When Will The End-Times Be And How Will We Know?

Here we go off on a rabbit trail. I will allow it, for this topic is about the possibility of the End Times and I think it is important to realize that as the war of ideologies, world views, humanism vs apologetic Christianity, minority cultures vs white privilege, and finally exclusivity vs inclusive thinking heats up, these issues will define the human responses that we see on a daily basis. Never mind the belief that we are in a spiritual war. I'll throw that one out for now. We can always pick it back up later. Perhaps we need to first address what hell is and why hell exists (within our argued construct) We next need to point out that you think that God is a human creation and I think that He existed long before humans were even around. So before I address your questions philosophically, consider allowing mine into the public record.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.Edited by Phat, : spelling

Which is simply another of your attempts to deny reality and play sophomoric moronic word games. What Hell is in Christianity is clearly set out in the Bible. Which is nothing but yet another misrepresentation of what I have posted at best and more likely simply yet another attempt for you to lie. So before you post more utter nonsense how about you answering the three questions?There are several parts to the issue.Is God the creator of all that is, seen and unseen?Is God omniscient?Is anyone or anything sent to hell?

I wish you could read the stuff you write through my eyes - this is pure Lord of the Rings fantasy stuff. It's childish and embarrassing.It's also not internally logical - heaven is populated with such 'zombies'. You are desperate to be just such a 'zombie'. Happy ever after at the right hand of your Lord, all sweetness and light, not an evil or selfish thought crossing your mind. If it was foreknown and done anyway, of course it's evil. Even our human systems allow for recklessness as a crime even without full intent. If you know there's a high likelihood of causing harm but are reckless to that risk, you commit the crime. Freewill has no meaning at all, it doesn't bloody exist! I am absolutely incapable of strangling a baby and so are you. I have a sense of morality that prevents it. For freewill to be even contemplated as a real thing, we'd all have to be medically psychopathic. More semantics and apologetics. More 'interpretation' of inconvenient ideas. There's no end to it is there? Hand-wave away all the problems because you have the revealed truth. It's bonkers Phat; delusion.

And you can not claim that somebody else has not experienced what you have experienced. By it seems to be the entire premise of your theology. In Message 392 you said, "I would argue that the only way that humans could ever truly have free will is through being offered a choice between Gods authority and the lie of autonomy provided by the sneaky snake." So forget free will. Explain your theology without any mention of free will. That doesn't answer the question. It doesn't even have anything to do with the question.It isn't about God at all. It's about you. How can unconditional obedience involve free will? So take it or leave it. That isn't free will. Then it isn't free will. In fact, in your scenario, God has to actively prevent me from succeeding. You're rejecting the truth and embracing a lie. That is not good theology.I think at some level you know it's a lie, otherwise you wouldn't be so afraid of discussing it. I didn't say a word about what Romans claims. I said there IS no transformation. I can see that in your life. If Romans claims there is a magical transformation, Romans is wrong. Of course not. I point out what the book says. Much of what it says is not true but it still says what it says. He certainly was, as the Bible clearly shows - and you're afraid to discuss that too.

Get your mythos straight. 2/3 of the angels chose NOT to rebel. That is free will in action.

That doesn't answer the question. They might have been obedient slaves or they might have been discontented slaves who were afraid of the consequences of rebellion. There is no reason to think they had "free will" or to think they used it if they had it.

So there is no reason to think that they were not slaves? Surely your logic puzzles us.

If they walk like a slave and talk like a slave....Show YOUR logic.

Granted for the sake of this discussion we are talking hypotheticals and philosophy here. All that I have to go on is either what an apologist thought or what I myself think.
Given that God exists and is essentially the Creator of all seen and unseen and given that He is the God of scripture Who is Jesus Father (in a Triune Concept) and given that God had angels....
Why is it as logical to believe that Angels are zombies over the idea that Angels had and have Free Will? Why would God need to create zombies? And the apologetic argument is as good of one as any...that Lucifer chose autonomy over authority. That is not an action a zombie would make. It is equally plausible that 2/3 of the Angels chose Authority. They happened to like existing as servants for their Boss. Now unless you want to pull Stan Lee in here(we would need another resurrection, however ) and ask for his opinion, I see nothing wrong with the popular apologetic model...which by the way most Christians dont even go so far as to know.Now you are perfectly free to throw it all away, but then it becomes your turn to replace my hypothetical and not by saying we simply live, do our best for each other and die...turning to worm food and ceasing to exist. That hypothetical is less likely. Humans know and have seen too much to be atheistic materialists as a species.

Again, why not? Why would He need to create rebels? But you need to explain the ones who "chose" slavery, not just the ones who chose freedom. I don't think it's plausible at all. How many people would choose slavery if it was actually a choice. That is the argument that slavers used to use ("Slavery is fun! They like it!) but it doesn't fly very high in the face of reality. Why? By that logic, they also know too much and have seen too much to be Christians. Christianity, especially your right-wing-nutty cult, is very much a minority.But practically every religion DOES believe in doing our best for each other, so clearly your assessment of "plausibility" is way off.

The first mistake you make (and its huge) is to equate obedience to God with slavery. When the Prince of Peace is your Boss, you are not a slave but a son.You seem to think freedom is being able to do whatever you want. Which is fine if you believe the lie that the universe is simply some vast frontier awaiting discovery.

See the story of the prodigal son. He was disobedient but his father didn't kick him out of heaven. He welcomed him home. Doesn't that sound inclusive to you?Sorry, try again. By definition, yes. That's not a lie.

Just for clarification:It will not weaken the certainty of your faith.
The actual veracity of your faith is as it always was - unknown.It may, however, weaken your perception of your certainty of your faith.And, it's a personal question that only you can answer:Does Phat want "certainty of faith!" regardless of the actual veracity of that faith?
(Prioritize personally feeling good - regardless of reality's truth)orDoes Phat want "certainty of faith!" in things that are, actually, likely to be true?
(Prioritize reality's truth - regardless of personal feelings on the matter)For certain things, it is an easy pick.
One will always prefer "reality's truth" over "personal feelings on the matter" when deciding whether or not to look both ways before crossing the street.For other things, it is not easy, and it is a personal decision which is best.
Sometimes, "feeling good" can (and should) be prioritized over reality's truth. (Usually when "feeling good" gets blurred in with "reality's truth")
For example: Someone choosing to deny/ignore/refuse-to-accept-credibility of certain historical events in their past in order to be happy in the present.
Like a rape victim choosing not to focus on the event because it is too painful and debilitating to even attempt to heal through therapy.It's up to you to choose which is best for you in which situations.
And, of course, up to the rest of us to do the same ourselves.When the two path's cross - it can be difficult to "hide one's aversion to reality's truth" when discussing with someone else who prioritizes "discovering reality's truth regardless of personal feelings" on any particular matter.Best practice is to be able to identify which one you're doing.
-when you want to avoid reality; then avoid situations where others want to investigate reality.
-when you want to investigate reality; avoid actively seeking out people-minding-their-own-business and forcing them to listen to you.It's the only way everyone can do what they want with their personal lives without affecting others.

Hi Phat, Does this sound remotely like free will to you?If we don't do it willingly now, we'll bloody well do it by force soon. Either free or by force we will all have to do it.Free will from the deity of your theology is both an illusion and a delusion.

Its a partial truth. God exists. God is spirit. The universe is populated by Onee Creator of all seen and unseen and, by design, a bunch of rebels. Imitators. Prodigal Angels? Maybe...thats a strange concept which I wont deny nor embrace. All I know is that as far as humans are concerned, we have a choice of the illusion of autonomy...which if we collectively choose we will learn the hard way or Son-ship...which would place us in Communion with this One Creator of all seen and unseen, allow us to explore the universe similar to how Gene Roddenberry imagined it--and "The Federation" which is the good guys is good because they submitted to a Good GOD rather than choosing to become a bunch of rebels clawing their way to the top of an imagined empire and dominion. Truth is stranger than Fiction.