God is Love

[David Sklansky]

"The reason works are important is not because they have merit in themselves for justification, but because they are the only possible evidence that one has genuine faith"

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant to put the word "only" after the word not.

[NotReady]

Nope.

[Girchuck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

But our knowledge about the Universe is a very practical kind. All we know is the stuff that we can observe. We assume that our observations are valid, because otherwise we couldn't get anything done.


[/ QUOTE ]

So you make an assumption on a purely pragmatic reason, because you cannot think of anything else. This assumption doesn't make what you observe true however.


[/ QUOTE ]

Many of our observations seem to give us workable solutions to our problems. Even if what we observe is not true, it worked for us for thousands of years. We are getting better at it.

[ QUOTE ]

Remember that past performance is no guarantee of future results.


[/ QUOTE ]

So why make assumptions at all?



[/ QUOTE ]
Because we need to survive. Because those that need to survive and know how to do that best will pass their desire to survive to their progeny. Because we know how to record past experiences and observations.

[ QUOTE ]

Suppose you are hungry, and you see a fruit hanging high on a tree. Do you know that you have to climb the tree to get the fruit? How did you come to posess this knowledge?
All our knowledge is of the same kind that the knowledge that you need to climb the tree to get the fruit.


[/ QUOTE ]

Divine revelation. God soveignly granted me the knowledge that the fruit existed, was on that true, and that I was hungry and needed to climb the tree in order to get to it.



[/ QUOTE ]
Nice. Do you know how to climb trees? Do you know if the fruit is good to eat? How are you going to find out?

[ QUOTE ]

Since we have now capability to perform many more observations than we have in the past, and summarize them with better models faster, our knowledge is growing faster than it was growing in the past. It all comes down to improved technology.


[/ QUOTE ]
But if all of these observations and conclusions are based off of an unjustifiable assumption (that these observations are reliable) how can you know that knowledge is growing? If you were wrong at the core (observations are reliable) then you've gone off in a completely wrong direction.



[/ QUOTE ]
you are right. If my core assumption is wrong, then our knowledge might be also wrong. Yet, we know and can do many more things now than we could in the past. I will hold on to my assumtion until it is shown not to work.
[ QUOTE ]

Let me ask you. What new things did humans learn about god since the bible was written and read.


[/ QUOTE ]

Humans are continuallly developing their individual knowledge of God. As years go on deeper insights and conclusions come out of Scripture. All knowledge that we need to know for salvation is contained in Scripture yes, but we cannot have a perfect understanding of this and are continually striving to learn more.

It is not the "reading" of Scripture that grants this knowledge however, but it is God's soveign grace by which He places this knowledge in our heads and He chooses to do this when we read Scripture. For some, it may take years for understanding to happen, for others whom God has hardened, never. So in that sense, since God is implanting more and more knowledge in our hearts we are learning more about God.



[/ QUOTE ]
What new things do you know about god that Paul did not know?
What new things do you know about the stars that Paul did not know?

[PairTheBoard]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Funny, but I didn't call you a Pharasee in that last post.


[/ QUOTE ]

I can read. So can everyone else. If you ever want a rational discussion again, let me know.

[/ QUOTE ]

From Last PTB Post -
"NotReady -
"You can find all the excuses you need to disbelieve, or to think Scripture contradicts itself, is wrong, or can't be understood. Only the individual can decide these things for himself. I would warn you that " The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"

This is good advice for NotReady and undontknow. It is especailly good advice for all Religious Sophisticates.
=======

This is the only place in that post where you are mentioned. Do you not think that advice is also applicable to you? Do you not think it is applicable to Religious Sophisticates. In fact, the word "Pharasee" does not even appear in that post. I talk about Jewish Religious Sophisticates and Chistian Religious Sophisticates. I mention that they have great knowledge of scripture and the words of Paul show that their hearts can be calloused leaving them with an inablity to understand with their heart. Nowhere in all that are you mentioned. I can't help it if you find the shoe fits so well that you take offense.

PairTheBoard

[Girchuck]

[ QUOTE ]

I do believe that I am saved, are being saved, and will be saved. You say as far as you understand from my theology there is a possibility that I will change my mind. Please quote relevant statements I have made to that extent, or quote from the confessions that I linked to in an earlier post that point to this for I disagree.

Since my salvation is founded upon the Word of God and is held by God's hand and His promises, He has given a gift of eternal life so that Christ will raise up all that the Father draws. If I have been drawn by the Father then I will not fall away because God will preserve me.

"Then it will turn out, that, from your present theology's point of view, it was but an illusion that you were saved, and actually you were never saved."

This is correct, but will not happen for any that God has given the grace of saving faith. He gave Peter this gift and since God had predestined Peter to turn back (and strengthen his brethren) after his denials, Peter cannot have died after his denials before his restoration.

I cannot fathom God's will completely, that is correct, but God is a God of His promise and His covenant, He does not change His mind, and He is not like flickering shadows, and His promises for His people are forever, held together by His soveign plan.


[/ QUOTE ]

I said that the chance that you will change your mind is very small. There is nothing in your writing that indicates that it is possible for you to change your mind right now. However, you will live for many years. During the course of these years, there is a slight chance that you will gradually or suddenly change your views. People change their views all the time, it is not unprecedented. Why do you think that you are 100% safe from this happening to you?

[Girchuck]

[ QUOTE ]


Ok. Let me summarize:

1)I feel human
2)Humans are the most complex thing you know.
3)Killing humans reduces the complexity of the universe you can observe
4)You feel complexity should be increased.
5)I have emotions that react when humans are killed. These reactions are illogical.
6)The world agrees with me that humans are valuable and should not be killed.
7)Therefore all people everywhere, any time should value human life.

While I cannot deny you 1. 2,3,4,5 seem to be completely based upon your views. How can you make a judgement that all people should value human life?


[/ QUOTE ]
I cannot make this judgement. I can only wish for it. I can also try to persuade others who think differently. Fortunately for me, I am not in a minority, otherwise my life would be in great danger and so would be the lives of many others.

[ QUOTE ]

For the sake of the arguement, even if I grant you 1, the other statements all have problems.

2) You may feel humans are the most complex thing you know, but what if I disagree? In order to come to an agreement, you must define complexity and show somehow that one thing is more complex than another. This still does not give you the strength of a statement you need, because to someone else, there may be more complex things out there (and to Nazi Germany, the death of "lesser humans" was necessary to ensure the purity of the "greater humans")


[/ QUOTE ]
Not all people value the same things I value. I accept that. As long as we can co-exist without violence, I cannot complain that your views are different from mine. Since forcing death on other people always involves great violence, my co-existance with nazis would not be possible.
[ QUOTE ]

3) Even granting you 2, what if someone doesn't want complexity to increase? Once again you're left jumping from a "I feel" to a "everyone should feel"


[/ QUOTE ]
No. I am unable to make you feel the same as I feel. However, if your system of values is such that I have to die, we will inevitably reach violent disagreement. Either your system will be changed, or mine. Or one of us will die.

[ QUOTE ]

4) Even granting you 2 and 3, What if someone has greater observational powers and feel that complexity is increased with the killing of people?


[/ QUOTE ]
I will need a very good argument for this. I do not deny that it would be possible to convince me but in this case it would be very difficult
[ QUOTE ]

5) You jump from "these emotions are unpleasant" to "therefore killing is wrong"


[/ QUOTE ]
No, I said that in my view killing is wrong. I made no universal statements. If it is possible to persuade me that killing is not wrong that would also remove these extremely unpleasant emotions, my views would be changed.
[ QUOTE ]

6) You cannot establish that most of the world agrees with you. And even if you could, what if most of the world disagreed with you later? You'd have to establish that most of the world for all time agree with you. Even if you could do that, you need to establish the fact that "most of the world agrees with you for all time" leads to the fact that "what they believe is right"


[/ QUOTE ]
I have a pretty convincing (at least to me) evidence that on the subject of killings, many people agree with me. This evidence is that killing humans is illegal most everywhere in the world. If most people disagreed, these laws prohibiting killing of humans would be changed.
I cannot say for sure that this will not change in the future. I cannot even say for sure that my own views will not change in the future.
[ QUOTE ]

You're left with a completely personal definition, one that you cannot use to judge others.


[/ QUOTE ]
I cannot judge others. I can persuade others. I can negotiate and compromise. I can live and let live as long as the others also let me live.

[udontknowmickey]

Thanks by the way for quoting things, I appreciate it.
[ QUOTE ]

Many of our observations seem to give us workable solutions to our problems. Even if what we observe is not true, it worked for us for thousands of years. We are getting better at it.


[/ QUOTE ]

How can you be getting better at making unjustified assumptions? Can you really define a "good" unjustified assumption and a "better" one?

[ QUOTE ]


Because we need to survive. Because those that need to survive and know how to do that best will pass their desire to survive to their progeny. Because we know how to record past experiences and observations.


[/ QUOTE ]

So here you're making the assumptions that
A) We need to survive

can you prove this?

B) Those that need to survive and know how to do that best will pass their desire to survive to their progeny.

Can you prove this?

C) we know how to record past experiences and observations.

Can you prove this?

Until you can establish all 3 and prove that the only condition that enables all 3 to be possible is to make unjustified assumptions then your arguement falls apart. It's just a chain of unjustifiable assumptions.

[ QUOTE ]


Nice. Do you know how to climb trees? Do you know if the fruit is good to eat? How are you going to find out?


[/ QUOTE ]

yes, no, God may or may not grant me that knowledge dependant upon His will. What is the point of these questions? All knowledge comes by the soveign grace of God. He plants it in my head completely dependant upon His timing.

[ QUOTE ]


you are right. If my core assumption is wrong, then our knowledge might be also wrong. Yet, we know and can do many more things now than we could in the past. I will hold on to my assumtion until it is shown not to work.


[/ QUOTE ]

How do you know that "you know more things than you could in the past" if all your knowledge is supposedly dependant upon an unjustified premise? You don't even know how much you knew in the past, let alone how much you know now.

And even if it seems "workable" how does that necessarily translate to more knowledge?

[ QUOTE ]


What new things do you know about god that Paul did not know?
What new things do you know about the stars that Paul did not know?


[/ QUOTE ]

Since I do not know what Paul did know or didn't, I cannot possibly answer your question.

I can pose the question (in a different wording) to you though:

What certain knowledge about God do you have?
What certain knowledge about the stars do you have?

Do you even know if stars exist?

[udontknowmickey]

[ QUOTE ]


I said that the chance that you will change your mind is very small. There is nothing in your writing that indicates that it is possible for you to change your mind right now. However, you will live for many years. During the course of these years, there is a slight chance that you will gradually or suddenly change your views. People change their views all the time, it is not unprecedented. Why do you think that you are 100% safe from this happening to you?


[/ QUOTE ]

I request that we drop this topic. I say: God's soveignty and you say "but you might change your mind". I don't think either of us are contributing to the discussion about the Preserverance of Saints, though if you insist I will continue discussing it. With that said, I will answer your questions.

People do change their views all the time. However, none of these changes are apart from the soveign will of God. It is He who hardens hearts, He who softens hearts. If God was a random God, capable of breaking His promises, then yes, I would have much to fear. But God, by His very nature defining truth and perfection, does not lie. This means that when God promises that He will maintain His people to the end, I can trust in that and trust in what Paul says, that "all who call upon the Lord will be saved." (and if you would like, I can flesh out what it means to 'call upon the Lord" if you would like, but this isn't a "saved once then do anything" mentality).

In short: God is soveign, He opened my heart to His words. He hardens hearts against His words. Part of who God is means that He does not lie and does not change. He will preserve me because of His promises.

Once again, I request that we drop this topic but if you insist upon it I will respond to your questions.

[David Sklansky]

Then why did God choose that as the means to give evidence?

[Aytumious]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks by the way for quoting things, I appreciate it.
[ QUOTE ]

Many of our observations seem to give us workable solutions to our problems. Even if what we observe is not true, it worked for us for thousands of years. We are getting better at it.


[/ QUOTE ]

How can you be getting better at making unjustified assumptions? Can you really define a "good" unjustified assumption and a "better" one?

[ QUOTE ]


Because we need to survive. Because those that need to survive and know how to do that best will pass their desire to survive to their progeny. Because we know how to record past experiences and observations.


[/ QUOTE ]

So here you're making the assumptions that
A) We need to survive

can you prove this?

B) Those that need to survive and know how to do that best will pass their desire to survive to their progeny.

Can you prove this?

C) we know how to record past experiences and observations.

Can you prove this?

Until you can establish all 3 and prove that the only condition that enables all 3 to be possible is to make unjustified assumptions then your arguement falls apart. It's just a chain of unjustifiable assumptions.

[ QUOTE ]


Nice. Do you know how to climb trees? Do you know if the fruit is good to eat? How are you going to find out?


[/ QUOTE ]

yes, no, God may or may not grant me that knowledge dependant upon His will. What is the point of these questions? All knowledge comes by the soveign grace of God. He plants it in my head completely dependant upon His timing.

[ QUOTE ]


you are right. If my core assumption is wrong, then our knowledge might be also wrong. Yet, we know and can do many more things now than we could in the past. I will hold on to my assumtion until it is shown not to work.


[/ QUOTE ]

How do you know that "you know more things than you could in the past" if all your knowledge is supposedly dependant upon an unjustified premise? You don't even know how much you knew in the past, let alone how much you know now.

And even if it seems "workable" how does that necessarily translate to more knowledge?

[ QUOTE ]


What new things do you know about god that Paul did not know?
What new things do you know about the stars that Paul did not know?


[/ QUOTE ]

Since I do not know what Paul did know or didn't, I cannot possibly answer your question.

I can pose the question (in a different wording) to you though:

What certain knowledge about God do you have?
What certain knowledge about the stars do you have?

Do you even know if stars exist?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it safe to sum up your arguments in this thread into, "we can't really know anything but I choose to believe the Bible."