Unbeliever Struggles with a Biblical Truth.

[eyeshaveit]

What better for a Christian to ponder: that we are all sinners and Jesus Christ is our Savior.

Deut. 24:16 & Ezek. 18:20 still refute that!

Well, let's see about that:

?Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.? - Deuteronomy 24:16.

?The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.? - Ezekiel 18:20.

Yes, ?the wages of sin is death?; and that is exactly why mankind needs a Savior:

?For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.? - Romans 6:23. 

What better gift, during this season of Christ Jesus' birth, than the promise of eternal life?

[Airyaman]

What is Jesus saving someone from if not sin?

[eyeshaveit]

What is Jesus saving someone from if not sin?

God's wrath.
God isn't sinful.

[composer]

What better for a Christian to ponder: that we are all sinners and Jesus Christ is our Savior.

Deut. 24:16 & Ezek. 18:20 still refute that!

Well, let's see about that:

?Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.? - Deuteronomy 24:16.

?The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.? - Ezekiel 18:20.

Yes, ?the wages of sin is death?; and that is exactly why mankind needs a Savior:

?For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.? - Romans 6:23. 

What better gift, during this season of Christ Jesus' birth, than the promise of eternal life?

You missed the crucial factor fatal to your assertion -

. . . . Each one shall be put to death for his own sin. . . . .

i.e. NO one else can be put to death for the sins of another!

Your ideology is proven spurious!

[Airyaman]

What is Jesus saving someone from if not sin?

God's wrath.
God isn't sinful.

What will God's wrath encompass?

[QuestionMark]

This word "saving" should be taken to have variable meaning. The study of salvation is soteriology. This reflects on the Greek "soter" or savior. The words "soter" and "savior" are not direct translations. Other related words would included "deliverer", "protector", "guaranteer", "preserver".

God saves us from perishing, as our preserver.
God saves us from the risk of change and loss as guaranteer.
God saves us from attack and harm as protector.
God brings us through trial and tribulation as deliverer.

In these senses and many others God is our savior. In fact, the name Jesus means "The LORD is savior" or "The LORD's salvation" or "The LORD saves". But we must look at how he saves with regard to sin if we want to accept that Ezekiel's testimony is also correct (which it is).

In the Christian historical document, the apostles of Jesus make it clear (if it wasn't already clear on the night of his betrayal), that we are one flesh with Jesus. He said, unless you eat of my body and drink my blood you have no part in me.

The goal then is being "one flesh" with Jesus. He is not dying for someone else then, he himself is dying.  "For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord?s."

He took on our sin, though he had not done it himself, and we took on his righteousness though we had not done it ourselves, when the body of Jesus became the body of his elect. Just as on a proper wedding night, the body of the man and the body of the woman are united and become "one flesh", the body of Jesus Christ and His bride became one flesh.

Composer will not understand this, he cannot understand it. It is why the deceiver crucified the LORD of glory.

[composer]

This word "saving" should be taken to have variable meaning. The study of salvation is soteriology. This reflects on the Greek "soter" or savior. The words "soter" and "savior" are not direct translations. Other related words would included "deliverer", "protector", "guaranteer", "preserver".

God saves us from perishing, as our preserver.

Posts like yours & Co. only demonstrate your gods are imaginary / mythical!

God saves us from the risk of change and loss as guaranteer.

Posts like yours & Co. only demonstrate your gods are imaginary / mythical!

God saves us from attack and harm as protector.

Posts like yours & Co. only demonstrate your gods are imaginary / mythical!

God brings us through trial and tribulation as deliverer.

Posts like yours & Co. only demonstrate your gods are imaginary / mythical!

In these senses and many others God is our savior. In fact, the name Jesus means "The LORD is savior" or "The LORD's salvation" or "The LORD saves". But we must look at
how he saves with regard to sin if we want to accept that Ezekiel's testimony is also correct (which it is).

Posts like yours & Co. only demonstrate your gods are imaginary / mythical!

Deut. 24:16 & Ezek. 18:20 still refute you!

In the Christian historical document, the apostles of Jesus make it clear (if it wasn't already clear on the night of his betrayal), that we are one flesh with Jesus. He said, unless you eat of my body and drink my blood you have no part in me.

jebus is a Historical MYTH!

The goal then is being "one flesh" with Jesus. He is not dying for someone else then, he himself is dying.

Only died in Story book land!

"For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord?s."

He took on our sin, . . . .

Nah! Story book Deut. 24:16 & Ezek. 18:20 still refute that!

Composer will not understand this, he cannot understand it. It is why the deceiver crucified the LORD of glory.

What you fail to realise foremost is your bible is human devised propaganda, especially regarding Historical MYTHS like jebus, Moses, Pauly & apostles!

Hence even your latest (6th or more) Cult ideology is predominantly based upon Mythology & human invention!

You are only deceiving yourself otherwise!

&

The test for a genuine believer is a simple one - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; (John 14:12 KJV Story book.

Time for you & Co. to run for the hills again no doubt!     

[QuestionMark]

Can you demonstrate that anything you say is true?

[composer]

Can you demonstrate that anything you say is true?

Sure!

Let's start with -

The test for a genuine believer is a simple one - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; (John 14:12 KJV Story book.

Your turn! 

[Airyaman]

This word "saving" should be taken to have variable meaning. The study of salvation is soteriology. This reflects on the Greek "soter" or savior. The words "soter" and "savior" are not direct translations. Other related words would included "deliverer", "protector", "guaranteer", "preserver".

God saves us from perishing, as our preserver.

Everyone dies, so false.

God saves us from the risk of change and loss as guaranteer.

Christians don't suffer because of life changes? I know many, for instance, who were laid off and faced financial difficulties. Some even lost their homes. Does that mean then they those were not true Christians?

God saves us from attack and harm as protector.

Also false. Many middle eastern Christians are being killed. Does that mean then they those were not true Christians?

God brings us through trial and tribulation as deliverer.

That one is speculative at best.

[jetson]

Can you demonstrate that anything you say is true?

What would be the point of that? You spend your time making claims about an entity that has yet to be shown to actually exist. You have the freedom to make up whatever you want, determine who is accurate and who is not when it comes to an old book, and blow off the burden of proof as though it isn't a factor for what you claim is true.

You, and all "Christians" do this on a daily basis, and then you want others to demonstrate truth?

How about you demonstrate any truth about any god you think is real? Demonstrate...you know, as you have asked of someone else. Your demonstration could become the standard!

[Boots]

This word "saving" should be taken to have variable meaning.

variable depending on what?  what you need it to mean at any given time to defend your faith?

aren't you simply advocating equivocation?

[QuestionMark]

Depending on the meaning of the Greek.

You know the Scriptures aren't written in English...

I hope you know that.

Merry Christmas

[composer]

Depending on the meaning of the Greek.

You know the Scriptures aren't written in English...

I hope you know that.

Merry Christmas

So are you now admitting your ESV English Translation you say you claim to prefer & use, is flawed?

[Andy S.]

This word "saving" should be taken to have variable meaning. The study of salvation is soteriology.

According to Wiki, differing Christian views on "soteriology" are as "widespread as Christianity itself":

"Variant views on salvation are among the main fault lines dividing the various Christian denominations, both between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism and within Protestantism, notably in the Calvinist?Arminian debate, and the fault lines include conflicting definitions of depravity, predestination, atonement, and most pointedly, justification.

According to Christian belief, salvation is made possible by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, which in the context of salvation is referred to as the "atonement". Christian soteriology ranges from exclusive salvation to universal reconciliation concepts."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology

If there are so many differing opinions concerning "soteriology" within the Christian faith it kinda seems like the study of salvation is....well....pointless.

How can unbelievers "struggle" with this "biblical truth" of salvation when Christians can't even agree what the "biblical truth" of salvation really is?

It seems like this "struggle" (past and present) is amongst Christians....not unbelievers.  Maybe Christians should first hammer out the exact requirements needed for salvation and completely agree on Christian soteriology before saying an unbeliever "struggles" with some "biblical truth" concerning salvation.     

[Goombah]

This word "saving" should be taken to have variable meaning. The study of salvation is soteriology.

According to Wiki, differing Christian views on "soteriology" are as "widespread as Christianity itself":

"Variant views on salvation are among the main fault lines dividing the various Christian denominations, both between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism and within Protestantism, notably in the Calvinist?Arminian debate, and the fault lines include conflicting definitions of depravity, predestination, atonement, and most pointedly, justification.

According to Christian belief, salvation is made possible by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, which in the context of salvation is referred to as the "atonement". Christian soteriology ranges from exclusive salvation to universal reconciliation concepts."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology

If there are so many differing opinions concerning "soteriology" within the Christian faith it kinda seems like the study of salvation is....well....pointless.

How can unbelievers "struggle" with this "biblical truth" of salvation when Christians can't even agree what the "biblical truth" of salvation really is?

It seems like this "struggle" (past and present) is amongst Christians....not unbelievers.  Maybe Christians should first hammer out the exact requirements needed for salvation and completely agree on Christian soteriology before saying an unbeliever "struggles" with some "biblical truth" concerning salvation.   

As a Christian, it seems to me that you already pointed out the exact requirements:

"According to Christian belief, salvation is made possible by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, which in the context of salvation is referred to as the "atonement"."

  If a person starts with the belief in the atonement as accepting " the life, death and resurrection of Jesus" ,they are a Christian.I don't remember encountering  any unbelievers who do accept that belief and maintain it.

[Andy S.]

As a Christian, it seems to me that you already pointed out the exact requirements:

"According to Christian belief, salvation is made possible by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, which in the context of salvation is referred to as the "atonement"."

I think this wiki article stated the above requirement ^^^ as the most basic of requirements needed for salvation.  In other words, most Christians would agree with this basic requirement.  However, Christians can have additional requirements than this most basic requirement. 

If you read this wiki article it is clear that there are differing views on Christian soteriology.   

  If a person starts with the belief in the atonement as accepting " the life, death and resurrection of Jesus" ,they are a Christian.

Goombah, Christians have different views on the exact requirements needed for salvation.  My former pastor would disagree with your above statement because of his additional requirements needed for salvation.  He would say many people can accept the "life, death and resurrection of Jesus" and are still not true Christians.

I bet Jstwebbrowsing, as a JW, accepts the "life, death and resurrection of Jesus" but my former pastor would say he is not a true Christian because Jst. does not believe that Jesus is the one true God of the old testament.  This is according to my former pastor's interpretation of John 8:24.

My former pastor would also say one can accept the "life, death and resurrection of Jesus" but without repenting from the sins that separates one from God then they cannot be saved or be considered a true Christian.  I believe this was based on his interpretation of Luke 24:47.

My wife's former pastor would also disagree with your above statement.  He says anyone who doesn't speak in tongues is not a true Christian.  This is according to his interpretation of Mark 16:17.

In addition, when I was a teenager my old youth pastor said I had to be baptized in order to be saved according to his interpretation of Mark 16:16.

I could go on but this is just a sample of differing views on Christian soteriology.  Goombah, Christians have differing views on the exact requirements needed for salvation.

Christians should first hammer out the exact requirements of what a true Christian has to do or believe in order to be saved.  Then they can maybe say unbelievers struggle with this "biblical truth".     

[Boots]

Here's the problem as i see it.

?Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.? - Deuteronomy 24:16.

If this were true, then The Fall in the Garden of Eden is irrelevant; only A&E should suffer because of their sin (if one is to believe they sinned at all).  Then we don't need a Savior.

[nick]

So what it comes down to, which it always does, is that you need the "magic decoder ring" to know what the bible really says or meant.  Fathers shall not be held accountable for others sins yet we all are held accountable for the apple trick.  Maybe it is time for the God thing to come back and give us a re-write so we can all be on the same page.  Kind of hard to play this God game with a whole bunch of different rules for playing.

[Goombah]

As a Christian, it seems to me that you already pointed out the exact requirements:

"According to Christian belief, salvation is made possible by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, which in the context of salvation is referred to as the "atonement"."

I think this wiki article stated the above requirement ^^^ as the most basic of requirements needed for salvation.  In other words, most Christians would agree with this basic requirement.  However, Christians can have additional requirements than this most basic requirement. 

If you read this wiki article it is clear that there are differing views on Christian soteriology.   

My opinion is that the basic requirement means just that....the threshold we cross from non-believer to Christian.If there were other things necessary then that would expand the basic requirement.I usually reflect on the 'thief on the cross' to determine necessary requirements.

  If a person starts with the belief in the atonement as accepting " the life, death and resurrection of Jesus" ,they are a Christian.

Goombah, Christians have different views on the exact requirements needed for salvation.  My former pastor would disagree with your above statement because of his additional requirements needed for salvation.  He would say many people can accept the "life, death and resurrection of Jesus" and are still not true Christians.

What requirements?Are there exceptions?Until you perform those requirements we cannot be Christians?

I bet Jstwebbrowsing, as a JW, accepts the "life, death and resurrection of Jesus" but my former pastor would say he is not a true Christian because Jst. does not believe that Jesus is the one true God of the old testament.  This is according to my former pastor's interpretation of John 8:24.

My former pastor would also say one can accept the "life, death and resurrection of Jesus" but without repenting from the sins that separates one from God then they cannot be saved or be considered a true Christian.  I believe this was based on his interpretation of Luke 24:47.

what would one seek to have atonement for, then?Isn't that what one accepts the basic teaching to attain?

My wife's former pastor would also disagree with your above statement.  He says anyone who doesn't speak in tongues is not a true Christian.  This is according to his interpretation of Mark 16:17.

The original Apostles weren't Christians until Pentecost in his view?

In addition, when I was a teenager my old youth pastor said I had to be baptized in order to be saved according to his interpretation of Mark 16:16.

But the thief on the cross wasn't ?Who here on earth gets to determine the exceptions to these rules?

I could go on but this is just a sample of differing views on Christian soteriology.  Goombah, Christians have differing views on the exact requirements needed for salvation.

Christians should first hammer out the exact requirements of what a true Christian has to do or believe in order to be saved.  Then they can maybe say unbelievers struggle with this "biblical truth".   

I don't think unbelievers struggle with biblical truth,I just don't think they are capable, by power of human means, to experience it.I sure couldn't.

[Andy S.]

My opinion is that the basic requirement means just that....the threshold we cross from non-believer to Christian.

It's sad that you can only have an "opinion" on this topic.  It really is sad.  When I was a Christian, I was saddened when I found out different Christians had different views on the requirements needed for salvation.  All I really had when it came down to nailing down the requirements needed for salvation was what you have......an "opinion".  I honestly couldn't say I had the "truth" concerning salvation.  There are too many differing views.  I would have been arrogant to say I had the "truth" on what one must do or believe in order to be a true Christian. 

I appreciate your humbleness in saying you only have an "opinion".

In addition, the terms "basic requirement" and "Christian" can have multiple meanings depending on the Christian you are talking to. 

If there were other things necessary then that would expand the basic requirement.

Correct.  But like I said, "basic requirement" can mean different things to different Christians.  Like I pointed out earlier, my former Pastor would say repenting from your sins is a "basic requirement" for salvation.  Would you agree? 

I usually reflect on the 'thief on the cross' to determine necessary requirements.

Luke could have made this whole story up of the "thief on the cross" being kind to Jesus since the author of Matthew and Mark say both robbers that were crucified with Jesus were "insulting" him.

For the sake of argument, I'll lay that aside.

I remember my former pastor preaching a "thief on the cross" message.  Luke 23:40 says, "But the other answered, and rebuking him (the other thief) said, 'Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation?'"  My pastor said something like, "even the thief on the cross knew that Jesus was "God"....in verse 40 the thief on the cross called Jesus "God". 

Now, granted, this was his own interpretation.  My former pastor would say one has to understand that Jesus is the one true God if they wanted to be saved.  If you "usually reflect on the 'thief on the cross' to determine necessary requirements" do you think one has to believe that Jesus is the one true God in order to be saved?

If you say yes, then Jst. and Wilson are not saved.  If you say no, I will show you that some Christians believe this despite your "opinion".

  If a person starts with the belief in the atonement as accepting " the life, death and resurrection of Jesus" ,they are a Christian.

Goombah, Christians have different views on the exact requirements needed for salvation.  My former pastor would disagree with your above statement because of his additional requirements needed for salvation.  He would say many people can accept the "life, death and resurrection of Jesus" and are still not true Christians.

What requirements?

I laid them out in post #16.  You know....the requirement of having to believe that Jesus is the one true God and the requirement of having to repent from your sins.   

Are there exceptions?

My former pastor would say no.

Until you perform those requirements we cannot be Christians?

He would say yes.  He would say one is not truly saved until they believe Jesus is the one true God and they have repented from the sins that separate themselves from God.

I bet Jstwebbrowsing, as a JW, accepts the "life, death and resurrection of Jesus" but my former pastor would say he is not a true Christian because Jst. does not believe that Jesus is the one true God of the old testament.  This is according to my former pastor's interpretation of John 8:24.

My former pastor would also say one can accept the "life, death and resurrection of Jesus" but without repenting from the sins that separates one from God then they cannot be saved or be considered a true Christian.  I believe this was based on his interpretation of Luke 24:47.

what would one seek to have atonement for, then?Isn't that what one accepts the basic teaching to attain?

Goombah, you will have to forgive me.  It's late and I don't know if I quit understand these questions. 

I'll try to answer but sorry if I miss the mark.  Luke 24:47 says that, "...repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed...".  My former pastor interpreted that to mean one must "repent" in order to be forgiven (or saved).

My wife's former pastor would also disagree with your above statement.  He says anyone who doesn't speak in tongues is not a true Christian.  This is according to his interpretation of Mark 16:17.

The original Apostles weren't Christians until Pentecost in his view?

Good question.  Unfortunately, you can't ask him this good follow-up question as he has gone to be with the Lord (if he got the exact requirements right).

It's all about interpretation.  The bible says speaking in tongues is a "sign that will accompany those who have believed" (Mark 16:17).  You are entitled to your interpretation/opinion as he was entitled to his interpretation/opinion.  Hell, I know one opinion out there is that these verses at the end of Mark shouldn't even be in the bible. 

Opinions....opinions.....opinions.  If we could only have more "truth" and less uncertainty and confusion.   

 

In addition, when I was a teenager my old youth pastor said I had to be baptized in order to be saved according to his interpretation of Mark 16:16.

But the thief on the cross wasn't ?Who here on earth gets to determine the exceptions to these rules?

I remember as a teenager I was troubled with this view.  If I can remember correctly I think it was because my Grandpa said he was a Christian but I don't think he was ever baptized. 

It's funny you bring up these questions as I had similar questions.  I remember talking to a Church of Christ minister about this requirement.  I remember I also brought up the thief on the cross.  He said people can be "initially saved" but if they have the opportunity to get baptized but they refuse then they can lose their salvation because of their disobedience. 

This blew my mind because I had no idea that other Christians thought that one could lose their salvation.  I was always taught the doctrine of once saved always saved.  Different interpretations lead to different views on salvation.   

I could go on but this is just a sample of differing views on Christian soteriology.  Goombah, Christians have differing views on the exact requirements needed for salvation.

Christians should first hammer out the exact requirements of what a true Christian has to do or believe in order to be saved.  Then they can maybe say unbelievers struggle with this "biblical truth".   

I don't think unbelievers struggle with biblical truth,I just don't think they are capable, by power of human means, to experience it.I sure couldn't.

What "truth"?  Remember, you only have an "opinion" on this topic.  Opinions are like assholes....everyone has one and most of them stink. 

The definition to "truth" is "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality".  The only fact I see is that different Christians have different views on the requirements needed for salvation.  I'm not capable of grasping this "biblical truth" because Christians can't even agree on what this "truth" actually entails.  Christians have different views regarding the exact requirements needed for salvation.  Hell, Christians can't even agree if believers can lose their salvation.  These differing views bring uncertainty to the doctrine of salvation and all one really has to offer is an "opinion". 

I bet that if you laid out all of your beliefs regarding the doctrine of salvation I could find another Christian out there, bible in hand, that would think your "opinions" are stinky.   

[Boots]

Opinions....opinions.....opinions.  If we could only have more "truth" and less uncertainty and confusion.   

If only an omnipresent, omniscient, and/or omni-benevolent deity could provide such "truth"...

[80sChild]

Opinions....opinions.....opinions.  If we could only have more "truth" and less uncertainty and confusion.   

If only an omnipresent, omniscient, and/or omni-benevolent deity could provide such "truth"...

opinions is all anyone has. I can say "Its the truth that God is real!" and you would say, " that is your opinion, you can not prove it!" I can say, " Ronald Reagan was the best president ever!" and you could say, " thats your opinion, everyone knows Lincoln was the best president ever!" Or I could say, "John Elway was the best QB to ever play the game!" Then you could say, " your opinion! Everyone knows Dan Marino was the best QB ever!" Anything I say is only my opinion, I my see it as truth but doesn't mean anyone else does. If you want truth, open up your heart and take everyones opinions into consideration  instead of believing their wrong with out even truly listening to what they have to say, isn't that the whole idea of a  forum?

[80sChild]

Here's the problem as i see it.

?Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.? - Deuteronomy 24:16.

If this were true, then The Fall in the Garden of Eden is irrelevant; only A&E should suffer because of their sin (if one is to believe they sinned at all).  Then we don't need a Savior.

I think the fall in the green had to happen, its the only way we were ever going to acquire free will . The free will to choose right from wrong. We are free now to make these choices because of Adam and Eve. Sinning in the garden only made man mortal by not being able to eat from the tree of life anymore. When God said they would surely die by eating the forbidden fruit, he was saying they would no longer me immortal and would one day die. Every person since Adam and Eve has been born into sin and must try turn from it and make their way back to God on his own, by his choice. Deuteronomy 24 is talking bout he law of new marriages, the laws given concerning divorce, making merchandise of men, taking pledges, leprosy, oppression of servants, and leaving gleanings of crops. Verse 16 is talking about how many ancient nations like in the time of Daniel (Daniel 6:24) and Esther, (Esther 9:13) when the family was looked at as a moral unit, and the children were put to death along with their father for his crime.   

[Andy S.]

Opinions....opinions.....opinions.  If we could only have more "truth" and less uncertainty and confusion.   

If only an omnipresent, omniscient, and/or omni-benevolent deity could provide such "truth"...

opinions is all anyone has.

I'm not too sure you know the definitions to the words "opinion" and "truth".  It is wrong to say "opinions is all anyone has".

Truth= "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality"

Opinion= "a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge."

"Truth" is based on fact.  "Opinions" are not necessarily based on fact.

I can say, " Ronald Reagan was the best president ever!" and you could say, " thats your opinion, everyone knows Lincoln was the best president ever!"

Ronald Reagan was the US president from January 20, 1981 ? January 20, 1989 = Truth

Ronald Reagan was the best president ever = Opinion

Or I could say, "John Elway was the best QB to ever play the game!" Then you could say, " your opinion! Everyone knows Dan Marino was the best QB ever!"

John Elway is the current General Manager and Executive Vice President of Football Operations for the Denver Broncos = Truth

John Elway was the best QB to ever play the game = Opinion

Do you see the difference?

Anything I say is only my opinion, I my see it as truth but doesn't mean anyone else does.

No.  Anything you say is not only your opinion!  It would be more accurate to say, "Anything I say that is not necessarily based on fact or knowledge is only my opinion".

If you want truth, open up your heart and take everyones opinions into consideration

Substitute the definitions to these words into this sentence and this is what your sentence sounds like.  If you want to know something that is true that is in accordance with fact or reality you should open up your heart and take everyone's views and judgments which are not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

You see, it's important to know definitions to words.

Since you now know the meaning to the words "truth" and "opinion" do you think your view on salvation (what someone has to do and believe in order to be saved) is based on "truth" or "opinion"?

   

[Boots]

Here's the problem as i see it.

?Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.? - Deuteronomy 24:16.

If this were true, then The Fall in the Garden of Eden is irrelevant; only A&E should suffer because of their sin (if one is to believe they sinned at all).  Then we don't need a Savior.

I think the fall in the green had to happen, its the only way we were ever going to acquire free will .

what the what????

[80sChild]

Here's the problem as i see it.

?Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.? - Deuteronomy 24:16.

If this were true, then The Fall in the Garden of Eden is irrelevant; only A&E should suffer because of their sin (if one is to believe they sinned at all).  Then we don't need a Savior.

I think the fall in the green had to happen, its the only way we were ever going to acquire free will .

what the what????

that was suppose to say garden not green lol. my bad.

[80sChild]

Opinions....opinions.....opinions.  If we could only have more "truth" and less uncertainty and confusion.   

If only an omnipresent, omniscient, and/or omni-benevolent deity could provide such "truth"...

opinions is all anyone has.

I'm not too sure you know the definitions to the words "opinion" and "truth".  It is wrong to say "opinions is all anyone has".

Truth= "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality"

Opinion= "a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge."

"Truth" is based on fact.  "Opinions" are not necessarily based on fact.

I can say, " Ronald Reagan was the best president ever!" and you could say, " thats your opinion, everyone knows Lincoln was the best president ever!"

Ronald Reagan was the US president from January 20, 1981 ? January 20, 1989 = Truth

Ronald Reagan was the best president ever = Opinion

Or I could say, "John Elway was the best QB to ever play the game!" Then you could say, " your opinion! Everyone knows Dan Marino was the best QB ever!"

John Elway is the current General Manager and Executive Vice President of Football Operations for the Denver Broncos = Truth

John Elway was the best QB to ever play the game = Opinion

Do you see the difference?

Anything I say is only my opinion, I my see it as truth but doesn't mean anyone else does.

No.  Anything you say is not only your opinion!  It would be more accurate to say, "Anything I say that is not necessarily based on fact or knowledge is only my opinion".

If you want truth, open up your heart and take everyones opinions into consideration

Substitute the definitions to these words into this sentence and this is what your sentence sounds like.  If you want to know something that is true that is in accordance with fact or reality you should open up your heart and take everyone's views and judgments which are not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

You see, it's important to know definitions to words.

Since you now know the meaning to the words "truth" and "opinion" do you think your view on salvation (what someone has to do and believe in order to be saved) is based on "truth" or "opinion"?

   

Duh ! I was talking about God being real and the things that are said about him, if your just trying to make me look stupid go ahead, I don't really care. Anything I say about God is not facts to you, thats all i was saying. I wasn't saying that every thing is opinion just about ~God .

[Andy S.]

Duh ! I was talking about God being real and the things that are said about him, if your just trying to make me look stupid go ahead, I don't really care.

Whoa whoa whoa.....easy there 80sChild.  I thought I was helping.  Judging by the way you used the words "truth" and "opinion" in your post, it really didn't seem like you knew what these words meant.  Sorry I offended. 

Anything I say about God is not facts to you, thats all i was saying.

Anything you say about God is not "facts" to YOU either.

You said in another post, "God has always been possible and I hope that he is."

I'll refrain from defining the words "facts", "possible" and "hope" for you as you might think I'm making you look stupid.

[80sChild]

Duh ! I was talking about God being real and the things that are said about him, if your just trying to make me look stupid go ahead, I don't really care.

Whoa whoa whoa.....easy there 80sChild.  I thought I was helping.  Judging by the way you used the words "truth" and "opinion" in your post, it really didn't seem like you knew what these words meant.  Sorry I offended. 

Anything I say about God is not facts to you, thats all i was saying.

Anything you say about God is not "facts" to YOU either.

You said in another post, "God has always been possible and I hope that he is."

I'll refrain from defining the words "facts", "possible" and "hope" for you as you might think I'm making you look stupid.

No No No its ok. No you take me too literal . Yes to me God is fact, but to you he's not cus I can't prove he exist. Im only seeing your side when agreeing I can't prove it. I know what I believe, I just can see others side of things as well, and just saying I hope He is cus all this mess of a life and then dying seems so pointless. And sorry about the typos, my computer does what it wants! lol