Friendly debates here!
- This topic has 162 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 6 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Agreed. May man be fools, only let God be glorified. And yes, without scripture, we are blind men in the dark. Thanks be to God for his Word.
In response to number 1, yes i do believe they were saved. I think Hebrews 11 makes it clear it is by faith they were ‘counted as righteous.’ But i think the emphasis is not on their faith, but who their faith is in. Muslim faith cannot save, though it be fervent. Catholic faith cannot save though it be reverent.
While indeed no human can be saved apart from faith, simple faith cannot save them. Faith in allah, or Mary, cannot save muslims or Catholics. Only faith in Christ can save. So I beleive the emphasis is faith upon Christ and his work.
I beleive that faith can only be had by sinful beings tho by a working of God beforehand. I think that the mystery of predestination works as such: God chooses his people, not according to what we have done or ever could do, but according to his glorious purpose(Ephesians 1) But to believe in Him we must be transformed, and so by his work on the cross, when his spirit enters his people, he transforms them by the renewing of their mind.(Romans 12, Colossians 3)
Now that God has opened our eyes to his beauty and grace and our need thereof, we fall on our knees in humble submission to God and His Gospel, freely choosing it, tho only because of his work in us. I view mans will dependant in Gods, not vice versa.
Sorry, I went off the trail there.
I think that after death, all a unbelievers sins, are ‘unforgivable.’
What are your thoughts on these things? I’d be glad to hear them. And I too agree. We all are on learning curves. Only God truly knows.
Also Brian, i checked out your novel, and it looks awesome!
Your post disappeared but here’s the response I wrote.
So I’m tight for time right now, but just in response to some of your stuff, I don’t think I completely understand the illustration of the billion dollars. I think it would be better illustrated by a very rich man going into the city streets and saying to him who comes to me I will give a billion dollars, but the problem is, the city’s currency, is mud. The people of the city look at the crisp green bills in disgust, wondering what possible use there could be for them. So I’m order for the man to bless these people, he must go and show a person the true value of the money, and the uselessness of the mud. And this rich man will lose none of those whom he goes to. To those he does not go to, he simply leaves them without showing them the true value because they weren’t interested in the first place. But they were ignorant you may say. Yes, but guilty ignorance nonetheless. The rich man is not beholden to any of these street urchins, but chooses those he will bless, and merely leaves the rest in their mud loving sinfulness. They sin, and deserve his wrath, but his general offer of the money still stands. So they are guilty.
Ill try to answer more of your questions later, but for now here’s this.
And this is by no means a perfect illustration, but I beleive it portays the situation somewhat accurately
Hi Peter (@crazywriter)
There must be a glitch in the system. It happens from time to time.
I know the billion dollars was a poor illustration, but perhaps I can come up with a better 2nd Draft, 😉I am really just having a hard time accepting that God created some people just so that He could consign them to everlasting torment. It doesn’t seek to comport will what He says about His desire that “none should perish”. Why create His own anguish? What is the joy that merits that?
Also, do Calvinists believe there is no point in evangelizing?God gave us a clear charge, just as He gave His disciples before His ascension:
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. [Mark 16:15-16 KJV]He does not hold us accountable for knowing who will respond or who won’t. Our response should be to leave that in His wisdom and foreknowledge. Ezekial 3:18-19, 33:8-9.
When the Scriptures say God grieves over the lost, I truly believe He does.
I don’t think giving us a free will diminishes His authority, but it does carry with it a weight of justified consequences that would elicit His wrath.Romans 2 speaks to this:
For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. [Romans 2:14-16 ESV]There is a natural law written on the human heart. C.S. Lewis expounds upon this concept in “Mere Christianity”. And there is a written law that God gave the Jews to reveal His divine standard.
God sees the heart of man, both those He redeems and those who refuse Him, and He does give just consequences.
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also [is] the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, [which is] by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. [Romans 5:13-15 KJV]
For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. [Isaiah 55:9 KJV]
There is no way either of us are going to be able to tease out the “higher ways” of God, so let me just concede that point right away. God is just, and we must take Him at His word, rather than try to impose our limited understanding of “fairness” on Him. But neither is God afraid of our questions to sincerely understand, unless we have motives that seek ways to challenge His character, and dare to make Him accountable to us.
The very first to infamously question the justice and nature of God was Satan himself, by positing it to Eve. He did it to justify the temptation to sin. The second most famous was Job, who was a righteous man, questioning God amidst great suffering. He did it to try and understand what was happening to him.
When those hostile skeptics we speak to in our circles do it, they do so to justify their own sin, preferring their own standard of justice, by impugning the character of the God we serve. When the honest skeptic asks us the question, they are puzzling over whether they can trust the God we serve.
Very different approaches to the same question: Is God just?
When Job asked this question, God reminded him of His higher perspective and ways. Job saw into the immediacy of his present circumstances, but God saw both Job’s end and his beginning. God saw detail Job would and could never see. God saw an illustrative purpose in Job’s suffering that Job could not presently see, so God wanted to remind Him of that.
“Do you still want to argue with the Almighty? You are God’s critic, but do you have the answers?” [Job 40:2 NLT]
But God has put such fascinating mysteries in His Word that if we sincerely seek to understand Him we can be rewarded by some interesting finds in the treasure chest of Scripture.
Let’s think for a moment about what we do NOT know, and that is what information has God given the person who has never heard the gospel about Himself, that we are not privy to?
When we ponder the condition of a person in some remote land that has not heard the gospel, to our knowledge, do we truly know that God has not revealed Himself in any other way to them to give them an opportunity to seek Him by faith? Of course not. Only God sees the heart fully.
I the LORD search the heart, try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, [and] according to the fruit of his doings. [Jeremiah 17:10 KJV]
Let’s look again at the passage in Romans:
What then? If some were unfaithful, will their unfaithfulness nullify God’s faithfulness? Absolutely not! Let God be true, even though everyone is a liar, as it is written: That you may be justified in your words and triumph when you judge. But if our unrighteousness highlights God’s righteousness, what are we to say? I am using a human argument: Is God unrighteous to inflict wrath? Absolutely not! Otherwise, how will God judge the world? But if by my lie God’s truth abounds to his glory, why am I also still being judged as a sinner? And why not say, just as some people slanderously claim we say, “Let us do what is evil so that good may come”? Their condemnation is deserved! What then? Are we any better off? Not at all! For we have already charged that both Jews and Gentiles are all under sin, as it is written: There is no one righteous, not even one. There is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God. All have turned away; all alike have become worthless. There is no one who does what is good, not even one. Their throat is an open grave; they deceive with their tongues. Vipers’ venom is under their lips. Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and wretchedness are in their paths, and the path of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes. Now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are subject to the law, so that every mouth may be shut and the whole world may become subject to God’s judgment. For no one will be justified in his sight by the works of the law, because the knowledge of sin comes through the law. But now, apart from the law, the righteousness of God has been revealed, attested by the Law and the Prophets. The righteousness of God is through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe, since there is no distinction. [Romans 3:3-22 CSB]Thoughts?
Brian Stansell (aka O'Brian of the Surface World)
I was born in war.
Fighting from my first breath.@obrian-of-surface-world
No, I don’t think God created people for the exclusive purpose for hell. I think Romans 1 puts it quite well in that he ‘turns them over’ to their evil desires. However, I think it is dangerous to say that he is not sovereign over that. He may not create his creatures for that express purpose, but when they break his law, he ordains those that never turn to him to be thrown in the fiery lake. It is not because they want to repent but can’t, but because they utterly hate him(Psalm 53, Romans 3:23).
God is not causing them to sin. But he ordains some vessels to vessels for honorable use, and some for dishonorable use(Romans 9)No, by no means should we not evangelize. Some alleged Calvinists may say that evangelism is not biblical, but they could not be farther from the truth, and I beleive most mainstream calvinisnts are marginalized into this category. While we believe scripture says God appoints those who shall be saved(Acts 13) and he opens their hearts,(Acts 16:14) this by no means communicates the lack of need for evangelism. As you wrote, the great commission is clear. God has told us to go into the world and proclaim his gospel. Who believes and who doesn’t isnt our problem, not is it our responsibility. That is entirely Gods. Our responsibility is to the be vessel with which God plants gospel seeds in the hearts of those he has called.
I’ll write more tomorrow but I’m a little more than brain dead at the moment, so cheerio friends!!
Hey Peter (@crazywriter ),
Are you going to participate in this year’s Resonant Themes Summit?
Just wondering what your plans were. My wife’s birthday is on the 22nd, so I will miss part of it, but I bought the set that allows me to go back later and catch up. Hope to get to see you there.
I think we are more aligned in most aspects of this topic. I do have a few other questions, but they can wait. Hope you are having a blessed day!
Thanks for checking out my site. I don’t really promote it yet because I am doing a lot behind the scenes and want to get my WIP further along before I really start investing in it. Just using the free version now, so it is probably plagued with irrelevant ads and whatnot. Do you have an author site yet or a newsletter?
Brian Stansell (aka O'Brian of the Surface World)
I was born in war.
Fighting from my first breath.Im not sure. I don’t think I’ve heard of that before. What is it?
Yes, I believe we probably have a lot more of common beliefs, but it’s very hard to communicate just through words on a screen. Yeah, anytime you have questions I’m just here, and I’ll prolly think up some for you. XD
Anytime! It looks like an awesome book!
I don’t have a site yet, or blog, but I may consider getting one in the future. We’ll see.
I recently joined SE. Time to resurrect some rooms, bwahaha! 😇😂
Would fire breathing turtles be classified as dragons, turtles, or something else? If the turtle is a dragon, and dragons aren’t turtles, could I still call it a fire breathing turtle or would it be a shelled dragon?
On a more serious note, do y’all understand villains better if you know their backstory?
A long-hidden tale may hold the answers-and the healing-they so desperately seek.
~Set the Stars AlightJust popping in during breakfast sipping my coffee to mention something extremely witty my mom said when we started discussing the turtle-dragon dilemma.
“Writers are like theologians”
Me.”…wise??”
Mom: “Why would you even ask that?”
To be a light to the world you must shine in the darkness.
😂
A long-hidden tale may hold the answers-and the healing-they so desperately seek.
~Set the Stars AlightWould fire breathing turtles be classified as dragons, turtles, or something else? If the turtle is a dragon, and dragons aren’t turtles, could I still call it a fire breathing turtle or would it be a shelled dragon? On a more serious note, do y’all understand villains better if you know their backstory?
lol. I think it depends upon the definitions one uses for dragon and the world building – which means… personal preference. I have a creature in my fantasy books that breaths fire (sort of… it has a special compartment in it’s throat that stores lava and/or boiling water – as in from hydrothermal vents – and uses that store to blast its enemies… but it is unique, and I do not call it a dragon, but a Tannink’esh. which translates loosely to fire leviathan… it is born in the water, in hydrothermal vents, lives most of its adolescence in the water, then flies out to mate in high altitude volcanos. Females then tend to go back to the sea, but the males tend to stay in the air. They have a pair of fins and a pair of bat-like wings, as well as reptilian scales but the scales cover every part of its body, like a fish. As well as a dolphin-like tail. Then it also has gills like an axolotl – which looks a lot like the mane of a lion.) but I don’t call it a dragon for two reasons – one, my world and its mythology is greatly different from our own, and two, it’s distinct.
So, the distinction of it being a fire-breathing TURTLE may be enough for some to classify it as a different creature. Lol. Randomly, in Harry Potter anthology, there is a creature that is practically a fire breathing turtle…well, at least it’s farts are… lol. It’s not classified as a dragon.
However, there are plenty of other examples where an armored (shelled) lizard-like creature is called a ground dragon or shelled dragon. So, it all depends upon your fancy, really.
so, long answer short… yes and no. lol.
ON the second question…do I understand villains better if I know their backstory.
That is a GREAT question. The answer is totally YES. Whether that is NECESSARY in a story, that is more debatable. Of course knowing the backstory of the villain will bring greater understanding for why the villain is villainous. Such understanding may (or may not) bring sympathy toward that character. It can also help in explaining his actions and the rationale for what he/she does.
That being said, is it always necessary to have the background to the villain. Absolutely not. For example, in my current WIP, which I hope to turn into a book series. My main antagonist is an evil emperor who killed my protagonists father, killed the king, and took over the kingdom, then used hitler like propaganda and practically committed genocide on one race and ostracized another (for standing up against him in his conquest of the kingdom). And then he proceeds to conquer surrounding kingdoms.
In the first three-five books, I do not plan to go into the evil emperor’s background. And he is seen as pretty much a down-right evil guy. He periodically kills for sport – to satiate a deep craving. He allows his army to ravage the countrysides, rewrites history and strongly controls the flow of information and freedoms. etc.
However… here is his background… He is the very last of his race. In a war, a war that my protagonist’s father was a top general in – this antagonist’s race, the vaelintriens, had tried to conquer the world. They lost, but at the last battle, a powerful vaelintrien mage cast a blood curse on all living vaelintriens. This blood curse sent every living vaelintrien into a blood rage (think berserker) until the target of the blood curse had been killed. The target of the blood curse was the war generals leading the final attack – one of which was the protagonists father.
Due to having his father’s blood in his veins, when his father died, the protagonist inherited being the target of the blood curse, and thus the blood curse did not stop. The antagonist, the last living vaelintrien, was only a child when the blood curse occurred, so he lived his whole life figuring out ways to live with it. If he even thinks about 1) not killing the target of the blood curse or (2) killing himself, the blood curse basically tortures him until he relents.
So, the reason the antagonist invaded the kingdom in the first place was to kill the protagonists father and end the curse. But, it didn’t end the curse, so the antagonist committed genocide on that race in an attempt to finish the curse. Still didn’t work. So then he hears about this ancient, lost relic (armor) that has great power, even over curses, so he seeks it out but is met with hostility from surrounding nations (quite understandably) and thus his conquest militarily continues.
He must kill occasionally, for no reason, for he finds that assuages his curse, at least for a time. Without it, it would easily drive him crazy.
Thus, he is not evil by choice, though that is also all he has ever known, so there is a bit where his personality is decidedly twisted.
So, yes. The background definitely brings more understanding; however, how much and where to reveal that in a book…. that is very subjective and relative.
Christianity has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found difficult and left untried. ~ G.K.C.
Soo…. unexplicit nudity. What would be your stance?
Example…. my main character is an Aygiff, which is a race that can transform into different creatures. However, he can’t transform into creatures with his clothes on unless he wants to tear them to shreds.
He does have something called a gaaban. In my fantasy world, there is a creature that is able to change it’s size at will (within certain limits). And so aygiffs have fashioned a boxer-like garment called a gaaban to wear so they don’t go around naked after transforming.
That being said, if the creature is too big, like an elephant – or too small, like a mouse, then the gaaban will either slip off or rip apart.
Therefore, in special situations, where it is desperate and greater or lesser creatures are required (example overwhelmed with enemies or in need of great stealth) issues arise where my main character is left naked for a bit before and after he transforms.
Makes for awkward situations at times, but I never am ever explicit in the descriptions. Like not even a little. EVER. However, there is that back knowledge, the reader knows he’s standing there naked at that moment. Is that considered nudity, and what is your stance on that specific example?
Here is an more detailed example of a situation in my book.
Abirami has to fight off 20 rock golems and a squad (6) of armed guards. In the process of the fight, he is almost squashed by the golems but transforms into a spider to escape (so of course, the gaaban so no longer on him at that point). He transforms into an elephant, a bat, an elk, a wolf – all to dispatch the remaining enemies. However, the last enemy, he hasn’t enough energy to keep transformed and has to fight the last man in his human form (so although I don’t mention it, yeah, he’s naked.) He kills the last man, even though he is wounded badly in the arm. Then the second after the battle ends, his allies enter (so yeah, he’s still naked, though I don’t mention that). He gets embarrassed, of course, and quickly tries to find his gaaban and garb and put them on.
Would you consider situations like that inappropriate. Now, this is written for young adults on up. …
what would your opinion be?
Christianity has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found difficult and left untried. ~ G.K.C.
*tries to get over how epic those animals sound so I can move on* *fails* 😂
Hmm, ok. (I feel like there isn’t much debate going on here… 😂)
(Dang it, I’m gonna have to use my brain to come up with a name. Come on imagination… *decides to sit on sister’s bed until she throws ideas at me* There, that’s easier… 😂😂😂)Randomly, in Harry Potter anthology, there is a creature that is practically a fire breathing turtle…well, at least it’s farts are… lol. It’s not classified as a dragon.
The blast-ended skrewts? Fire farts 🤣
Lol, it’s been a while since I’ve read HP.It can also help in explaining his actions and the rationale for what he/she does.
Yeah, that’s why I asked. I’m planning to redeem a villain but am trying to figure out why and their backstory. And then if I should put the backstory in…
It’s still in the plotting stage so I don’t know much yet. I’ll keep your thoughts in mind while I’m plotting and begin writing.That sounds like an interesting story. Is that the one my sister E. N. Leonard beta read?
Soo…. unexplicit nudity. What would be your stance?
I’m not going to be great here but I can say what I notice in reading and what I dislike.
I recently read a book where it’s a very brief “he disrobed and slipped into the pool” which I didn’t mind. Very brief, no detail.
However in two other book I read, it could get really weird fast. Like in one, the MC and his elder mentor go to bathe in a stream after sword fighting and the MC is like “oh, I wonder what an elf looks like naked” and then proceeds to describe the elf’s figure and muscle and erm, I’ll stop before this gets inappropriate. As can be expected, this totally threw me off and I was just like “what the heck? That was Not needed.”
So yeah, I think as long as you keep it unexplicit and brief, you should be ok.A long-hidden tale may hold the answers-and the healing-they so desperately seek.
~Set the Stars Alight@jared-williams I have a few thoughts regarding this! First of all, I completely agree with what @lady-grace said. I don’t think that nudity itself is inappropriate, but rather the context and kind of portrayal. Of course, I think it’s one of those things that you don’t want to just casually throw in a story, but if it’s a logical, natural inclusion for the next step of the story or otherwise has significant meaning, and isn’t sexualized or graphic, then I certainly don’t think it should be avoided either!
The only way I could see it being perceived as inappropriate or disrespectful is if it was turned into a joke, but that’s not the impression I’m getting at all!
Also, your books already deal with some pretty mature topics, so I don’t think this is going to feel shocking or out of place at all – it’s a lot smaller of an “issue” than some of the other things you’re writing about, so I think if your readers are fine with the rest of it, this isn’t going to be an issue 🙂
*laughs as one fey*
Hi @lady-grace,
Interesting…
Would fire breathing turtles be classified as dragons, turtles, or something else? If the turtle is a dragon, and dragons aren’t turtles, could I still call it a fire breathing turtle or would it be a shelled dragon?
I’d just have to call it “hard-cased heartburn”…😉
Brian Stansell (aka O'Brian of the Surface World)
I was born in war.
Fighting from my first breath.
- The forum ‘Private: Fantasy Writers’ is closed to new topics and replies.
