (I thought it was clear enough but you appear to have missed it) – this is still just one mans personal choice of belief. I can’t say why he decided in both science and faith but there are also many cases of scientists who are believers. There are unknowns in science and maybe he was looking to fill the voids, so read a couple of books, liked Christianity and went with that. Since much of what he read was either undeniably false or unverifiable or undemonstrable or even unpalatable, he would have had to pick one that he liked best, of had some emotional “resonation” with. Maybe he has his own take on it and accepts parts and rejects other parts, although science alone would lead to rejection of many parts. There are no real barriers or limits to beliefs unless you go mainstream versions.
Skepticism and critical thinking is the reason that many have turned away from belief – odd how you think that it works the other way. Mainstream version belief requires abandonment of critical thinking and acceptance of the written word. Skepticism of the belief is not allowed. Do as instructed, or else.
I don't think I can remember the last time I saw so much speculation in one paragraph. Skepticism and critical thing is what drives Scientific discovery and Christian apologetics
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
"Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
Turning from sin is a work just like keeping the law. Sin is transgression of the law. Therefore when someone tells you that you must "repent of your sins to be saved", they are issuing you an Unbiblical requirement or good works. It might persuade God to change His mind about destroying a nation, but it's not a requirement He has for personal salvation from hell, if you get what I mean. Again, we know that it's not works of righteousness that saves us.
Have you read the gospel of John, mrmarklin?
Acts 2. Read the whole chapter. John was present when this was uttered.
37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
So what are you meaning by this. Each time I be asked a straight question, you stop short of clearly answering what you believe. I gave as clear answers as I know how from the first post. I'm just asking the same.
I don't know how to make it any clearer. When someone askes me a question about my beliefs I answer with God's Word. The Scripture is more elequent that I can ever be.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
It's not all the complex. I've never read, or heard that an IQ of 120, or higher is required to get to Heaven.
That's an interesting point. It there a biblical type publication for those far, far below any standard IQ range, that they are capable of understanding, or are there exemptions for such people? Surely no-one will burn in hell for eternity for a simple misunderstanding or misinterpretation?
Seems to me that IQ and/or “intellectual understanding” is not the critical issue. Maybe there is a two ways to look at this one issue…
First way….. has the person rejected the Son, turned his back on the Creator and followed after gods/idols of his own making?
IQ May not be a factor here at all… truth about oneself and about God is spiritually discerned….it may not be solely a matter of “intellectual understanding” or not understanding. You don’t need to understand all the details of the Bible or Christian doctrine to be saved….
It may be a simple matter of reacting to light given by the Spirit and in turn, seeking Jesus. Does not take a superior IQ to respond to the call of God……Superior intelligence may be in fact be a hindrance and cause a wellspring of pride resulting in rejection of the Son.
Second…. The old age of accountability issue…. If one is a child or has the mind of a child….then perhaps that one cannot reject the Son…..ie…not guilty.
Last edited by TF49; 12/13/21. Reason: Type error
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2
" Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us...Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Romans 11
What does the first sermon say by a first person student of the One Who saves?
"Repent and let each of you be baptised..." Acts 2:38
Let's see the context of this one phrase in Peter's sermon on the day of Pentecost.
Not many days earlier, Jesus left to go to Heaven. The last thing He told the disciples was in the first chapter of Acts.
"To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence."
So they were told that they crucified the Savior Jesus Christ. They had to repent/ change their minds and realize Who He was and believe on Him.
'He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses."
"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
What occurred at the time they believed the preaching of Peter? They were automatically baptized by the Holy Spirit into union with Christ and endued with a spiritual gift. Just days earlier, Jesus was clear as to this distinction between water baptism and this baptism.
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
It's good that we look at 2:38 in context...agreed. Let's see what Jesus told them back in the beginning of the book. From what Jesus just told them days earlier, the Holy Spirit would give the believers power. This day of pentecost was that day. They actually saw a manifestation of the Holy Spirit, those who believed were baptized by Him and given spiritual gifts. My explanation was posted above from a previous page.
It's not all the complex. I've never read, or heard that an IQ of 120, or higher is required to get to Heaven.
Like I said before, a child can understand the true gospel.
Here's a question. It's not a trick question or to get one up. It's just a way to think and learn.
If you had a little girl or boy who was following you around the field on their bicycle while you were mowing, but you couldn't see them. You already warned them to stay away, but they nevertheless followed closely. Then they wanted to surprise you by coming around the brush hog or harvester. All of a sudden they're peddling next to you on the tractor. Would they no longer be your child?
Are you nuts?
Some say so, but I'm only giving a clear example to make a point about another totally different passage that I was talking to Wabigoon about. It made sense in context.
Skepticism and critical thing is what drives Scientific discovery and Christian apologetics
LOL! I understand the source of your comprehension issues now – you don’t understand what scepticism and critical thinking is, and what facts and evidence are either more than likely.
There are plenty of videos on-line pointing out the “problems” with the “science explanations” of the Christian apologetics. Me and the kids laugh ourselves silly at those.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Raspy
Whatever you said...everyone knows you are a lying jerk.
That's a bold assertion. Point out where you think I lied.
What is true or false is true or false regardless of our beliefs. Believing something is true or false doesn't make it true or false. Faith changes nothing.
I am not religious but always liked the old testament. In the bronze age folks werent as edumacated and God liked direct examples.
When the burning bush said free your people and committ genocide 7 times on the way to the holy land, you listened!
Just ask the canaanite council in the UN what they think of the old testament. Actually there isnt any canaanite council, Moses killed every canaanite down to the last child
Skepticism and critical thing is what drives Scientific discovery and Christian apologetics
LOL! I understand the source of your comprehension issues now – you don’t understand what scepticism and critical thinking is, and what facts and evidence are either more than likely.
There are plenty of videos on-line pointing out the “problems” with the “science explanations” of the Christian apologetics. Me and the kids laugh ourselves silly at those.
Ringman has exactly zero idea about what constitutes good logical evidence.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
Skepticism and critical thing is what drives Scientific discovery and Christian apologetics
LOL! I understand the source of your comprehension issues now – you don’t understand what scepticism and critical thinking is, and what facts and evidence are either more than likely.
There are plenty of videos on-line pointing out the “problems” with the “science explanations” of the Christian apologetics. Me and the kids laugh ourselves silly at those.
That is because you and your kids don't understand critical thinking.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
There is no Jesus in Judaism, that is Christian theology. The Jews still await their prophesied Messiah.
Which messiah were they looking for in Isaiah chapter 53?
“No one in hell can ever say I went to Christ and He rejected me.
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
There is no Jesus in Judaism, that is Christian theology. The Jews still await their prophesied Messiah.
Which messiah were they looking for in Isaiah chapter 53?
It was Jesus who Isaiah prophesied about and Micah, David, Moses Zachariah, etc….
Yep Jahrs. Jesus made it crystal clear that He was the Messiah mentioned in the sacred Jewish Scriptures; He explained to His followers what was said in all of the Law and the Prophets concerning Himself. The Old Testament is about Jesus.
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/XqqRwbqC/brain-slice.gif)
