Arguments – Obstacles on the way leading to eternal life

P

PetriFB

Registered Senior Member
http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/arguments.html

The purpose of the following lines is to contemplate those obstacles, which one may encounter on the way leading to eternal life and why some people don't turn to God so easily. The purpose is to deliberate especially over those outlooks and thoughts, which lie in the minds of many people and make them negative toward spiritual matters and God's call; in other words reasons, why they turn their backs on God's salvation and grace.

So, when we start searching for reasons and obstacles, why these people don't turn to God and on what grounds, especially the following points are relevant. They appear again and again in the lives of many people and are a reason for why spiritual matters and God's call are neglected by them.
 
Sarkus said:
All old arguments, and those within the "I am scientific" section are vast in their logical fallacies and misunderstandings.
You'll need to do better. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


I don't have to do better, because article isn't mine. But I agree with it...
 
If I ever "turned away" from God and "neglected" God's call, it was because I couldn't tell whether I was merely being delusional or not.
In a case of such a dilemma, I make an effort to refrain from the suggested action.
 
I just don't feel it necessary to turn to God for anything. From a personal point of view I think it's selfish and unrealistic to expect him to intervene in my problems when there are so many other problems in the world. As for these other problems: yes, I'd like to see an end to world hunger but feel that he's yet to prove himself in this and similar areas. I think that, like any authority, he should be judged on his track record. So far, sad to say, it's poor.
 
redarmy11 said:
I just don't feel it necessary to turn to God for anything. From a personal point of view I think it's selfish and unrealistic to expect him to intervene in my problems when there are so many other problems in the world. As for these other problems: yes, I'd like to see an end to world hunger but feel that he's yet to prove himself in this and similar areas. I think that, like any authority, he should be judged on his track record. So far, sad to say, it's poor.
Click to expand...

All people of the world don't convert for God, but if they would, the Bible says to them love your neighbour as yourself...... so you see that if all would believed God, so there would be any hunger in the world and not avarice.
 
Ok .lol ......I love USA and all nations. I'm European, I live in Northern Europe in Finland...Here in Europe all don't like USA and Bush ....
 
About the content of the site:

The standard theist stuff. Give some vague quotes which could mean anything and don't say anything specific. Somehow this question 'scientific'. It just questions the sanity of the writer I'm afraid.
 
Is delusion mentioned in your article at all PetriFB? To believe in eternal life means you have to be delusional to some degree... Nevermind any other reasonable obstacles, because that is the biggest one.
 
from the site:

Therefore a good question is, who is right in this matter; Jesus or the many "scientific" people of today, who claim that he and at the same time God is a liar, because they don't believe in his words (John 5:10 …Anyone who does not believe God has made him out to be a liar). Certainly one or the other is wrong.
Click to expand...

Scientists do not call god a liar. They dismiss the existence of god. Well, not all of them. Just the atheist ones. Something that does not exist cannot lie. It is the theists that lie to themselves. And to others. Theists exist. Not god.
 
KennyJC said:
Is delusion mentioned in your article at all PetriFB? To believe in eternal life means you have to be delusional to some degree... Nevermind any other reasonable obstacles, because that is the biggest one.
Click to expand...


Jari Iivanainen has written that article, I haven't .........
 
PetriFB said:
I just say that I haven't written it, but agree with it ........
Click to expand...
If you agree with it you must surely be able to support what it says? Otherwise you are as guilty as the writer of logical fallacies in what you agree with.

Let's be more specific....


WHAT exactly do you agree with?
Please quote some statements from the piece that you agree with and let's see how they stand up to scrutiny. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top