Simple question about god-human relations

[Kyriakos]

I don't think so. It is a clear set of steps and the last verse is pretty clear.

28 When all things are subjected to Him [Jesus], then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

In the end God will be all in all. "All in All" is pretty definitive.

A few verses before it is even clearer that "death is an enemy of god". Well, an all-powerful god shouldn't need time and a plan to defeat death, unless Thanatos is also an antagonistic god.
I do like that apostle Paul mentions (in the beginning of this chapter) how Jesus also appeared to him, but as something hideous, like an unborn child. The chapter is about people who argue they believe in christianity but not in the resurrection of Jesus, so Paul says that this is entirely futile, given the resurrection being true is all that can give meaning to christianity.

I dont get the impression the biblical God is either, the serpent snuck into the Garden and ruined his arrangement with Adam and Eve and He had to call out to them because they were hiding

Maybe pretending, to make the scene more dramatic and the anger more righteous.

I think there are various issues with religion, and in this case of this specific type. Many things are random. I mean some people believe when Jesus appears in front of them, having been resurrected (at least in the gospels) but others are expected to believe just due to reasons. But apart from that, it strikes me as a belief which turns humans into some kind of scared lowly animal, to be gathered at some future time by the herdsman.
Maybe becoming one with the herdsman means he will eat you.

edit: @Birdjaguar , also, I think cav scout is correct in what he said. At least the interpretations of the apostolic text which I am aware of say that it is meant that when the dead will rise, all with be one with god but those who weren't saved will still get the bad end of the deal. Otherwise there's no point to believe in god in the first place; if you are dead you just wait for god to raise the dead and then leave hell or whatever.
I wouldn't take this too literally, of course. Other apostolic texts supposedly try to keep the faithful of the first century AD alert, cause god will raise the dead soon.

 

[Kyriakos]

A rather choleric comment from the thread over at TWC:

So we’re saying that God was able to make a rock so dumb even He couldn’t enlighten it.

 

[Birdjaguar]

A few verses before it is even clearer that "death is an enemy of god". Well, an all-powerful god shouldn't need time and a plan to defeat death, unless Thanatos is also an antagonistic god.
I do like that apostle Paul mentions (in the beginning of this chapter) how Jesus also appeared to him, but as something hideous, like an unborn child. The chapter is about people who argue they believe in christianity but not in the resurrection of Jesus, so Paul says that this is entirely futile, given the resurrection being true is all that can give meaning to christianity.

idk, the words are pretty clear.

1 Corinthians 15:

20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. 21 For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming, 24 then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 27 For He has put all things in subjection under his feet. But when He says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. 28 When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

Paul's case for resurrection is pretty strong: it is gonna happen and even one's dying will reversed. No exceptions are made. Your argument that a god does not need an enemy such as death doesn't matter. That is not the topic of the passage.

edit: @Birdjaguar , also, I think cav scout is correct in what he said. At least the interpretations of the apostolic text which I am aware of say that it is meant that when the dead will rise, all with be one with god but those who weren't saved will still get the bad end of the deal. Otherwise there's no point to believe in god in the first place; if you are dead you just wait for god to raise the dead and then leave hell or whatever.
I wouldn't take this too literally, of course. Other apostolic texts supposedly try to keep the faithful of the first century AD alert, cause god will raise the dead soon.

Read verse 22. All since Adam. There are no limitations and being saved is not mentioned.

Now the bible is not contradiction free, but this particular passage is pretty clear that in the end, God all will be all in all.

 

[Kyriakos]

You are free to believe whatever, yet it is inconsistent with logic.

 

[Birdjaguar]

You are free to believe whatever, yet it is inconsistent with logic.

People are not logical. Religion is not logical. Saying that a 2000 year old letter of religious persuasion is not logical and therefore some how wrong, is not logical.

That letter was not written as part of some biblical cannon. It was written to persuade Christians that they were on the right track and to keep the faith despite life's difficulties. Paul was explaining the nature of the Resurrection as he saw it. All we have are the words translated from Greek to English to go by. If the translation was good, the words are clear. Changing the meaning is a personal thing.

 

[Josu]

If I was president I would put God on trial for everything that's happened thus far. God must face trial.

I am going a bit OT, but this remembered me a True Story (tm)

There is an Spanish actor called Willy Toledo, he was very popular in Spain in the early 2000s, he worked in a decent number of spanish TV Shows and films.
Suddenly he started to speak in interviews about his ideology, he considered himself as a commie, was supporting cuban revolution and was atheist.
After that, producers count much less with him, some years ago he claimed that he was not working so much due to a boycott due to his ideology, however he continued giving opinion in Facebook and other social media.

In 2017 he published a text in facebook in which he used a very spanish expression which figuratively means that he defecates over god, he used same expression with Virgin Mary.
A catholic lawyers association, sued him, a trial was held, but Willy Toledo did not come up, later he was asked why, and he answered that neither the offended, God or Virgin Mary went.

He finally was declared innocent

 

[Berzerker]

Maybe pretending, to make the scene more dramatic and the anger more righteous.

I think there are various issues with religion, and in this case of this specific type. Many things are random. I mean some people believe when Jesus appears in front of them, having been resurrected (at least in the gospels) but others are expected to believe just due to reasons. But apart from that, it strikes me as a belief which turns humans into some kind of scared lowly animal, to be gathered at some future time by the herdsman. Maybe becoming one with the herdsman means he will eat you.

I dont get the impression God's ignorance was fake, but the scared lowly animal were fish. The herdsman was Aries, Jesus was a fisher of men - Pisces. The story is written in the sky.

 

[Joij21]

I dont get the impression God's ignorance was fake, but the scared lowly animal were fish.

Or maybe he was faking ignorance to see if Adam would lie to his face. Like a cop looking for lies from the suspect in order to incriminate.

The herdsman was Aries, Jesus was a fisher of men - Pisces. The story is written in the sky.

I feel that this is stronger evidence to prove Greek Paganism rather than Christianity.

But all in all it's just connecting dots in the sky until you create a recognizable image in the sky. Like I could create a phallic constellation if I just trace the stars correctly. I'll name it the Big Dickus.

 

[Kyriakos]

As long as he doesn't speak with a lisp...

 

[cav scout]

So the issue Paul is addressing in 1 Corinthians 15 was resistance to the idea that everyone would be bodily resurrected. The church in Corinth believed in the resurrection of Jesus, but some believers apparently struggled with the idea that everyone would be resurrected (the Platonic view that the body was debased and not eternal was prevalent in the Greek world at that time). Paul makes the case that if they deny the general resurrection of the dead they are undermining the believe that Jesus rose from the dead. This is much more apparent if you start at the verse 12 instead of verse 20.

The resurrection of the dead is referenced throughout the Old and New Testaments. It's an important aspect of God's redemptive plan. Here is what Paul said when on trial before Felix:

and I have the same hope in God as these men themselves have, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

Jesus spoke about the resurrection of the dead:

Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.

The resurrection of judgement:

Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

So I guess that takes us back to the original question posed by Kyriakos...


EDIT: @Birdjaguar- I don't think I responded sufficiently to your points just now so let me go over the passage from 1 Corinthians 15 that you quoted:

20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. 24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. 28 When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.

Jesus is the 2nd Adam, the Son of Man. He restores what Adam corrupted at the fall. Through him there will be a resurrection of the dead. But not all at once- Jesus is the firstfruits, then when he returns Christians will be resurrected (resurrection of life), then at the end of time those not in Christ (resurrection of judgement). Verses 27-28 speak about the nature of the Trinity and the relationship between the Father and the Son. Everything will be put into subjection to God, that he may be all in all. This doesn't mean that everyone is heaven.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

....

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

...

Assuming a god exists, what is the point of salvation being gained by humans depending on some action, ethic, work or other part or even the whole of their life? If god is omnipotent and omniscient, it would already be aware of who will be saved and who will not.
At times I've heard the argument, from clergy, that the point is to have people realize that they are responsible for what will happen to them, and therefore if they aren't saved it is due to their decisions. If so, god would still be aware they would act in this way, rendering the decision-making decorative at best, and at worst a pretext to have god mock those destined to fall anyway.

...

Maybe there is some other dynamic here? Asking people who believe in religion.

I'll try to answer your question. I'm religious but I do not claim to be an expert.

The point of salvation is to gain eternal life and be with God in total bliss and happiness forever. Rejecting God earns eternal separation from God, thereby granting the rejectors wish, and to be apart from God means eternal chaos and torment. But this is too simple an explanation. I could go into more detail if anyone is interested.

An all powerful being and free will are simply incompatible.

Actually it is possible for the two to be compatible. God loves us so much, more than anyone can imagine, that he gave us free will. God doesn't want a robot to love him back. He wants us to love him because we actually want to love him. Love of that nature is real. Think of your parents. You are not obligated to love them but if you do love them of your own free will aren't they then overjoyed?

 

[Kyriakos]

I'll try to answer your question. I'm religious but I do not claim to be an expert.

The point of salvation is to gain eternal life and be with God in total bliss and happiness forever. Rejecting God earns eternal separation from God, thereby granting the rejectors wish, and to be apart from God means eternal chaos and torment. But this is too simple an explanation. I could go into more detail if anyone is interested.



Actually it is possible for the two to be compatible. God loves us so much, more than anyone can imagine, that he gave us free will. God doesn't want a robot to love him back. He wants us to love him because we actually want to love him. Love of that nature is real. Think of your parents. You are not obligated to love them but if you do love them of your own free will aren't they then overjoyed?

I am always wary of turning this into an actually religious discussion - cause then the religiously-inclined participators are in a disadvantageous position because they have more invested in the matter. I do think that there is an issue with humans wanting to be loved back, cause unrequited love is a very real thing and no one is supposed to have to love anyone, regardless of how the other person feels And if the other entity is a god, more issues arise!

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

I am always wary of turning this into an actually religious discussion - cause then the religiously-inclined participators are in a disadvantageous position because they have more invested in the matter. I do think that there is an issue with humans wanting to be loved back, cause unrequited love is a very real thing and no one is supposed to have to love anyone, regardless of how the other person feels And if the other entity is a god, more issues arise!

I think I understand what you mean. I'll try to tone down my answers to fit more with the intent of this discussion.

As for unrequited love I think that certain people do expect, but hopefully never demand, love from those in their social circles. When their love is not reciprocated it can hurt.

 

[Narz]

Actually it is possible for the two to be compatible. God loves us so much, more than anyone can imagine, that he gave us free will. God doesn't want a robot to love him back. He wants us to love him because we actually want to love him. Love of that nature is real. Think of your parents. You are not obligated to love them but if you do love them of your own free will aren't they then overjoyed?

I'm not going to love an invisible absentee parent.

Love me (and make sure to tithe to the church) or you're gonna burn in ****ing hell is not really free will anyone than "your money or your life" is free will

 

[Berzerker]

why in the hell would god want us hanging around, he got really pissed off when we built a tower to visit his heavenly abode

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

I'm not going to love an invisible absentee parent.

Love me (and make sure to tithe to the church) or you're gonna burn in ****ing hell is not really free will anyone than "your money or your life" is free will

He's only absent if you push him away. Faith is all about believing in things that are unseen.

why in the hell would god want us hanging around, he got really pissed off when we built a tower to visit his heavenly abode

He got angered because man thought he could build a tower to reach and replace Him.

 

[El_Machinae]

I'm not going to love an invisible absentee parent.

My recent atheist Insight is this, do I think that the universe is beautiful and amazing?

I do!

The big difference is that no one is telling me that the universe is sentient and cares about me. It is invisible and my creator and it's also absentee. But no one tells me that it is a person, and therefore I have nothing to resent. The universe is what it is, and I think it's amazing

Christianity's mistake is claiming that God loves you. Even the ancient Jewish faith makes that mistake.

 

[Narz]

He's only absent if you push him away. Faith is all about believing in things that are unseen.

I'm not going to believe in a fairy tale w/ no evidence.

Anyway, God is an @$$****, who wants to spend eternity in the prescience of such an angry, insecure deity.

He got angered because man thought he could build a tower to reach and replace Him.

That's kinda patheitic. If I were God I'd want my creations to share in my power & glory.

 

[Kyriakos]

My recent atheist Insight is this, do I think that the universe is beautiful and amazing?

I do!

The big difference is that no one is telling me that the universe is sentient and cares about me. It is invisible and my creator and it's also absentee. But no one tells me that it is a person, and therefore I have nothing to resent. The universe is what it is, and I think it's amazing

Christianity's mistake is claiming that God loves you. Even the ancient Jewish faith makes that mistake.

Tbh, god mostly hates you in the OT ^_^