Religion or Science - How do they compare?

You can't understand it because it's incomprehensible. This is what you agreed is what you believe. So we are unable to do what pretty much every Christian has told me that Christians have to do which goes along the lines of 'accepting Jesus into your heart'. (Whatever that means.) God accepts or rejects our attempts to do what Chritians tell me is to 'know him' (whatever that means) on some basis that he doesn't disclose. So 'sin' (whatever that means) is normal. We can't help ourselves and we can't stop sinning. This at least almost true, or at least it is if we use 'sin' as a synonym for crime. Crime is normal in that we all do it; it's the frequency and harmfulness that varies. And then we have the crunch. It says that regardless of the above, some people are saved anyway and some are not. Nothing we can do - either good or bad, believe or not believe - it makes no difference to god.Sounds like a recipe for mayhem to me, no need to take personal responsibility for anything, you're saved or not anyway.

1. Arminianism being wrong does not make Calvinism correct.2. Salvation is by grace through faith.

I think most of this is resolved by understanding that there are two natures involved, the fallen sin nature which we are all born into, which lacks the spiritual life of Adam and Eve because they lost it through disobedience which is the Fall, and the restoration or regeneration of our spirits, or being born again, which is the beginning of eternal life.In our fallen condition we are incapable of exercising faith, that ability has to be understood as the product of regeneration which is given by God to us on account of Christ's death for us. This is what salvation really is, the regeneration of our spirits which were "dead" due to the Fall. In our fallen state we have the "spiritual" capacity to be in touch with demons unfortunately, but not with God -- that requires the regeneration through the Holy Spirit which was earned for us by Christ's death on the cross. So when people talk about "accepting Jesus into your heart" they are talking about something that can only really be done by a regenerated spirit.Yes sin or the violation of God's commandments (to love God, not commit idolatry or worship idols or images, to honor parents, not to lie, steal, covet, commit murder or adultery), is our normal fallen condition. When we are regenerated through the new birth and our spirit is "quickened" --or made alive or regenerated-- we begin to be able to have communication with God and to love His commandments and try to obey them.We have to grow into this, when we are born again we are truly spiritual babies that have to grow in the faith through spiritual experience. We are told to "walk in the Spirit" which implies we may instead walk in the flesh, and unfortunately we often do. We won't be fully free of the fleshly fallen nature and our inborn tendency to sin until we die into the new life.Calvinism accounts for our natural inborn fallen condition in terms of "total depravity" which really refers to our being dead to the things of the spirit, To become open to the things of the spirit means regeneration or the new birth which occurs when we believe in Christ.In our fallen state we are still the image of God and have a conscience and moral sense though it's imperfect. This is something I think does need to be understood as a matter of the regeneration of the spirit, which is what makes it possible for us to believe and to obey. The problem is that the way it is put is in terms of the fallen nature, and it is true that we can't believe or do anything for our salvation in that condition, so God does it all. But when we ARE regenerated then we can believe, have faith, have communication with God, obey God, and so on, but it is still all done through Him and in His power.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Yes we cannot refuse it and for those of us who have received it that is immense rassurance though you make it sound like some kind of deterministic trap.

---

You could fairly call it a trap since you have no real choice. That’s what Calvinism says.

quote:

---

You seem to be picturing some kind of robot-like existence even though you don't experience such a thing and neither do I

---

I’m just pointing out that you disagreed with Calvinism by implying we had a real choice about salvation. Calvinism says we don’t. If you think that implies a robot-like existence that’s your idea, not mine.

quote:

---

You are getting too caught up in a distorted theological theory.

---

So you regard Calvinism as a distorted theological theory. And presumably inferior to your own opinions.

Darwinism is about our physical evolution that adapts to our physical surroundings. I'm not concerned as to whether or not God intervened with the process or if all that was necessary to that process was in place from the time of creation and even back to the BB if necessary. I'm somewhat inclined to the latter but I simply don't know and am not concerned one way or the other.The other evolutionary aspect is how a consciousness that is capable of intelligence, morality and empathy evolved. No matter how much you say that you have conclusive evidence that it is strictly a mindless process from beginning to end it is strictly your belief, again confusing process with agency.As far as empathy and/or altruism is concerned we both agree that there are many influences that we can observe such as parenting, culture etc. None of that excludes there being an intelligence that also influences us as individuals or that influences those who influence us within the family or culture.As a Christian it is my belief that is in opposition to your belief that we are able to understand love and have it become part of our lives because God first loved us. Your belief is that it love has grown strictly from mindless processes from the conception of creation to now. You object to me using the term belief as when I do I don't have to have physical evidence for it and it is based on philosophical evidence which you discount. However, we all have philosophical beliefs.

I forget the context but I remember saying two things about our being interested in salvation, that it could come from God which implies a regenerated spirit even though the person may not be aware of it, which I think was true of me when I began to read about God on my way to becoming a Christian a couple years later. So being interested in the things of Christ may be the first step of genuine regenerated faith, But I was also considering that maybe it can be an interest of the fallen nature that in itself can't lead to salvation. I'm not completely sure even this much interest is possible without some spiritual regeneration but I say it because I know some Chrisians are actually not saved, which some discover after many years of churchgoing and then seek the new birth and receive it. We may be talking about degrees of spiritual life but I don't know.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I think Faith that you perceive that the primary point of Christianity is individual salvation or as is often put to be saved. Along with that is the belief that in order for this to occur it is necessary for one to accept the Christian faith.I don't see that as being in accordance with Scripture or in accordance with human reasoning. Is it reasonable to assume that some poor smuck in a slum in Karachi is going to spend eternity in hell because he/she doesn't commit to Christianity? From a scriptural POV what God wants is humble kindness and justice. Jesus tell us that the great commandment is to love others as we love ourselves. It isn't about our doctrinal beliefs.I suggest to you that the point about being saved is that we are saved because we have been given a job to do in the present world. That job is to reflect God's love into the world, however, that is true for everyone regardless of religious belief.Being a Christian does give us an understanding of where that love came from and what it looks like, particularly when we see the example of love that Jesus endured on the cross with all of the suffering and shame that went along with that. It also gives us a glimpse of what a resurrected or renewed creation might look like, and giving us ultimate purpose for our lives.I do agree that as Christians when we pray in accordance with the command to love that God is with us in our attempts to be more Christ-like.

You originally said: But - according to Calvinism - our desires are irrelevant. God chooses. That is all that counts.I’d add that for anybody not chosen for salvation it has to stop somewhere. They cannot achieve salvation because God chooses not to allow it. Can they have even a little interest ? Will God increase it if they do ? Where does it stop ?

Yes I believe salvation is the foundation of it all and there is plenty of scripture for that I can track down if necessary. As I've been saying the whole point of Christ's sacrifice was to restore to us what was lost at the Fall, primarily communication with God, but also a whole host of moral and intellectual capacities we lost, and even physical capacities I believe. Without that regeneration we may make a "good show in the flesh" with good deeds of many sorts, but can never become conformed to Christ.

I think tangle needs to tell us what he thinks the nature of reality and consciousness and meaning is. How faith and GDR and Phat and me think of those things is the reason we believe in God.https://youtu.be/zA8FxYwSKIcConsciousness is a mystery that faces the mystery of potential and transforms it into actuality. We do that with every choice we make. Our choices determine the destiny of the world. By making a choice, you alter the structure of reality....Jordan B. Peterson

Here's an apple and an orange. Pick one. Then I'll give you whichever one I please.Now you. Set up a scenario where you're offered a choice but you don't have the ability to choose.

God definitely responds to our desires if we appeal to Him to do so. We can't drum up the faith for salvation, that requires His regenerating us, but we can have desires and if we present them to Him He will answer. I'm not getting this. WHAT "has to stop somewhere?" Where is it said that Calvinism means "God does not allow" salvation? It's always put as a positive: God brings about salvation, otherwise people are simply in their fallen condition. Although I've said there can be a purely fleshly interest in salvation, because I know some Christians are not saved, I don't really know if this is the right way to put it. Generally it seems to me that if there is even a flicker of interest in salvation, that is from God. In any case I KNOW that if someone asks God for understanding of these things, for greater interest, for salvation itself, He will give it. There is no active REJECTION of anyone who comes to Him in such a way, that's not in Calvinism at all. As Jesus said, Anyone who comes to Me I will not cast out. Anyone who has enough interest to ask God to illuminate these things, assuming of course a sincere desire to know and not just game-playing mockery, He WILL answer.

No, Darwinism is about how organisms adapt to the environment. It is not only physical, it includes ALL of the traits we inherit. That means our hormonal responses, reflexes, intelligence and emotions and so on. It's not just arms, wings and noses. We've answered this a thousand times. Intelligence, empathy and morality evolved in exactly the same way as all other traits. You have the evidence, you presented it yourself. You agreed with it.But If you can show us some other mechanism that did it and that is specific to one particular organism - ie us - and not present at all in other organisms please do so. Flat out wrong. How many bloody times?YOU tell me that evolution is a mindless process. We all agree. YOU agree that it produced the brains of animals. YOU produced the article showing the parts of the brain responsible for empathy and morality.Which part of this process is where an undefineable and unevidenced god getting involved with? Where is this agent? Why is he needed? It doesn't exclude invisible pink toads either or anything else you can imagine. The fact is that another 'intelligence' is not needed in the process. The process is both the why and how. If there was a missing step where some outside intervention was necessary you would be entitled to suggest your god, but there isn't. Sorry, I read no further.

We all know that intelligence evolved, don't we? By attributing intelligence to your God you're diminishing Him to an evolved being.