Are you the type of Christian that thinks that any unfortunate situation that happens to you in life is a test of your faith that God allows the situation to test whether you will deny your faith in Christ or fall into sin?
Then you are absolutely wrong. You don't know your right and power given to you as a Christian.

Perhaps he tested Abraham and Job does not mean he will test you with affliction. So when you suffer affliction, either it occur as a result of your ignorance not knowing what to do initially to prevent the affliction, or you unfortunately by chance met the wrong person who is causing the affliction to you.
God do not need test people, he already knows everyone.



Here is one case :

A man comes back from work only to hand over the sack letter that was given to him by his manager to his wife telling her that after devoting 20 years of his career to work with the company, the manager sacked him after 20 years because he refused to sign a forged document.(lets assume this is true )
Then the wife celebrated him saying, I'm proud of you for standing for the Lord inspite the persecution.

Now, just like Christians were persecuted will you say that the man's faith was tested and that he was persecuted for having faith?
The answer is no!
You will be so fallacious to conclude that he was persecuted for his faith.
The man's faith was not tested, rather his integrity was tested or you can say the man was persecuted for having integrity.

Note that everyone are subjected to have integrity whether they are Christian or not, therefore having integrity can never be a demand of your faith.

Consequently, showing love and kindness can never be a demand of your faith, you do them because there are needs to meet.
Peace,Long suffering, faithfulness, goodness, temperance are never demands of your faith. You live them because they are needed from you in such situations that they should be applied.

John 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? John 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

So, the only demand of your faith in Christ is to believe, which you have already done.

Yo

paxonel:

So, the only demand of your faith in Christ is to believe, which you have already done.

Sorry Pax, but it is not belief that you have shown here, but an understanding of the Word gained through your faith in Christ.

There was indeed a time when you merely believed. But you had faith that that which you believed was true. And now, having tested that which you believed by faith by asking and knocking and seeking with all your heart and your soul and your mind and your being, you have received an understanding and you now know it is true, and you have created a thread to help us understand too.

So, thank you for doing the work and for increasing our understanding.

budaatum:


Sorry Pax, but it is not belief that you have shown here, but an understanding of the Word gained through your faith in Christ.

There was indeed a time when you merely believed. But you had faith that that which you believed was true. And now, having tested that which you believed by faith by asking and knocking and seeking with all your heart and your soul and your mind and your being, you you have received an understanding and you now know it is true, and you have created a thread to help us understand too.

So, thank you for doing the work and for increasing our understanding.

Thanks buda!

You are wonderful

paxonel:
Thsnks buda!

You are wonderful

Aba Paxonel! It is you that is the wonderful one that started this wonderful thread after doing the wonderful work, so please do not be stealing from your wonderful glory and be giving it to that undeserving buda, lol!

budaatum:


Aba Paxonel! It is you that is the wonderful one that started this wonderful thread after doing the wonderful work, so please do not be stealing from your wonderful glory and be giving it to that undeserving buda, lol!

paxonel:
Consequently, showing love and kindness can never be a demand of your faith, you do them because there are needs to meet.
Peace,Long suffering, faithfulness, goodness, temperance are never demands of your faith. You live them because they are needed from you in such situations that they should be applied.

John 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? John 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

So, the only demand of your faith in Christ is to believe, which you have already done.

Interesting claim you make... and let me guess, to believe implies mental assent and nothing more, right?

Let's be reminded here that the greatest commandment(not to be confused with only commandment) stipulates that you first love God with all your heart, mind, body and soul - this before anything else.
And when the same Jesus Christ goes on to state that those who love Him are those who submit to and obey (Faith) His commandments & teachings, going by your claim there, are we to assent that Jesus Christ didn't in fact mean a word of this?

Kobojunkie:
Interesting claim you make... and let me guess, to believe implies mental assent and nothing more, right?

Let's be reminded here that the greatest commandment(not to be confused with only commandment) stipulates that you first love God with all your heart, mind, body and soul - this before anything else.
And when the same Jesus Christ goes on to state that those who love Him are those who submit to and obey (Faith) His commandments & teachings, going by your claim there, are we to assent that Jesus Christ didn't in fact mean a word of this?

see, I can always identify why this simple logic is difficult for you to understand.

Have you ever heard what is called the law of excluded middle?

Go and learn that law, come back and see how it applies here

paxonel:
see, I can always identify why this simple logic is difficult for you to understand.

Have you ever heard what is called the law of excluded middle?

Go and learn that law, come back and see how it applies here

Wow... what the heck has the law of excluded middles got to do with any of this?

What simple logic do you allude to? If your OP claim is indeed a logical one the you shouldn't have any problems answering the questions posed now, should you?
Again...

Kobojunkie:
Interesting claim you make... and let me guess, to believe implies mental assent and nothing more, right?

Let's be reminded here that the greatest commandment(not to be confused with only commandment) stipulates that you first love God with all your heart, mind, body and soul - this before anything else.

And when the same Jesus Christ goes on to state that those who love Him are those who submit to and obey (Faith) His commandments & teachings, going by your claim there, are we to assent that Jesus Christ didn't in fact mean a word of this?

Kobojunkie:
Wow... what the heck has the law of excluded middles got to do with any of this?

What simple logic do you allude to? If your OP claim is indeed a logical one the you shouldn't have any problems answering the questions posed now, should you?
Again...

The law states that for every proposition A, either this proposition A or its negation B is true

You mentioned the greatest commandment stipulates that you first love God with all your heart, mind, body and soul, that is proposition A which is true. But there was proposition B that you didn't bother to mention which stipulates that you love your neighbour as yourself. I'm telling you that, that proposition B(love your neighbour as yourself) is negation and cannot be true to be a demand of faith. Rather, proposition A (Love God with all your heart..) is the only demand of faith because if anyone says he loves God then he must believe that Jesus is Christ. John 14:1

Previously, i also mentioned Romans 11: 6 to you but it seems your brain cannot understand

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

This is law of excluded middle.
Grace is the proposition while works is the negation.

But i know what you want to do.
You want to glory on your works for your salvation.
Continue

paxonel:

The law states that for every proposition A, either this proposition A or its negation B is true

You mentioned the greatest commandment stipulates that you first love God with all your heart, mind, body and soul, that is proposition A which is true. But there was proposition B that you didn't bother to mention which stipulates that you love your neighbour as yourself. I'm telling you that, that proposition B(love your neighbour as yourself) is negation and cannot be true to be a demand of faith. Rather, proposition A (Love God with all your heart..) is the only demand of faith because if anyone says he loves God then he must believe that Jesus is Christ. John 14:1

Previously, i also mentioned Romans 11: 6 to you but it seems your brain cannot understand

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

This is law of excluded middle.
Grace is the proposition while works is the negation.

But i know what you want to do.
You want to glory on your works for your salvation.
Continue

I am afraid you are still not making any sense of any kind.
So, you claim that given two, in this case, independent propositions, greatest law P(A), and the second greatest law , P(B)...

---

P(A) ="Love the Lord God with all your heart, mind, body and soul"
P(B) = "Love your neighbor as you love your own self"

...You can somehow reach the following conclusion, this by applying the law of excluded middles .

Either P(A) is true or ~P(B) is true

where ~ implies negation

---

Can you read that aloud to yourself and then try explaining to us how it makes any logical sense?

Kobojunkie:
I am afraid you are still not making any sense of any kind.

it is more honorable to say "i don't understand" rather than using the term "you are not making sense" which amount to ad hominem. Because what may not make sense to you does not implies it is so with other people.
Otherwise, when a post does not make sense to you it is better you don't quote it, unless you want clarification by saying i don't understand, OK

So, you claim that given two, in this case, independent propositions, greatest law P(A), and the second greatest law , P(B)...

---

P(A) ="Love the Lord God with all your heart, mind, body and soul"
P(B) = "Love your neighbor as you love your own self"

...You can somehow reach the following conclusion, this by applying the law of excluded middles .

Either P(A) is true or ~P(B) is true

where ~ implies negation

---

exactly, that's the point.
b implies negation in the context of the scriptures i just quoted

Can you read that aloud to yourself and then try explaining to us how it makes any logical sense?

beyond the logic i quoted scriptures saying

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

That works implies negation while grace is the proposition, meaning works is mutually exclusive of grace and vice versa, what else do you want again?

If after this you still cannot understand, then there is no one else that can help you

paxonel:
it is more honorable to say "i don't understand" rather than using the term "you are not making sense" which amount to ad hominem. Because what may not make sense to you does not implies it is so with other people.
Otherwise, when a post does not make sense to you it is better you don't quote it, unless you want clarification by saying i don't understand, OK
exactly, that's the point.
b implies negation in the context of the scriptures i just quoted
beyond the logic i quoted scriptures saying

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

That works implies negation while grace is the proposition, what else do you want again?

This ain't about ad hominems here I am simply trying to be as blunt as possible so as to cut straight to you on this. I suggest you go back to your logic teacher and ask for your money back.

The propositions set before you are INDEPENDENT of each other, therefore you cannot apply the law of excluded middles to them. What you have done amounts to saying something alone the lines of

Either her eyes are hazel in color or the wall is not high .
What eyes? Who is she? What wall? Where? How high is high?

Kobojunkie:
This ain't about ad hominems here I am simply trying to be as blunt as possible so as to cut straight to you on this. I suggest you go back to your logic teacher and ask for your money back.

The propositions set before you are INDEPENDENT of each other, therefore you cannot apply the law of excluded middles to them. What you have done amounts to saying something alone the lines of

Either her eyes are hazel in color or the wall is not high .
What eyes? Who is she? What wall? Where? How high is high?

The OP is talking rubbish.

James 1:12

Blessed is the one who perseveres under trial because, having stood the test, that person will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him.

1 Peter 4 :12

Dear friends, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal that has come on you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you.

1 Peter 1:7

6Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations: 7That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire,

Daniel 11:35

And some of the wise will fall victim to persecution. In this way, they will be refined and cleansed and made pure until the time of the end, for the appointed time is still to come.


No one has time to sit and listen to someone who loves to give his own opinion instead of the scriptures and one useless "law of excluded middles" that has nothing to do with the Bible.

Kobojunkie:
This ain't about ad hominems here I am simply trying to be as blunt as possible so as to cut straight to you on this. I suggest you go back to your logic teacher and ask for your money back.

The propositions set before you are INDEPENDENT of each other, therefore you cannot apply the law of excluded middles to them. What you have done amounts to saying something alone the lines of

what is the difference between mutually exclusive event and independent event?
I want straight answer, no long talk

Jeromejnr:


The OP is talking rubbish.

James 1:12

Blessed is the one who perseveres under trial because, having stood the test, that person will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him.

1 Peter 4 :12

Dear friends, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal that has come on you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you.

1 Peter 1:7

6Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations: 7That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire,

Daniel 11:35

And some of the wise will fall victim to persecution. In this way, they will be refined and cleansed and made pure until the time of the end, for the appointed time is still to come.


No one has time to sit and listen to someone who loves to give his own opinion instead of the scriptures and one useless "law of excluded middles" that has nothing to do with the Bible.

if you like change your moniker it is the same you kobojunkie talking long talk

paxonel:
if you like change your moniker it is the same you kobojunkie talking long talk

Huh? Abeg, no use me as excuse .

paxonel:
what is the difference between mutually exclusive event and independent event?
I want straight answer, no long talk

i am honestly not sure why you chose this tedious route when it is unnecessary but here goes

1. The given P(A) and P(B) are not mutually exclusive since they are intended to both occur at the same time... meaning you are expected love the Lord God with all your heart,mind, body and soul even as you love your neighbor just as you love your own self. No mutual exclusion here.

2. Even though as propositions, P(A) and P(B) exist independent of each other, P(B) can be said to be an event dependent on P(A) but the reverse is not the case.i.e. The chances of event P(B) happening increased with the occurence of event P(A)

So, P(A) and P(B) are no mutually exclusive events and instead, P(B) can be said to be an event dependent on P(A).

Kobojunkie:
i am honestly not sure why you chose this tedious route when it is unnecessary but here goes

1. The given P(A) and P(B) are not mutually exclusive since they are intended to both occur at the same time... meaning you are expected love the Lord God with all your heart,mind, body and soul even as you love your neighbor just as you love your own self. No mutual exclusion here.

2. Even though as propositions, P(A) and P(B) exist independent of each other, P(B) can be said to be an event dependent on P(A) but the reverse is not the case.i.e. The chances of event P(B) happening increased with the occurence of event P(A)

So, P(A) and P(B) are no mutually exclusive events and instead, P(B) can be said to be an event dependent on P(A).

OK,
I get you!

All you want is that i should use the right principle which is independent and not excluded middle?

No wahalla!

In that case, going by

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Grace is independent of works going by the scripture yes or no?

Kobojunkie:
Huh? Abeg, no use me as excuse .

sometimes you people don't know that what you do is obvious?

How on earth will someone call himself Jeromejnr dedicate all his 10 to 20 minutes of his time typing to comment on a thread, all to tell you that the op is saying rubbish.
All for you,
Are you paying him?

paxonel:
sometimes you people don't know that what you do is obvious?

How on earth will someone call himself Jeromejnr dedicate all his 10 to 20 minutes of his time typing to comment on a thread, all to tell you that the op is saying rubbish.
All for you,
Are you paying him?

Dude, I am not jeromejnr!

Kobojunkie:
Dude, I am not jeromejnr!

whatever!
But it appears unusual

Jeromejnr:


The OP is talking rubbish.

James 1:12

Blessed is the one who perseveres under trial because, having stood the test, that person will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him.

1 Peter 4 :12

Dear friends, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal that has come on you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you.

1 Peter 1:7

6Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations: 7That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire,

Daniel 11:35

And some of the wise will fall victim to persecution. In this way, they will be refined and cleansed and made pure until the time of the end, for the appointed time is still to come.


No one has time to sit and listen to someone who loves to give his own opinion instead of the scriptures and one useless "law of excluded middles" that has nothing to do with the Bible.

You noticed that too?
ROFLMAO

paxonel:
OK,
I get you!
All you want is that i should use the right principle which is independent and not excluded middle?

No wahalla!
In that case, going by
Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Grace is independent of works going by the scripture yes or no?

The teachings of Jesus Christ was preached to the uneducated poor people of His time without use of those principles you attempt here to drag and many of them understood it without problem. Jesus Christ said you should use the understanding you have in comprehending His teachings. Try that instead !

Till then, you logical conclusions remain disconnected at best

Kobojunkie:
The teachings of Jesus Christ was preached to the uneducated poor people of His time without use of those principles you attempt here to drag and many of them understood it without problem. Jesus Christ said you should use the understanding you have in comprehending His teachings. Try that instead !

Till then, you logical conclusions remain disconnected at best

you are evading the question to bring Jesus teachings which is not what i asked.

Is Romans 11:6 not Paul's teaching?
Did Paul teach anything different from what Jesus Christ thought?

May be you should just tear off the page Romans 11:6 was written in your bible and focus on Jesus teachings only

paxonel:
you are evading the question to bring Jesus teachings which is not what i asked.

Is Romans 11:6 not Paul's teaching?
Did Paul teach anything different from what Jesus Christ thought?

May be you should just tear off the page Romans 11:6 was written in your bible and focus on Jesus teachings only

I didnt evade any of your questions. I believe I have made it more than clear that the logical principles you seek to bring into this are unnecessary given that beginning with layman level understanding, one is able to clearly grasp the laws are given by Jesus Christ.

The first and second greatest commandments were given you by God through Jesus Christ. First gain understanding of what God is telling you before you proceed to learn what Paul may or may not be saying in regards to those two commandments.

Also realize that those two are the greatest, but most definitely not the only commandments given you, so whatever ideas you are first the two need apply to the more than 54 other commandments that were given you by God through Jesus Christ.

Kobojunkie:
I didnt evade any of your questions. I believe I have made it more than clear that the logical principles you seek to bring into this are unnecessary given that beginning with layman level understanding, one is able to clearly grasp the laws are given by Jesus Christ.

I can tell you no one fully understood Jesus in his time, not even any of his disciples.

And among Jesus disciples right from the time Jesus was yet alive before he was crucified till after his crucifixion, Paul was the most educated among them.

The first and second greatest commandments were given you by God through Jesus Christ.

the very thing that keep baffles me about people like you, even within your statements you are not seeing what I'm trying to portray to you.
why is it the first AND the second commandments?
Why is the phrase AND used there?

can't you see that the two commandments are separated and are excluded from each other and they exist independently?

That was why I brought the logic to help you see that.

You see this thing called religion?
Na God go help una

paxonel:
I can tell you no one fully understood Jesus in his time, not even any of his disciples.

And among Jesus disciples right from the time Jesus was yet alive before he was crucified till after his crucifixion, Paul was the most educated among them.
the very thing that keep baffles me about people like you, even within your statements you are not seeing what I'm trying to portray to you.
why is it the first AND the second commandments?
Why is the phrase AND used there?

can't you see that the two comments are separated and are excluded from each other and they exist independently?

That was why I brought the logic to help you see that.

You see this thing called religion?
Na God go help una

1. No one understood Jesus Christ's teachings except Paul you say. Ok.it is what you think... can't take it away from you.

2. I see now that I may be talking to someone either taking logic classes for the first time 0r doing a review and suddenly thinking Himself intelligent because of that.

Can you post for us the verse where Jesus Christ stated those 2 commandment clearly AND-ing them in the way you suggest so we can at least have something tangible to consider here for an example.

Hi

Kobojunkie:
1. No one understood Jesus Christ's teachings except Paul you say

another aspect you need to correct about your cognitive understanding.
I say no one fully understood.
I didn't say no one understood

Can you post for us the verse where Jesus Christ stated those 2 commandment clearly AND-ing them in the way you suggest so we can at least have something tangible to consider here for an example.

I will explain how the two comments apply separately, you don't need Jesus to tell you that.

The first commandment says love God with all your heart: that one is achieved by accepting Christ i have already said that.

The second one says love your neighbour as yourself : anyone can love his neighbour whether he is Christian or not, therefore it does not take your believe in Christ to love your neighbour.
Loving your neighbour and believing in Christ are two separate entity

paxonel:
another aspect you need to correct about your cognitive understanding.
I say no one fully understood.
I didn't say no one understood

I will explain how the two comments apply separately, you don't need Jesus to tell you that.

The first commandment says love God with all your heart: that one is achieved by accepting Christ i have already said that.

The second one says love your neighbour as yourself : anyone can love his neighbour whether he is Christian or not, therefore it does not take your believe in Christ to love your neighbour.
Loving your neighbour and believing in Christ are two separate entity

Again....

Kobojunkie:
1. No one understood Jesus Christ's teachings except Paul you say. Ok.it is what you think... can't take it away from you.

2. I see now that I may be talking to someone either taking logic classes for the first time 0r doing a review and suddenly thinking Himself intelligent because of that.

Can you post for us the verse where Jesus Christ stated those 2 commandment clearly AND-ing them in the way you suggest so we can at least have something tangible to consider here for an example.

Kobojunkie:
The teachings of Jesus Christ was preached to the uneducated poor people of His time without use of those principles you attempt here to drag and many of them understood it without problem.

Really? Did they understand him now?

I guess that is why they did not [url=https://classic.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+15%3A+21%E2%80%9341&version=KJV]nail his ass to a cross and mock him and spit on him and poison him and stab him[/url] and why he lived to a very ripe old age!