|
everythingfallstogether
|
read my profile
sign my guestbook
Name: Jonathan
Birthday: 4/18/1984
Gender: Male
Interests: My band (EverythingFallsTogether) www.everythingfallstogether.com, and going to other shows, AIM: AntiMidgetKilla
Expertise: Probably none
Occupation: Artist
Industry: Entertainment
Message: message meEmail: email me
Website: visit my website
Member Since:
2/10/2003
|
|
|
First off I'm not all knowing on this subject but these are my thoughts.
The
main arguement I have with Predeterminism is that If God creates some
people to be born to die and then spend eternity in Hell then he is
going against his own character. Our purpose is to glorify God and if
some are to be born and die to live eternity in Hell how does that
glorify God? I believe he gives us the freewill to choose him so that
it brings him the most glory. But I also believe that he chooses us
first by revealing himself to us.
This is where it gets
sticky, if you will. What about the tribesmen in Africa or India that
will never know about the "gospel"? If they will never know then how
are they to become saved? I don't know the answer to this because I
don't believe God's given us an answer, but looking at God's character
it says that it's his will that none shall perish.
2 Peter 3 pretty much covers this:
6-
by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with
water. 7- But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the
same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and
perdition of ungodly men.
8- But, beloved, do not forget this one
thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a
thousand years as one day. 9- The Lord is not slack concerning His
promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not
willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.
This
is saying that the earth was once destroyed by water and that this
present earth will be destroyed by fire. And that he is holding off as
long as possible to bring more men to salvation and not only that but
to glorify himself more through this. What would bring more glory to
God? God picking out all the people that will goto heaven and all that
won't or God creating us to have the free will to choose him back?
Would he rather us be robots or would he rather us be free? Also, you
have to say: if we were created in his likeness then wouldn't we be
like him in that we have our own choice?
Some would say that God
is not all powerful if we are choosing our own choices, but I think the
people that say that are limiting God. Even though we have our own
choices God can intervene if he sees it fit. I think it is a very well
balanced thing that no one usually wants to see. Some think that God
either gives us free will or he chooses everything. I think it is a
balance of the two. We are given free will and we can choose our own
way but sometimes God will intervene (Ex. I think God will intervene in
a persons life that has fallen away from him, and awaken that person, I
believe that happened to my brother)
If God predetermines
salvation then God would also predetermine how a person is to be saved.
If this is true then does God predetermine every minute choice in a
person's life? Are we truly robots? (Ex. A church is planning a mission
trip to Africa. If anyone knows how many decisions go into planning one
of these you have to wonder is God at the hand of every small detail
that might possibly change the outcome of this trip? Would he control
where everyone in the plane sits, would he control a flight delay or an
car accident that might happen? I don't think God is technically behind
every action that is on this earth)
Therefore I think that some
things happen because we live in a fallen world where sin is sometimes
at fault. I think human nature can be at fault sometimes, and none of
these are God. Going back to the tribesmen some of them may never hear
the "gospel" and it may be because of orignal sin that they may never
know. I can't trace every action and every regional placement back to
original sin and I can't explain it perfectly but by looking at the
character of my God I can't believe that he would create a person to be
eternally damned. It doesn't add up to his character, in fact it goes
against it. | | |
| I was listening to C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity and he touched on the
subject of love. So I felt that I would write in my two cents. First we
all try and define what love is to us. Personally I think that love is
summed up in 4 parts. Honestly, there may be more to it that I've
missed but I'm writing my account of what I believe it to be.
First
I think that love starts obviously with the physical attraction. Being
physically attracted to the person, I believe is essential.
Second,
I believe that you also as equally need to be attracted to their
mentality or more commonly known as a person's personality. This is
important and more substantial than the physical part of love.
Third, I think there is a more hidden part of love that a lot of
couples miss out on and because they do it is determental to their
relationship. I believe for love to be true there is an emotional side.
And I'm talking about relating to the person in a way in which a couple
can feel with out necessarily conveying through words how the other
feels, and being able to cater to the person's need's without them
asking. It's a bit like when cuddling, because even though it is not
said there is communication that is very strong, and can help bond a
couple; therefore, it is like cuddling but in the mental sense.
And
the part that will make or break love is commitment. Without commitment
love is dead. A person can be clever, beautiful, and pleasant (and we
should love these qualities) and you can want to be with that person,
but when the thrills of marriage die out then couples will want to move
on to others who provide these thrills. Sometimes couples are so
focused on the the thrills of first "being in love" that when the
thrills start to die out (and they will) they will try and prolong
these. This will only weaken these thrills to a point in which both
persons will be so bored of the thrills that it becomes a chore. A
commitment is more than just looking into the future and foreseeing you
and your partner growing together in old age, it is a duty to that
partner for the rest of your life. When the thrills die out and the
arguements over money, appearance, or jealousy start then a commitment
may be the only thing that can keep a couple together. Commitment is
being able to love and admire your partner even when you should want to
kill them. Commitment is agreeing to compromise even when you know you
are completely right. It is sacrifice, and it is comparable to the
sacrifice that Christ made. In fact most importantly I think it should
be a commitment based around a relationship with Jesus Christ. As
cliche' as that seems, sometimes it may be the only thing the couple
has to fall back on. Sure there are couples who have made marriage work
without this, but I don't think they are living in the abundance of
what marriage could be. It should be two people becoming one forever,
for eternity. That may sound scary to imagine becoming one with another
person for eternity, but that's why marriage is an important decision
that shouldn't be rushed or misjudged. In fact, I think because this is
the image that the bible portrays, that in heaven we will also be one.
I think that is why the bible also condemns divorce. I've not thought
this through in every aspect but this is a hypothesis of mine. | | |
| After reading a friend's blog (by the way I hate the terms: blog and kudos), I
was thinking about what I wrote to her. I wrote to her about how life and
spiritual matters are best lived by balancing. I mean by that, that there is a
time for everything; that part of being mature is knowing when to laugh, when to
not laugh. But the spiritual irony with what I said is when we test what is put
in front of us to what we know is right/wrong, are we focusing too much on that?
Because satan's best trick is to keep us idle by weighing our wrong with our
rights, infact in Revelation the rider of the black horse is holding the weight
scales of the world; in which, I think is a symbol for how every religion except
Christianity bases the after-life on doing more good in a life span than
evil.
And when I started thinking about spirtial ironies I thought about how
the Bible is supposed to be full of the absolutes that we are to stand firm on.
But when I think about our lives they are full of the "gray areas" and are not
so absolute. If we are supposed to live by absolutes then why would it be wrong
for a Pastor to walk into a bar if only to say "Hi" to a friend on his birthday
when it would perfectly fine for a layman to do it and no one would care. I
think it is purely because God knows that people will judge that pastor. And
when committing to that job I guess we have to come to a point to where no one
could judge us. I understand the rule of being above repoach, but for some
reason other Christians will look down on you if you get a tattoo, or they may
be repulsed by the style of music you listen to, or ultimately Christians may
look down on the way you live your life. How is it possible to be above
reproach? Is it? If we are to live by absolutes then why do these things matter
at all. Do gray areas even matter to God? I know the motive of your heart does,
so if your motive is pure and I mean truly pure then what does the "action"
matter?
| | |
|  | | |
| We've been on tour come back and been back on tour, and we're about to
go out again. For this next tour I've vowed to keep the civil war
beard, but as the weeks go on tour the beard also changes, so I imagine
after this tour I'll be clean shaven which will be the weirdest of all.
Jon
| | |
|
