Is man inherently good or inherently evil?

Lets look at it another way. Lets say that you and I and Jar, for instance, are all on unemployment and are nearly broke. Economic times are hard and there are scant few jobs in America. One day, perchance, we each see an ad in the paper for Copper Mountain ski resort in Colorado. The resort promises that it needs workers and that the time of need is December, January, and February. The ad promises that each worker hired will receive $5000.00 after the ski season. What an opportunity! Everyone hired will make $5000.00! We all pack up to go. Jar gets there December 2nd. I get there December 28th. You can't make it until January 25th. Nonetheless, we all work hard while there, and on March 1st, we are all handed checks. Happily, we all go home. Later, we happen to be talking on a chat board and discover that each of us received $5000.00. Is this fair?
Consider:

Each of us was virtually broke. Each of us was given an opportunity. Each of us received the pay that was promised.

Each of us was paid by the good graces of the employer and not on how long or how hard we worked. What if you worked harder than Jar and I even if you got there later? In any event, our "works" did not matter. We were each paid what was promised. Fair or Unfair?

No, we weren't. We were paid in exchange for services rendered.You don't get paid because your employer is a nice person. You get paid because employment is an exchange of time for payment. This principle, for instance, is how we're able to compel a minimum wage from employers, or why employers have to pay overtime. Yes, because the terms were laid out in advance. It was made clear by the ad that, if I decided not to show up until the end of January, I'd get paid the same.(What I can't figure out is why you showed up early. Sucker!)That wasn't the case in the Bible example. The employer says "one dinar (or whatever) for a day's work"; but that only applies to the first group. The last group gets an entirely different pay scheme. If the employer was willing to pay a whole dinar for only two hours work, he should have said so, so that the first employees didn't wind up volunteering 6 hours of their time for nothing.

Crashfrog, you have not thought this one over! First of all, you use an erroneus example: Not a good comparison. Say that you go to the store at 9 a.m. and see a sign that says "fill out our survey and receive free bunch of Bananas. Later, your friend comes in and sees another sign that says "thanks for coming in. Have a free bunch of Bananas.Are you mad that you had to fill out a survey and your friend did not? Seriously, your entire concept of fairness is in comparison with other people. You know what the parable is about. I know you are atheist, but lets assume that God is real. Lets assume that He is good, and that being taken to Heaven or to a better level is the best thing that any human could hope for. Now...there are three people.

The first person is a devoted believer. Very devout. He is involved in a lot of volunteer work to help the less fortunate in society. He tries very hard to be pure minded and well respected. He is good to all types of people without favoritism. One day, God comes to him and says to come to Heaven.

The next person is not as good. He has done a few major sins in his life. He likes to pick up women and get drunk once in awhile. He knows about God, but he has ignored God for much of his life. He has gotten better in his old age, however. One day God comes to him and says to come to Heaven.

The last guy is a total atheist. He has some concept of morality, and he is as good or better to people than the other two who are believers. He has spent much of his life laughing about religion and attempting to disprove God. He lives life well, however, and seeing no need for god, he never feels a loss. One day, God appears to him.
Confronted with the obvious reality, the atheist still looks away, prefering the safety of his own wisdom. God still says to come to Heaven.
The first group are appalled. They ask God, "Why are you giving that ungrateful loser a break?" God says "What of it? Are you mad because you worked so hard to get to Heaven while this atheist has done nothing?? Is it not up to me to ask him in?"
OK, Crashfrog---Fair or Unfair?
--------------------------------------------------------------

This was a good answer, so I thought I'd show you the link:
Bible Contradictions and Answers
Check out the whole series of questions answered and tell me what you think.....>>Cheers. Phatboy

In fact, it's a perfect comparison. We're talking about different wages and prices for different people, which is unfair. We're not talking about a survey, Phatboy. We're talking about hours of backbreaking labor. Yes. That's how we know what is fair, and what is not - comparing. Yes, I do know. But you need ot think the parable through, because then, you'll see why its such a bad parable.Back to our asshole employer. What do you think happened the next day, when he went back to the square to hire workers for the day? Do you think he found a single person willing to work any more than the last two hours of the day? Since he's demonstrated that he won't pay for any more than two hours' work, no matter how long you work, why would he? Works for me. But then, I don't insist that the afterlife be all about revenge. Each of those people lived the life they wanted to live. Now, on the other hand, the ascetic monk who winds up in the same heaven as my debaucherous ass might have some reason to complain, but then, it's not like God actually told him to live that way.

Guys, hasn't it occured to you that life isn't fair?

Has it occured to you that life is just as fair as we decide it should be?

Who is "we"? I am all for fairness. It's the fundies that are fighting to make society as unfair as possible.

dpardo responds to me:

quote:

---

Removing the term "judgeth"

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you?Remove the very term we're discussing and you think you're talking about the same thing? You can't just remove the contentious word and then claim there is nothing to contend.

quote:

---

and paraphrasing

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you? You didn't just paraphrase. You did a hatchet job. "Without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work" is in no way paraphraseable to "who is impartial." You're completely missing the second half of the statement:How is god impartial? By what criteria is god being impartial? What is god being impartial about?That's right: Every man's work. The point behind god's action is examination of a person's work.And in the end, you completely avoid the question. It's very simple and I wish you would answer it directly:Why is god judging? What is the result of the judgement? Is god going to give you a car? What is the point of the judgement? If god judges you and doesn't find you wanting, what do you get?

quote:

---

quote:

---

why is God judging?

---

​

God is constantly "judging" because he is constantly evaluating the behavior of people.

---

Non sequitur. That's an answer to "how" and I asked you "why." I don't care about the process god is using. I want to know the purpose of the process.

quote:

---

Again, this judging is not always regarding salvation.

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you?Where in 1 Peter do you find anything except discussion of salvation?A judge in a courtroom can be involved in felonies or misdemeanors, but if the case is regarding murder, then it is necessarily about a felony.That god can do other kinds of judgement is irrelevant. We're talking about the kind of judgement discussed in 1 Peter. Where is there any indication that 1 Peter is talking about something other than salvation?

quote:

---

The people that accepted his offer of grace through Jesus Christ will not be judged to determine their salvation.

---

That's in direct contradiction to what Peter just said. He just said that their salvation is based upon god's judgement of their works:

quote:

---

Psalm 98:9 reads

---

Who cares? We're not talking about Psalms. We're talking about 1 Peter.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Phatboy responds to me:

quote:

---

I know that the Christian one is the one that exists.

---

And two-thirds or the world disagrees with you. Why should anybody believe you over them?

quote:

---

You can't claim to be atheist and then just "make up" a god concept without being challenged to answer the question of where your concept came from.

---

a) I don't claim to be atheist. I also don't claim not be atheist.b) The reason I don't is because it is irrelevant. I am not the one claiming that something will or won't happen to your immortal soul or regarding the existence of such a thing.c) Where is this "god concept" coming from with regard to an atheist? Isn't that defeating the entire purpose of atheism?

quote:

---

My God has been written about, discussed, and experienced by many people throughout History.

---

And so have the gods of the rest of the world. Why should anybody believe you over them? And throughout that history, there have been those who lament the existence of those who do not believe. Atheism is as old as, if not older than, theism.

quote:

---

Even if this in and of itself does not prove my God to you, it explains His origin through humanity.

---

Incorrect.Just because two million people do a dumb thing, it's still a dumb thing.

quote:

---

So what about your "god"? Did you make him up to put me in check?

---

Where was it agreed upon that I had one?And why does it matter if I do or not? Does the validity of any of my statements change depending upon my belief status?

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Hi Rrhain, Your question of "Why is god judging?", does not follow, logically, from Peter's statement. Peter's statement in 1Peter 1:17: as I have stated before, can be reasonably translated as: The reason it is more reasonable than your interpretation is because Peter goes on to say that we are redeemed (saved) through the blood of Jesus in the subsequent verses.Your interpretation results in Peter contradicting himself (and Paul) in the same chapter.Does that seem likely?

But it doesn't say that at all. In fact, it returns again to the issue of behavior as so many of the passages throughtout the NT do.1Peter:22 The issue for so many of the fathers of the church was to diferentiate between the older tradition of buying forgivness through offerings and the newer requirment that you actually live a good life. It is saying that it is not by how much you have, not by who you are, not by how many offerings you make through the priests, but rather through your life, your actions, that you will be judged.It goes back to the two Great Commandments, Love GOD and do unto others as you would have them do unto you. These are action commandments. They are not philosophy, not profession, not belief. They say DO. Do love, do for others. Do stuff.It is quite clear. Peter is saying that GOD will judge you by your actions, not by your position or words.Look at verse 18: This is saying the same thing. It's not the wealth that you accumulate, it's not your position, it's not following the rules laid down in Leviticus, it is not through professions of faith or belief; it is what YOU do and WHY YOU DO IT that is important. It's not doing good for gain, it's about doing good because that is the right, the godly thing to do.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The issues that Rrhain and I are discussing are:

1. Is salvation is by faith (grace through faith) or by works?
   ​
   and
   ​
2. What does Peter say concerning item 1?

Peter says it is through works.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Hi Rrhain,I went back to your original post that I first responded to concerning your statements of faith vs. works. I realized we were going OT and was wondering how that got started.Anyway, I just realized that you also said this: Can you show me, in your post, where Peter and Paul said these things?