[Aaron5604]

Yeah...

A lot of good stuff here, but I also still think that everyone is slightly side stepping the actual question:

What point is there for a "trial" (sequential tests) if life is already determined by the maker; what purpose does that ultimately fill?

We can sit here and split hairs all day long, but the bottom line of it still seems rather skewed. A test/trial is held w/ a purpose to determine, otherwise it wouldn't truly be a, "test" nor would it have a reason to exist.

So, again, I can definitely understand how this underlining portion of the bible could be perceived as a catch-22, based on our physical definitions of such

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by Aaron5604

Yeah...

A lot of good stuff here, but I also still think that everyone is slightly side stepping the actual question:

What point is there for a "trial" (sequential tests) if life is not only determined by the maker, but also claims to already know as to what will ultimately occur as well?

We can sit here and split hairs all day long, but the bottom line of it still seems rather skewed. A test/trial is held w/ a purpose to determine, otherwise it wouldn't truly be a, "test" nor would it have a reason to exist.

So, again, I can definitely understand how this underlining portion of the bible could be perceived as a catch-22, based on our physical definitions of such

where are you, rambo, you fool! (just building suspense)

[Aaron5604]

Originally Posted by Laureate

where are you, rambo, you fool! (just building suspense)

I don't follow...

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by Aaron5604

I don't follow...

I was agreeing with you

[Aaron5604]

Originally Posted by Laureate

I was agreeing with you

Well, this is also a solid topic, I agree -- because it does need further explanation in light of its confusion; and not only here on PBN, but elsewhere as well. People all over address this constantly whether they're a devout Christian or not

[Flying_Dutchman]

Originally Posted by hsilman

you're emphasizing the wrong word.

Let me rephrase.

I understand your point. You're asking how one can possibly judge the purpose of life, because such a thing simply is, much like a law of nature/physics (gravity, as you mentioned).

your argument is (pretty much) as follows:

1. Judgments such as "dumb" and "smart" cannot be attributed to things that simply exist basically and objectively (like physical laws) with any type of semantic meaning, hence, gravity is dumb.

2. A purpose for life is something that simply exists basically and objectively.

3. Therefore, judgments cannot be attributed to a purpose for life with any type of semantic meaning.


My problem with this is that "purpose" is completely non-existent when its anthropic semantics are abstracted away from it. So when you're talking about this thing that just is, you're not really talking about purpose at all. So it's silly to say that a purpose for life is immune to those types of judgments for that reason. You effectively say that a purpose for life is immune to judgment because it is not a purpose... Perhaps you mean to say that there just is no purpose for life, because that is the conclusion your statements lead to.

[MikeM]

I don't believe that God's 'testing' is intended for us to prove ourselves to God, but rather for God to teach us about ourselves. In other words, God's 'testing' is for our benefit.

Sometimes 'testing' forces us to stretch in a way we wouldn't on our own. I don't believe God 'tests' us beyond our capabilities, but uses trials to teach us about ourselves. By being 'tested' we learn what we are capable of. Without the 'test' we might never realize the depths of those limits.

'Testing' can also teach us about faith. Being forced to be a position of dependence can teach us that God is faithful and that being dependant on Him is not a such bad thing.

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by hsilman

how does one judge a "purpose for life" as "dumb" or "smart"? Isn't it just...well, what it is? you can't quantitatively judge it.

That's like saying gravity is dumb.

Before I give a full detailed response, if "god" intentionally created a purpose to life, doesn't he have to have a reason in doing so?

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by MikeM

I don't believe that God's 'testing' is intended for us to prove ourselves to God, but rather for God to teach us about ourselves. In other words, God's 'testing' is for our benefit.

Sometimes 'testing' forces us to stretch in a way we wouldn't on our own. I don't believe God 'tests' us beyond our capabilities, but uses trials to teach us about ourselves. By being 'tested' we learn what we are capable of. Without the 'test' we might never realize the depths of those limits.

'Testing' can also teach us about faith. Being forced to be a position of dependence can teach us that God is faithful and that being dependant on Him is not a such bad thing.

this is bad...i need time to think

[Aaron5604]

Originally Posted by MikeM

I don't believe that God's 'testing' is intended for us to prove ourselves to God, but rather for God to teach us about ourselves. In other words, God's 'testing' is for our benefit.

Still though, (for better or for worst) how is a trial considered plausible from an all knowing, all powerful God -- as we're so lead to believe? Whether such occurrences exist for our own refinement or not, there has to be a second outcome for the term to actually apply in our language. Otherwise, strenghthening (or losing) ones faith couldn't ever take place

[05 ProStock]

Irrelevant.
There is no god.

[Mastermind26]

I think the concept of testing is not in the "what did you learn from that" factor.
But more of a goal to accomplish in one's walk/race (of faith). Where God allows something to be a test of our faith so we can start a higher walk to another point (a deeper level of understanding maybe or a deeper commitment or maybe even a greater desire to be more like Christ as time passes).

When we fail it is a hurdle we have yet to pass and when we do pass, we can see our growth.

[MikeM]

Originally Posted by 05 ProStock

Irrelevant.
There is no god.

I would agree with your conclusion if I agreed with your assumption.

[MikeM]

Originally Posted by Mastermind26

I think the concept of testing is not in the "what did you learn from that" factor.
But more of a goal to accomplish in one's walk/race (of faith). Where God allows something to be a test of our faith so we can start a higher walk to another point (a deeper level of understanding maybe or a deeper commitment or maybe even a greater desire to be more like Christ as time passes).

When we fail it is a hurdle we have yet to pass and when we do pass, we can see our growth.

...or you might say learned something about ourselves! I think we're on the same page.

[ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη]

Originally Posted by NEp8ntballer

because a lot of people don't ask these questions and if they do they aren't met with open ears. one person I know asked his mother what peopel eat in heaven when he was younger. Answer: Milk and Honey. Next question: do they have to use the bathroom? answer: why do you wanna know Response: because if they have to go to the bathroom, then they need to have somewhere to go, and if they have somewhere to go then where does their poop go? Retort: *SMACK*(back then you could get the tar beat out of you and it wouldn't be child abuse)

another good one is if when a baby dies if they go to heaven as a baby or as an adult? Or if you die in a horrendous accident do you go to heaven all disfigured and possibly missing body parts or perfect?

Well, I'd like to know who thinks we're going to even eat in heaven/new Jerusalem.

Originally Posted by cuttlefish32

While that's true, but there's one things you missed. Job fails, he curses the day he was born, but then all he does is repent for his sins and God gives him everything back and Satan (for some reason) never calls that cheating. So if it's not a test, what is it? An example toward others to follow when times get bad?

I never knew Job cursing his birth was equivalent to Job cursing God.

But, in all seriousness, it isn't the same.

Originally Posted by JRunior

God only has two questions of his test:
a) Do you accept Jesus as your Lord and Saviour
b) Do you repent your sins

Everything else is a bonus question (Living a good life, being kind, generous, following his laws etc). Even if you ace the aforementioned the only two that count at the end are a & b.

P.S I know this is going to get picked apart so I have to ask; do you honestly believe that the test I layed out is incorrect? Does our entire life not boil down to our judgement on whether or not we accept Jesus and repent? Do you believe it's fully possible for a knowledgeable Atheist to go to Heaven while rejecting the Bible?

To the first part, no, that's not true. Living a good life, loving God and all your neighbors, and following God's law is as important as having faith itself, it is just a lot harder to do.

To your second part- perhaps. We shall see, I suppose.

Originally Posted by Aaron5604

Still though, (for better or for worst) how is a trial considered plausible from an all knowing, all powerful God -- as we're so lead to believe? Whether such occurrences exist for our own refinement or not, there has to be a second outcome for the term to actually apply in our language. Otherwise, strenghthening (or losing) ones faith couldn't ever take place

You spend too much time only on the phrase (sentence) you quoted, instead of looking at the one right before it. If these "trials" or "tests" are to teach us about ourselves and the animalistic nature of man, then these tests would really not be related to God trying to figure something out about us at all. Making this point invalid.

[Laureate]

Originally Posted by ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη

You spend too much time only on the phrase (sentence) you quoted, instead of looking at the one right before it. If these "trials" or "tests" are to teach us about ourselves and the animalistic nature of man, then these tests would really not be related to God trying to figure something out about us at all. Making this point invalid.

WHY WOULD GOD CREATE SOMETHING TO TEACH IT ABOUT ITSELF?

[ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη]

Originally Posted by Laureate

WHY WOULD GOD CREATE SOMETHING TO TEACH IT ABOUT ITSELF?

Why don't you just get to the point and say why would an omnipotent, omnipresent God create anything in the first place? If this question is answered so is the next, and many more by it. But, just as much as the next guy, I have no idea. But that is not relevant to the point by a long shot. The point is, the question asked in this thread, "Why does God test us?" has more or less been answered. The question you yourself ask has never been and will never be answered, but it is still not relevant to this thread because extraploation was not asked for. If someone wants to kill the leaves rather than the root, it is their decision to do so and it shall be done.

[RamboPreacher]

maturation process. some call it "evolution".

[cuttlefish32]

Originally Posted by Aaron5604

Still though, (for better or for worst) how is a trial considered plausible from an all knowing, all powerful God -- as we're so lead to believe? Whether such occurrences exist for our own refinement or not, there has to be a second outcome for the term to actually apply in our language. Otherwise, strenghthening (or losing) ones faith couldn't ever take place

Any why not? Think about this anagoly of a regular school where God is the teacher and gives out the tests. God knows the answers and he knows who hasn't studied, yet he still passes out the test. God doesn't want to purposely fail people and yet, some people will fail. But ultimatly, by getting their result, people will learn that they should study more or continue studying. I'm not sure if there is a second outcome, but I doubt it's as important as the idea of growth in one's faith.

[cuttlefish32]

Originally Posted by ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη

Why don't you just get to the point and say why would an omnipotent, omnipresent God create anything in the first place? If this question is answered so is the next, and many more by it. But, just as much as the next guy, I have no idea. But that is not relevant to the point by a long shot. The point is, the question asked in this thread, "Why does God test us?" has more or less been answered. The question you yourself ask has never been and will never be answered, but it is still not relevant to this thread because extraploation was not asked for. If someone wants to kill the leaves rather than the root, it is their decision to do so and it shall be done.

Well, I hate to be a spoilsport, but you have offered an odd idea that should be elaborated, "leaf" or not. Besides, as you already said the main question has been answered and new ones have risen. Anyway, Why would God create anything? What else would he do, hang around in nothingness for all eternity? The Lord may work in mysterious ways, but the reason creating anything at all is present, because obviously he created everything.

[ἔρως-φιλία-ἀγάπη]

Originally Posted by cuttlefish32

Well, I hate to be a spoilsport, but you have offered an odd idea that should be elaborated, "leaf" or not. Besides, as you already said the main question has been answered and new ones have risen. Anyway, Why would God create anything? What else would he do, hang around in nothingness for all eternity? The Lord may work in mysterious ways, but the reason creating anything at all is present, because obviously he created everything.

Well, that is the unanswerable question. Why did God create anything? He knows exactly everything that would happen since the beginning of earth. Even more, he knew since the "beginning" of eternity that he would create us, so why did he wait until he did if everything would happen the same? I find these questions to be pointless, for they are unanswerable and everyone knows that they are unanswerable, but still they ask. Life is a labyrinth each must go through individually, so they can find their own answers, and own purpose.