Jar's belief statement- Part 2

Did you mean this passage from Matthew 7? To life: Narrow path + narrow gate + few find itTo death: Wide path + wide gate + many find it Your original take seems to be accurate - why do you disagree with it?

It would seem that if what we do makes the difference at the custom point then it wouldn't be God who would be sending most of his creaton to Hell - it would be his creation sending themselves by not doing that necessary to get past customs. Its the person who cannot pass customs that is the asshole. The customs are just enforcing the standard. This is very honest of you. However, if your understanding of heaven was eternal bliss and hell, eternal torment, then I doubt that even 80% in and 20% out (of heaven) would provide comfort (like, reversing the directions the respective gates take a person). Would you undertake a car journey in which you only had an 80% chance of surviving? I doubt it. But you would be content to ride in a gospel of same odds when your eternal destination is at stake? This doesn't add up.A gospel that included an assurance that you were irrevocably in would be even more comforting to you. It would be consistant with a loving father who didn't want his adopted sons stewing and trembling for the rest of the natural born lives wondering what would happen to them. This gospel exists of course. But you don't plump for that gospel on the basis of the comfort it provides. Why is that?Jesus refers to himself as "the gate". He also refers to himself as "the way"...the only way through which a man comes to the father. This parallels closely the narrow gate and path does it not?

quote:

---

7:14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

---

The gate needs to be found. The problem is not dealing with customs (which supposes that arrival at the gate is automatic) it is finding customs in the first place. The implication is that the exhortation to enter throught the narrow gate is a function of finding it here.

At what level would it not be mean? No matter where he sets it (if he did in fact do that in the sense you mean it : a bar set for us to jump over) there will be people who will say "that's mean" because they are not able to jump over it. You would have to have a standard that all could jump over: Hitler et al.As it is, the standard isn't set as something we have to jump over to be saved for jumping over a standard is not the way we are saved. Gods law wasn't put in place for that reason. Gods law was put in place to make us conscious of the fact that we cannot meet his level of holiness. To help convince us that we are sinners and that there is only one place for sinners to go. Gods law is an essential componant in the mechanism which he installed which would save us: the gospel.

quote:

---

Romans 3:20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.

---

Or as put elsewhere. "The law is a schoolteacher to lead us to Christ" The law is a signpost and teacher. Its purpose is to make us feel condemned, for when we feel under condemnation from the law the law will have fulfilled the part it plays in the gospel. It's effect, if successfully applied to us will cause us to become desparate. The show isn't over at that point - but you would be just about home. Salvation is in sight (even though a person would not be aware of that fact at that point) It does in a way. Except that the barrier (if you see it as being something you have to hop over) isn't laid out. You know there is a narrow gate and a wide gate. You do not know whether your efforts place you. YOu could, for all you know, be in the worst ten percentile for want of any objective measure of where you lie. My point was that even if the narrow and wide were reversed and it was say 80% getting into heaven and say 20% not you still do not know where you lie on the list. A person who seems somewhat worse than you but who had an appalling upbringing and was sexually abused as a child might turn out to be far higher than you on the list when all things which cause us to behave as we behave are taken into account. Point being: you do not know all the factors involved in the Judgement, all the things which are taken into account. And so you cannot have a clue about where you stand. According to your gospel.How does this make you feel. Does "I do my best and that is all I can do" stand up in that light? Is that all you are placing your faith in? Your efforts? The gospel (or good news) which if applied to you (by God) guarentees that you are saved - at the point it is applied, whether this minute or 10 years from now. You don't have to work for this gospel. You don't have to "get your act together" in order for it to be applied to you. God offers it for free to you. Surely a gospel which guarentees your position before God, independant of your good and bad deeds, would be preferable to a gospel which offers no assurance at all, nor an indication of where the pass mark is, nor an indication of where you are in relation to the pass mark - were one to exist. If plumping for a method of salvation on personal preferance then one would imagine you would plump for the one I describe. You caught me on the hop! You are going to heaven! You know this. In other words you know you will pass customs. So you are fine then. Heaven is a certainty for you. If you are sure then great!Edited by iano, : No reason given.Edited by iano, : No reason given.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Halleujah. What grace! Your argument permits that God could judge you to be amongst the vilest. It would strike me a more sensible to look to a gospel that saves even the vilest if you could be counted amongst their number. Or are you not convinced by your own argument?Perhaps you are more convinced of your own righteousness than you let on.Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Honestly, the best athiest Christian apologist I know. Remarkable. But you weaken here: This is a non sequitur. It doesn't matter if your a nihilist in order for this to make sense in the context of Christianity. It helps your case to avoid non sequiturs. Otherwise you get a pile on. LMAO - for sheer spot on-edness. You have been oft accused of being a fifth columist Christian. Within a nats whisker of being seconded, thirded.. whatever...by me Therein the RobinProblem perhaps. You would agree that if true a Christian cannot change their position. And the theology says they know it can be true. Whereas yours cannot demonstrate itself to be true in principle. Except by dying of course - but then you wouldn't be around to know its true then either.Ever consider changing your hobby to "having my beliefs changed"?