This week we are kicking off a new teaching series. Next week we’ll be off again. After that, though, we’ll finish the last four weeks of this series. In the apostle Peter’s final letter, he asks a question that is critical for followers of Jesus to answer. In light of Jesus’ forthcoming return and the end of the world it will bring with it, who do we want to be? If Jesus really is coming back, what kind of lives should we be living? In our new series, Who Do You Want to Be, we are going to explore some of the ways we should be living as followers of Jesus in a world that won’t last forever. We’ll start today by taking a look at Peter’s question and why it matters so much.
The End Is Near
Have you ever met someone who was so convinced of some future event that they were willing to make dramatic adjustments to their life and the lives of their family members in light of it? One such group of folks are colloquially called “Preppers.” That’s short for Doomsday Preppers. These folks may look normal—or maybe not—but they hide a secret. Everything they do, they do with the idea in mind that the world is going to end sometime soon, and they’re going to be ready for it. And if you choose not to get ready yourself, don’t come crawling to them when you’re out of food and water and the zombie hordes are threatening to bust down your doors and you don’t have sufficient firepower to hold them off. That’s your fault, not theirs.
Now, maybe you think these folks are a little off. Or perhaps you count yourself as one of them. Can you be Doomsday Prepper-adjecent? What would that even look like? Anyway, whether or not you agree with their take on the timing or nature or even belief in the forthcoming end of the world or at the very least civilization as we know it, one thing is for certain: you would be hard pressed to find a group of people more vision-driven than they are. Again: everything they do, they do with their vision of the end in mind.
This idea that the world is going to end someday has had an interesting history. Various religions have predicted one in some form or fashion. Others, though, have held to one version or another of the idea that the world isn’t going to end. In fact, it was once scientifically fashionable to believe the universe was eternal—it had always been and would always be. Christians were ridiculed by the scientific elite of the late-19th and early-20th centuries for believing something so quaint and obviously silly as the idea that the universe had actually begun at some point in the finite past and would end at some point in the finite future. And then science finally caught up with theology; something it has had to do a lot over the years. Whether or not you think the world is going to end someday affects how you live your life now. More than that, the kind of end you think the world is going to have affects how you live your life now.
If the world is going to end one day when the sun finally explodes and that’ll be that, then nothing we do in this life really matters. I mean, sure, we can make up purpose for ourselves but that isn’t ever anything more than that: made up. We make it up anyway because we can’t live without purpose, but that nagging sense that it’s all made up in the end can start to get heavy after a while. If, on the other hand, this world is going to end and then transition to a new one after that, and if the choices we make in this life will have some sort of impact on what our experience of that next world is going to be, then what we do here and now matters a great deal. Christians have tended to hold to the latter idea over the centuries. Still, though, it’s not so popular to believe that kind of thing today. It’s sufficiently unpopular, in fact, that we don’t often really think in those terms even as professed followers of Jesus.
But what if it really is true—not merely true in some hypothetical, theological sort of way, but a right and proper description of reality—that the world as we know it is going to end someday and transition to a new world of some kind? What if it really is true that the decisions we make now will have some sort of an impact on our experience with this new world? Now, is this something for which you are going to find some sort of hard, empirical evidence to support? Of course not. We’re talking about the future. There’s not any kind of empirical evidence to totally support anything that may or may not happen beyond the moment we are in right now. But Jesus was pretty clear that something like this is going to be the case, and He predicted and pulled off His own death and resurrection. Because of that, I tend to just go with what He thought and let the chips fall where they may.
Now, maybe you haven’t given this too much thought. I don’t blame you. It’s not all that comforting of an idea. But do you know who did give it a lot of thought? Jesus’ earliest followers. Paul talked about it several times. James and Jude both mentioned it. The author of Heberws pointed toward it. John wrote a whole book about it. This morning, I would like to look with you at something the apostle Peter had to say about it. We can find this right near the end of his second letter, written not long before his martyrdom that likely came at the hands of the Roman Emperor Nero. If Peter’s first letter which we talked about a couple of weeks ago is about standing firm in our faith in the face of a culture that doesn’t like our doing that, the second letter is about standing firm in our faith in the face of the forthcoming end of the world. Of course, we’re rather far removed from anything resembling the timing Peter would have imagined for that end’s arrival, but that doesn’t mean he was wrong. It just means his assumptions about the timing were too small. In any event, in talking about what our response should be to the return of Christ and the world’s end, Peter asks a really important question. It is a question I want to begin exploring with you this morning, and after next week’s special guest, continue exploring for the next few weeks in a new teaching series called, Who Do You Want To Be?
If you have a copy of the Scriptures handy this morning, find your way with me way to the back of the New Testament to the letter we call 2 Peter. We’re going to start right at the beginning of the third chapter. Check this out with me: “Dear friends, this is now the second letter I have written to you; in both letters, I want to stir up your sincere understanding by way of reminder, so that you recall the words previously spoken by the holy prophets and the command of our Lord and Savior given through your apostles.” In other words, Peter’s not making up anything new in any of this. He’s simply pointing by way of reminder to things his audience had already heard so they didn’t forget what matters most.
As for what matters most, look with me at v. 3: “Above all, be aware of this…” And just as a matter of best practices when engaging with the Scriptures, when you see an author say something like that, pay pretty close attention to what comes next. “Above all, be aware of this: Scoffers will come in the last days scoffing and following their own evil desires, saying, ‘Where is his coming that he promised? Ever since our ancestors fell asleep, all things continue as they have been since the beginning of creation.’” Remember that thing we said a minute ago about the scientifically fashionable belief about a century ago that the universe had always been and would always be. It’s like Peter knew what he was talking about. When you start talking about something like the end of the world, people who don’t believe in God in the first place are going to think you’re nuts. I don’t blame them. If I believed like they do, I’d probably think I’m nuts too.
Why do we stick with this silly notion then? Look at v. 5 now: “They deliberately overlook this.” In other words, they could know this, but they choose not to. “They deliberately overlook this: By the word of God the heavens came into being long ago and the earth was brought about from water and through water. Through these the world of that time perished when it was flooded. By the same word, the present heavens and earth are stored up for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.” In other words, the same God who created the world and brought judgment to it once, is going to bring judgment to it again. The first judgment was with water; the second will be with fire. Now, what exactly does that mean? We don’t know for sure. Just how literally exactly we are to take Peter’s comments here isn’t totally clear. What is clear, though, is that there is an end coming. It will be a God-directed end at just the right time. It will be an end marked by judgment against those who have rejected any kind of a resemblance to the God who created them by refusing any sort of an association with Jesus who makes us like Him.
Okay, but when is all this happening? I mean, we’re nearly 2,000 years past Peter’s writing this. Well, believe it or not, Peter had an answer for that. Keep rolling in the text with me: “Dear friends, don’t overlook this one fact: With the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord does not delay his promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance.” If anything, this observation is even more true and relevant today than when Peter first made it. God doesn’t operate on the same timetable that we do. He limits Himself to operating within time because we do, but He’s not bound by that. He operates on the timetable of eternity. When eternity is your timeframe, you move at an entirely different pace than we do with our lifespan of a century or less. The end will come in its time. It’ll come right on time, in fact. If there seems to be a delay at all, that’s because God is graciously exercising patience to allow for as many to embrace Him as will so that no one has to be an object of His judgment when it comes.
Yet make no mistake: That judgment will come. “But the day of the Lord will come like a thief; on that day the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, the elements will burn and be dissolved, and the earth and the works on it will be disclosed.” He doubles down on this idea in the second part of v. 12: “Because of that day, the heavens will be dissolved with fire and the elements will melt with heat.” Again, this is almost certainly not intended to be literal language here. Indeed, how could something be dissolved and disclosed at the same time? Peter’s point is that there is a judgment coming; the end of the world will arrive. When it does, it is going to be disruptive of our lives in a way we can’t even fathom—something like the universe exploding and everything around us melting down—but it is also going to reveal who’s really who.
So, thus far in this little journey, we have confirmation from Peter that, yes, the world is going to end someday. It is going to end in judgment on those who have finally rejected God’s offer of eternal life in Christ. God’s waiting on this as long as He can, but it will indeed arrive when the time is right. Okay, but so what? Well, that’s exactly where Peter goes next in what I submit to you is the most important part of this passage in terms of its implications for our lives. Look at what Peter says next right at the heart of this little chiasm starting in v. 11: “Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, it is clear what sort of people you should be in holy conduct and godliness as you wait for the day of God and hasten its coming.”
Now, the translation I use makes v. 11 there into a statement. In the original Greek, though, the verse is a question. But the question carries the force of a command, thus the statement form we have here. In other words, Peter considers the answer to the question so patently obvious, and the anticipated answer so abundantly clear that it’s hardly a question at all. It’s a little like asking your children something along the lines of, “When do you think you should have these chores done that I’ve given you to do while I’m gone to the store?” You might as well just say: “Get these chores done while I’m gone to the store.” Nevertheless, Peter really does ask a question here, so let’s put this as a question: Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, what sort of people should you be? Since the world is coming to an end, how should you be living between now and then? Or perhaps more simply, to borrow the title of our series, Who do you want to be?
Well, who do you want to be? Do you want to be someone who is going to wind up an object of this judgment that’s coming, or someone who gets to enjoy the new heavens and new earth that are coming on the other side of the cataclysmic, cosmic destruction that Peter mentions in v. 13? “But based on his promise, we wait for new heavens and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.” Who do you want to be? Listen, if Jesus is really coming back, then how we live matters.
If guys like Peter are right, then Jesus is coming back one day to bring judgment to all those who persist to the end in rejecting His work on the cross on their behalf, preferring instead to try to stand on their own two moral feet before God’s judgment. Just so we’re clear: that’s a dumb decision to make. No one is going to be able to stand on their own two moral feet before a holy and righteous God. Our best good works are like filthy rags before Him. The prophet Isaiah put it even better than that in Isaiah 64:4-5: “You welcome the one who joyfully does what is right; they remember you in your ways. But we have sinned, and you were angry. How can we be saved if we remain in our sins? All of us have become like something unclean, and all our righteous acts are like a polluted garment; all of us wither like a leaf, and our iniquities carry us away like the wind.” If “all our righteous acts are like a polluted garment,” then how does God welcome “the one who joyfully does what is right”? Because Jesus is the one who joyfully did what is right and our welcome is in Him. So then, who do you want to be? If Jesus is coming back, how we live matters.
Just so we’ve seen it, Peter closes the chapter (and the letter) out by answering the question for us again and reminding us of what we are up against—in a sense, he kind of repeats what he said at the beginning of the chapter. That just means the whole chapter is a beautiful chiasm with the haunting question of v. 11 at its heart. Look at this now starting in v. 14: “Therefore, dear friends, while you wait for these things, make every effort to be found without spot or blemish in his sight, at peace.” Do your best to pursue the path of Christ. If Jesus is coming back, how we live matters.
“Also, regard the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our dear brother Paul has written to you according to the wisdom given to him. He speaks about these things in all his letters. There are some matters that are hard to understand. The untaught and unstable will twist them to their own destruction, as they also do with the rest of the Scriptures.” Verse 16 there is way more important than just its context for this sermon. What Peter writes here means that the writings of Paul were already being considered as Scripture on par with everything in the Old Testament in terms of its inspiration and authority within a single generation of the resurrection. This verse completely undercuts the common skeptical argument today that the various New Testament documents weren’t considered as Scripture until much later on in the history of the church.
The other thing Peter says here is pretty important too. Untaught and unstable people are going to take the words of Scripture that we understand fairly clearly through the lens of Christ, with the help of the Holy Spirit, and in the context of a community of committed believers, and twist them in all sorts of ways to argue that they don’t say what they clearly say. They are untaught in that they don’t know what they are talking about when it comes to the Scriptures. Unless you see it through the lens of the Holy Spirit, you aren’t going to make any sense out of it. They are unstable because they are arguing in favor of a view of the world that is disconnected from reality. Peter’s telling us this so we know what to expect. When it happens—and if you spend enough time engaging with people about Jesus who aren’t following Him, or living in an obvious way to be ready for His return, it’s going to happen—you’ll already know to expect it and won’t get blown off course by it. If Jesus is coming back, how we live matters. If someone tells you otherwise, Peter makes clear the reason is that they don’t know what they’re talking about.
“Therefore, dear friends,” verse 17 now, “since you know this in advance, be on your guard, so that you are not led away by the error of lawless people and fall from your own stable position.” If your life is founded on Christ, if you are living in light of His return, you are standing on solid ground. There’s no good reason to leave that ground no matter how convincing of a case someone seems to make that there is firmer ground to be found somewhere else. The reality is: there’s not. “But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity.” If Jesus is coming back, how we live matters.
Okay, but matters how? What does it look like to live like Jesus is really coming back? If the Doomsday Preppers can do everything through the filter of their belief that the world or at least society as we know it will come to a cataclysmic end soon, how do we do something similar? What kind of people should we be? Peter said we should make “every effort” to be found without spot or blemish, but, if we’re being honest, we need more specificity than that. If Jesus is coming back, how we live matters. So, we want to live in such a way that matters.
Let me put this tension a different way. One approach to living in light of Jesus’ forthcoming return would be to separate ourselves off from society and build our own communities that are marked by an abundance of the fruit of the Spirit. These would no doubt be wonderful places to live and work and grow together as we await His return, but does living in that kind of a way actually matter? Would we be actually making a difference in the world around us, encouraging them in the direction of a lifestyle that matters? That’s harder to say. Besides, Jesus’ prayer for us in John 17 was not that God would take us out of the world, but that He would protect us from the evil one while we are in the world. We need to live in such a way that we make a difference in the world. That’s the kind of living in a way that matters we are called to in light of Jesus’ return. Okay, but what does that look like? That’s what we are going to talk about for the next few weeks. If Jesus is coming back, how we live matters. Don’t miss the next few weeks as we talk about some specific ways we can do just that.
The Nexus 
Accept Yahweh’s offer…. Drum roll…. Or else, you rotten sinners.
🤣
LikeLike
You know, I was just thinking this morning, “I’ve got to get back with Ark, or he’s going to think I’ve abandoned him.” I hope you weren’t too bored while I was gone. How’s the big football tournament going? Does the U.S. even have a chance in the Olympics? Our women’s team seems to beat up on everybody else, but our men just can’t seem to compete.
Let’s do a little thought experiment just for fun. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that God exists and that He created the world like the Scriptures claim. In other words, let’s assume my position is correct for the moment.
If He really is totally sovereign and by right our lives belong to Him, then when it comes time for this world to end and to transition to the renewed and restored creation He has planned for those who have been willing to accept Him for who He is (still assuming on my position here), what do you think should be the end for those folks who have said, “Nope, not playing by your rules; not going to accept you for who you are or me for who I really am”?
LikeLike
As it has already been established that your god, Yahweh is a genocidal, egotistical monster, and based on the vile doctrine of Christianity, we are all going to Gehenna, apparently.
How nice!
And you worship this deity?
Maybe time for a rethink?
LikeLike
No, no. That hasn’t been “established” as if it were some sort of a fact. That’s what you believe based, as I have argued time and time again, on an incomplete and incorrect understanding of the Scriptures, and because you start the whole process of understanding the relevant questions by rejecting the starting premise such that the rest of it isn’t going to make sense to you.
That being said, you didn’t answer my question at all. You sidestepped it and simply fired back an irrelevant shot of your own.
I’ll restate and summarize it again for you just in case you missed it: Assuming my position is the correct one for the sake of argument, what should be the end for those who finally reject God’s sovereignty and authority in favor of their own?
LikeLike
Did not Yahweh annhialate all life on earth with a global flood?
If humanity is still on earth then they will be destroyed.
If scripture is correct all non believers will be sent to Hell.
What am I missing here?
LikeLike
Apparently, you’re missing my entire question. Should I pose it again just for the sake of clarity?
LikeLike
Let’s work through it..
What should be the end for those who reject your god, Yahweh?
Have I at least got the question right?
LikeLike
You mostly do, minus your apparent unwillingness (or perhaps plain inability) to take my position at face value and without any attendant scorn purely for the sake of argument.
Assuming my position is correct, what do you think should be the end for those who finally reject God’s sovereignty and authority as God?
LikeLike
Also, for arguement’s sake do we assume Hell does or does not exist?
LikeLike
That’s part of the question. Hell as a place for the finally impenitent as described in the New Testament does not exist yet at all. Given that, and assuming on the correctness of my position, what should be the final end for those who persist in a rejection of God’s sovereignty and authority as God?
LikeLike
No hell? Didn’t Jesus mention Gehenna?
Anyway, what options are there?
Be destroyed along with the earth or be destroyed by your god Yahweh?
Am I still on point?
LikeLike
We can drift into the theological weeds of a nuanced conversation about Hell later if you wish. For now, let’s stay on topic.
Assuming on what I believe about the character and nature of God for the sake of argument (which, I feel confident in saying, is a fair representation of historical orthodoxy), what do YOU think should be the final end of those who persist in a rejection of God’s authority and sovereignty as God? You get your choice of options in the context of this thought experiment. What do you think would be best? And by “best,” I mean wisest, most compassionate, and most just.
LikeLike
I am not trying to be pedantic here but if the world is about to end who cares?
LikeLike
No, that’s a fair question. But it’s outside the parameters I’m trying to put in place for our thought experiment. It’s also outside the parameters I put in place for the sermon based on what Peter said in his letter.
The world is ending, yes, but there’s a whole new world coming on the other side of that. And, our experience of this coming world is going to be determined by the choices we make in this one. That’s why we care. That’s why Christians care, at least.
And, for the purposes of this thought experiment, we’re assuming that the end of this world is not going to be the end of existence, but the start of a whole new existence.
So again, assuming on all of this, assuming God is who I have said He is (and assuming on the basic contours of historically orthodox Christian theology as I have been representing it to you over the course of our conversation), what do YOU think should be the end for those who finally refuse to acknowledge and accept God’s sovereignty and authority as God?
LikeLike
At the end, ( prior to the end of the earth) has your god, Yahweh, finally revealed himself?
LikeLike
Well, He’s long since revealed Himself more than clearly enough such that the excuse, “I didn’t know He existed” totally fails, but in the end, the revelation will be entirely beyond any means or thought of dispute. Still, though, you seem to be missing the fundamental question:
If God exists as I have long since described Him to be, what do YOU think should be the right and proper end for those who finally refuse to acknowledge and accept His sovereignty and authority as God?
LikeLike
Well, on your initial point I firmly disagree, and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.
I am not missing the point, but I do need to clarify and make 100% certain we are on the same page: So, just prior to the earth’s imminent destruction will your god, Yahweh, finally reveal himself to all non believers, including those of other faiths/religions?
LikeLike
I don’t know about just prior, but prior, yes, through the dramatic return of Jesus. But, at the point of that return, all sales will be final, if you will.
And, on the first point, I just go with Paul on that one, but that’s for another time.
LikeLike
Okay, so on the eve of earth’s destruction, Yahweh, once more returns in his Jesus guise.
Are ALL non believers instantly made aware that Yahweh is the creator?
LikeLike
Well, again, assuming for the sake of argument my position on the obvious nature of God’s existence for all those who are willing to see things as they really are, at that point, yes, His existence and nature will be entirely beyond any thought of deniability.
LikeLike
Excellent!
NOW I can answer your question.
I can’t speak for the billions of other non believers in your god, Yahweh, but my response would be:
” Why the hell didn’t you reveal yourself to everyone the first time you came?
In fact, you’ve had 2000 years to do just that, and you show up just as we are all about to be be flame grilled? Well, Mr. Yahweh, you can kiss my arse. Do your worst you selfish miserable son of a bitch. ”
LikeLike
Ah, but that doesn’t answer my question at all, and you’re not operating within the framework of the thought experiment. You assumed my position is wrong and answered from the standpoint of your position. Also, you told me what you would say to God in the end, not what you think would be the right, just, and proper end for those who persist to the end in their refusal to acknowledge and accept His sovereignty and authority as God.
Let’s try this again. I know it’ll take some effort, but give it a try just for the sake of our thought experiment. Assume for the sake of argument that my position is correct. Assume for the sake of argument that Paul was right in Romans 1:18-21 when he said this:
“For God’s wrath is revealed from heaven against all godlessness and unrighteousness of people who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth, since what can be known about God is evident among them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, that is, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen since the creation of the world, being understood through what he has made. As a result, people are without excuse. For though they knew God, they did not glorify him as God or show gratitude. Instead, their thinking became worthless, and their senseless hearts were darkened.”
Romans 1:18-21 CSB
If that’s the case, and if God is like I have consistently described Him to be (and not merely as you have often incorrectly heard me through your secular lens), then what do YOU think would be the right and proper end for unbelievers (to shorten that longer phrase down a bit)?
LikeLike
Your question is as somewhat like the old, “Have you stopped beating your wife?”
So my answer would remain the same.
If scripture is correct then your god has shown himself to be a genocidal monster and your undedstanding is incorrect as was Paul’s.
LikeLike
My question was not even remotely like that. Your answer was not of my question at all, but of an entirely different question: what would you tell God at the end of the world if He turned out to have really existed but most of what was written about Him in the New Testament was wrong? That’s not what I asked for the purposes of our thought experiment. You did not even once assume purely for the sake of argument that the position I have outlined and defended over the course of our conversations was correct.
Your final assertion is clear evidence of this. You said, “If scripture is correct then your God has shown himself to be a genocidal monster…” That’s only the case if your accepted understanding of Scripture is correct. But again, that’s not what I asked. I asked you to assume on mine for the sake of the thought experiment. So either you really didn’t understand the question at all, or else you never intended to engage meaningfully in the first place. And if that’s the case, and given how much you purportedly prize honesty, why not just be honest from the start and tell me you didn’t have any interest in more than taking a petty potshot at the sermon in the first place?
LikeLike
If I am to presume your god, Yahweh is as YOU insist then we must accept that the Scriptures are incorrect, and disregard all the heinous acts perpetrated and/or commanded by Yahweh.
Are you prepared to accede this point – for the sake of argument of course?
LikeLike
No, that’s not the case at all. I am inviting you to assume that my understanding (which is, again, fairly representative of the historically orthodox understanding) of the Scriptures is correct. By that statement and question, you are making clear that you either still don’t understand what I’m asking, or else still aren’t willing to engage meaningfully with the thought experiment I’m inviting you into. Either way, you seem unwilling to set aside your understanding of the Scriptures even at my genuine invitation into a sincere attempt to actually understand the position you reject rather than continuing to embrace caricatures.
LikeLike
Then assume I do not understand as you are asserting your god, Yahweh is just, true, honest, deserving of all worship bla bla bla… etc etc and yet the gospels clearly show he is a genocidal monster.
How is MY understanding wrong ( even though the text would agree with my position – the global flood for example) and your understanding correct?
You will have to explain how your just, compassionate god, Yahweh, can liquidate all life on earth save for one incestuous family and still be regarded as having those qualities.
LikeLike
What I’m hearing is that you’re not willing to even try. Once again, you are avoiding the issue and the question entirely. Instead, you’ve run back to your bunker and the same set of issues you ALWAYS eventually try to steer the conversation back to. We’ll just leave it, I suppose, and try again for meaningful engagement next time. For the record, I didn’t try to argue that your position is wrong. I invited you to assume on mine for the purposes of a thought experiment, which you are either unwilling or incapable of doing.
LikeLike
Please stop being petulant, Jonathan.
I am sincere in wanting you to understand that I cannot answer your question as it is asked, because it is asked from a false position.
Your god, Yahweh is NOT good, just, compassionate etc and the Bible is evidence of this.
Unless, one take the position that genocide is a just reaction.
I do not and never will.
And even if I were to accept your position, my question would remain.
Why would Yahweh wait til the final moments before showing up?
So the choice is yours.
If you consider my responses are not honest then take a breath, rethink your position and ask an honest question.
LikeLike
No, It is asked from a position you reject. That’s different. I am asking you to abandon your position and to adopt mine for the purposes of a thought experiment. You have so far proven either unwilling or incapable of doing that. Until that changes, we can’t get any further here.
LikeLike
So, to be clear your position is that Yahweh was justified liquidating life on earth save for bone incestuous family in a big boat?
LikeLike
Once again, when you want to engage meaningfully, we can try again. Your persistent refusal to do that, though, is making it seem less and less worthwhile to bother trying to talk with you at all.
LikeLike
I am not refusing a damn thing. You are stacking the deck which is grossly dishonest.
If you want to play this game then have some integrity.
You cannot expect me to play while you sit and eat all the cake.
Is it your assertion your god, Yahweh is as portrayed in the bible?
Yes or No?
LikeLike
Of course you are. You resolutely refuse to abandon your perspective, to assume everything you think you understand about the Scriptures is wrong, for the sake of a simple thought experiment.
LikeLike
So firvthe sake of your experiment what position do you suggest I take regarding the Noachian flood and the ensuing genocide?
LikeLike
That’s almost entirely irrelevant to the question. Near as I can tell, you’re trying to keep things focused there instead of where the question actually focused its attention because you don’t actually want to answer it or otherwise engage meaningfully. If you don’t want to answer it as I asked it, just acknowledge that rather than wasting both of our time with all this red herring nonsense.
LikeLike
Again, you are trying to hold cards up your sleeve and still make me play.
Let me try it another way. If I am to assume your understanding of Yahweh is correct must I dismiss the actions of Yahweh in the Old Testament?
LikeLike
Those are irrelevant to the question I asked. And, no, it means you understand them through an entirely different worldview lens than you are using. You’re keeping the subject changed to avoid actually engaging with the question.
LikeLike
No I damn well am not!
For the love of your god, Yahweh.
Lay out your understanding of the actions of your god, Yahweh in the Old Testament.
Specifically, the liquidation of the human race in the Noachian Flood tale.
LikeLike
You could have fooled me. And you don’t have to do anything for His love. He loves you regardless of what you do.
I’m asking a question about the end of the world, and you are focused on the Old Testament. You are jumping into your favorite theological weeds (which, as I have tried to help you understand time and time again, are not going to make the first bit of positive sense as long as you insist on operating from out of your chosen worldview perspective), and my question was focused on big picture matters.
Leave aside the OT entirely for the purposes of this thought experiment. Assuming God is good and just and holy and compassionate and loving and sovereign and the singular source of all authority in the universe and all the other positive things Christians have historically described Him as being, what do you think should be the right and proper end for those who persist to the end in their refusal to acknowledge and accept Him for who He is?
When you are ready to engage with the question I asked and on the terms I’m asking it we can talk more. Until then, stop wasting both of our time. I’ll be back in touch tomorrow if you are ready to do that.
LikeLike
How is one expected to acknowledge your god, Yahweh when he is effectively hidden?
And if this is not the case and ignoring all the heinous actions in the OT, why would anyone NOT acknowledge and accept your god, Yahweh?
LikeLike
You are still merely insisting on operating within your worldview framework rather than adopting mine for the purposes of the thought experiment. I’m really starting to lean more toward the conclusion that you can’t manage this and answer the question I asked instead of your being merely unwilling to do it.
LikeLike
I will answer the question but I will NOT play your game on the assumption your god, Yahweh is as you insist without dismissing the description in the OT.
If your god, Yahweh is as you claim then he would not play hide and seek with billions of non believers and thus render billions at the mercy of your god.
Therefore, you either acknowledge the behaviour Yahweh displays in the OT or for the sake of your thought experiment we dismiss his genocidal actions.
Your choice. Play fair or sulk. I could care less.
Or….
When Yahweh returns we all get to go to paradise irrespective of any previously held beliefs about him.
Time for tea and buns and they all lived happily ever after.
Happy now?
LikeLike
So then, you’re just not going to do it. Well, I tried.
LikeLike
No, you were being dishonest.
Furthermore, I answered your damn question.
Or did you miss my ‘Or’ example?
LikeLike
Not a single thing I said has been even remotely dishonest. And if that was your real answer and not just a petulantly thrown bone because I won’t let you change the subject to things that aren’t relevant to the thought experiment I was inviting you into, then we can work with that, but it came off much more like the latter than the former.
Is that your real answer then, that the just and proper end for those who persist to the end in refusing to acknowledge or accept God as God is that they all get to go spend eternity with Him in heaven anyway?
LikeLike
Yep. That is my answer as any just and compassionate god would understand.
Unlike his spiteful and disingeious lackies.
LikeLike
I’m curious, then, do you consider it a compassionate thing for God to ultimately force someone to be with Him for eternity when they spent their entire life expressly refusing to accept Him for who He is? Given just what you think about God, if He turns out to exist, would you want to be forced to be with Him for eternity?
LikeLike
Oh, so now your god, Yahweh is forcing non-believers to go to heaven?
When did the term force enter this discussion?
Now look who’s shifting the terms. Sorry, Jonathan, not playing.
LikeLike
You’ve made that very clear from the beginning.
Okay, change up the language if it’ll make you feel better. Would it be just of God to invite someone to spend eternity with Him who has spent their entire life rejecting Him and spreading vicious lies about His character and identity and encouraging others who had acknowledged and accepted Him to quit and ridiculed them when they wouldn’t? To have spent an entire lifetime developing and nurturing such a committed opposition to Him, do you think such a person would even want to ultimately be with Him? I.e. seems like they would have to be forced into such a state. Seems to me at least that such a person would prefer to remain separated from Him rather than go to the heavenly picnic you flippantly described. That’s where the language of force comes from, by the way.
LikeLike
Well, first off, it would only be considered a lie, vicious or otherwise, if I had known all along that your god, Yahweh, was real. This is plainly not so as there is no genuine case for his existence.
Therefore, the fault lies with your god, Yahweh.
Furthermore, if Heaven is as you lot believe then why wouldn’t I want to live there rather than be destroyed when the earth blew up?
Be honest, you didn’t really think this through did you, and unintential or not this little gotcha exercise has sort of
backfired.
LikeLike
Nope, we’re assuming on my perspective in which Paul’s words in Romans 1:18-21 are true, not yours. You just can’t get all the way there, try as you might.
And, no, I thought this through pretty well. You are revealing how little thought you have given to this thought experiment.
For instance, I didn’t say anything about being destroyed as the alternative to Heaven. You added that. Hell would be the alternative. But, because we are assuming on the truthfulness of my position, we are assuming that the exact details of Hell are unknown beyond its being a place that is totally separated from God. Yet because God is the only source of life and goodness, Hell is a place that will be totally devoid of those by virtue of being totally separated from Him.
And, if someone had spent their entire life vigorously opposing God in spite of the evidence for His existence being obvious, what makes you think they would suddenly prefer to be with Him? What’s more, why on earth would He allow that? They had their entire life on earth to acknowledge Him, but steadfastly refused until they literally had no choice but to do so, which means they likely really don’t mean it. They just don’t want to face the ultimate consequences of their choices. Would it really be just to give people who rejected God for their entire life the same end as those who accepted Him before the all sales are final point? Wouldn’t such a thing take all the meaning and worth out of following Him in this life?
None of this was intended to be a gotcha. But when I was thinking through what your response might have been, it turns out I was right on the money.
LikeLike
If the end is nigh then it would follow that the earth is being destroyed. Consumed by the sun. I thought this was part of the deal?
If this is not the case then when YHWH comes back and institutes the rapture I’ll stay put.
Ah, so Paul’s words are true?
Gee whiskers you are making an awful lot of assumptions here in order for you to get to the answer you have already decided you want to hear!
What evidence is there, for the existence of your god, Yahweh?
Or is this also simply part of the assumption?
Or are you, as usual, playing loose and fast with the word evidence.
If Yahweh is just to deny every non believer then he is simply a nasty miserable twat.
If you got the answer you expected why the hell did you ask the damn question in the first place?
Don’t you look a bit of a twit, then?
LikeLike
I indicated the truthfulness of Paul’s words was a foundational assumption of the thought experiment from the get go. Had you forgotten that?
As for the destruction of the earth, that language is figurative to make a point. And there’s nothing about being consumed by the sun that I can recall at the moment.
I wasn’t desiring to hear a particular answer. I was merely expecting to given the evidence of our interactions. I would have been delighted to engage with whatever answer you gave. And, you could have surprised me. I had my suspicions, but those were only untested hypotheses. Now they’ve been tested.
The bigger point of all of this is further justify my regularly rehearsed observation that if you aren’t willing to even meaningfully try to walk in the ideological and theological shoes of the people you disagree with, then all of your hand-waving about all of the supposed issues with their position come off as little more than that: hand-waving. What’s more, as long as you persist in rejecting the foundational premise, all of your complaints about specific points that rest on that foundational premise will remain pretty devoid of substance.
As near as I can tell from the sum total of our interactions, you don’t have the first real, meaningful clue about the Christian worldview beyond caricaturizations and straw men. What’s more, you don’t really have any interest in gaining the understanding you lack so that your criticisms come off with more substance than they do. Your ideological blinders are thick, and you steadfastly refuse to take them off even for a second in an attempt to better understand what you don’t.
I really do feel sorry for you in all of this, although I don’t suspect that means very much to you, much less is something you are interested in at all. All the same, as I have said many times before, the net effect of this is to set up our interactions from the outset as being mostly pointless. We can keep having them, but we’re not likely to move the other much, and I probably won’t ever do much to change your well-ingrained opinion of me. Oh well. I guess there are always potshots.
LikeLike
So you lay out an untenable premise including dismissing the actions of Yahweh in the OT yet still expect me to provide you with the answer you had already decided would be “spot on the money “.
🤦
Not that was a pointless exercise.
And please don’t feel sorry for me as I do not suffer the affliction of being indoctrinated into believing supernatural crap.
LikeLike
No, I invited you into a thought experiment whose parameters you didn’t like, and so you refused to operate within them. And, again, I didn’t expect an answer in the sense that I wanted you to give a particular one. I merely guessed (accurately as it turns out) what your answer might be.
LikeLike
The parameters were so narrowly defined I could hardly be expected to make any sort of response that did not pander to your presuppositions and when I questioned those parameters I was accused of not playing the game.
How about we redo the experiment only this time we acknowledge the true nature of your god, Yahweh as reflected in the bible and include his actions in the OT?
LikeLike
You didn’t question the parameters, you simply rejected them. I was inviting you to consider a point of Christian doctrine that has often been a sticking point for you in the past from within a context in which it makes not only logical sense, but compassionate and justice sense as well. The point of the exercise, as I said, was to help you see that your criticisms of Christian doctrine fall flat because you are criticizing from the outside and without real knowledge. If you ever develop a willingness to honestly explore it from an insider’s perspective, you can still reject and criticize away, but at least you’ll sound like you have some clue as to what you’re talking about.
And, no thanks on that second offer. It’s not worth wasting either of our time rehashing that yet again.
LikeLike
I rejected the parameters because they were dishonest. You created a scenario that not only dismissed the true nature of your god, Yahweh as described in the Bible but then obliged me to accept that although I knew hecwax auch a nice fellow all along I still rejected him and spent my life trying to convince others likewise.
That is as stupid as it is dishonest.
It isn’t me that has no clue it is you because you have been indoctrinated to defend such rubbish to the point you now want to create even more lies to justify your genocidal deity.
Time you stopped playing these childish games and grew up a little, Jonathen.
LikeLike
They weren’t dishonest at all. I was inviting you into my perspective in an attempt to help you better understand what you reject. You decided you wouldn’t accept the invitation. That just leaves you in your rather painful ignorance on matters of Christian theology. You are welcome to stay there, of course, and you can even remain ignorant of your ignorance. But it won’t be for a lack of effort on my part. Time for dinner and a busy evening. I suspect we’ll yet talk soon. You just can’t seem to stay away for long 😉
LikeLike
Again, more dishonesty. You cannot invite me to play your game of ‘what if’ , exclude the vile details of your god, Yahweh then at the end assert I knew he was good and real all along but still rejected him. What sort of arsehats would reject a loving deity the evidence of whose existence was known by billions of people?
Again, the ignorance is all yours, Jonathan and your churlish attempts to belittle my position just makes you come across as a fatuous arse, and while I would prefer honesty, until you show some evidence of this I’ll settle for calling you out.
LikeLike
I didn’t say you knew He was good and real all along. I said you rejected His goodness and existence in spite of evidence to the contrary. In other words, I said Paul was right in Romans 1:18-21 was one of the parameters of the thought experiment.
And I’m not sure “what sort of arsehats would reject a loving deity the evidence of whose existence was know by billions of people.” I don’t know that I would call them “arsehats” personally. Paul just implied that their brains don’t work right. Either way your position depends entirely on those billions of people being wrong.
And I suppose that as long as you confuse dishonesty with disagreement, you’ll have to just keep calling me out. Still, I have yet to be dishonest in anything I’ve ever said to you. I’ll maintain that standard whether you accept it or not.
LikeLike
Your little experiment stipulated that your assertion and Paul’s description about your god Yahweh was correct and presumed there was evidence that clearly indicated your god existed but that I had simply rejected this evidence.
And this must therefore apply to the billions of other non-believers, including, Hindus, Jews, Muslims and all those in between.
Therefore, if your god, Yahweh was the just, compassionate, loving deity you and Paul assert, and everyone of those billions knew this then yes, we would be complete arsehats for rejecting him… Oops sorry, Him.
So knowing your little experiment was rigged from the get go I maintain there is at least an element of ( unintentional?) dishonesty involved. More so as it has been pointed out a while ago and you have had time to reevaluate. It seems you have chosen not to.
Brains didn’t work right? 🤣🤣🤣🤣
From the ‘mouth’ of the character who in all likelihood suffered from temporal love epilepsy.
LikeLike
Or even temporal LOBE epilepsy.
LikeLike
I like the temporal love epilepsy better 😉
LikeLike