Simple Question For Not Ready And Others

[David Sklansky]

You have stated that God does not want anyone to ever flat out say or believe that someone else will, or will not, be saved.

You have also stated that non believers cannot be saved unless they change, per your reading of the bible.

So here is my question.

If Joe Schmo tells you on his deathbed that he doesn't believe and I ask you "will he be saved" and you answer (as you say you must) "I don't know", do you answer that way

A) Because there is a possibility that Joe will change his mind the last possible second

B) Because there is a possibility that Joe lied to you

C) Because you are lying when you say you don't know, to avoid God's wrath

D) Because God is not bound by syllogisms, in this case

Non believers are not saved

Joe is a non believer

Joe will not be saved.

[JayTee]

E) Because you are lying when you say you don't know, to avoid being ostracized by those around you by telling Joe's family that he is swimming in a lake of fire and brimstone and having his teeth gnashed for eternity, and he deserves because God is just

[amplifiedsilence]

I don't really know much about what "saved" and "non believer" means, but I do know that any good religion should flaunt the fact that it is not bound by petty things like syllogisms and other mundane logical principles. Zen Buddhists meditate on things like "one hand clapping" because things like this are at the heart of every religion. Christianity in particular is full of internal contradictions that "Christians" usually try to forget or bypass, thereby losing touch with the most religious part of their beliefs and reducing their creed to a delusion. It takes doubt and faith to overcome religious contradictions, not dogma and preachers.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
You have stated that God does not want anyone to ever flat out say or believe that someone else will, or will not, be saved.

You have also stated that non believers cannot be saved unless they change, per your reading of the bible.

So here is my question.

If Joe Schmo tells you on his deathbed that he doesn't believe and I ask you "will he be saved" and you answer (as you say you must) "I don't know", do you answer that way

[/ QUOTE ]

If I was in that situation I would not answer "I don't know" I would simply say "Its not my place to judge him/her". I gave that same answer to a co-woker who asked me if I thought his wife was going to hell becuase she recently had an abortion. Its just wrong to proclaim a specific individual will (absolutely) go to hell. You can only go so far as saying certian actions lead to damnation.

Stu

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You have stated that God does not want anyone to ever flat out say or believe that someone else will, or will not, be saved.

You have also stated that non believers cannot be saved unless they change, per your reading of the bible.

So here is my question.

If Joe Schmo tells you on his deathbed that he doesn't believe and I ask you "will he be saved" and you answer (as you say you must) "I don't know", do you answer that way

[/ QUOTE ]

If I was in that situation I would not answer "I don't know" I would simply say "Its not my place to judge him/her". I gave that same answer to a co-woker who asked me if I thought his wife was going to hell becuase she recently had an abortion. Its just wrong to proclaim a specific individual will (absolutely) go to hell. You can only go so far as saying certian actions lead to damnation.

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]
This entirely misses the point. He isn't asking what you would say. He knows what you would say, "I don't know" or some variant there-of. What he is asking is WHY you would say that. Do you really not know, and why do you not know?

[bills217]

A and B both seem valid to me.

Also, some believe once-saved-always-saved, so it's also possible Joe may have been a believer earlier in life and thus unable to lose his salvation (although this is a very hotly debated topic in Christian circles).

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

do you answer that way


[/ QUOTE ]

In a sense God is bound by syllogisms - He is the source of logic and doesn't contradict Himself, nor does He lie. What He says He will do, He will do and so He is bound by His word.

D) is a correct syllogism but only God can apply it to someone else. Apply it to yourself, God will take care of everyone else. That's basically why I would say I don't know, though I might also add that if he doesn't repent and believe the Bible says he has no hope.

[MaxWeiss]

Or you could say she did the right thing if she wasn't ready for a kid, and praise her for having the courage to do something so difficult and heartbreaking. But I don't know the circumstances--it could have been a horrible thing; I don't know.

And you never got back to me on my last PM.

[Siegmund]

I tend to think the syllogism D is not valid, as its first premise is not valid -- at least in some Christian traditions, simply not believing is different from actively rejecting (but both are 'nonbelievers'), and in some there is a place for "virtuous nonbelievers" to do a little time in purgatory and be set right. There is nothing STOPPING god from saving whomever he pleases.

[David Sklansky]

Your answer translates to "I'm lying when I say I don't know".

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
I tend to think the syllogism D is not valid, as its first premise is not valid -- at least in some Christian traditions, simply not believing is different from actively rejecting (but both are 'nonbelievers'), and in some there is a place for "virtuous nonbelievers" to do a little time in purgatory and be set right. There is nothing STOPPING god from saving whomever he pleases.

[/ QUOTE ]

But there is. His Word. God can't lie, and if he said "You cant get in if you X" then you being X prevents him from letting you in. I'm not necessarily claiming this goes against his omnipotence (although I think it might) but it clearly shows that you are wrong when you say nothing can prevent God from doing something.

But I think NotReady would admit that there is some chance that God never said that, and so THEREFORE he can let anyone he wants to into heaven. But even if there is some chance, NotReady doesn't actually believe its likely. NR, is that accurate?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Your answer translates to "I'm lying when I say I don't know".


[/ QUOTE ]


I don't think so.

[Magic_Man]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

Your answer translates to "I'm lying when I say I don't know".


[/ QUOTE ]


I don't think so.

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
D) is a correct syllogism but only God can apply it to someone else. Apply it to yourself, God will take care of everyone else. That's basically why I would say I don't know, though I might also add that if he doesn't repent and believe the Bible says he has no hope.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it is a syllogism, no one needs to "apply" it to anyone else. It applies universally. If you believe the syllogism in D), then you either do think that Joe will not be saved, or you believe that God is not bound by syllogisms. The former is why DS thinks you are lying. Do you believe the latter, or must God obey syllogisms?

~MagicMan

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
This entirely misses the point. He isn't asking what you would say. He knows what you would say, "I don't know" or some variant there-of. What he is asking is WHY you would say that. Do you really not know, and why do you not know?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because you honestly do not know how God is going to judge someone. In the case of Joe Schmoo perhaps he was a good person who believed and essentially lived his life in the manner Jesus taught but was incapable of believing he was the messiah. Could not Joe Schmoo honestly say he does not believe in Christ yet God might judge him to have believed in Christ as much as he was able?

Stu

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

But I think NotReady would admit that there is some chance that God never said that, and so THEREFORE he can let anyone he wants to into heaven. But even if there is some chance, NotReady doesn't actually believe its likely. NR, is that accurate?


[/ QUOTE ]

He has said He doesn't want to let some people in, i.e., unbelievers. It's a semantics game to argue whether He could let an unbeliever in if He wanted to but will never want to.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

If it is a syllogism, no one needs to "apply" it to anyone else. It applies universally. If you believe the syllogism in D), then you either do think that Joe will not be saved, or you believe that God is not bound by syllogisms. The former is why DS thinks you are lying. Do you believe the latter, or must God obey syllogisms?


[/ QUOTE ]

The issue of application has to do with whether Joe really believes or disbelieves. No human can pass judgment on that except maybe Joe himself. If, in God's view, Joe is an unbeliever then the syllogism follows for him, because it applies to him, because he is an unbeliever. But only God can make that judgment. And God doesn't obey syllogisms that are independent of Himself, but rather He is the source of syllogisms, the source of the possibility of syllogisms.

[keith123]

I think most of the "I don't know" Christians, say that because they do not have 100% faith in their beliefs, and maybe they hope they are wrong about some of their beliefs, however they are pretty sure (~99%) that they are correct. They allow for the possibility that they have somehow misinterpreted God's message, since claiming that they have 100% understanding of God would certainly have to be considered highly sinful.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

They allow for the possibility that they have somehow misinterpreted God's message, since claiming that they have 100% understanding of God would certainly have to be considered highly sinful.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good point. Plus the Bible tells us both to not be overconfident in our own abilities and not to judge others.

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
I think most of the "I don't know" Christians, say that because they do not have 100% faith in their beliefs, and maybe they hope they are wrong about some of their beliefs, however they are pretty sure (~99%) that they are correct. They allow for the possibility that they have somehow misinterpreted God's message, since claiming that they have 100% understanding of God would certainly have to be considered highly sinful.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well there's a big difference between, "I honestly don't know if he will be saved", and "I am ~99% sure he is going to hell unless I've somehow misinterpreted god's message." You are really just leaving yourself an out in case you are wrong - but it doesn't change your true opinion, which is that he's headed for hell. I mean, obviously you can't possibly KNOW for sure (unless you've died and come back with some definitive answers from the afterlife).

It seems to me that the only reason to say "I don't know" is either out of politeness or a desire not to appear conceited. But let's face it - you're pretty convinced he's going to hell, no?

[She]

A. He may change his mind.

Also, I think many christians believe it to be a "heart" issue, and that only God knows the heart of a person. Your actions, of course, are a product of what you beleive... but you can't do much after you're dead. (The whole you will know a "tree by it's fruit" thing... only, without any fruit you can't know with any accuracy.)

Although, I do wonder... why would it be so wrong for you to simply agree w/ a man who says that he's not saved (and going to hell), but not agree w/ a man who says he's is saved (and going to heaven)? Christians seem to have no reservations proclaiming that so-and-so's "in heaven now."

/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
Although, I do wonder... why would it be so wrong for you to simply agree w/ a man who says that he's not saved (and going to hell), but not agree w/ a man who says he's is saved (and going to heaven)? Christians seem to have no reservations proclaiming that so-and-so's "in heaven now."

[/ QUOTE ]

Because a lot of people have ethical problems with a person being tortured for eternity. Saying "grandma's in heaven now" is a lot easier than saying "grandma's in hell now", because by saying the latter you then must think about your sweet granny being tortured and in agony for all eternity. Not the most pleasant thought.

[She]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Although, I do wonder... why would it be so wrong for you to simply agree w/ a man who says that he's not saved (and going to hell), but not agree w/ a man who says he's is saved (and going to heaven)? Christians seem to have no reservations proclaiming that so-and-so's "in heaven now."

[/ QUOTE ]

Because a lot of people have ethical problems with a person being tortured for eternity. Saying "grandma's in heaven now" is a lot easier than saying "grandma's in hell now", because by saying the latter you then must think about your sweet granny being tortured and in agony for all eternity. Not the most pleasant thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol... Ok, although I will readily admit that the person who said it about themselves probably knows alot more than I do.. I still see no reason to refrain from saying something that is (more than likely) true just because it may be unpleasant. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

But I think NotReady would admit that there is some chance that God never said that, and so THEREFORE he can let anyone he wants to into heaven. But even if there is some chance, NotReady doesn't actually believe its likely. NR, is that accurate?


[/ QUOTE ]

He has said He doesn't want to let some people in, i.e., unbelievers. It's a semantics game to argue whether He could let an unbeliever in if He wanted to but will never want to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sort of agree, which is why I said it wasn't necessarily evidence against his omnipotence. But it IS something that must constrain God. If he promises something, he can't change his mind.

[Magic_Man]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If it is a syllogism, no one needs to "apply" it to anyone else. It applies universally. If you believe the syllogism in D), then you either do think that Joe will not be saved, or you believe that God is not bound by syllogisms. The former is why DS thinks you are lying. Do you believe the latter, or must God obey syllogisms?


[/ QUOTE ]

The issue of application has to do with whether Joe really believes or disbelieves. No human can pass judgment on that except maybe Joe himself. If, in God's view, Joe is an unbeliever then the syllogism follows for him, because it applies to him, because he is an unbeliever. But only God can make that judgment. And God doesn't obey syllogisms that are independent of Himself, but rather He is the source of syllogisms, the source of the possibility of syllogisms.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, that makes sense, you are saying that YOU cannot judge whether Joe is a believer, and so you are not sure whether the syllogism applies (right?)

Can you apply the syllogism if Joe tells you that he is a non-believer? In that case, could you still answer "I don't know," or would the answer truly be "Joe will not be saved"?

~MagicMan

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Can you apply the syllogism if Joe tells you that he is a non-believer?


[/ QUOTE ]

I would tell him, if he's interested in the question of what I think about his future state, that if he means it, is really an unbeliever, is truly rejecting Christ, he has no hope.

[dknightx]

believing is just a path that God has opened for us ... if you choose to accept that path, then you will be saved. Now what that "path" actually is, is up for debate. Some believe that "faith" is all that is necessary, while some believe its BOTH "faith" and "works" (i'm more in this school of thought).

Now, what happens between death and judgement? *shrug* if i knew i would tell you. Is there a chance you can be "saved" during this time? possible, you'll have to find out for yourself.

Are there other ways to be "saved"? Clearly people who have never heard the gospel before can still be saved ... but yet they sin? so how can they be saved if they have sin? so there is this missing component we do not know about, that God has chosen NOT to reveal to us ... why? In my opinion its not any of our business, what *IS* our business is our own salvation, and the desire to see others saved as well. If others choose not to take this path that God has offered, well then its now between them and God. God has offered us this option, we can take it or leave it ... there may be other options out there, but some aren't willing to take that chance.

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Can you apply the syllogism if Joe tells you that he is a non-believer?


[/ QUOTE ]

I would tell him, if he's interested in the question of what I think about his future state, that if he means it, is really an unbeliever, is truly rejecting Christ, he has no hope.

[/ QUOTE ]

And the incredible arrogance and ego-inflation raises its ugly head again. It is, of course even less possible, for NotReady to be in the wrong than for god to change its mind!