Category: Let's talk
This topic is DEFINITELY DEDICATED to those that might be experiencing being unwanted, ESPECIALLY by family, friends, WHOEVER, and are FINALLY TIRED of being the victim of "OUTCAST TREATMENT," and you're willing to RADICALLY/AGGRESSIVELY OVERTURN the "PASSIVE ATTITUDE" world that you've been (EXISTING, NOT LIVING) in, OFFICIALLY AFFIRMING WITHIN YOURSELF that NOT ONLY were YOU CREATED, you were BORN with GOD'S OVERALL PURPOSE, EVEN if YOU, YOURSELF, don't know what that purpose IS, thus explaining the title of this TOPIC, with absolutely NO INTENTION of ARROGANCE, but as a DARING SNEER of TOTAL NON-COMPLIANCE and UTTER INSUBORDINANCE against those, ESPECIALLY SUPPOSED AUTHORITY FIGURES that you've been (until NOW) bullied by. Although I, MYSELF, have never experienced such, my heart CERTAINLY goes out to those who either HAVE and are SCARRED, and/or are CURRENTLY PLAGUED by it, letting you know that STARTING NOW, you NO LONGER have to be ANY VICTIM of ANY ABUSE, WHATSOEVER, ANY MORE--how possible was it for GOLIATH, the PHILISTINE GIANT, to be ETERNALLY LEVELED by a SINGLE SLINGSHOT?
cool story bro
My life has no purpose but the one I choose for myself.
EVERYONE has a GOD-CHOSEN PURPOSE, AS WELL as a GOD-GIVEN FREE WILL to either choose HIS CHOSEN PURPOSE or OUR OWN. How am I ETERNALLY PROFITTED if I chose MY OWN, instead of GOD'S? THAT'S the question that ONLY WE, OURSELVES, can ONLY ANSWER FOR OURSELVES, ultimately. If WE choose OURSELVES, instead of GOD, to be in COMPLETE CONTROL of our OWN LIVES, as well as our OWN ETERNAL DESTINY, how's that NOT an ETERNALLY FOOLISH MISTAKE?
If I have a God-chosen purpose then let me hear it from God himself. Until then, its program, eat, drink and be merry for me.
I'm so incredibly fucking sick and tired of people telling me there's some predestined plan for my life. In the next breath I know they're going to tell me what *they* think that plan is. For some reason it almost always has to do with fixing the whole world for blind people because I'm smart and blind, and obviously that's all I should ever think about. Only I define my priorities and my life.
SO, since you've chosen to be the SUPREME MASTER of your OWN LIFE, which you DO have the UNCONDITIONAL FREE WILL that ONLY GOD, HIMSELF, gave you to MAKE such a choice, what ETERNAL PROFIT is gained as a result? THAT'S the question I asked you earlier. There are ONLY TWO ETERNAL DESTINATIONS that we can choose; ABSOLUTELY NOONE can choose NEITHER.
Bloody hell.
I don't see God busting his ass to get through school, so I guess I'll take charge of my life and do it myself.
Thanks but no thanks to his plan.
Ugh. The banality.
My thoughts exactly Holly.
Oh Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick Terrance! By Odin's thunder and Thor's
hammer you can't do your side any better? I've not really got a dog in this fight,
something women on both sides of the argument have more than said over the
years. But I've heard from the anti-abortion cause as I have from the pro-choice
cause.
Your betters would be ashamed of your representation of your and their mutual
beliefs. Surely you can do better?
Stories? Once again another faux testimonial you probably got from a chain
letter or a Faithbook post?
I'm bored.
Sadly mygodchosenbride&i4lifefinally is an entertainer
that only appeals to some people. While his sporadic use
of EXTREMELY CONSPICUOUS CAPS LOCK and
EXTREMELY STRANGE WORDING makes him a real
treat, these threads tend to get boring pretty quick when
the gimmick wears thin.
You should have put this on the Religions board, so you might have gotten more respect on it. Not saying I like what's going on with swearing on here and all, but is this under Religions topic? I didn't look but it doesn't sound like it.
This post is stupid and illogical, not to mention terribly written, and I'd say
that whether it was on here or the religion board. If your god is so stupid as to
pick this guy to be his spokesman, I don't want to worship him even if he were
real.
What I ALWAYS OBSERVE, and it NEVER FAILS to prove itself as such, is that for THOSE that BLATANTLY DENY GOD'S EXISTANCE, no matter HOW HARD you try to convince yourselves of ABSOLUTE, UTTER FOOLISHNESS, it NEVER WORKED, NEVER WORKS, and NEVER WILL WORK, because whenever you participate in these topics that DARINGLY CHALLENGES your position, REGARDLESS of your POWERLESS ATTEMPTS to shield yourselves with your SUPER-EGO INTELLECT, your HOSTILITY, NOT MY TOPIC, nor any of MY REPLIES to YOURS, is what ALWAYS EXPOSES you, OTHERWISE, if it's REALLY TRUE that GOD NEVER EXISTED, except in my OWN IMAGINATION, as well as ANYONE ELSE that I could've shared the SAME IDEA of this imagined GOD, that EVEN YOU, YOURSELVES, might've joined in and conjured up YOUR own fantasy version of GOD, it would be TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE for you to be hostile, as it would CERTAINLY VIOLATE the integrity of YOUR "INTELLECT GOD." It would be JUST LIKE if I were to tell you that I'm the ONLY HUMAN that can ACTUALLY FLY, by simply flapping my arms and lifting off the ground, and RIDICULOUSLY, your hostility would've been provoked--that's JUST WHY I'm CONSTANTLY laughing at your ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS feedback--IT'S FUN!
You are funny kid.
Thing is, I'm not saying there isn't a god. I'm not saying there is, for that matter. But even as I struggle in my own way with the whole what's-it-all-about-Alphie syndrome that I've got, what I am saying is that you make no sense.
If you equate logic with hostility, Terrance, of course we look hostile. But that's usually what happens in cases like yours. I can live with that because I'm certain enough of my position to state that any burden of proof rests with you and those like you, not with me.
Regarding god's supposed plan and all that? Sorry, not seeing it.
And let's also remember the ingrown hypocrisy of the free-will argument. If god gives you free will, then he can't have a plan for you greater than "exercise whatever free will you choose in whatever choices come to you". Because as soon as god tries to set out a plan for you to follow, he is putting more weight on certain choices and less on others. That's called bias. Bias and free will don't really get along in a case like this.
Hopefully this concept makes sense, but I explained it clearly enough so that if it didn't before, it ought to now. That is one of the fundamental problems I have with any religion who claims to support a god who actually does things for people. The instant that god intervenes, or purports to, he is skewing the balance. If his intervention stops you from making a choice, then he is superseding your free will. Free will does not exist if you are being blocked from certain choices by a creature which, let us also remember, is supposed to be all-powerful.
This all presupposes god's existence in the first place of course, which is where that aforementioned burden of proof comes in. Till that is demonstrated, everything else that follows therefrom is nonverifiable, illogical and not worthy of true debate.
Put another way: prove that a god or gods exist in terms that are rational, and I will treat with you rationally.
As I've said in PRIOR POSTS, YOUR DENIAL, as well as MY "PROOVING," GOD'S existence neither proves nor disproves it ANY MORE or LESS than GOD, HIMSELF, HAS, and STILL CONTINUES to, for NOW, and ALL ETERNITY to COME, PROOVEN HIMSELF through HIS INFALIBLE WORD, EVEN BEFORE HE spoke the UNIVERSE into existence, SIMPLY and ONLY BECAUSE it brings us RIGHT BACK to OUR OWN FREE WILL--if I choose to believe that GOD doesn't exist, and when challenged by the argument that shows CLEAR EVIDENCE that HE DOES, which would ALSO clearly explain that I'm "LOOKING" hostile, ONLY, NOT USUALLY, because I AM, NOT BECAUSE of the one with whom I'm COUNTER-ARGUING, even though I've convinced myself to believe that it IS, but that MY UTTER HOSTILITY is REALLY BLATANT REBELLION against the VERY GOD, for which BESIDES HIM, there's ABSOLUTELY NO OTHER, whether I choose to believe it or NOT, the very god, which is a FALSE god, THEREFORE, an IDOL, to what I'VE chosen to METAPHORICLY bow MY knees to, is of COURSE, human logic, and by DOING so, I'VE chosen to become ENSLAVED, the VERY EXACT OPPOSITE of the result of GOD-GIVEN FREE WILL. The ONLY RESTRICTIONS that GOD established ARE THOSE that MAKE US FREE, and FREE, ONLY, to serve HIM, who's NOT any EGO-DRIVEN SLAVE-DRIVER, which is EXACTLY what the DEVIL, LUCIFER (SATAN), is, meaning that if we choose to serve OURSELVES, we've chosen to serve SATAN, not that we're calling OURSELVES Satan, of course, but as GOD, HIMSELF, has CLEARLY STATED that BESIDES HIM, NO OTHER GOD EXISTS, SATAN, who once was the HEAVENLY ARCHANGEL, LUCIFER, until PRIDE caused him to be kicked OUT of HEAVEN, along with a third of the angels, who's the SUPREME FATHER of ALL LIES, says that there ARE, or even CAN, within our OWN IMAGINATION, be as MANY GODS as WE, OURSELVES, can choose to serve, and/or even serve ALL of them, if we'd like, thus, ENSLAVING OURSELVES to an ETERNAL ABUSER. Although this is UTTER FOOLISHNESS to YOU, at which you'll LAUGH, it's ONLY to your VERY OWN PERIL that ONLY YOU'RE causing YOURSELF.
Hey terrance, what purpose did got have in mind when he equipped you with a dysfunctional capacity for intellect?
This is trolling and should not be taken seriously folks.
WELL, WRITE AWAY, since YOUR VENOMOUS HATRED that you're vomiting is TOTALLY DIRECTED at HIM, ASK HIM! LET US KNOW how HE answers you!
For once, Terense, I agree with at least the spirit of your first post, Though I admit having a tough time picking through your verbose wording. I have certainly felt as though I waere merely "existing" lately. I also recognize that it is up to me - and my psychology - what I'm going to do about it. I can accept that I was born with a purpose, more than just to "eat, drink and be merry" so to speak. I also believe that I have the free will to choose whether to fullfill that purpose as welll. I believe that just because I have free will doesn't mean there isn't some form of plan, however loose, thought of for me. Asuming God exists - and I've found more personal proof of that than that he doesn't - I don't find it all that far-fetched. Having a child has, I believe, given me at least some limited perspective on how God thinks. I have a daughter. I want her to be kind to others, to grow up getting a good education, to get a fullfilling career, or to stay home with her children. I want her to marry a good man, to believe in the gospal of Jesus Christ with faith, and with true critical investigation, and to utilize her talents, preferably for the betterment of herself and others. I hope I will be able to guide her down that road. That is my plan - my wish for her. But she could drop out, she could marry a woman, join the army and die. She could decide that God doesn't exist. She could grow up to be Prime Minister. Who knows? She has the freedom to choose for herself. Maybe God knows in advance what she will choose. If he does, that isn't a violation of her free will. It simply meens he knows us so well that he knows what our ultimate choices might be. Right now, as a toddler, I have a pretty darn good idea what my daughter's choices are going to be. So if I, in my knowledge of her can accurately predict - at least right now - what she will and won't decide, how much more can God, in his much greater knowledge of us know?
But I believe in God, yes, even that Jesus Christ which you do. The people here who question the spirit of your post Teranse, they may either disbelieve, not know, or not care. And unfortunately words alone, especially those lost in translation, or - as has been the case with you in the past - cary the weight of condescention, are probably not going to give people the inclanation to go searching for him. Not that my own posts will either.:)
My question for all of you however is this: If you don't believe, or don't care, and if you are familiar with the way such topics are going to go, why do you bother? I'm seriously curious. Why do I for that matter?
Normally I wouldn't bother at all, especially considering the source of this topic. But the whole purpose thing hit a sore spot for me. I've had people claim that God told them why he had put me on this Earth. Why in the world would he tell a near stranger and not me? I think people were just making stuff up. At certain churches they had a license to say almost anything if they prefaced it with "God revealed to me..."
I hear this God-as-parent analogy over and over again and it doesn't work. If my parents behaved like God, they would never return phone calls or emails. I would eventually conclude that they had either died or didn't want to speak to me again. I can also be reasonably sure that my parents exist because I see them at least once a year.
That's what religion is for. It gives you a convenient answer to questions
you're either afraid of or don't know the answer too. Take christianity for
example. Afraid of dying? Don't worry, christians never die, we have eternal life,
so long as you do these things, maybe, sometimes, depending on who you ask.
Feeling guilty for running over that old lady? Don't worry, God forgave you
already because you really really really felt sorry for it. So you're off the hook.
Don't know why you lost your leg in that tragic hippo accident at the zoo? Well,
God wanted you to be inspirational to all people who wanted to forcibly copulate
with hippos, so he made you lose your leg. Daughter got sick after snorting too
many lines of coke? Its ok, God will save her. Daughter dies after getting sick
from snorting too many lines of coke? That's ok, God just needed another angel
and she's in a better place.
Its nothing but convenient lies to make life a bit more easy for those too
afraid to actually look it in the eye.
Actually BG, you don't have free will, and neither does anyone else, if you believe the bible. The bible says that god scheduled every day of your life, before you were even born. No way is that free will.
To answer your question, BG, I sometimes bother because I, too, dislike the purpose thing rather intensely.
That dichotomy of free will vs. God's plan is something I simply will not stomach. I am sometimes ruthlessly logical, and it doesn't make sense to me.
I have absolutely no problem with others believing whatever they wish, or talking about it when asked, or whatnot. I'm not saying Terrance was out of line to post this. It's an opinion, I challenged it because I take issue with it. That's all.
Put more succinctly: some religious stuff I will actually debate, point for point, because the person doing the arguing is willing to bend or listen, or at the very least consider what I'm saying. But it's not an argument if you go into it thinking you're absolutely unassailable, and it's not an argument if you're just out to try and push an agenda. When I hear this purpose stuff, that's almost always what it results in; ergo, I challenged it.
Do I think God exists? No, I really don't think so. But I also admit that I just might be wrong. There are tons of things we don't understand, and logic dictates that easy answers or dismissals don't always work. I am the sort of atheist who has a somewhat open mind...sort of a "if God speaks, I will listen" mentality. I have mor e problem with organized religion than I do with faith itself, anyway.
What it really comes down to for me, I think, is that I find certain lines of supposed argument pushy and arrogant. I wouldn't start a conversation trying to argue that way, so I'd prefer others do the same. I don't want to be fixed, or prayed for, or wept over, or preached at. I don't want to be told that God has a plan for me. Start doing that, and I'm guaranteed to see you as pushy, and that's a very very bad way to start things off. You, BG, do not do this, btw, so I'm not calling you out.
I expect people not to be pushy, and in response I try not to be pushy about them. I'm not going to come barrelling into your average Christian topic just to try and lay waste to doctrine and scripture. Why would I? What good does that do besides maybe making me feel momentarily vindicated when no logical argument develops in response?
Trust me. If I want to know something about Christianity, or faith in general, I will approach it. And when whoever I'm talking to tells me something, I'll be listening. That's a very important distinction I find with some people. They talk, but they don't listen.
I'd like to address the fallacy that people present: "If you don't believe in God, then why do you bother engaging about god?"
You're a Christian. You don't believe in new-age spirituality any more than I do. Yet you can and do engage on topics of the effects, perceived or otherwise, of the new age mind sets. You don't believe in a lot of things which you engage others in discussion about.
Don't believe in Islam? Yet you talk about the many problems coming out of the Muslim world.
Truth be told, Christian apologetics is rife with examples of just this very thing. People who don't believe in speaking in tongues have a lot of counterapologetics for it. People who don't believe in the slaying of the spirit have a ton of apologetics against it also. Some of those were even offended when I presented the electrical solution to that problem, known as the Electric Touch Machine, which is used in magic shows (and most probably Pentecostal events) to temporarily incapacitate people -- cause their muscles to relax and them to fall down. An alleged spiritual event fully explainable by electricity. Hell I've even pissed off the faith-based narrative that it's all in their heads, by presenting the technological evidence for this little spiritual escapade that is so popular among some.
And here's one final example:
Harry Potter. Everyone everywhere knows this is just a story. Some of us would say not as good a story as was Lord of the Rings, but just a story nonetheless.
And yet, while Christians everywhere know it's just a story, how much money was made on anti-Harry-Potter counterapologetics? Gods and gargoyles, what an incredibly lucrative endeavor that was! Christians everywhere forking over cash for books about the dangers of Harry potter,
Oh and finally, us atheists. Some of you might believe it's impossible for us to "disbelieve", or not find plausible, the idea of god. If you think that, you are proverbially atheistic to the notion of atheism itself. Christian bookstores everywhere are chalk full of apologetics by Dinesh D'Souza, Ravi Zecharias, William Lane Craig, and others, all talking about atheists. A group that some of them contend doesn't actually exist.
Discussing other's narratives and lack thereof is all part of the human experience.
Shepherd, that was a breath of fresh air. Leo, my comment wasn't about debating Christianity, just this particular topic. Just ends up always turning into a circle jerk of inch worm proportions. Experience dictates our beliefs. Cody does have a point; religion is convenient in answering the hard questions. It's comforting and it's safe. Doesn't mean it's wrong. A good massage is nice and comforting too; it doesn't mean it doesn't help the body. Not the best analogy I'll admit. Science provides many answers too, but often also more questions. I don't believe for a second that science disproves the existence of a higher intelligence. Heck, many of the leaders of my church are quite accomplished scientists. You'd think that would create a conflict of belief, but in fact whenever they talk about it, they often allude to how the facts of science and those of spirituality compliment one another. It's all about what you're willing to see, and what you've experienced. But as I've said countless times, that's just my conclusion based on my own experiences, study, and believe it or not, even logical investigation. It might be hard to believe, but I'm actually not 100% sure about Christianity. I'm actually an extremely skeptical person by nature. But I am sure enough, both due to the hope of it being true, - since I honestly can't comprehend my conscieceness simply winking out - and through logic, experience and others experiences that I'm willing to put my faith in it. My faith in god harms no one in my life; not even me. Religion isn't evil, but those who use religion to achieve their own ends may sometimes be. If I'm wrong aboutit, I'll be no worse off; I'll simply cease to exist. and therefore won't have anything to worry about. Everyone here has come to their own conclusions. Perhaps your oppinions will change one day based on additional experience; perhaps not. Who knows, something could happen to make me as hardcore anti-theist as Cody. I seriously, seriously doubt it, but you never know.
As for the whole agency versus predestination thing, I suppose that depends on how you interpret the bible, or how you've been guided to interpret it. In my church, it's very clear that free will is paramount to God's plan for us. Certainly there are people who are preordained from the foundation of the world; Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ etc. But they had their own free will. Impricator, I can provide a lot of scriptural references in various scriptures to back up free will. Where in the bible are you referring to when you say God scheduled every day of your life? I'm not being flippent; I really want to know. That doesn't logically compute to me. If that was the case then God is responsible for all the time wasting and idleness, the murders and rapes and terrible decisions. Considering the many things which are considered commandments and sins, how could God be responsible for "making" us do those things? If that were all true, he'd be just some bloodthursty game master; the kind of Tyrant Cody and Leo and others accuse him of being. Problem with that theory is there's too many scriptural references to counter it.
Geez, every time I say I'm not going to bother replying, or replying very little, this happens.
"You saw me before I was born and scheduled each day of my life before I began to breathe. Every day was recorded in your book!" [Psalm 139:16)
Oh, I know you're probably gonna say that was quoted out of context, but it's one of the verses christians use to defend the "god's plan" argument. Thus we don't have free will. God already knows all of our decisions and actions and words, because he set the whole situation up himself.
God dignifies us with free will, the power to make decisions of our own rather than having God or fate predetermine what we do. Consider what the Bible teaches.God created humans in his image. (Genesis 1:26) Unlike animals, which act mainly on instinct, we resemble our Creator in our capacity to display such qualities as love and justice. And like our Creator, we have free will.
To a great extent, we can determine our future. The Bible encourages us to “choose life . . . by listening to [God’s] voice,” that is, by choosing to obey his commands. (Deuteronomy 30:19, 20) This offer would be meaningless, even cruel, if we lacked free will. Instead of forcing us to do what he says, God warmly appeals to us: “O if only you would actually pay attention to my commandments! Then your peace would become just like a river.”—Isaiah 48:18.
Our success or failure is not determined by fate. If we want to succeed at an endeavor, we must work hard. “All that your hand finds to do,” says the Bible, “do with your very power.”(Ecclesiastes 9:10) It also says: “The plans of the diligent one surely make for advantage.”—Proverbs 21:5.
Free will is a precious gift from God, for it lets us love him with our “whole heart”—because we want to.—Matthew 22:37.
Doesn’t God control all things?
The Bible does teach that God is Almighty, that his power is not limited by anyone other than himself. (Job 37:23; Isaiah 40:26) However, he does not use his power to control everything. For example, the Bible says that God was “exercising self-control” toward ancient Babylon, an enemy of his people. (Isaiah 42:14) Similarly, for now, he chooses to tolerate those who misuse their free will to harm others. But God will not do so indefinitely.—Psalm 37:10, 11.
No, we created him in our image. A perfect, all-powerful, all wise god would not have emotions. It would be infinitely neutral.
Imprecator, you are EXTREMELY DECEIVED, beyond ALL MEASURE, and if I had enough time to explain the FULL DETAIL of your ABSOLUTELY MISLEAD situation, which I might LATER (perhaps TONIGHT, or over the WEEKEND), EVEN THAT might not be enough of an explanation, but you've DEFINITELY been TOTALLY DRUGGED ENOUGH to ACTUALLY BELIEVE that it was MAN that created the ONE and ONLY TRUE GOD of the ENTIRE UNIVERSE--HOW IDIOTIC! ENTERTAININGLY RIDICULOUS, of course, but GROSSLY IDIOTIC, and NO, I'm NOT BASHING you: I'm just commenting on your post, as I DO recognize it for ALL that it IS (LOL)!
It's actually not such a far-fetched idea.
If you can philosophically accept that God might not exist (as in, drop your certainty for a moment), you will see that, with God as with all other things in the world, one should believe that he exists only after some sort of verifiable proof. Since no verifiable proof exists, then the certainty of his existence cannot be counted upon.
Now, operating under the idea, just for a moment, that an actual god does not exist out there somewhere. Let's remember that humans don't like what they don't understand. They want to know what happens when they die. They want to know what it's all for. They want to know what's out there beyond their little bubble of understanding. So what they did was create a construct, a means of explaining all of those things which could not be absolutely disproven but which could not be proven either. And because their need to be comforted trumped their need to be right, they came to accept a once-fanciful idea as real.
I'm not saying this with any malice, by the way, but the phrase "man created God in his image" is particularly strong here. Observe just a few striking supports for the notion:
1. Ever notice how the Bible takes place in the Middle East, and yet most of the main characters had quote-unquote white names? By this, I mean names that are traditionally aassociated with Europe and America and such, not names associated with, say, the Middle East as we know it. The names don't sound Arabic at all.
2. Ever notice how the Bible picks on black people, curses them to be the hewers of wood and all that? And ever notice that it was Noah's son who laughed at him in his drunkenness who brought this on? Well I don't know about you, but that looks fairly convenient.
3. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it is widely assumed that Jesus was white, but in reality he would likely have been dark-skinned.
4. And last, but not at all least, the Bible speaks of God as if he is basically an all-powerful man. Jesus reinforces this stereotype. He's not a seven-legged alien with a shifting ball of light for a head. He's not a woman either. He never speaks of other planets or scientific things, even though such things are undoubtedly within his ken. In short, God acts very much like a created creature, a creature who is perforce bound by the imaginations which, over time and with a great deal of planning, fashioned him in the first place. Sorry, but he's just...too human, too fallible, too much a creature of his time. Nowadays, God is dated, simplistic and largely one-dimensional.
Please remember, this is not said as a personal attack. It's simply a case to be made for the fact that God is a created thing, and that he was created in man's image, most likely because man, in creating God, wanted something to relate to.
When an atheist quotes a holy book, it is said they are doing so out of context. When a religious person cites the very same quotation in the very same context, it is said they have "one interpretation."
Now, Terrance, my good boy, you're older than I am, but in the same relative age demographic. Since you were knee-high to a grasshopper, in your sunday school classes, you were no doubt taught that a whole brigade of European expatriots to the Middle East were somehow magically and mythically the Chosen Ones, were you not? You were no doubt informed that the very apocalypse you were trained to look forward to depends upon the construction of the Third Temple, which depends upon a genocidal overthrow of the local populations.
Now, we just sent 4 billion of your tax dollars and mine over there to help bring this apocalypse about. A yearly homage to the eastern god, you could say.
But when the shrapnel from a Western-constructed piece of impressively sophisticated military hardwares tears open a pregnant Palestinian woman's belly, destroying the fetus, as your Good Book describes in at least one of the prophets and history describes as the act of the Assyrian army: Is that an abortion, Terrance?
Is it then justified because the abortion leads to the apocalypse your faith / political power tells you will be the result of this genocide?
That's a pretty important question, Terrance, because no Planned Parentbhood has received anything remotely similar in dollar amounts from U.S. tax dollars in comparison to the most expensive foreign lobby in Washington, in the vain hope that this will bring on your sought-after apocalypse. Many unborn die during this mission of your leaders. Is that debt cancelled because of the "greater good?" Sounds Orwellian.
Perhaps someday you will learn the great extent to which you've been lied to, how the system you defend so readily is propped up by an astounding amount of dishonesty.
But since you asked about abortion, why not Take a look at how the abortion issue even formed itself in the U.S.
And while you're at it, ask yourself why it is a faith / ideology / political persuasion so dedicated to "truth" and "righteousness" would see fit to withhold this information? There are so many ways you've been lied to, Terrance. You and I both. Kids in the 70s and 80s, it's how it worked. Every strong ideology does it, from the radical feminists to the gulags of the former Soviet Union, to the fascists, to the Evangelical Christians here in the U.S. And for both you and I, it is highly likely those who fed us the lies, were ignorant themselves that these were lies.
Shepherdwolf, of course the people's names don't all sound Arabic, or Hebrew, or what have you. That's obviously a translation thing. Jesus' actual name was Yeshua or Yoshua. Jesus was the greek for Yeshua.
To DefendThe truth of the Word
Psalms 119:41-42: “Let Your mercies come also to me, O LORD-- Your salvation according to Your word. So shall I have an answer for him who reproaches me, For I trust in Your word. ”
1 Peter 3:15: “But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you”
Jude 3-4: “Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints”
Ephesians 5:11: “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.”
2 Peter 2:1-2: “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed.”
We are instructed to defend the faith in response to those who challenge the Bible, Jesus and the gospel. We are to be prepared to give a satisfying explanation to those of other religions. This is true apologetics, to give an answer to everyone-those who are in other religious systems or those that we call cults that have different teachings on Jesus, the gospel and the way of salvation. Many claim they are the practicing true Christianity and do not adhere to the core doctrines of the faith but instead disbelieve or distort them. The immense growth of these other religions and cults are due to the churches inadequacy to explain and defend the faith publicly to prevent those from joining these groups. Being able to define and defend the Bible correctly goes hand in hand with successful evangelism.
Since these other positions are often presented in the public medium by various means, we believe it is necessary that we counter their positions publicly as well. The Bible calls this contending for the faith (Jude 4).
Real believers do not allow those who speak falsely about Jesus or the gospel to go unchallenged. they are to be corrected, especially for the sake of others that are listening that may be influenced in their false teaching.
John wrote "I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth" (3 John 1:4). Jesus said “"If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:31-32)
Our main purpose is to give Christians information that will equip them to protect themselves from false teaching and teachers that prey on the innocent and unwary. By doing this we encourage others to stand true to the Word of God against a growing apostasy.
“Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Timothy 4:2).
One of the names of the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of TRUTH (John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13.) God is called the God of truth, God hates lies and liars who connive, that are thieves, and manipulate others to their own ends – these are idolaters.
Psalm 31:5 (Isaiah 65:16) tells us our God is known as the “God of truth,” Psalm 33:4 tells us “all His work is done in truth.” John introduced Jesus as being “full of grace and truth.” The truth is very important to God. His word was delivered to mankind for us to have absolutes in instruction on how to live and walk in relationship with God.
Defending the faith is not just to be to those outside the church but also inside the church, this is part of apologetics, it is called polemics. 2 Ti m. 4:2-3: “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears.”
Sometimes it is necessary to name the people that teach contrary to the Bible. There are numerous examples where a biblical writer "named names" in order to identify aberrant teaching and to warn others about those who taught it. Those who promote another Gospel, another Jesus must be challenged with the truth of the word.
Titus 1:13: "This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith."
We are not to ignore these men and allow them to continue to spread falsehood and spiritually destroy many lives. To watch our spiritual family being misled is negligence, and is the absence of true compassion. True love is not silent when people are being misled, hurt or abused. We are our brothers keeper (Jms.5). If there were more teachers who spoke out on this we would have less deception and more honest fellowship with one another and our love and trust for one another would increase.
We have numerous examples of identifying people and their characteristics starting with John the Baptist. He called both the Pharisees and Sadducees (the religious leaders of his day) that came out to hear him “a generation of Vipers” (snakes) (Matt. 3:7). Jesus was the epitome of loveand yet He offended people by telling them the truth. Jesus publicly condemned the religious leaders as the blind leading the blind, calling them hypocrites several times, whitewashed tombs containing dead men’s bones (Matthew 15:14, 23:27). Jesus told Nicodemus The Teacher of Israel that he did not know about spiritual matters. After He resurrected He even called his own disciples “unbelieving” “fools and slow of heart.” Jesus also commends the church in Ephesus for testing self-proclaimed "apostles" whom he calls liars (Revelation 2:2).
The apostles are our example to know how to handle matters like these. Paul wrote in Phil. 3:16-17 “let us walk by the same rule let us be of the same mind. Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern.” Paul used himself and the other apostles as physical examples, and what we see are servants, caring not about their reputation, but for the truth and love of the brethren.
Peter named Simon the Sorcerer (Acts 8) and he exposed “the way of Balaam (II Pet.2: 15). Paul named Hymenaeus and Alexander (1Tim. 1:20), Phygelus and Hermogenes (2Tim. 1:15), Hymenaeus and Philetus (2 Tim. 2:17), Alexander the metalworker (2 Tim. 4:14),Paul had some strong words for the sorcerer El'ymas (Acts 13:10).Paul in correcting the Galatians told them they began in God’s grace and right doctrine; he then asked in Galatians 2:4-5, how they were bewitched by the law (Gal 5:12). “because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage), to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.”
The apostle John named Diotrephes (3 Jn. 9) as one to stay away from. John writes that Christ commended the church in Ephesus for "hating" the deeds of the Nicolaitans" (Revelation 2:6). He writes the words of Jesus who is angry that the church in Pergamum for allowing false doctrine to be taught. He like Peter exposed “the doctrine of Balaam” and repeats the warning of the Nicolaitens which Jesus hates (Rev.2: 6, 14).. The apostle John writes the words of Christ who is angry with the church in Thyatira for letting the false prophetess Jezebel to lead the people astray (Revelation 2:20).
If they did not name names they certainly named the teachings. Jude spoke out against the teaching in the church of Cain, Balaam, and Korah describing them as "greed" and "gainsaying" and pronouncing, "Woe unto them!" (Jude 11).
No one enjoys this part of ministry but it is a necessary for protecting the sheep. When the integrity and purity of the gospel is at stake, we have no choice when it comes to the matter of exposing error and naming names. Paul even named Peter publicly. ‘“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed...But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?” (Gal.2: 11-14). The issue revolved around salvation by the law or by grace, something he would not keep silent about.
It is right to expose error and to name those who are teaching error.Faithful messengers will warn the sheep of heresy, and when needed identify them by name. unfaithful ones protect them! Many do understand that when they have loyalty to blatant false teachers and prophets and defend them they condemn themselves. Prov 17:15: “He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the just, both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD."
1 Cor .5:12-13 “For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But those who are outside God judges. Therefore "put away from yourselves the evil person."
As the giant Goliath mocked Israel, David, who would be the future king stepped out in faith to challenge him to silence his mockery. As we defend the faith we do not fight physically against flesh and blood (Eph.6) but enter into a spiritual battle for peoples souls by reaching their minds and heart through explaining the gospel. We must always keep the person soul in mind as we try to make sense of the word and its meaning. at the same time
Paul warns “Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation!” (Philippians 3:2), as Jesus told us not to “give what is holy to the dogs nor cast your pearls before swine,” so they do not turn on you. We are to identify those who mock and warn them. Proverbs 9:8-9: “Do not correct a scoffer, lest he hate you; rebuke a wise man, and he will love you. Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be still wiser; teach a just man, and he will increase in learning.”
Our attitudeis to save and restore: 2 Timothy 2:24-26: “And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth , and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will."
Heresy is not limited to only the Trinity or Salvation, it is anything that is contrary to sound doctrine. Heresy is when one lays truth alongside their error as 2Peter states. From the Greek word pareisago: meaning to lead in aside, to introduce surreptitiously, to privately bring in. When one says the right thing on a subject one day and then another time the opposite, that makes them a false teacher because they are inconsistent in their doctrine. Heresy-hairesis: means disunion, division from the truth. They willfully change its context; reinterpret the Scripture to introduce another new meaning to make themselves different or unique.
Anyone that leads people beyond the Scripture, instead of correctly explaining what is contained in it is being spiritually destructive to himself and others who listen to him. A good teacher can be easily identified as: “holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict” (Titus 1:9). We are told to “Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine”(1 Timothy 4:16).
The Bible says the Spiritual man judges all things- if you do not judge teaching you are proving that you are not a spiritual man. But a babe or child with little knowledge. We are to test and judge teaching to know whom to listen to (1 Cor.11:18-19). It is a matter of spiritual safety for ourselves and loved ones which is important in these last days. It is not wrong to openly challenge false or wrong teachings by the Bible, this is something God approves for us to do? The Apostle Paul writes: "And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all discernment (judgment) that you may approve things that are excellent in God's sight.
Our love should extend from ourselves to others, we should have the heart and the knowledge to minister to those who struggle and are led astray.
James 5:19-20: “Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.’
May we be filled with the Spirit and be bold and courageous as they were in the early church to reach other religions and those who are in error inside the church.
Answering the Critics
There are many that look with disdain on those who publicly defend the Christian faith. For whatever reason, they have been convinced that we should not have a say about anything. What if the early Church had taken their advice? We would not have any Christianity today. It would be so watered down and changed it would be just vestiges of a shell. Well that is exactly where we are heading to unless we take some hard stands and turn things around. We live in an age where being politically correct is the accepted way. Tolerance is the optimum condition for the masses as it stops any decisive thinking. It appears this tolerance has been adopted into the Church where we now have the "spiritually correct," those who have no stands on anything-- except those who have one.
Today much is reversed, those who notice and point out the wrong that are guilty and not those who teach the wrong. Scriptures says "Woe to those who call light darkness and darkness light." The Bible is clear --we are encouraged to examine and discern, decide and to speak if necessary to save others from sin, bondage and even eternal condemnation. That is our heart, to help those headed for destruction.
So why do this? Because souls are at stake; their eternal destiny can be turned around by someone who has enough chutzpah to speak out. They should not be silenced. We believe those who claim to be "Christian" should be open to discuss things, even to be scrutinized and questioned on what they teach. True Christians are not insecure in their beliefs - they should be always ready to give an answer to anyone who challenges their faith as1 Peter 3:15 states, "...Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence." This is more for non Christians, however there are times when Titus 1:9 is necessary " holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict." This is done to help. but Paul says there also comes a time “Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them” (Rom. 16:17).
Being on the receiving end of those who have been challenged, we have not seen much gentleness and reverence from the critics! They mostly do not deal with the facts nor the Scripture. We have not condemned anyone but we who are called Pharisee's, blasphemers, ungodly, slanderers and any other name people can think of. All because we have taken the time to examine their teaching in light of the Scripture and seen it false.
Before you join the crowd of "naysayers" you need to look at the history of your church, organization, persons or movement you are involved in. We have and have painstakingly taken the time to record as accurately as possible what is being CONSISTENTLY taught. We harbor no hatred towards those who teach these unbiblical doctrines nor the people involved. But we want to give the other side of the story that most people have not known, for whatever reason it has been hidden from them. We think it is fair and prudent to do so. Proverbs 14:15 says, "Only simpletons believe everything they are told! The prudent carefully consider their steps." It is a rare person who is willing to seek answers on correct Biblical interpretation and not accept the status quo
I hear Matthew 18 being quoted to prove we have not done this biblically. People say "If you haven't spoken to the person you can't say anything about them" False doctrine is not the subject of Matthew 18, this Scripture applies to personal trespasses and offenses, not to doctrinal problems. It is to iron out relationships. In most cases there has been no personal offense (it is the body of Christ that is offended). We do not know these people personally. Those who have public ministries influencing large audiences by their books, radio and television, are to be responsible for what they say. It is because they often have national TV ministries they are not easily approached. This should not hinder one from speaking up. We already know that the majority of these ministers do not respond to any letters or calls when they are being asked to answer. Yet we have taken the time to write to a few of them and it was not a surprise to have no response. Those who are publicly well known ignore inquiries that are questioning their teachings. Let me give a practical example on this. If you knew someone was constructing a building and found proof that they were cutting corners and using 2nd rate material and the structure of the building could be hazardous, would you actually go to that person who you know is doing this to confront them? What if you did try to contact them and that person refused to do something about it? You would have no choice but to go public. This is exactly what is happening. Many ministries have voiced there frustration in trying to contact the promoters of heresy inside the chruch.
False doctrine that is taught publicly is no a private matter and is to be dealt with publiclybecause it was spread publicly.If someone states something that is false publicly that is able to affect thousands or millions of people it would be utter neglect and a sin to sit by and say nothing. Discernment and watchmen ministries have no choice but to make a statement publicly. The fact is we do not have to approach these ministries each and every time when they already have a track record of not answering. If they are in error and we try to reach them for correction, if they do not receive it is necessary to take it to the church. It is because of a response of silence to peoples inquiries that this is done.
Whether you stand with us or not, it doesn't matter. Of course I'd rather see more people stand on the side of truth and be vocal in these perilous times, but it matters not. If I was the only one left (thank God I know I'm not) I would be doing this still. If you read the letters and met the people that some of us have, you would realize how many lives are being ruined and devastated by these false teachers, false prophets and cults. You too would be moved to tears and may want to do something about it. It's a matter of conviction to what the Word of God says.
We are open to dialogue, as I and others try to meet with many of the leaders and pastors of these churches and cults. Many letters have also been sent with no response back. The point is that people do not care to enter into a dialogue on what they perceive would be a challenge to what they believe. Some have, and I commend them for this. We may still disagree but at least an effort to dialogue and change was attempted.
I'd like to give an example of this, recently I had met with a representative of a Church we list as a cult when he was passing through Hawaii. We opened the Bible and had a peaceful yet passionate disagreement on the main issues that he and I felt were pertinent to the Gospel and the nature of God. We left as friends (at least I think we did) but we still disagreed. I do not wish ill on him and I hope he does not for me.
Paul commended the Berean's for checking the Scriptures daily on what he was saying. Sadly this is forbidden in some circles. In certain cults one is kicked out when they start asking questions, sometimes it can be no different in the Church.
At this point in history where most would agree the Lord is coming soon we should all be willing to make sure what the Bible says and see if we are following man or God. A mans interpretation of what it says, or what it actually states.
We are to be obeying the command of not having anything to do with the unfruitful works of darkness but expose them. The point is to rescue people so they may know truth and can have a true relationship with Jesus Christ.
I leave you with this 2 Corinthians 13:8 "For we cannot do anything against the truth, but only for it." I hope that you will agree that the truth will remain after all is said and done, what is done in and for the truth will last for eternity (taken from www.letusreason.org).
OBVIOUSLY, my above post might NOT have blended in, COMPLETELY, if at ALL, with any of the PRIOR POSTS from YOU, but HOPEFULLY, it covers ALL of what THIS, as well as OTHER TOPIC-POSTS of the PAST that I've created, is ALL ABOUT--it's CERTAINLY NO SURPRISE, WHATSOEVER, to ME that your responses to the challenge to your "BELIEF SYSTEMS," as the "POLITICAL-CORRECTNESS PROPONENTS" would say in reference to US, are EXACTLY AS ABOVE-DESCRIBED, since we're in the VERY DAY that GOD mentioned, concerning that "MAN would rather love the DARK, rather than the LIGHT," which the LIGHT, GOD'S ETERNAL, INERRENT WORD, is the VERY CORE of the ONLY ABSOLUTE TRUTH that's ETERNAL, which has ALWAYS BEEN, EVEN BEFORE TIME, ITSELF, ever began.
Terrance my boy it is not the politically correct who refer to religions as thought or belief systems. The PC crowd dislikes folks like me more than you, because you are a trope, and we are rogues.
So, what about those abortions in Palestine, Terrance? The 4 billion (with a b) we just sent to arm the Chosen Ones? Yes, the ones whose god needs us to supply the powder and arms? Is that made excusable because it's bringing about your apocalypse?
Go ahead and answer, boy, but don't play pin-the-ideology-on-the-atheist this time. Many of us are not as you would call politically correct, or what some of us would call, part of the authoritarian, dogmatic, Orwellian Left. Some of us might even have more guns than you do. You struggle, as so many evangelicals do, in the quicksand outside of the tropes you have been fed.
Terrance, you've used (or copied and pasted) the words "darkness" and "light" a total of 5 times each in this thread. I think you've said you were born blind. Has it never occurred to you that maybe this stuff was written for an ancient sighted audience whose main fear was the dark? Doesn't it strike you as odd that Jesus would insult someone by calling them blind?
And let's think about Old Testament God for a sec. In Exodus we find out that Moses will die if he sees God's face, but looking at God's backside is okay for some reason. Being shielded by God's hand also doesn't seem to be fatal. This stuff it hilarious. It also reminds me of sighted people I know in real life. Faces are very important to them; that's how they identify each other. Hands and backsides, not so much. Voices aren't too important either - notice that nowhere does it say that if any man hears God sing in the key of C, his brains will liquefy and run out of his ears.
The almost exclusive focus on visual attributes of God and the obsession with darkness as being evil suggests to me that this stuff is man-made. The marks of the seeing imagination are all over it.
Oh, and I almost forgot about the outer darkness. Kind of reminds me of a lit-up city surrounded by protective walls. If you're tossed outside at night then you're isolated, and predators or your enemies can kill you. No divine imagination is necessary to make that up.
And while we're on the subject, Terrance, explain to us all how Hell can be both a place of outer darkness and a lake of fire. Isn't fire always bright? Since you implied in post 4 that some of us are going there, I think you should enlighten us.
Voyager, I will agree with you this is clearly myth-making, just as it would be if the blind conceived of a god and could described what it sounded like via echolocation.
However, in defense of the sighted, or is it called seeing now?
Facial recognition, while nice and emotional now, is a low-level survival mechanism which is in part why we're here. Anyone doomd with the birth defect that prevents them from smiling, for instance, grows up bullied, misunderstood and ridiculed. Even those whose biology makes them appear particularly stern all the time, are constantly misinterpreted against their will. I have personally known people who suffered under these circumstances, and it's pretty difficult for them.
But the facial recognition algorithms sighted people possess seem to come at least in large part with the firmware. They're born with this ability. Right away, they begin to recognize facial features first.
If a Christian can see, they must have a face for their god, or their god couldn't be a person. This is even true for the Muslims, although they are more strict about not engraving such an image.
Voyager, I was 30 years old when 9/11 happened. Up until that time, I had never asked what Jesus looked like in the Christians' pictures. Why not? Because I'm blind and don't care about looks? No. I just assumed he must look something like a character from the Arabian Knights, or a hostage-taker in Iran / a bomber of barracks in Berut from my youth. And yes, the face of Osamu Bin Laden once we knew who he was. I didn't really realize I thought these things until a couple events happened.
First, the Wife was in charge of several ministry efforts at the church, and for one of these She had been getting some Jesus dolls or images, can't remember, of different origins. She told me that jesus was always portrayed as white, which was a mystery to me. I was pretty surprised; I could no more imagine Jesus as a white man, than Thor a semite.
Now speaking of Semites, true, genetic Semites. You may be too young to remember the formation of Homeland Security, and more speicifically TSA. Airport Security was profiling passengers, something some people find offensive, Christians at the time found to be God's work, and some of us rogue types saw as necessary but needed refinement.
If you look back at news reports from around 2003 or so, you'll find reports of Sikhs and other Northwest Asian / Indian groups being profiled, due to their genetic resemblance. In hort, due to facial recognition.
Do you know who was *not* profiled? And should have been, if your Sunday school texts had the slightest shred of credibility? Some European expatriots who were relocated on the Persian gulf, on a land claim based on mythology.
Whether you like, hate, or are indifferent to profiling, it must be acknowledged it's based on genetic factors. Certainly not by swabbing the cheek and sending it in for analysis, but a much more immediate and primordial method, that of facial / feature set recognition. Nobody profiles by voice.
That, as a blind person was pretty huge to learn. The alleged "chosen people" bore no recognizable resemblance to the native populations of their alleged ancient homeland. You, today, have the Genographic Project to review among many other sources. We didn't always have this, and for some of us putting two and two together without the distraction of a face of a god, had thought the god and the chosen ones would naturally have been of true genetic Semitic origin. It could be nothing else if one were to adopt even a semi-literalist interpretation of their texts.
It can only be concluded the faces of gods are not the faces of their genetic heritage, but the faces of those who adopt them. Same would be true of the voices. After all, in the current Afrocentric Pentecostal churches, the voice of the god is a well-spoken expressive black man. And in the stayed, Protestant Republican churches, its voice is the voice of a royal sovereign or a judge.
So I respectfully disagree with you, Voyager. The face or faces of gods are in fact very important. And in light of political events in the last 40 years, genetic discoveries, and recent archeology, I don't see how a western-raised blind-from-birth person with a respectable education in the sciences and current political events could remain an Evangelical Christian. Profiling is a short cut, sure, but it's not technically wrong when describing regional genetics. Your Christ, if he ever existed, would have resembled Osamu Bin Laden much more closely than any European expatriot to the Gaza Strip. Ironically, it was "God's Man," George W. Bush, and his TSA, which forever rent the curtain and revealed the fake foundations of the mythology and the Chosen Ones.
So the sun is god's face, and the moon is his ass? Makes sense, since he wants everyone to kiss his ass all the time.
What's ALWAYS been ABSOLUTELY AMAZING to ME is YOUR DESPERATION to INTELLECTUALIZE your ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS POINTS with such ELABORATE WORDS, PHRASES, ETC., to FURTHER and DEEPEN the WIDTH and DEPTH of your SELF-DESTRUCTIVE DISCEPTION, ONLY to PROOVE that YOUR LOGICAL INTELLIGENCE has ONLY shaped and molded you into the VERY FOOL that awaits the VERY DAY of PUBLIC, ETERNAL EMBARRASSMENT that you'll ONLY have YOUR SELF-IMPROVISED IDOL that you WORSHIP, HUMAN LOGIC, to thank FOR.
You could say, Terrance, that I'm your resident Psalm 14:1 fool.
You no doubt have been properly trained as to what kind of fool that is.
But that only makes sense if the book itself has credibility.
Now, let us say your concept is the right one. I'm just an average guy, of
average intelligence, was never a scholastic superstar, am no superstar on the
job or anywhere else. But I have seen the holes in all this religion. Perhaps a
little late, compared to many, but nonetheless I have. If by exceptional odds,
your god is the right one, and I am judged and publicly humiliated as you say,
then I and many others will be forced to concede. That isn't very likely,
however.
WELL, LeoGuardian, THIS JUST MIGHT come as a SUDDEN SHOCK that your ARROGANCE CERTAINLY WON'T be able to EVER HANDLE, but YOU ACTUALLY ADMITTED, INVOLUNTARILY, I dare add, that THERE WILL BE that VERY DAY that's ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE, TRUE BELIEVERS and TRUE NON-BELIEVERS, along with ANY/ALL WHATEVER IN-BETWEEN, IF ANY, will behold JESUS, SON of the LIVING, ALMIGHTY GOD, as KING of KINGS, and LORD of LORDS, either VOLUNTARILY, as their LOVING REDEEMER from the ENSLAVEMENT and CURSE of SIN, or INVOLUNTARILY, as their JUDGE, who will sentence them to ETERNAL FIRE and BRIMSTONE, which was ORIGINALLY ONLY MEANT for LUCIFER/SATAN and the one-third of the angels that participated in their FAILED ATTEMPT to OVERTHROW the VERY GOD of the UNIVERSE, which AGAIN, INESCAPABLY AS ALWAYS, YOUR FREE WILL to LITTERALLY HELP you to ACTUALLY CHOOSE WHOSE SIDE you're on, DETERMINES JUST HOW it'll ALL be said and done for you. CONGRATS!
So why do you suppose that might be? If the fire and brimstone was designed for the fallen angels, why not create another place to stick fallen humans?
You know, none of us who design things for a living will stick the battery designed for your iPhone into your Android.
Hell is a failure in design, my boy. I understand your texts were written by peple who were not engineers of any stripe, but if you stop and just think about it:
The infinite god of the infinite universe is far more likely to have designed a system fitting homo sapiens t go to, rather than just cosmically give up and toss them in with the fallen angels. It strikes me as such a peculiar and degraded means of design, possibly why it is that Hell never makes an appearance until after Greco-Roman influences who had also been influenced by Zarathustra AKA Zoroastrianism.
Why would a deity so capable of design, throw in the towel and toss dissident humans in with dissident angels, when it clearly states Hell was never dsigned for them? Occam's Razor if applied here would probably indicate the deity would create a location for dissident humans, especially if that deity is perfect in design capabilities.
The text doesn't present a model consistent with a super-designer. Sounds to me like the design has a bug, and a rather serious one at that, one your designer hasn't figured out how to resolve.
Or more likely, it is the imagination of bronze and iron-age men who over the years were influenced by surrounding cultures and religions ...
But then, taking everything literally relieves you of the actual responsibility of thinking about these engineering conundrums, yes? I mean, if you know you’re right, you don’t actually have to question anything, and you can feel superior to those who do. But believe it or not, recent experience with certain brands of Christianity leads me to believe that there are those enlightened beings who really admit that they basically don't know any more than the rest of us when it comes to heaven, hell, who goes where, what's literal and what's allegorical. Me, I'll continue to believe that we're all of us on a path toward understanding the so-called great mystery, and that in reality, Christians don't have any more of a lock on the ultimate answer than do the rest of us.
SO, what YOU'RE proposing is that if YOU'RE ACTUALLY INTRODUCED to a CURE of a disease that was ALWAYS, UNTIL NOW, thought to be FOREVER INCURABLE, but ALWAYS TREATABLE, you'd RATHER IGNORE the cure, ONLY to continue the TREATMENT, ONLY to find out, SOONER/LATER, that the VERY DISEASE that COULD'VE been IMMEDIATELY KILLED, ends up KILLING YOU, ALL THANKS owed to the CONSTANT TREATMENT. If THAT isn't EVER SO FOOLISH, OSAMA BINLADDIN should've been kept alive long enough to ACTUALLY make it to the WHITE HOUSE to become OUR NEXT US PRESIDENT! It's JUST AS WELL, ANYWAY, considering the VERY JEHODDIST that we already DO have (LOL)!
ALSO, there's ABSOLUTELY NO REASON, NO MYSTERY, WHATSOEVER, that GOD'S ABSOLUTELY INERRENT WORD hasn't ALREADY REVEALED, concerning WHY and for WHOM HELL was created--now, of COURSE, being that you ALREADY have your OWN AGENDA, upon WHICH, ONLY, ANY/ALL of YOUR QUESTIONS are ACTUALLY BASED, rather than choosing to let GOD'S WORD, ALONE, which is PERFECTLY DESIGNED for PERFECT TEACHING, be such basis for your questions, in order to be TRANSFORMED by the RENEWING of YOUR MINDS by HIS HOLY SPIRIT, it would CERTAINLY be NO WONDER that if I were to tell you that BECAUSE MAN was created in the VERY LIKENESS and IMAGE of GOD, HIMSELF, BY GOD, HIMSELF, FOR GOD, HIMSELF, ONLY, being given the VERY FREE WILL to CHOOSE to either WORSHIP HIM, ONLY, or NOT, that because MAN DID choose to fall for the VERY LIE of SATAN in the GARDEN of EDEN, which was the VERY MOMENT that SATAN was handed over our VERY BIRTHRIGHT, that EXPECTEDLY, out of the VERY SAME DESPERATION that SATAN shares with you to be RIGHT and GOD'S WORD be WRONG, that you'll become MORE of HEAVEN'S LAUGHING STOCK, by trying to find any "LOOSE ENDS" of THAT, whereas, RIGHT NOW, I'm REALLY PRESSED for TIME, so I'll DEFINITELY pick this up LATER, to continue with how MAN HAS, and SADLY CONTINUES TO, end up in HELL, which was NEVER for ANY of us, in the FIRST place, there's just SO MUCH MORE that ONLY GOD, HIMSELF, can only make clear to OUR LIMITED CAPACITY to EVER FULLY UNDERSTAND.
A dog pound is not designed for a disobedient child. As a parent, I would not send my daughter to the dog pound because she'd disappointed us. To her room? Yes, a place dsigned for humans, and for some things a fitting punishment.
And as a human parent, I know the difference between greater and lesser offenses. Something neither your god nor the neo-progressive leftists have a clue about, apparently.
Sending a nonconforming human to a hell created for demons and devils makes as much sense as sending a disobedient child to the dog pound as punishment.
On the other side, Johndy has a point: The Wife who is Christian and I were having a discussion recently and She Herself concludes that there are things we don't really know. Her conclusions are quite different than those of Terrance, and She has had quite a bit of study in that department.
my conclusions are also quite different than Terence. I think it's really important to be open-minded when it comes to the Christian religion. I see so many people seemingly unwilling or unable to see beyond their personal interpretations, or those of the people they follow. I suppose I can be a little like that, but I will be the first to admit that I don't even come close to knowing everything about the religion. It's a lifelong- perhaps even eternal process. The thing about Christianity is there are so many nuances to it. It's one of the reasons I am LDS. To me, the LDS interpretation of Christianity, makes the most sense, even if there are issues I have with some of our history. It could certainly be that the LDS interpretation of Christianity is wrong, but for now it all jives most with my understanding of who Jesus is and what our purpose is. I figure I'll deal with being wrong if the time comes. The main point I'm trying to make here is that the interpretation of the hereafter has so many variations that it will probably be very hard to know for sure which is correct until the end. To some, Hell is an actual lake of tormenting fire where souls burn unendingly for the sins they committed. You can be sent there for almost anything. To others, it's the same lake of actual flame and brimstone where only the people who haven't accepted Jesus would go. Yet to others, hell is a place in which we have such a clear understanding of ourselves, what we've done, what we could have been that our personal torment, as emotional and psychological as it is will be as a lake of fire. It's a place certainly, but also a state of being. The problem is, you can find evidence in the bible - and for the LDS, other scriptures - to support all of these ideas. You can't just look at passages about hell and think you know. You need context. You need personal revelation, and you need to study it out in your own mind. if you're Christian at all, it shouldn't be about which group is right, or who is going to what hell. It is about Jesus, the great mediator, being the one who paid the price for our sins, who bridged the gap between us and god the father, who loved us so much that he chose to bear torture, unbearable pain, humiliation and death for each one of us. And at the end he still forgave his tormenters. And he did all of this even though he knew there would be those of us who would scorn him, turn away from him, or even hate him.
Terence, you clearly wish to spread the message of Jesus Christ to others. This is part of the mission he has given us. But I fear you spend so much time telling everyone their wrong an calling people arrogant, among other things, that you destroy any semblence of credibility. Nobody is going to want to follow a god of mercy, love and justice when we who represent him can't act more like him. As a follower of Christ it is our responsibility to strive to lead by example. Scorn is not the way to get your point across.
And I think this is the big weakness with Christianity,, and perhaps other religions as well. We humans are a tribal lot in many, many ways even now, else there wouldn’t be as many problems in the world as there are. Sometimes I think it’s more than jjust wanting to be right; it’s the desire to lord it over other people. I think virulently radical Islam does this. Sometimes religions don’t want just to convert; they want to subjugate and make people submit. Another big problem I guess I have with Christianity is that there are brands of religion that are just as morally viable as Christianity supposedly is. The only difference between many of them and Christianity is that in Christianity, or at least some interpretations of it, you’re gunna definitely go to hell no matter how good you are if you don’t accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior. I have said why I’m not keen on this idea in other postings, and people can look at them if they wish. My interpretation of spirituality is rather different, I think, than the orthodox in that I think Christ was one of many teachers. I think Buddha was another. Mohammed still another. Every once in a few hundred years, great teachers come along who,, for lack of a better turn of phrase, try to teach us the way. They help us to progress as a species and, if such thing as a god or a spirit or a soul or whatever exists, they bring us possibly closer to that otherness beyond all comprehension. But then, I could be wrong.
No, John, I can get behind all of that. I think the desire to be right is definetly there, as is the desire to be superior. I don't believe religion is the cause for this however. You have, no doubt noticed the non-religious among us who act in that exact same way. Perhaps religion has the potential to enhance such feelings, but more likely I just think it's often a case of wanting what we believe to be the right road. We don't want to be told everything we believe in isn't right, because it can create fear. It can also devalue the time we've spent in learning it, and the feelings we associate with it. It makes us lash out quite strongly, giving us the need to prove wrong those differing in oppinion. I think it's also a matter, in the case of our tribal nature, of wanting others to believe as we do. It creates relatability. In my interpretation of the Christian God, stemming from the New Testament and Book of Mormon and other scriptures, God very clearly tells us that we are not to judge others. I believe what that boils down to is not to condemn a person, because there is need for at least some judgement of others' actions. You would not leave your 5 year old in the room with a known pedofile, even if that pedofile was sincerely repentant of their actions and trying to reform. Doing so would jepordize both the child, and the recovery process. That's a judgement, and given the abhorance of the act of pedofelia, perhaps not the best example of what I'm trying to say. It's not religion which causes humanity to judge and delve into hipocracy, but that need to be right, that desire to conform others, that is I believe at least some of the cause. I think religion just gets it worse because it represents a higher power, one whom, at least in many cases is supposed to embody ideals of peace, love, harmony, charity and compassion. When people act contrary to such virtues they are going to stand out a lot more. I believe very strongly that Jesus is essential to our eternal increase, but I believe too that many of the world religions have a lot of the right ideas. The primary me4ssages of many religions are quite compatible, even if the doctrines, culture and practices are sometimes not. Faith in Christ may be paramount, but embodying the virtues, mentioned above, whether you're Christian or not has, at least in my church, a great deal more marrit than much of Christianity gives it. After all, if someone says they have faith in Christ and a desire to follow him, how could they not be held accountable for actions which directly harm others? God is forgiving beyond our ability to comprehend, but we need to at least do our part. In that way, I think the kindist, most compassionate atheist will be in a much better position than the Christian who intentionally acts contrary to the commandments og God. Of course, that's only my oppinion, and it is an oppinion which stems from my church's belieffs on existence, pre-existence and eternity.
I should say that to me, morality is not a christian thing, it's a godly thing. You don't need to be religious to be grounded in moral virtue, just as not all of us who are religious are grounded in that moral virtue. After all, look at the way religious ideaologies perpetuate war sometimes.
Really? The idea that a lost tribe of Jews came over to America on wooden
submarines, using a magical, faith-based compass, and then wrote down
reports of their impossible activities on golden tablets, which were then buried
in up state New York, only to be found by a convicted fraud and conman who
had to put his face in a hat to read the golden tablets, which were written in a
language which doesn't exist called reformed egyptian, and which could only be
read by the use of magical seeing stones, which the man once had taken from
him and hidden by an evil frog makes more sense to you? I know three year
olds who wouldn't accept that as a bedtime story. They'd be like, "Ok, seriously,
princesses with impossibly long hair I can get on board with. Glass slippers, ok,
sure, why the hell not? But wooden submarines and evil frogs? You expect me
to believe that actually happened? Get outa here."
As I said, YOU, with your OWN AGENDA, who AREN'T WILLING to RECOGNIZE that YOU (and of COURSE, I include MYSELF, at ALL TIMES, whenever I SAY "YOU," EVEN THOUGH I might not always WRITE it, but I'M CERTAINLY NO BETTER) are the VERY CAUSE of your OWN DESTRUCTION, TIME and TIME AGAIN, are ALWAYS the CLEVEREST, with ALL of your PHILOSOPHICALLY-INFESTED ELABORATE ANSWERS, but ANYWAY, below CERTAINLY EXPLAINS what I started yesterday.
The new criticism of the scriptural record is corrosive and categorical from beginning to end. It claims, for example, that there is no evidence that any such person as Abraham ever lived or even could have lived in its new version of ancient Israelite origins. There was no migration from Mesopotamia to any “Promised Land.” Stories about the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, it argues, were cobbled together out of various bits of early local lore. Moses was no more historically real than Abraham, for there was no Israelite sojourn in Egypt and the Exodus was a fiction; nor did Joshua conquer the “Promised Land,” since the ancient Israelites were an indigenous culture already living in that land.
What about the monarchs Saul, David, and Solomon and their regional empires? Surely they were historical, weren’t they? No. According to this revisionism, Jerusalem priests in the eighth and seventh centuries BC probably invented them. In the words of Lazare, if David is historical, he was
not a mighty potentate whose power was felt from the Nile to the Euphrates but rather a freebooter who carved out what was at most a small duchy in the southern highlands around Jerusalem and Hebron. Indeed, the chief disagreement among scholars nowadays is between those who hold that David was a petty hilltop chieftain whose writ extended no more than a few miles in any direction and a small but vociferous band of “biblical minimalists” who maintain that he never existed at all.3
There never was a united Hebrew monarchy in this overcritical view, and, according to Finkelstein, the architectural accomplishments of David and Solomon should rather be ascribed to King Ahab of Israel. As for religious beliefs, monotheistic Judaism was itself a late development — again in contrast to biblical evidence — when also the heroic stories of the patriarchs and judges were crafted to show that Israel owned the land by rite of conquest. Probably not until we reach King Hezekiah in the eighth century BC do the extreme critics begin to grant historicity to the Old Testament narratives.
This attack on Old Testament Scripture is of a full-fledged, no-holds-barred variety. Such extreme views invite dismissal of this assault as the work of a cadre of sensation-seeking quasischolars whose radical revisionism almost guarantees attention in the media. This has been a trail well blazed, after all, by members of the so-called Jesus Seminar and their notorious votes on whether Jesus could have said or done something credited to Him in the Gospels. The more radical biblical minimalists certainly engage in sensationalism, but the balance of such scholars base their case almost entirely on what they deem to be the absence of archaeological evidence that corroborates material in the earlier eras of the Old Testament. Because their contentions are supposedly based on academic scholarship, we must now examine their allegations more closely.
False Claims
Abraham a Myth?Early criticsin the 1800s denied the existence of Abraham’s hometown, Ur of the Chaldees (Gen. 11:31). This continued until Sir Leonard Woolley’s systematic excavations from l922–34 uncovered the immense ziggurat or temple tower at Ur near the mouth of the Euphrates in Mesopotamia. The name “Abraham” appears in Mesopotamian records, and the various nationalities the patriarch encountered, as recorded in Genesis, are entirely consistent with the peoples known at that time and place. Other details in the biblical account regarding Abraham, such as the treaties he made with neighboring rulers and even the price of slaves, mesh well with what is known elsewhere in the history of the ancient Near East.4
No Migration from Mesopotamia?Semitic tribes of the time were continually moving into and out of Mesopotamia. In fact, Abraham’s recorded trek into the Promised Land along a route up the Euphrates valley to Haran in southern Anatolia, which has also been identified and excavated, and then down through Syria to Canaan is geographically accurate. Using that Fertile Crescent route was the only way to travel successfully from Mesopotamia to the Mediterranean in those days.
The Patriarchs? Nothing in the Genesis account contradicts the nomadic way of life, replete with flocks and herds, that was characteristic of life in the nineteenth or eighteenth centuries BC. The agreements and contracts of the time, such as finding a bride from members of the same tribe and other customs, are well known elsewhere in the ancient Near East. To argue that the patriarchs did not exist because their names have not been found archaeologically is merely an argument from silence — the weakest form of argumentation that can be used. As fair-minded historians put it, “Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence.”
No Israelite Sojourn in Egypt or Exodus Therefrom?Critics make much of the supposed “fact” that there is no mention of the Hebrews in hieroglyphic inscriptions, no mention of Moses, and no records of such a mass population movement as claimed in the biblical account of the Exodus from Egypt. This “fact” is questionable. The famous Israel Stele (an inscribed stone or slab) of Pharaoh Merneptah (described more fully below) states, “Israel — his seed is not.” Furthermore, even if there were no mention whatever of the Hebrews in Egyptian records, this also would prove nothing, especially in view of the well-known Egyptian proclivity never to record reverses or defeats or anything that would embarrass the majesty of the ruling monarch. Would any pharaoh have the following words chiseled onto his monument: “Under my administration, a great horde of Hebrew slaves successfully escaped into the Sinai Desert when we tried to prevent them”?
The ancient Egyptians, in fact, transformed some of their reverses into “victories.” One of the most imposing monuments in Egypt consists of four-seated colossi of Rameses II overlooking the Nile (now Lake Nasser) at Abu-Simbel. Rameses erected the colossi to intimidate the Ethiopians to the south who had heard correctly that he had barely escaped with his life at the battle of Kadesh against the Hittites, and so they thought Egypt was ripe for invasion. The story told on the walls inside this monument, however, was that of a marvelous Egyptian victory!
No Moses? The very name Moses is Egyptian, as witness pharaonic names such as Thut-mose and Ra-meses. The ambient life as described in Genesis and Exodus is entirely consonant with what we know of ancient Egypt in the Hyksos and Empire periods: the food, the feasts, everyday life, customs, the names of locations, the local deities, and the like are familiar in both Hebrew and Egyptian literature.5
No Exodus?It is true that few remains of encampments or artifacts from the Exodus era have been discovered archaeologically in the Sinai, but a nomadic, tribal migration would hardly leave behind permanent stone foundations of imposing buildings en route. Hardly any archaeology is taking place in the Sinai, and if this changes, evidence of migration may very well be uncovered. Again, beware of the argument from silence.
Terrance, there's something to be said not only for trolling but for honest thought.
One of my biggest beefs with Christianity as I have often heard it - and yes, I know that this is not always true - is that you're supposed to accept it. You're supposed to not ask questions, not challenge it. Those who challenge, those who ask, those who are cynical, must therefore be enemies. They must be conquered, even in the everyday sense. And this I abhore.
As a fairly rational human being, I think that basically anything is up for challenge if it's merited. Time and place, of course, but no matter how rock-solid something looks, evidence might turn up to give the metephoric bedrock a shake. And if it does, I think it behooves you (general you here) to listen.
Put another way, I detest the idea that if we dare to pick apart doctrine or arguments, we're suddenly scum, or hellbound, or at the very least bitter people who want nothing more than to topple something good. Some of us - and I count myself among these - simply want to separate wheat from chaff, and if that involves picking at arguments sometimes, then that's what I'll do. I will simply try not to chase someone who doesn't want chasing. As I've said in a previous topic, believe what you want.
I'm only saying all of this because there continues to be an attempted blanket dismissal of all things critical or rational (by the topic creator if no one else), and I'm sorry, but you can't just wave your hand and make arguments invalid.
Amen, Shepherd. I'd agree whole-heartedly with that. In my church it is actually encouraged to both study and question doctrine and history in order to understand. Yes a lot of it is still faith based, but not blind faith. That is why, Cody I can honestly say that yes, I do believe in the restoration of the church, and of the migration of people from Jerusalem. I believe that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God; that he found the plates buried on the hill along with the Eurom and thumum, the two seer stones, and the Liahona, the cumpass of curious workmanship which was presented to Lehi and his family by God, and which functions as per obedience to the commandments. I have red the book of mormon, the doctrine and covenants, the pearl of great price, the new testament, and at least a decent amount of the old. I've read a great amount of church literature and history, both from the perspective of the church and from those cclearly against it. I understand the claims against Joseph Smith, and the "reformed ejyption", and I've read the rebuttals. I'm not a believer out of ignorance, but out of study, pondering, and yes, also faith, and a hope of continued existence. There is far too much evidence for me personally to dismiss this church as a fraud. I understand you don't see evidence, you see bullshit. You can take any amazing story and make it sound perposterous, which you just did when greatly simplifying what the LDS church believes. Did Joseph Smith have some flaws, bad ones even? Yes he certainly did; he was only human, and he was rebuked for them time and time again by God. But how many throughout history have had their contributions to society live on despite their glaring flaws. considering the anti-LDS sentiment of the time, and now, Were some of Joseph's real flaws blown out of proportion by people with an agenda? I'd say it's very likely. This illiterate, uneducated farm boy is either a true prophet of God, or he is one of the greatest, most engenious con artists throughout history. If the latter, then everything he and so many others sacrificed is meaningless. And what would have been the point of what he did? To get rich? Considering nobody in the church really even gets paid, I'd say that's very unlikely. Even our leaders are volunteers; they are scientists, business people, artists, pilots who devote their time to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Certainly there is the tithing, but we have very detailed financial records, accessible to the public showing where that money is spehnt. Are there or have their been some individuals skimming a little off the top, sadly, probably. Greed is a great motivator. But that's the exception. Cody, you can call me stupid, or crazy, or laughable, or whatever mindless curse word you favor today. I know you will. But your demonstrated hatred and contempt of religion - seemingly all religion most likely causes you to be pre-disposed towards seeing only the bad and perposterous, and holding fast to "evidence" which supports your pre-disposed beliefs. And yes, I realize my own beliefs do this as well. You know, I did listen to that podcast you told me about. I didn't listen to the Book of Mormon one, but I did listen to the Pearl of Great Price. And I've got to say that if that's a representation of the kind of stuff you're basing your condemnation on, well then no wonder you think me and my religion are stupid. That podcast was entertaining, certainly. There were some amusing parts. but the guy clearly wasn't interested in trying to understand any of what he was reading. You can't just read the surface and expect to understand it all. You have to use the context of the time. You need to know how it relates to other scriptures. Often that means using the footnotes and references compiled over the years, something this guy disdainfully did not do, at least in what I heard. He set out to make a mockery, and he succeeded. Were I Anti LDS, I'd have found it very amusing. But as someone who has been studying the scriptures for the past ten years, I couldn't help but scratch my head, even as I also couldn't help chuckling at both his jokes, and his interpretations.
What about that biblical passage where Jesus says we need to act like little children and not question? Genuinely curious how people get around this.
Pretty easily Meglet. Is the time honored tradition of inserting one's fingers
into one's ears and shouting "nah nah nah I can't hear you, I can't hear you."
Works every time.
And BG, I'm going to be really blunt here, you can't believe in wooden
submarines and claim to be intelligent at the same time. Its simply not possible.
It requires, and again, this is harsh, it requires being stupid to believe such
things. It requires shutting off intelligence to believe in such things, and that is
the definition of stupid. Which is why I consider churches like the mormons to
be some of the most dangerous. It takes a special kind of stupid, and they want
to bring that kind of stupid to your front porch and feed it to you.
I see your point, Cody, but I was more interested in a Christian's point of view. I already know how you feel/what you think, and BG is generally up for honest discussion.
Okay, Cody. So to you I'm stupid. I can absolutely live with that. But I will say that just because something sounds unbelievable based on our understanding doesn't necessarily make it false. Do you know exactly how these barges were built, and all the materials they were built out of?
Ether chapter 2 states that the barges were built in a manner which was "tight like unto a dish". In other words, a vessel in which water could be held, but also where, when filled, water can not escape. There were holes which could be unstopped for breathing. Furthermore the barges were not submarines, but they were at times under the water due to the weather on which they were tossed. So obviously these boats would have had to be water resistant. They also stocked provisions to subsist throughout the journey. It is true that stones were set into either end of the the barges to act as a light source, and that that light came from the Lord. What the science behind that might have been I do not know, though I am curious to learn. But though I can not explain right now does not mean it is false. Perhaps you will enlighten me on what more information you have about these vessels, and what makes them so unbelievable? I know you'd like that.:)
Meglit, think of a little child. How full of wonder they are. The simplest things are amazing to them. they have strong faith in their parents, whom they look up to to teach them everything they need to learn. They are also humble. At the same time, children are incredibly inquisitive. They're constantly asking why, how, what. They often accept the answers as fact when they recieve them. This, I believe is what Jesus means in these passages. To be humble, meek, full of love of our Lord. Inquisitive, but also willing to accept answers and be obedient to his commandments. Little children are alive in Christ. They are without sin, pure, innocent, unspotted from the sins of the world.
Meglet, if you have a moment, may I direct you to a talk given by Jean A Stevens, who is one of the leaders of our primary - for children ages 3 to 12. I think she explains it very well.
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2011/04/become-as-a-little-child?lang=eng
THIS should be familiar to those of you that've read what's posted below BEFORE in any of my PAST similar topics:
"In Response to all the Religions
Why do Christians claim Jesus is God? Why do we ignore other teachers and teachings from other religions. Why do we say He is the only way and we cannot accept that there are other ways to God? These are the questions most often asked about us.
When we look at other religions they are not just asking us to add on their teacher but to ignore Jesus, and give their leader equal or a greater prominence. Jesus is then superceded by another, something no Christian would never do. Many leaders of these other religions often are opposed to what Jesus said or they change His statements to make them suitable in their own religious framework. Jesus asked the people to follow him alone, not only for that time and then look for another afterwards. Islam, Bahai, Mormonism [and others] all claim their prophet was to come with a new revelation in line with all the prophets. But why should accept these men’s claims unless they have proof. If Jesus is God follow him, if Mohammed, Baha’u’llah, Buddha or Krishna is God then follow him. Just about anyone can claim to be God and many have. Even in our modern times, there have been many but it is a whole other thing to prove it. Only one came from heaven died and raised from the dead, and ascended back to where He came from. This becomes the eliminating factor that makes it the Grand Canyon jump that no one can survive.
Some claim there are similarities to the moral ethical commands of Judaism/Christianity and other religions, such as in the teachings in Buddhism. This can be agreed upon to a certain extent. However there is a historical and Biblical reason for this. Religion can instill moral values and improve ones life temporarily but in the end it cannot affect our eternal state that continues after this life. The reason is that it does not have the solution to mans disease, it does not have the cure.
Romans chapter1 teaches that we all had a common ancestry and had the knowledge of God in common until mankind left the truth and started to worship the creation (paganism) instead of the creator of creation. From the time of Genesis God gave one man and woman together to be husband and wife and make a family. There was harmony in the family. Man knew it was wrong to murder, steal and lie from the beginning.
Rom 1:19-25: “Because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man-- and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.”
Romans 1:28-32: “And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.” Notice these are things that religions address, moral and ethical issues.
Also, we all have a conscience to instruct us in the basic guidance of what is right and wrong, he is like the umpire in certain respects. It is built into us as instinct to know what to do and not to do certain things. For example no matter what continent someone is on they know its wrong to murder another person. This would only change if a whole society or culture mandated a opposite philosophy as law which would go against ones conscience. The Bible also teaches that God has put eternity in our hearts. Man knows what he sees in this lifetime is not all there is. This is why almost unanimously all religions have a teaching on an afterlife, its built in knowledge there is an unseen afterlife. So we can trace many of the moral codes in the various religions to a common source from mans beginnings. But then Christianity rises above all the rest of the worlds religions in that it explains these thing in truth by the one who is the source of all things.
Even within the framework of Judaism and Christianity men like Moses and the prophets or Paul and Peter might have been replaced by other equally good men, but it is not so with Christ. On this theme Charles Gore writes: “To recognize this truth is to be struck by the contrast which in this respect Christianity presents to other-'religions. For example, the place which Mohammed holds in Islam is not the place which Jesus Christ holds in Christianity, but that which Moses holds in Judaism. The Arabian prophet made for himself no claim other than that which Jewish prophets made, other than that which all prophets, true or false, or partly true an partly false, have always made,--to speak the word of the Lord. The substance of Mohammedanism, considered as a religion, lies simply in the message which the Koran contains. It is, as no other religion is, founded upon a book. The person of the Prophet has its significance only so far as he is, supposed to have certificated the reality of the revelations which the book records.
Gautama, again, the founder of Buddhism, one, I suppose, of the noblest and greatest of mankind, is only the discoverer or rediscoverer of a method or way, the way of salvation, by which is meant the way to win final emancipation from the weary chain of existence, and to attain Nirvana, or Parinirvana, the final blessed extinction. Having found this way, after many years of weary searching, he can teach it to others, -but he is, all the time, only a preeminent example of the success of his own method, one of a series of Buddha's or enlightened ones, who shed on other men the light of their superior knowledge....”
The men who inaugurated these religious systems did not remain as the fountain source of all that they proposed, they were all cut short by the enemy of mankind, death. Nor do they remain as living executors of the order in the universe but have relinquished any control they had to another.
So many say I believe in Jesus, what they mean is they believe He existed and is a great teacher and a good man, but not that He is who Christians (and the Bible) claim He said He is. How do we know that that He claimed He was God? The Bible says this. It is this same Bible that Jesus quoted from the Old Testament about His teachings and Himself in prophecy.
If this is not true, then Jesus is neither a good man nor a true teacher. What other teacher do you know that said to make Jesus our Lord and follow Him ONLY. Or claimed they created the universe and then had organic miracles to prove it. If we look at the three or four main religions it was NOT Mohammed, Baha’u’llah, Krishna nor Buddha that claimed this,-- they couldn't. The Christian Gospel is not one truth among many “truths” that people nowadays can choose from, like going to a smorgasbord and choosing what one will or will not eat. It is either all true or not true at all. Because it claims to be all true and it is God who is watching over His word to preserve it.
Are you an honest skeptic willing to look at the evidence? We welcome those who are pursuing truth. There is an immense difference between a dishonest and honest skeptic. A dishonest skeptic will not believe even if they have the evidence, they will not call it evidence even if it is. It is then when the religious person needs to check his own heart to see if they care for truth.
If you can't recognize your sin then you can't have Jesus as a savior and you will as He said “unless you believe I Am you will de in your sins.” Jesus is the God of Moses that came only once in human flesh. This is the message of Christianity and it is what separates the wheat from the chaff of other religious teachers. If Jesus is who he said He is, (which is by proof, no one else has any contrary.) Then if you don't listen to Him it becomes the ultimate danger to ones soul. Religions are not all the same, like the example that all human are of the same species. No, not all religions lead to God. because there is only one from God. The only thing we do all hold these things in common is our sinful nature. But the solution is not the same in all religions that is offered to all. If it is only sin that needs to be given up for one to be pleasing to God or to go to heaven, than all we would need to do is give up our bad habits, but it goes much deeper than this.
All religion's have in common man pleasing God by his own hands and deeds, they are trying to reach upward to God. Christianity teaches man is unable to reach God, it took God himself to reach downward from heaven. He personally became a man to accomplish the solution for our dilemma which has always been sin.
Spiritual sayings are not enough it has to be the eternal truth that never changes from the God who came last of all in the person of JESUS CHRIST the ONLY TRUE GOD and savior. Christianity is summed up in the person of Christ. If you take Buddha out of Buddhism, Mohammed out of Islam…,Krishna out of Hinduism…, Baha'u'lla out of Bahaism…you still have their teachings intact, they are all doing quite well without their originator and teacher not being alive today. If you take Christ out of Christianity, if He didn’t rise you have nothing. All the religions “ point to' the graves of their leaders, no matter how brave or how ingenious they are. They all lie there waiting for their day to stand before the God they wanted to know; only Christianity points to an empty tomb and the promise to empty the graves by the one who rose first to live eternally.
None of these men were confirmed by the power of God, they are still dead, Jesus was resurrected and will judge the living and the dead.
John 3:19-21: “And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. “For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. “But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.” How does one know whether they practice the truth or a lie? By coming to the light (truth) found in Christ and the Bible.
Salvation is not by believing in God but by believing inthe gospel
To believe in God only makes us no longer an atheist. We are then a theist, but no one could have there sins forgiven by just believing in God. One must believe in the God who became man and died for your sins to be washed away. It is an act of unprecedented love that is not seen in any other religion. No other came from heaven and died for your sins while you rejected and hated Him. What Jesus did would be like you taking your worst enemy, someone who did evil to you personally, out to the best dinner he ever had and treat him as family and give the very best you have.
1 Peter 3:15: "Sanctify the lord in your hearts and always be ready to give a defense. To everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you." Not many people have hope and some have a false hope. All need hope but it needs to be true or its not real hope. As Christians were are asked to explain and defend the truth of Christ and God. So if we do this, don’t be offended, we only want you to come into a relationship with the same God that we now know. It is for no other reason than out of love and care for you as individuals. Because God cares so do we, Jesus Christ is still alive and changes hearts and lives today as He did when He first came nearly 2,000 years ago.
Maybe your tire from all the religious activities, the rituals you do; all the do's and don'ts you have to obey to please God. Jesus offered - “Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. “Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. “For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” (Matt 11:28-30)"
CHOOSING MY RELIGION
Of all the religions in the world and all the good that mankind has done in the name of these religions, there is only one person who stands out among the others. There have been more sermons spoken and books written on Jesus of Nazareth than any other individual in history. He alone stands out among any other religious teacher.
Now before I go into proving this, we can honestly say that each religion's founder to the adherents of that religion believe their founder stands out. That is the very reason they follow the religions of their particular founder. It is attractive to them because they see some unique redeeming quality in it, that they do not see somewhere else.
But being different and being a beacon to a certain culture at a certain time does not mean the religion or its teacher possess the truth.
Today there are many “faiths” but the Bible teaches there is only one faith, the one delivered to the saints once and for all. A recent poll taken found that 67% of Americans believe there is no such thing as absolute truth. For many people, choosing which religious system to join does not involve considering whether it is true. They choose what appeals to them, what works for them (pragmatism). In Omni magazine a number of years ago it stated that it doesn’t matter what you believe as long as it works for you. This has been embraced as the norm to know what is right and good. Unfortunately what works is no test for truth as something can work and not be based on truth at all. Something is not made true because we believe it. Most people today choose a religious system that appeals to their good nature, what they are comfortable with. If it works for them they are satisfied. If there is some self-improvement they can work into their lives that will make them happy that’s enough to justify it is right and from God.
Different religions may “work” for different people in some ways.When exercising our personal freedom of choice it cannot solve the issues of life, death, or God without considering the real truth! There are major differences to be considered. Our choice will not be satisfied by similar substitutes that change one’s present behavior and not their inner corrupt nature and their destination in the afterlife. God’s truth is from His nature and it is eternal. It will affect us in an eternal way. One can be satisfied with what they have arrived at not knowing that they would have struck gold if they would have kept on digging.
With the option of various faiths one can pick a religion or spirituality that is conducive to the lifestyle they want to live by. They can choose to believe in many Gods and become a Hindu. If monotheism and strict rituals appeal to them they can become Muslim. If they want to have an ethical way to live and do good without having God in their life they can become a Buddhist or another religion that has ethics without God. In this world there are many philosophies and religions all competing for our hearts. When one searches for the truth they need to be aware of many things that we are often not attentive to.There have been TV shows and articles about people of all faiths praying for the sick and all seeing some results. Some did not know that others were praying for them. This seems to imply that spirituality is all multi-faceted and that it does not matter what one believes or what God they pray to. Our culture is very pragmatic in its approach accepting the premise if it has worked for someone it should be accepted as valid and true. One persons ceiling becomes another person’s floor.
This is what I call the leaky bucket syndrome. As one pours water into a gallon bucket with a hole in it, the water slowly leaks out. Then they go and find another bucket and pour the water into that bucket which they find has a hole in it and they go find a third bucket to pour the water into. But no matter how many buckets you use to replace the first one the water still leaks out. The moral of the story is, if you start with the wrong premise, with an untruth, it will always lose its attraction later on. It will always make less sense as one goes under the surface and finds the belief system they have held is filled with holes. The bible teaches us there is only one foundation we can build on, that is Jesus Christ.
Mankind has a great imagination and a pursuit of knowing so developments of spiritual beliefs have surfaced. We are essentially spiritual beings because we have a spirit in a body that yearns to contact God our maker. In this world we have a smorgasbord of spirituality where one can eat freely to satisfy there hunger without knowing what they are eating. Before one fills themselves up on this spiritual food they need to see if the food they are ingesting is as healthy as they first thought. Certainly any newcomer to spiritual matters can be overwhelmed with all the claims and choices that are presented.
So who is right? Are they all right as some claim, or is there only one that is right? Ask people of ten religions and you will probably get 10 answers. So what makes Jesus and Christianity different? Jesus is unique.He came down from heaven to reach man. “He said to them, You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world” (John 8:23). While all religions are trying to reach up to God by the work of their own hands to please him. Instead God took the initiative and reached down to us. Why? Because we do not have the ability to please Him on our own.
So why is Jesus different? Some say if you ignore the doctrine one can find the same promotion of practices in all religions. Yes there may be a few commonalities. This mostly comes from our living in a day of increased communication, and by these means our world has shrunk. This has led to more familiarity with the religious beliefs of other people and with it has come more tolerance finding what we have in common and ignoring the differences. We can as Christians respect people’s culture and choice but we do not have to agree with their religious system.Instead they need to hear the gospel and we are commanded to give it to them. After all, the gospel is God’s message of love to the people of the earth. If we do not give them the gospel are we really showing them love no matter what kind of good we do toward them?
This is what separates Jesus and His offer of a relationship to God, which we now call Christianity, from all the other teachers of religions. If we take Buddha out of Buddhism it goes on. One can practice Buddhism divorced from its founder. If Krishna is removed from Hinduism the teachings and the techniques continue. One can practice Islam without Mohammed being alive. But if we take Jesus out of Christianity it crumbles. Because this religion (if I may be allowed to use the term), is based upon a person and His work done on the cross, not our work. Salvation rests on the person of Christ who must be alive or it cannot be carried out. He alone has come back to life. There is no other religious teacher who started their religion that has died, and is alive today. None. 2 Tim. 1:9-10 “Calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began, but has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who has abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.” It was Jesus who died for everyone’s sins,I find it interesting that no other religious leader claims this.
If we look carefully there has never been another man or woman like Jesus. He never lied. He only told the truth, even when it offended people. He lied to no one even when it meant saving His life. He lived a life completely free from bad influences having total integrity. If he ran for a political office all the regular people who wanted an honest man would have voted for him. There was no one who could accuse him of any wrongdoing so they had to make up lies. They lied about what He said throughout his ministry and they even lied about his being raised from the dead. People continue to lie about him and the Bible's record even to the point of the ridiculous. One of the allegations is that the Bible was written a hundred years later after His death involving no eyewitnesses. The records show that the writers claimed to be eyewitnesses.
He loved people more than anything in the world as He came to die so even his enemies can be forgiven. His life was an open book to all who wanted to know Him. He did nothing in secret. He was approachable by all willing to listen and gave perfect wisdom in every situation.Jesus did not “borrow” His teachings from anyone. His source was God, “My doctrine is not Mine, but His who sent Me. If anyone wants to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it was from God or whether I speak of My own authority” (John 7:16,17).
His compassion was evident to all. He ate with the outcasts and undesirables of society. “And behold, a leper came and worshiped Him saying, ‘Lord, if You are willing, You can make me clean.’ Then Jesus put out His hand and touched Him saying, ‘I am willing; be cleansed.’ And immediately his leprosy was cleansed” (Matthew 8:2,3). While the Religious leaders of the day scorned certain groups of people especially those who were not Pharisees, He instead sat and talked and ate with them. He let them know they were loved and not rejected by God. He had compassion on those rejected by the religious society and was for the underdog. He lifted up those who were in despair and humbled those who elevated themselves. As Peter His disciple later writes “Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time, casting all your care upon Him, for He cares for you” (1 Peter 5:6,7).
He gave us the highest standard of human morality and showed power to the helpless beyond any normal human ability. His abilities were supernatural as He was able to see into people’s hearts and know what they were thinking. He was able to heal with a word, not needing to be present. There has never been another like him before or afterwards. He affected our history in such a manner that we count our dating from the time he was born. There is hardly a religion that does not recognize Him today.
In 1970 years He has changed millions of lives for the better and still answers those who call upon him. No one can ever find a bad thing about him. They might find fault with the Church but they couldn’t with Jesus when He was alive, and still can't today. Yet people ignore him and find others to esteem above him or just don’t believe a word He said that is recorded in the New Testament. So why do many people refuse His ability to have compassion and love them? Why do they hate him? Why do they oppose him, when He said He is the only way, truth and life for all people? With people always appealing to tolerance, why are they not tolerant of Jesus? The reason is because His statements of exclusiveness are disturbing.
Because He gives an absolute standard of truth. In a world where people are led by their feelings people become offended. He taught that we are not good in ourselves. So they look at His teachings as negative, as He addresses fallen mankind as sinners. “He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe in the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (John 3:36). “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). But until one can comes to the realization that this is their state without Christ He can’t set them free.
If all the other religions are equally valid ways to God, then the Christian claim of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross as the one and only way would be impossible. It would be not just one of the many ways but the only wrong way. If we could work out our own salvation by our good deeds, religious rituals, and practices as each religion requires, God did not have to bring the solution for our sins by crucifixion. It would have been the only absolutely wrong thing to do!
If Jesus did not rise from the dead as He claimed then His claims and His followers are audacious, preposterous and they would be the greatest group of deceivers of all time. He would not be a good teacher to be listened to but should be rejected, despite all the other wonderful things that were said and done to better mankind. It either is truth and should be held onto like our being in a life raft alone in the middle of the sea or not a word should go into our ears. John Warwick Montgomery a respected theologian writes that: Christianity’s truth claim consists merely of a finger pointing back through time to an historical figure who divided world history into two parts—to Jesus of Nazareth—to His statements concerning Himself and true religion, and to the life He led attesting to the statements He made. An honest, historically accurate, scientific investigation of these data (involving chiefly a study of the documents collected in the New Testament) will show that Jesus claimed to be God Incarnate, that He described the only true (but not the only possible) religion consisting of fellowship with Himself, and that He attested His claims by a sinless life which profoundly affected everyone who crossed His path, and by a resurrection which left no doubt in the minds of eyewitnesses that He was in fact the true God (John W. Montgomery, The Shape of The Past: An Introduction to Philosophical Historiography, vol. 1, p. 328 1962).
No other religious teacher laid down their life for their followers like this and they certainly did not for those who opposed them and were enemies. “For when we were without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:6-8).
To disbelieve in the historical recoded documents that we have today one must disregard our entire knowledge of Greco Roman history. Because our knowledge of these cultures and the past depends upon documentation that is far less adequate and evidential than the evidence we have for Jesus and the Bible.
Bible Scholar F. F. Bruce stated, “The historical ‘once-for-all-ness’ of Christianity which distinguishes it from those religious and philosophical systems, which are not specially related to any particular time, makes the reliability of the writings which purport to record this revelation a question of first-rate importance” (The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? p. 8).
Jesus made it clear that we must choose when we hear. We are either for him or against him. There is no neutral ground, for to make no choice is a choice in itself. Christianity is either true reality or a figment of people’s imagination. If not the truth it is then no more or less then the other religions, it is one option to choose among the others.
It is one thing to say God gave me a message. It is a whole other thing to say I am God and here is the message. Those who walked with Jesus were very careful to write down what they heard as eyewitnesses.Why believe and follow something that is not true.Peter writes “For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.” (2 Pet .1:16-18) Peter is referring to the transfiguration as they were able to see Jesus for who he really is. As He hid himself from the people’s eyes but revealed it to his three closest followers on the mountaintop. Peter later died for believing in Christ.
Another one of the witnesses was John who later wrote in his first epistle, “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life--the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us--that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. And these things we write to you that your joy may be full” (I Jn.1:1-4). Christianity gives people the truth which in turn gives them an unfading happiness through life. Not a happiness that is dependent on circumstanced but a inner joy that can be constant.
The apostle Paul who was an adamant enemy of Christianity was on his way to his next extermination of Christians when he was convinced by an experience with Jesus. “I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen” (Romans 9:1-5).
People often ask the question “Can you prove Christianity is true?” “Have you seen God?In answering these questions- no I have not seen God physically but I have seen his touch on my life and numerous others to know it is real. After one comes into a relationship with Him they know the difference of before and after. There is a transforming power that is given to the recipient by faith. Christianity can be proven to be true because it rests on the claims of Christ. But the question that needs to be asked back is “will the person accept it if there is sufficient evidence.” Some do and some don’t despite the evidence that is presented.
In Heb.11:3 the word of God states that what we see is made by things we do not see, invisible things. In 1896 Roshen who began atomic physics discovered the X- ray and in 1923 began to discover through the electronic microscope that atoms were made of tiny particles of energy and out of these sub atomic particles are what all things were made of. Now what holds these atoms together? The nucleus of an atom are so changed that they should repel each other. There is some invisible force that holds it together.We cannot see this but reality and our experience tells us this is true. In Heb.1:3 it tells us Christ the architect of the universe holds all things together by the word of His power. Col.1:17 tells us “in Christ” all things consist and are held together. How is this possible that thousands of years before science discovered the laws and the mechanics to prove the things that could not be seen by the eye, the Bible eludes to Science when it is truly scientific verifies the Bible. So we are without excuse and have more knowledge then necessary to believe in our day and age.
It’s not that we don’t know God exists. For the prophet Isaiah writes Isa.64:4 “For since the beginning of the world men have not heard nor perceived by the ear, nor has the eye seen any God besides You, who acts for the one who waits for Him.” Over 700 years later the apostle Paul in the New Testament writes. Rom.1:20 “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, (not hidden) being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man-- and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.” This is where the other religions were birthed from refusing the correct knowledge of God that was once universally known. We now have the God of Eastern thought as impersonal, God is everything and everything is God. This is now the new age concept of God as a life force within all of creation. The Bible presents God as independent from His creation, the God of the Bible is personal and relational.Christianity believes and teaches that the Bible alone is the revealed Word of God. Even though it was written by men, the source of the authorship is God. This claim was not invented by the Church, but is the claim the Bible makes for itself.Men of God’s own choosing recorded the words that were heard from Him.
Christianity claims a moral certainty, to anyone who is willing to take the evidence and evaluate it in light of its historicity,prophecy and manuscripts. Christianity claims an external verification through evidence, as well as an internal witness through God.To those looking in from outside the Christian faith, they can be shown a great amount of evidence for its truth claims. But when a person becomes a Christian, the assurance of truth becomes reality. But this takes a step of faith to reach this point. This is not a blind faith but an evidential faith. We need to understand that there is no 100% evidence provided for the seeker. Despite less than 100% evidence it will not stop someone from coming to an accurate and appropriate conclusion.Faith is necessary to know God because God is invisible and He is infinite. We as creatures have been given a certain amount of proof to know He exists and what we need to know Him. This faith is much like a small child in the home of loving parent’s. When the child is hungry he or she knows (trusts) the parents provision for them, that they will not go hungry. The parents are watching out for the child because of a relationship of love. So although the child does not have the evidence that everyday the parents will feed him or her, the child trusts the parents. So 100% evidence is not necessary for one to come to God. Needless to say we find that people don’t apply the standard of 100% certainty to anything else for if they did, nothing would happen. No one makes decisions on 100% certainties for anything. To do so one would have to wait great lengths of time to make any move. When we buy something we are trusting a manufacturer that it will work like they say. When we drive on the road we are trusting the other drivers to obey the laws. There is no one that possesses 100% certainty for anything because we do not have perfect knowledge. God knows this and this is why He asks for us to exercise faith. Faith is trust and in this we can become certain, and have the assurance that what He said is true. Only a portion of evidence is necessary to believe in the truth. It’s like being in a house with the lights out and the shades closed in the middle of a sunny day. Someone can come over and tell us to go outside to experience a beautiful day. We can stay in the dark and say I don’t believe its light or we can trust that person’s report and just walk outside. Or we can ask for some evidence by looking out the window. Looking out the window we have enough evidence that it is sunny like they say, but we are not experiencing it. If we go outside we can find the report true, it is a beautiful day. We can feel the sun on us and the breeze blowing. Faith without any action is not faith. After faith is exercised the complete evidence of it will be there. We then know what we believe.
Moses 1500 years before Christ came into the world incorporated the first five books of the bible. Then there are the words of the prophets that spoke throughout Israel’s history. Because they turned their back on the Lord He sent them men calling them to repent and believe. They also spoke of a future redeemer through Israel that would bring reconciliation to the whole world. Heb.1 tells us that God does not use prophets any longer to deliver His scripture to his people but it is by the ultimate message bearer, Jesus the Son of God. So the eyewitnesses of Jesus wrote down His words as the final revelation to man. It was climatic and final because it was God who became a man this time. He didn’t send ANOTHER PROPHET BUT CAME HIMSELF. He said He was sent directly from heaven. So when someone refuses the New Testament record they are rejecting God almost face to face. “But Isaiah is very bold and says: “I was found by those who did not seek Me; I was made manifest to those who did not ask for Me” (Rom. 10:20). No one seeks God on their own but it is He who is seeking us. Have you been sought? Has He come to you in ways only you would personally know?
It’s not often a matter of evidence needed to believe but resistance to the truth of God that keeps us in unbelief. It is something we all have in our own fallen nature, as the Scripture says the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God. As Jesus spoke to Nicodemus He said in John 3:16-21: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.” It’s about dealing with our sin nature of which no other religious system has an answer for.
The light spoken of here is synonymous with God and His word, as both are called light. God is light and in Him is no darkness at all. The gospel is so simple that it disturbs those who consider themselves intelligent and important people of the world.
Are you looking for reasons to believe? Are you an honest seeker of the truth? Are you looking for reasons to disbelieve? Prov.8:17: “I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently will find me.” You may not have enough information to satisfy you about Jesus, but are you open enough, willing to hear and to gain understanding. Has He drawn you so that you now want to know Him?
The problem is not a matter of “I can’t believe because the facts have not been presented” but it is more like “No matter what proof you present, I won’t accept it.” If anyone is truly interested in evaluating the evidence for proof of Christianity’s truth, understand that God (the true God) has somethingwonderful for your life.“For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope. Then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and I will listen to you. And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart.” (Jer. 29:11-13)God’s will is for a person to believe and repent. As it is written God is not willing for any to perish but that all will come to repentance. We have the ability to do so but it becomes a matter of choice. God has done all to prove His love for us by sending His Son to earth to be rejected by those He loved and cared for. To die an excruciating death, humiliated before the people He came to forgive yet He did not retaliate. He continues to hold out open arms to anyone who will come to him and will close them around those who come to the cross for forgiveness of their sins.
wpe26.jpg (961 bytes)
There exists in your last two posts a fallacy of self-validation. Something cannot be true simply because it is stated to be so.
If I say "Terrance has seven arms", I am not speaking the truth. If I write a book, or help write one at least, in which one of the statements is "Terrance has seven arms", it still does not make it so. Put another way, nonsense is still nonsense.
The fact that other religious leaders are dead and gone is not a credible explanation or proof of the superiority of - or even the existence of - the Christian Jesus. First off, did the man not die on the cross? That does tend to mean he died. Second, since when does one's status as living or dead change the impact of one's teachings? Nelson Mandela has died, but does that mean he should not be largely lauded for his struggles against apartheid? Ditto Martin Luther King, who was assassinated but still tried his best to champion civil rights. These people, as well as thousands of others, are not somehow lesser because they are not pseudo-immortalized in a book written by human hands and falsely claimed to be eternal.
The simple fact is this. If you believe in any mythic figure, any at all, it takes faith. This is especially true if a figure who likely did exist in real life was supposed to have done or participated in acts which have never been seen before or since. What would you do if someone wrote a book next year detailing Nelson Mandela's second life as a holy spirit? Would you dismiss it out of hand? You probably would, and rightly so, because it lacked proof.
And here is the cyclical nature of the argument:
"The bible must be correct, because it is the word of God. It is the word of God because the Bible says it is, and the Bible must be correct."
Kind of like a Chinese finger-trap. Self-validating, empty proof. It doesn't stand up logically. To accept it, you have to first accept that either 1. the Bible is the word of God, 2. the word of God is infallible, or both. Probably both. If you reject any of those tenets, you're stuck. Most non-Christians fail to come to terms with one or both of those conditions.
Thus, anything predicated on the Bible, or the word of God, has that inherent flaw. It self-justifies.
I look with sadness on anyone who believes in a faith-based system and considers their beliefs beyond reproach, particularly if they are able and willing to push their beliefs on others. There is simply far too much in the world that we aren't clear on, and there aren't enough answers to decide definitively. Religion is not rational, and that's okay, but I think you make a mistake assuming that it is, particularly when you try telling someone that there is proof of their inferiority in the face of your religion. the moment you do that, you're treading dangerous ground.
And as far as simply wanting to enlighten people? I call bullshit on that one. If you wanted to enlighten, you would approach only those who showed that they were willing. You wouldn't push, you wouldn't find yourself superior, you wouldn't believe your religious system untouchable. It's a power-play built directly into the fundamental doctrine of the religion, and one of the reasons there is so much religious text is because I believe Christianity was the first truly militant religion...the kind over which large wars were often fought, and much blood spilt, sheerly for the pleasure of converting the conquered and subjugated populace. It spread aggressively because the people who formulated it were smart enough to know which buttons to push in their constituants.
Please note that I'm making a split here between Christianity as an organized religions, and the straight-up teachings of Jesus. They're not one in the same.
Terance, I enjoyed that second post. It resonates with me, as a Christian. But I can see Shepherd's point. I generally avoid hardcore philosophy because it too is very cyclical, but I can say it does take more than someone saying something is absolute truth to be convincing. Evidence is, sadly in many cases quite subjective. I agree with this article, but then, I am Christian, and am thus pre-disposed towards belief. For me the evidence is apparent. For someone like Cody and Shepherd, it is not. It's true that our mission is Christians is to bring souls unto Christ. But that is often so much more than preaching. The greatest missionaries live the gospel and lead by example. And when we do that, people notice because we stand out. And of course, it requires even a desire to believe from the ones we come into contact with. In that way, Shepherd is right. We can not shove our beliefs at people and expect the uninterested, uncertain and especially zealously anti not to push back in various degrees.
One thing I did not see in Heb 1 is where it actually says that there will be no more prophets after Jesus comes.
THIS raises the FOLLOWING QUESTION: when Shepherd said that he "LOOKS with SADNESS on ANYONE who believes in a faith-based system," as a response to the GOSPEL that's being SHARED, is he REALLY saying that he has UTTER CONTEMPT for the VERY TRUTH that speaks CLEARLY and DIRECTLY to one's CONCIENCE, compelling one to ULTIMATELY/NARROWLY DECIDE? Below FURTHER EXPLAINS what I'm asking.
"To DefineWhat we Believe
The Bible identifies what are the essential doctrines to the Christian faith by consistently promoting them through the gospels, the book of Acts and especially the epistles that were written to the churches.
To define what we believe is to make clear what is historic/ biblical Christianity. What is presented in the Bible as necessary teachings that we must adhere to. Many do not understand Christianity is the fulfillment, the completion of Judaism. It is the goal of what was started with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Given to Moses and the prophets. The Bible for the most part is written through the context of Jewish writers and prophets. This is why Jesus and the apostles all refer back to the Old Testament as the basis for the new covenant, for prophecy being fulfilled and their teachings to the new entity, the church.
Scripture, alone is said to be "God-breathed" (Theopnuestos) by it alone believers are complete equipped for- every, good work" (2 Timothy 3:16-17). The doctrine of Sola Scriptura is the Bibles position, not a promotion of a certain denomination. It is the Word that is to be our guidance and source for living a spiritual life. We are admonished to teach sound doctrine which encompasses the whole counsel of Scripture, from Genesis to Revelation.
1Timothy 4:6 Paul writes for us to be “nourished in the words of faith and of the good doctrine which you have carefully followed.”
To explain to others what is the Christian faith we are encouraged to, “Study to show thyself approved, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed” (1 Timothy 2:15).The word “study” in this passage means “to make an effort, to be earnest, and diligent, with labor.” The phrase “rightly dividing” comes from the Greek word “orthotomeo,” which means “to make a straight cut, to dissect correctly, to rightly divide.”In other words, with no hesitation, make every effort to understand correctly what the Word of God actually says, so it can be used to benefit yourself and those you speak to. The Holy Spirit is given to us for understanding the Scripture, to lead us into all Truth and to give us the power to live it.
Christians believe there is only one God who is self- existent before anything was made.
Isa. 54:5 : “Holy One of Israel; he is called the God of the whole earth.”
I King 8:60: “that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God; there is no other.”
God is triune in His nature is seen by the persons that are called God in the Bible. each having an eternal nature and the attributes and characteristics of God, but different positions (Mt.28:19).
Numerous doctrines are to be accepted for one to be called a Christian. The virgin conception, the incarnation; the Deity of Christ - Jesus is God in flesh. The sinfulness of man and the need of a savior. The new birth by the Gospel (death burial and physical resurrection of Jesus), the rapture/ resurrection, the second coming, eternal mediator and priesthood of Jesus, the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture, judgment and rewards to the believers. These are essentials that are clarified all through the Scripture.
When people claim Christ but do not understand the uniqueness of His person, they eventually incorporate Christ as a teacher among the many other teachers, not as the way the truth the life-the only way to the Father. The way to God is accomplished not by keeping the commandments but by God's grace working by faith in the work Christ did by his crucifixion. Romans 3:24: “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ.” We are saved by grace through faith alone, and kept by God’s grace as we walk in faith.
There is no Christian faith without “sound doctrine” being taught to the church (1 Tim. 1:10; Titus 1:9), “sound instruction” (1 Tim. 6:3), or the “pattern of sound teaching” (2 Tim. 1:13-14). It is this doctrine, or, more precisely, the truth it contains that expresses what was “taught” by Holy Spirit through the apostles and “delivered” to the Church. One cannot be a Christian and grow in their faith unless they are being taught the Bible correctly. The word is our light; we are like a new plant that stretches out toward the light for its life, it soon falls over if it has no root and does not grow sturdily upward. Various things come against us as we receive the word (Mt.13 the parable of the sower and the seed).
The basics need to be taught over and over until the believer is established. We start with foundational teachings, the milk. As we grow we are expected to digest the meat. There are basics we need to understand as our foundation before we can go on to the deeper or harder teachings. The cults often major on the hard teachings and then use these to make themselves unique. Things quickly become confusing as one has not built on the foundation correctly.
The New Testament exhorts people to have right doctrine more often than practicing right conduct, because if you believe and practice right doctrine, right conduct will naturally follow. Right doctrine means your Christianity will be practical and effective. People will see the change in your life and Christ will be glorified.
All through the book of Acts “Then the word of God spread”(Acts 6:7, 13:49); when they were scattered, they “went everywhere preaching the word” (Acts 8:4); “the word of God grew and multiplied” (Acts 12:24). It was their concentration on the Word that brought an increase to the church. “they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine, in fellowship, breaking of bread and in prayers” (Acts 2:42). Notice that doctrine (teaching) came first. Those who believed the gospel were brought into the Church and “they continued steadfastly in the Apostles doctrine, having all things in common, and the Church increased daily.”
The epistles are what the church was taught to be discipled. “If you instruct the brethren in these things, you will be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished in the words of faith and of good doctrine which you have carefully followed” (1 Timothy 4:6). Paul writes “Till I come give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine” (1 Timothy 4:13). “Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you” (1 Timothy 4:16).
We have a great need to understand what we believe so we can better explain it to others so they understand the differences. “These also who erred in spirit will come to understanding, and those who complained will learn doctrine” (Isaiah 29:24).
We should be able to explain the overall teaching on salvation through the new covenant which Jesus completed when he died and resurrected. That salvation it is by grace not by works or by keeping the Old Testament commandments. This is what separates a true biblical church from what we classify as cults. All of Christianity begins with and centers upon the person of Jesus Christ and His work on the cross. It was Paul who said the cross was everything to him.
In Rev. 3:7 Jesus commends the church for keeping both His “word and his name.”
We are to have the goal of trying to be true and accurate to God’s word and to continue to have his blessing on our ministry (www.letusreason.org)."
The way people get around the passage about little children is actually interesting, and speaks to not only Christianity but many ideologies Christian and secular. What has been posited as evil caused by religion can better be stated as evil caused by ideology, where ideology trumps
So here's how the ReasonableFaith and other apologetics crowd of Christians circumvent the passage you speak of:
Coming to faith in Christ requires the tacit acceptance of a little child, but afterwards you "spiritually" grow up, which does in fact involve questioning and seeking out sources. The problem is, this is faith mixed with the enlightenment era, folks like John Locke. The sources you're supposed to seek out are typically apologetics and nonreligious sources that don't contradict the actual texts.
This leaves the participant in the proverbial rabbit hole, find an answer to one question in one apologetics book, which only opens a Pandora's box of more questions. "Reasonable faith" is the narrative.
I'm pretty skeptical of the frequent use of the word "addiction," and I'm not willing to say this system creates apologetics addicts, but there are parallels in the patterns here. Unlike standard scientific theories that many of us in applied sciences use, apologetics tends to patch one opening by creating another. It doesn't properly buid on itself.
That, and you get the "proofs" of a god, followed by an inexcusably illogical leap to a very Western Evangelical sense of a god, the only god picture I have personally ever had, and draw your assertions from there.
It's a multi-billion-dollar business, full of debates, speeches, treatises, etc.
Karen Strong writes about this a lot in her book series starting with The History Of God. What you're told is that the faith you espouse is reasonable, the deity is the supreme reasoned and that you can reasonably understand at least enough of it to be convinced and resolve contradictions.
I can say with clarity that all it takes to become atheist is to read their apologetics with the mind set of diligently resolving the technical, philosophical and moral contradictions. That's what I did. And to be honest, by the time I made it to the very popular Hitchens, I found him to be dreadfully anti-climactic. I was probably the last person to read his popular book.
But make no mistake, apologetics is how they get that done, not sticking their fingers in their ears. There is a multi-billion-dollar Christian book business to prove it. I understand that a large slice of that is so-called self help and other soft science stuff I've personally never read, but apologetics is still extremely big game fish. With some really bright minds on board, too. Folks like William Lane Craig, who is both a cosmologist and a philosopher.
Craig's ex-protégé, John W. Loftus, writes a very thorough series of books that do a lot for questioning and ex-Christians. He has the unique perspective of having been an apologist for Christianity, and hosts the website DebunkingChristianity.blogspot.com and his books are on Bookshare.
He is even recognized by Christian sources, which is rare for them as they tend to do as the new third wave feminists do, -- block and vilify whomever they disagree with.
He explores the claims of Christianity from the inside out, from the outside in, and turns it inside out for further examination.
Not everyone takes to the apologetics track, of course. But to claim the response necessarily is a matter of plugging one's ears? That claim is, generously put, irrationally simplistic.
I know there are families that discourage questioning, I have a friend in my atheist group that comes from such a place. I was fortunate enough to not be subjected to that.
My parents weren't religious but they didn't mind me asking questions either. and I did, of course I did. When they couldn't give me answers, I looked elsewhere. I was lucky (or perhaps unlucky, depending on your take on things) in that I came to realize very quickly that contradictions couldn't just be patched with more contradictions. In some ways, I will probably never understand what it's like to believe in any sort of true god, because I simply don't have it in me to leap that large a chasm on blind faith.
Faith, as in the nonspiritual kind, is part of one's existence, and I can have that. Get to know me, uphold my trust, and I will have faith that you continue to do so. But this is predicated on the fact that you've built up a relationship with me. At face, I accept that most people aren't assholes and they're probably worth giving a chance to, but I understand it for the calculated risk it represents. Beyond that, how I deal with you and your actions depends entirely on what you do.
But when a system demands that I not only suspend things I have seen proof of, but also asks me to constantly accept at a glance ideas I find baseless, I simply can't abide it. It's too hypocritical, possesses too many logic faults. And I'm sure this makes me sound like a computer, but still.
And just so we're clear: when I said earlier that I felt sadness, it was at the arrogance, not the faith. The moment you take a belief system, which is built on so many blind leaps, and start claiming it's superior, you're willfully turning away from reason on some level. To say that you believe it is one thing...but then to potentially go and put others down with it, even passively, is something I'm not at all okay with. If you believe you're getting a reward while others who don't believe as you do are getting punished, that's arrogance. If you believe your god is the one true god purely because a book said so, that's also arrogance. If you work hard enough to convert anyone who has not specifically sought you out for answers, then that, too, is arrogance. At the core of all of these things is a single driving need: to be right, to be justified, to be superior. And I'm sad every time I see it. We, as people, should be above such pettiness.
The futility and fatality of Atheism
From the beginning of time man has believed in a creator, as we can see many religions have been upon this ancient belief. The fact that many religions have pagan beliefs and practices does not negate the point that man has been a religious being and that atheism has only grown to what it is in the last few centuries.
So why is Atheism philosophically bankrupt? The problem with the philosophy of atheism is that it does not go back far enough to arrive at a logical conclusion
If there was a time when nothing existed what made it change. Some claim two gases collided - but they cannot explain where did the gases from? How did they collide, why are there two gases and not one. Where were they before they combined. How long did they exist before they caused a big bang What did they exist in before a universe was there?
Can this be proven by reality today or in anytime in history? To the atheists there is always a substance there to create another, such as a self existing universe. Thus they themselves are creating the reasons for a beginning. Much has to be assumed to come to the conclusions they hold. The majority of scientists today are of the opinion that the universe actually began to exist at a certain time, so this theory can be discarded.
The late Carl Sagan said, “If we must worship a power greater than ourselves, does it not make sense to revere the Sun and stars?” (Carl Sagan, Cosmos (Random House, 1980), p.243.) Does it make sense to worship another created thing? Out of necessity they have manufactured something with the power of existence beside what is created, as a replacement for God the creator.
For example, I have a book, but the book needed a pen to be used to first write its contents (or computer program) but you still needed an intelligence to use the pen to write the book. No intelligence no pen and no book. But atheists want us to believe the pen and book came into being from nothing. This does seem to stretch ones credulity.
Reality teaches us that all things that exist have their existence depend upon other things. If there was nothing; what did not exist, then it cannot be the cause of its own existence, nor of anything else. How could it bring itself into being if it does not exist? Therefore, our reality of life teaches that all things great and small depend upon something else for their existence.
The universe, our earth is filled with natural laws, which means that something orchestrated these laws for the things to exist.
Science cannot explain how life began or what life is. What are the chances of life coming from non life? Has anyone seen anything come from nothing?
Even the bible does not teach something came from nothing but that God is the creator, He initiated all that is seen and unseen to exist. As incomprehensible this is to the human mind that a being exists with such power to draw out the cosmos galaxy to galaxy that it is nearly incomprehensible to measure the vastness, that is what we are confronted with.
Only with a crises of faith in Christianity has it opened the door for young people to be corralled in with a philosophy of no hope. No doubt the failings of certain Christian ministers have given a boost to those who take “there is no God” position. But if we were to use this same standard then those who failed in sports taking drugs for enhancement or those who cheat in marriage would negate these as well. In fact you cannot find anything of man that is pristine without flaw.
Atheist insist that a miracle is simply a natural occurrence which science has not found an explanation for yet. Reminds me of their argument of the beginning of the universe… we don’t really know what began it but we are sure it can’t be God. With intelligent arguments like these its no wonder everyone has not converted. While they use arguments to blame religions for all the wars committed we should not forget that Karl Marx once a professed Christianity and turned to atheism. Calling it “scientific materialism,” his communism believed nothing existed except the physical world. Which would only be what the eye could. But everything that is seen is made of things unseen. “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse...” (Romans 1:20). Was this a estimated guess, or imagination for the apostle Paul to write such an exact observation of our modern science nearly 2,000 years ago?
The “mathematics, upon which all other science rests, irrefutably disproves both Atheism and evolution. We need a brief review of math in order to proceed. For example, ten to the second power is expressed as 102. It means 10 squared, which is 100. Ten to the 4th power (104) is not twice as much as 102, it is actually 100 times larger. So 104 means one with 4 zeroes after it. The “2” and “4” are called exponents. Thus 108 means one with 8 zeros after it. It is not twice 104 but 10,000 times greater (i.e., add four more zeroes). This is what is known as increasing “exponentially.” The numbers quickly become too large to comprehend.
This is why huge numbers must be expressed by exponents. It is much easier to write 1010 than to write 10,000,000,000; easier to write 1050 than to write a one with 50 zeroes after it. Imagine trying to multiply such numbers! But expressed exponentially, it is easy to multiply. One simply adds the exponents. Thus 103 (1,000) multiplied by 106 (1,000,000) equals 109 (1,000,000,000).
To show how things increase exponentially, suppose you tear in half a piece of paper, put one piece on top of the other and tear the two in half, then keep doing this 50 times. Think this could be done by hand? No! The number of resulting pieces is expressed mathematically as 250. If the paper was 1/500th of an inch thick, multiplying that thickness times 250 tells how tall the stack of paper would be. Any guesses? It would be nearly 35,539,770 miles high!
When it comes to life, the mathematics become even more impossible to imagine.”
(Faith Is Strengthened by Challenge Hunt, Dave May 1, 2008)
Atheists are so offended by the word God they are bent on removing all manger scenes and crosses from public places, anything that would refer to God or the Bible. Yet they seem to ignore all the OTHER religions i.e Islam. But Christianity is the focus of their belligerence.
There are some atheists that are leading the charge that are ingenious dimwits Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens. Militant Musers that have invented schemes to convince the naïve and uneducated the possibility of the impossible. Preaching to their own choir, which cannot recognize how out of tune they are with reality.
A-theism (atheism) is an absence of a belief in God but people deny many things in life that do not suit their worldview but this does not make them right. Atheists ask how can we know that God exists? How do I know that atheists exist? Because they have proven their existence, how? By writing, by communicating to certain people. This is the same we can see for God, he put order in nature, down to the minutest particles, the DNA. He had communicated to certain people and gave them a consistent revelation of himself.
The Creator made man gave him the ability to think and make decisions. This ability makes him morally responsible to the one He depends on - God. Atheism tries to escape this responsibility
The atheists deny there is any purpose or meaning to life except what we assign to it.
Richard Dawkins says, “Faith is one of the world’s great evils....[It is] belief that isn’t based on evidence [and] the principal vice of any religion.”
Yet atheists use a type of "faith" each day. They must trust the pilot whose plane they get on – the doctor if they are on a operating table. Even while driving their car on the road they must trust traffic signals and other drivers. What evidence do they have that all these things will function without a problem when they do not 100% of the time. So it is really about trusting what they cannot see and not rely only on their own senses.
When you look at a building you do not see the builders but you know there had to be someone who built and someone designed it.
Look into the sky at night: how far it extends, far beyond what can be seen by the eye or a telescope.
Ps 19:1-4 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork. Day unto day utters speech, and night unto night reveals knowledge. There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard. Their line has gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them He has set a tabernacle for the sun."
Seeing is believing to an atheist. Even Charles Darwin was perplexed over the eye… “To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable [matchless] contrivances [plans] for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree” (Charles Darwin, 1859, The Origin of Species p. 217)
What of our DNA, the building blocks of life. One cell contains approximately the same amount as1,000 500 page books. DNA is so small that if it was like a thin wire, it would stretch out around the circumference of the earth over 30 times. And all this contains information for the make up of life.
Nobel Prize winner Linus Pauling, “Just one living cell in the human body is, more complex than New York City”(Dave Hunt, In Defense of the Faith, p.22)
Psalm 94:8-9: “Understand, you senseless among the people; And you fools, when will you be wise? He who planted the ear, shall He not hear? He who formed the eye, shall He not see?”
David Hume a skeptic of Christianity said, “I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that anything might arise without a cause.” All things have a cause except those things that are uncaused, which would be the originator and would be of necessity eternally existing.
Can an inanimate, unintelligent, something produce an intelligent unique living creature[s]? Can this it, plus chance, plus time actually bring forth something so complex, so unique and so intelligent to have the ability to also create.
Or is it the way the Bible states:
Gen. 1:27: “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”
I will leave that for you to decide (www.letusreason.org).
Thankfully, I can refute this pretty roundly in far fewer words than you used to set it up. Since it's not just your own writing, it will be even easier.
Atheists, at least honest ones, don't say that some sort of god or creator-figure is utterly impossible. They simply say there isn't any proof, and they're right. There sure as hell isn't proof of any specific god or gods, so any postulation that Christianity or any other religion has it right simply lacks credibility. It makes the leap that "something must have been the origin, and that something must've been God". Wrong. It -might have been some sort of god, that's true, but it also might have been some sort of scientific anomaly we don't yet understand. We are short on facts, and as atheists, we don't default to god, as you do, when we are seeking knowledge. We are willing to say "we just don't know yet", while most religious people aren't. We can stare ignorance in the eye and admit it as precisely what it is. Can you say the same?
Now, as for faith? That's a stupid argument. As I clarified in my last post, everyday nonreligious faith is something basically everyone has in some measure. The argument in your post, Terrance, is trying to twist the word and its meaning to smear atheists by suggesting they are against faith, when in fact they are against religious faith (well, some of them are, but not all of us are like Richard Dawkins, so I'll thank you in advance not to lump us all into one group, please). When a building goes up on a street-corner even though we didn't see it built, we know it was built by someone because common sense dictates this to be so. When a so-called miracle happens though, we don't use any sort of god as a default, and that's where we differ.
Funny parallel for you. The more knowledge science attains, the greater the number of atheists in the world. Ever wonder why? I bet I can tell you. The more we know, the more we want to know, and the less we accept superstition and spiritual fluff as acceptable reasons for things. Oh sure, there are tons of religious people still, and that's not apt to change, but rather than try and dismiss atheism as a fad that will fade or as a relatively new and thus somehow unenlightened philosophy, it might be wise to accept that, like it or not, atheism has arisen due to an uptick in knowledge acquisition. As we learn more, this trend will no doubt continue. Let us also remember that older is not necessarily better; I will point you in the direction of Greek, Egyptian and Roman gods, most of whom are no longer actively worshipped and most of whom predated Christianity and Islam and Buddhism by many centuries.
Oh, and just as one last coffin-nail:
A lot of people say that something can't come from nothing. Current understanding of both physics and quantum theory suggest that this is not entirely true. A Christian will fall back upon "something must have created the universe" and default to god. An atheist worth his salt will say "there may be multiple universes, one of which spawned others, and there may be scientific laws of which we are as yet ignorant that will suitably explain them". Okay, both are conjecture of a sort, but one is faith-based and the other is logic-based. The logic of the essential atheist when confronted with something he doesn't know is "I will put my trust in a system which has again and again demonstrated its ability to prove things, rather than in a system of superstition, supernatural happenings and empty pronouncements which has as yet offered no concrete proof of anything it suggests". Logic, I'm afraid, wins the day.
Terrance, keep doing what you're doing: spreading the gospel. The Lord's word is the only way; anyone who is unwilling to listen or hardens their heart to the truth does not experience true happiness or fulfillment. Don't let them discourage you, just because they don't wanna hear that God loves everyone, including those who outwardly reject His teachings.
One notes that this love is conditional -- upon absolute obedience.
Hi, BG; thanks for answering my question. Interesting take on it, too. I'm of the opinion that you can't have it both ways, though. You can't be inquisitive yet inherently accepting. Little children ask things, are given the answers, and generally take them at face value until/unless they're given reason to doubt. Christians, though, don't seem to do that. Even the "intellectual/logical/scientific" ones still can't explain to me how you can open wide and swallow whole something Jesus said, yet question things with any honesty. I think questioning and doubting are buzzwords Christians often use when they try to prove they can still be considered credible and logical. When you get right down to it, God says "Believe my word (which is in this here book), or else. Believe in my existence, or else. Believe that I shall grant your prayers (unless I don't wanna, for which you'll never receive a concrete reason, by the way) or else. Believe that I was your maker, and the maker of all things, or else. Believe that every single thing I tell you is absolutely irrefutably true, or else." When you boil it down, Christianity sounds a lot like those fairytales parents told their children at night to ensure they'd behave. If you don't obey your parents, monster such-and-such will come and eat you; he preys on disobedient children. When children stop believing in Santa, we call that growing up. Ceasing to believe in God, though, is sinful, even though it requires the exact same critical thinking skills. Christianity is basically a bunch of humans (pointing to a book they themselves wrote, whether it was divinely inspired or not, we can't prove it) and saying, "If you disobey, then you shall go to hell." How believable is that, in a world where we've dispensed with many other fairytales? Even children won't often find that very persuasive, given enough time and the resources to think critically. I understand that faith works for you, and that's okay. I understand that your religion makes sense to you, and that's also okay. Just don't be discouraged if atheists don't consider your arguments at all worthy of debate; you can't debate with a mind that will believe basically anything as long as the Bible contains it. You cannot debate with someone who believes in very specific beings there is literally zero empirical evidence of. I realize you know it in your heart, and again, that's totally okay. We probably all have little things we hold close, even if they don't altogether make sense. I, for instance, have a very strong intuition when it comes to judging character; most everyone I had a "bad feeling" about turned out to be trouble. But as I said, knowing it in your personal heart means nothing to the rest of us...and to say that "this many people can't be wrong" doesn't work either, because a whole lot of people thought the earth was flat, the sun revolved around the earth, and tomatoes were poisonous (maybe don't eat from lead dishes, guys). All this to say that I still don't get it. lol
WELL, REGARDLESS of your SCIENTOLOGICALLY RIDICULOUS BANTER to DESPERATELY "RIGHT" your "WRONG," as to YOUR ATHEISTIC LIFESTYLE, at the END of the DAY, it STILL comes FULL-CIRCLE to THIS:
Taken from www.liveprayer.com: "Date: 10/06/15 - 20 days ago.
Category: CHOICE
The Freedom to Make Choices!
(1 Kings 18:21)
**DAILY PERSONAL PRAYER FOR YOU: Dear Lord, help me to get through this day and the challenges that I will be facing today. Guide me, strengthen me, and give me wisdom as I make choices throughout this day. Please watch over my family and those I love in this world, and keep them safe. I love you Lord, and depend upon you each moment of each day. Bless me as I go through the day, living my life for your glory. In the name of Jesus I pray...AMEN!
Our freedom to choose. One of the greatest responsibilities God has given each one of us, is our ability to make our own choices. We often take for granted the fact that God has given us this free will ability to choose. Even though you do it subconsciously, each day you make hundreds, often thousands of choices.
>From what time you get up, to what you eat, to what you wear, to the roads you drive on, to what you say, and on, and on, and on. The choices you make, ultimately determine the direction that your life takes. Because we make so many choices instinctively, we lose sight of how important each choice can be to how we live our life.
The reason I continually challenge you in your DAILY walk with Christ, is for this very reason. When you start the day, even if it is only 20 minutes, praying, reading the Word of God, it helps to give you a Godly focus to your thoughts and a Godly foundation from which you will be making all of those choices during the course of the day. Church is critical to the life of a believer since again, it helps you build that spiritual foundation in your life from which you make your day to day decisions.
Paul said to "pray without ceasing." Literally, it means to "stay connected" with God at all times. You see, when you are "connected," it makes it difficult to make the choice to rebel against God. We make our bad choices, we make our rebellious choices when we are "unplugged" from God.
This is obviously a very deep, and intense issue that people have spent their entire life studying. The point I want you to understand today is that God has given us this incredible ability to make our own choices during this life. Many have questioned why, since it is our freedom to choose that destroys peoples lives. The alternative though would leave us a little more than robots.
God gave us free will, so that we could freely, on our own, choose to love Him, serve Him, and glorify Him. We say with our mouths how much we love God, how important Jesus is in our life. The way we prove that, is in our daily decisions, the choices we make day in and day out. That is how we ultimately tell God we love Him. The old saying, actions speak louder than words is very true.
I love you and care about you so much. I grieve daily as the emails pour in from all over the world. People who have had their lives destroyed by the choices they have made. The good news I want to share with you today is that God is in the restoration business. He can help you overcome the bad choices. He can strengthen you to make wise, Godly choices in the future.
Please be aware that as you make each and every choice in the course of a day, it is a responsibility God has given to us. Take a second and ask yourself if the choice you are making, is the choice God would want you to make. After all, when you know Christ, it is not your life any longer, it belongs to Him.
***Pray!!!! If we prayed as much BEFORE we make our choices, we wouldn't have to pray so much AFTER we make the wrong choice. It only takes a moment to ask God for guidance.
***Lastly, the most important choice you will ever make in this life, is the freedom that God has given you to choose your eternal destination. The greatest choice of this life is to choose to accept, or reject Jesus Christ as your personal Savior. If you want to make that choice today, simply go to: http://www.liveprayer.com/plan.cfm
God has given us the freedom to make choices in this life, I will be praying today that you will make, wise, Godly choices!!!
In His love and service,
Your friend and brother in Christ,
Bill Keller"
Yawn.
So let me summarize what you just parroted, Terrance:
"God gives us free will so that we can follow him. He gives us freedom of choice so that we should be grateful and choose him to guide us and limit our choices for us. We are given free will, so we ought to make the right choice with it. And the right choice is God because...well, because we said so, damn it. Sorry, we're kinda short on reasons here."
That's the layman's version of what you just wrote here. And it's also strikingly similar to the mentality of people in abusive relationships. "He says it's my choice, but I know what will happen to me if I go against him. He says it's my choice, but what choice is there if I truly believe I'm going to be punished for disobedience?"
When we see this in interpersonal relationships, folks, we denounce it for the stupidity and danger it represents. I'm doing likewise with your last post, Terrance.
Follow him if you want to. That is indeed your choice. But the way that post appeals to the reader to essentially "follow or else", in nicer terms, is frankly slimy.
One of the hallmarks of logic and intellectual scrutiny is that it does not depend on deception or deflection to deliver its point. Oh, there are many logical people attempting to make logical arguments with deceptive or deflected arguments, to be sure, but if an argument is sound and well-constructed, it requires neither flaw in order to be correct.
I can respect a religious person who argues straight from the hip. No dancing, no hidden threats, no "do it just because we said so" crap. I can't respect underhanded tactics, scare tactics, bullying, aggressive conversion, arrogance - which as I've said before makes me more sad than angry - and hypocrisy. Honestly, if religion in general is so good and right and perfect, why does it resort to all of those things in order to attempt to build itself up? That sounds more the province of con-men than of an organization supposedly seeking, explaining and spreading truth.
Shepherdwolf, it's VERY SIMPLE: in FACT, TOO SIMPLE--when ADAM and EVE ORIGINALLY had the PERFECT Face-to-face, INTIMATE, PHYSICAL-CONTACT RELATIONSHIP between THEMSELVES and the VERY GOD, who's the ONLY GOD of THIS ONLY UNIVERSE, that's YET to be RESTORED to ONLY THOSE that've FREE-WILL-CHOSEN to be REDEEMED through HIS SON, JESUS'S DEATH on the CROSS, which was JUST AS PHYSICAL and REAL as it would be if THOSE OF US that are participating in this topic were ACTUALLY sitting in a ROOM, engaging in a VERBAL CONFERENCE with each other, SUCH was NEVER ABUSIVE, on ABSOLUTELY ANY LEVEL, WHATSOEVER, because WHY? THIS WAS the PERFECT WORLD. What RUINED it was when the CHOICE, NOT GOD, nor the SERPENT, although he was the TEMPTER, nor even FREE WILL, ITSELF, but the CHOICE that ADAM and EVE used THEIR FREE WILL to MAKE to VIOLATE the VERY PROTECTION that GOD had in place, when HE COMMANDED, NOT DEMANDED, them to ALWAYS PARTAKE of ANY/ALL of the OTHER TREES of THEIR CHOICE within the GARDEN, EXCEPT ONE TREE, NOT ONE GROUP of TREES, even, but ONE LONE TREE, ITSELF, which was the VERY TREE of the KNOWLEDGE of GOOD and EVIL that the DEVIL, THROUGH the SERPENT, LIED to EVE and told that if they WERE to partake of, they would, INSTEAD of "SURELY DIE," which was EXACTLY what GOD, HIMSELF, told them would happen, become "AS WISE as GOD," was FREELY and WILLFULLY CHOSEN. At EXACTLY THAT MOMENT, was SUPERNATURAL WISDOM imparted to them, just as Satan said that it would be? If GOD was such a CRUEL TASK-MASTER, why was the ACTUAL UNION between HIM and MAN TOTALLY UNFLAWED BEFORE the deception?
I'll turn that question immediately on its ear:
What kind of parent, loving guardian or godly figure deliberately puts temptation in the way of creatures he blesses with free will? This is much akin to deliberately teasing someone with something they aren't supposed to have. Okay sure, you can argue that they ought to have the wherewithal to resist, and you have a point. But why do it in the first place? Why put harm in front of them, then tell them not to indulge, particularly when they aren't sure what harm will actually be done?
And here's a really telling argument as far as I'm concerned. That's basically the tree of knowledge. God said to his children, in layman's terms, "Here's a way to become stronger, smarter, better than you are. It will let you understand more than I want you to. So, uh, don't touch it, kay? I need you to be under my thumb, and if you're not, you're just working for Satan, so...yeah, don't touch it, kay?" And then, when Eve and Adam partook of that fruit and got whatever they got, God had the temerity to get pissed? Um, sorry to trash the core ideology of pre-Jesus Christianity here, but he basically threw a fit because mankind had the balls to enact the very free will God gave them. And in so doing, they came to understand that there was more to the world than God wishtd them to know.
Notice how it was originally Eve who did this, and then tempted Adam? Notice how old civilizations are male-dominated and easily apt to pass the buck to a woman so that men in general don't look as bad? Notice, as well, how ridiculous it looks that any omnipotent creature would in any way restrict knowledge?
Let me put this another way.
Let's say, for just a moment, that God really does exist, and he's a loving sort of God, and he's all-powerful.
1. He has absolutely nothing to fear from us. We can't hurt him, we can't kill him, we can't overthrow him, we can't cast him out.
2. If he is real, then all he ever need do is prove himself to us in a way that cannot be refuted. He hasn't done this.
3. If he really does want us to enjoy free will, then proving his existence does not rob us of that...not if he really does exist. Because if God is real, and omnipotent, and if there's no getting away from him, then it's a lot like breathing...there's no "disbelieving" it. God is a fact of life, and as such, does not enter into a choice or lack of free will.
4. All these things being true, there is absolutely nothing we can say, do, know or wonder, which will do any damage to God. In that light, shouldn't he have welcomed eating of the tree of knowledge? Shouldn't he encourage his constituants to be as lofty and worldly and wise as they can possibly be?
I think the problem is that the Christian God reflects man in a couple of very human ways:
1. He is afraid that if his followers know too much, they will cease to believe what they're being fed, and
2. he knows that fear is the best way to keep the lesser folk in line. Thus, things like hell and sin and shame and the oppression of women and the keeping of slaves and all that jazz.
No, no, no. It's a busted system. Nothing in your last post makes a shred of sense. I would rather believe that God was insane than believe he is a power-hungry, childish, sadistic, insecure, jealous, tyrannical, tempting, manipulative creature who still, after all those vices, claims to be all-powerful and good, and who still claims to love me. Because if that's one's idea of God's love, I want to run in the opposite direction.
Metlet, that's what religious people teach about children. However, as a parent I'll say that children never just accept an answer, not just right away. Have you seen a four-year-old continue to ask "Why?" and try to follow something to its end?
I'm not defending a childlike position -- even their own texts don't fully. Paul states "when I was a child, I thought as a child. But when I became a man, I put aside childish things."
But in reality, healthy kids are always curious and always questioning their world.
Heh. Leo, I was definitely such a child. My parents could tell ya. I was forever asking questions. Would hardly shut up.
But Leo, that's what I'm saying. Jesus was all "So here is a thing that you must believe...swallow it whole like a good little child and everything will be fine." He was asking adults to do this, mind you. He did not then go on to say "however, once this initial swallowing is complete, you can learn and grow and question." No, Christianity, Leo, relies on the idea of childlike attributes, not their reality. So, I already knew (and referenced) what you said about children being inquisitive; I said they aren't persuaded long because of critical thinking, and when kids doubt God, as a perfectly normal human being does, it's considered wrong wrong wrong. So...I'm not really sure what you were trying to do there. Also, Gregg, you are far, far above what most children are like. Your insatiable curiosity is stronger than most adults, and it seems the same was true of you as a kid. You were subversive and even contrary by nature; nothing was ever good enough. You had to poke and pry and know...and not every child feels the need to do that after the initial storm of "why"s.
Subversive is good.
I guess I was referring to Paul Meglet, come to think of it. Paul being more foundational to Chgristians and their thinking than Jesus is, except in name and one-way-ticket only.
While it's likely Paul actually existed, save for some magical tales etc., it's most likely that the Jesus myth is a composit of country preachers and their various teachings and retelling of one another's myths.
You are right, of course, about the conundrum.
Interesting. Paul didn't even cross my mind, but yes, you have a point.
In Christianity, Jesus Christ may be the CEO, but paul for lack of a better term is the director of operations and head of HR., e.g. from Paul most church policies follow.
At least the evangelicals swing that way, hence some of us reprobates refer to it as Paulianity.
From www.letusreason.org: "When Someone Claims to be a Christian but...is Not a Christian
Much discussion takes place among the various churches of different persuasions on what makes someone a believer in Jesus Christ. The fact is, what you believe will shape your life. This is especially true in spiritual matters.
Does someone only need to confess Jesus as their savior to be a Christian or is there more to what they confess and live by?
Certainly one can’t say they are a Christian if they don’t hold to the distinctive doctrines that make one a Christian. There are certain requirements in any religious group that one must adhere to so that they are accepted as part of that religious persuasion. Hinduism, Buddhism, Mormonism, and the various cults all have their own particulars of what one is to believe and do to be called of that “faith, church or religion. Anyone will tell you if you don’t hold to the basic fundamentals of a certain religion then you are not considered part of it. The fundamentals are what makes one acceptable and in the body of Christ.
So what is the Christian distinctive? This is what makes this difference between someone holding to the historic Christian faith, upholding orthodoxy or being part of an aberrant, cultic group or church. Unfortunately many in orthodox churches do not know what they actually believe nor can they share it with others. this is why it is so important to teach and re-teach the basics to all.
The essentials of Christianity come from the Bible. Every essential doctrine is found in Scripture. They are not found by an individuals revelation or tradition. They concentrate on God - His nature and His dealing with mankind in relation to our salvation. How one is saved and forgiven of their sins and brought into a relationship with God.
Being a Christian cannot be reduced to one being loving and kind. Because many people in different religions are this way. Nor can it be reduced to someone that only believes in Jesus. There is much more. The core teachings (called the essentials) are what a Christian believes and he lives by what he believes in.
You can adhere to Christian values and principles and still not be a Christian. That’s right you read it right; you can live by the Bible and never experience the new birth. Your quality of life will improve because you are applying biblical principles to every day living, however Jesus said the new birth is first and foremost mandatory for one to enter the kingdom of God; without it you will not be going to heaven after you die nor be in the kingdom when He comes back (Jn.3). This is why Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons can have a moral lifestyle and feel they have the truth. It is just enough truth to change their lifestyle and have an inclination to learn of the Lord but not enough to be in a relationship. Any group that denies the new birth becomes a cult despite their adhering to some or nearly all Bible doctrine.
Every religion has their fundamentals, what we would call doctrine. Doctrine does matter; it is the subject matter of what one believes. There are numerous doctrines all contained within the Bible that are essential to our faith. Some keep them very basic to a few essentials, such as, there is one God who is uncreated and brought into existence all things, which disallows evolution. Jesus is God - he died and rose again physically from the dead-salvation is by grace through faith. Others see more than just three or even five points. The core doctrines are not representative of any particular denomination, they are doctrines shared by those of the faith delivered to all the saints in all Christian denominations. They are taught as basic teachings to the Church from the Scripture.
We can break down the major doctrines to several basic fundamentals. One way we can identify what a core doctrine is by its necessity. Is it necessary for our salvation; making a distinction of our relationship to be sustained, or for being fruitful? Another is on the nature of who God is - His attributes, which will define how he interacts with mankind. Is it necessary to know certain things that will clear any confusion. From the main core of teachings there are sub-doctrines attached to the core teachings (like branches off the main trunk). These numerous sub-doctrines are attached to the core and are just as important. An example of this: Jesus is God, but to be God and man He needed a virgin birth. Two of the Gospels address this in their beginning. John’s gospel goes back even further, to his pre-existence as God. Christology is the study of the Son. The virgin conception was the means of the incarnation, through which God became a man. The point being, that without his being born into the world as a sinless man through a virgin conception, He could not be God, nor live a sinless life as man. Around this core doctrine come other essential doctrines that are more specific on the person of Jesus. The Hypostatic union, which is about the dual nature of Christ, his being both 100% God and 100%; man dwelling together as one person (Jn.1:14,18; Phil.2:6-8; Isa.9:6; Heb.4; Col.2:9). It matters who you believe in, as much as what this “who” did. If you do not have Jesus as deity or called upon this Jesus to save you from your sins, you are not saved. The Bible puts this in the category of believing on another Jesus. This is the biblical teaching from Jesus and the apostles. Jesus said to them, “You are from beneath; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.” “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am (ego eimi), you will die in your sins”(John 8:23-24). This would exclude him from being an angel, a creature created by God.
The CORE Teachings
The core doctrines are required for us to believe in to be a Christian. They make us part of the body of Christ and keep us in unity. All Christians hold to these same teachings, regardless of what denomination or non-denominational church they attend. So what are the core teachings? These doctrines include the following: That there is one God who is uncreated and brought into existence all things, which disallows evolution in any form be it secular or variations of progressive creation (God using evolution as a means to create).
Jesus Christ is the eternal God, being both God and man, lived a sinless life. The Trinity -- God who is triune in his nature, three distinct eternal persons who always exist simultaneously as the one God. So God is one being, yet three in persons. There is only one God and all others are false. All mankind needs a savior; because of the sinfulness of man God initiated His love by sending His Son to become man. The death of Christ on the cross for the sins of mankind being God’s only means for salvation; dying once for all. This means for the Old Testament saint looked forward to the one sacrifice that would take away sin forever. The New Testament saint he looks back on the cross in the past looking forward to Christ appearing a second time apart from his sacrifice (Heb.9:27-28). The resurrection, that Christ was raised physically in the same body and glorified having an eternal body, not raised a spirit. The new birth is given through the good news of the Gospel (Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection) by grace through faith alone in Christ alone. Salvation in the work of Christ alone, our being saved by grace through faith alone, the believer having the power of the Holy Spirit in them to conform them to the image of the Son of God and to live a Spirit filled life. The divine inspiration of Scripture: the assurance of the Bible (66 books) being infallible and inerrant as the Word of God having the power of God. The Eternal Priesthood of Christ as our only mediator between God and man and the priesthood of all believers. The Church universal, invisible, and the local church being visible is our spiritual home of fellowship on earth. The rapture of the Church to be in heaven where he has prepared a place for. The second coming as the bodily return of Jesus Christ to earth to first judge (Mt.25) and then rule and reign. The awaiting judgment for the unbeliever and rewards for what we as believers have done with our talents and gifts. Heaven and hell are all part of the fundamentals. Heaven promised to all who believe as a gift because of our believing and following Christ. Hell to those who disbelieve and rejected his message of love to them as an individual. We can’t compromise on these. These essentials are set forth clearly in the Scripture, just as those on the nature of God and Christ, man and salvation. All these doctrines are based on the divine inspiration of Scripture. John 7:16 Jesus answered them and said, “My doctrine is not Mine, but His who sent Me.” To reject what Jesus said is to reject the one who sent him to speak it. Jesus answered, “It is written: `Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.”’(Mt. 4:4,7,10 )
All Christians are to hold to these teachings, regardless of what denomination or non-denominational church they attend. “Whosoever ... abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, HATH NOT GOD. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son” (2 John 1:9). For this reason Paul wrote to Timothy as a pastor to “Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you” (1 Timothy 4:16). “That you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:3).
The cults will all deny or distort one or all of these major doctrines.
Along with these main core doctrines there are many sub-doctrines that have been and are still being discussed and many Christians have various points of view. Eschatology; the timing of the rapture; spiritual gifts, how God predestines, etc. all these are discussed. As the writer of Hebrews states (6:1-3)
“Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this we will do if God permits.” The Writer of Hebrews recognizes the difference between some of the foundational principles and those that are not, ie. Repentance; faith; the different baptisms (water- Spirit); laying on of hands (to approve and release one in ministry); the resurrection of all who died and the judgment. For the New Testament saint he looks back on the cross in the past looking forward to Christ appearing a second time apart from his sacrifice (Heb.9:27-28)
But one cannot be a Christian without agreeing with the main tenets of the faith. By these we endeavour to maintain the unity of the Spirit given to us; it is the doctrine of Christ given by the apostles that unites us all. This is the work of the Spirit. This is where we find our unity and where the true church resides.
Infallibility and Inerrancy of Scripture
Without the infallibility and inerrancy of scripture, we could not know who Jesus is or what He has done. The Bible being the word of God- Infallible signifies the quality of neither misleading nor being misled and so safeguards in categorical terms the truth that Holy Scripture is a sure, safe, and reliable rule and guide in all matters. Similarly, inerrant signifies the quality of being free from all falsehood or mistakes that safeguards the truth of Holy Scripture being entirely true and trustworthy in all its claims.
God moved upon holy men who walked with him and obeyed him, they wrote the Scripture that is delivered to us today. The Lord made certain that His revelation about Himself was recorded without error in the original documents. Scripture alone is said to be “God-breathed” (Theopnuestos) thus by it believers are competent. The same thing the church was taught by the apostles is written down for us today. Thus we can be Equipped “for every, good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20-21). John 14:26 Jesus taught that the Holy Spirit would provide an accurate recall for the apostles as they penned the words of Scripture. He would also help us remember what is written as well. The doctrine of Sola Scriptura is not a Protestant teaching but a Bible teaching. Paul says in 1 Cor.4:6: “Do not exceed what is written,” rejecting those who would come later with statements that are not written.The Bible is sufficient without the aid of tradition and Scripture alone is our source in all matters of faith and morals. The Bible does not contain the word of God it is the Word of God, and the Church is to proclaim the Scripture being the pillar and ground of truth. The degree of inspiration is that 'All' the Scripture is the product of God's 'out-breathing'; this means the whole of the Old Testament and the New Testament are equally inspired through his Spirit though we live in the New Testament as our covenantal relationship with God. Rom. 15:4 equates the word of God as scripture before in the Old Testament and then in the New Testament. Scripture is our authority and when one disregards or changes it this proves they are not submitted to Christ; nor a believer. You cannot be a true believer and follow without holding to the Scripture as being infallible and inerrant.
Illumination is the ministry of the Holy Spirit to believers teaching them all things from the closed canon of Scripture (1 John 2:27) through study (hermeneutics, devotion) and meditation. A believer is to be equipped by the word for the purpose of glorifying God in our lives. The Spirit also uses those who have various gifts for teaching to carry out this ministry in the Church. (Psalm 119:99; John 16:12-15; Romans 12:7; 1 Corinthians 2:9-3:3; 2 Timothy 2:15).
Jesus promised the disciples in jn.14:26 the Holy Spirit who would give them accuracy in recalling his words as they penned it on paper. Even Paul recognized what he was writing was the Lords commandments (1 Cor.14:37). That his words were taught by the Spirit. 1 Cor 2:13. In 1 Thess. 2:13 he commends them for their accepting his words not as mans but as the word of God. John also recognized his teaching came from God and to reject it meant to reject God. In 1 Jn.4:6. 1 Jn.1:1 he states they were all eyewitnesses. Peter claims to be an eyewitness and not making up stories. In 1 Pt.1:16-21 He also states Paul’s writings are Scripture as he was alive in 2 Pt.3:15-16.
Doctrine is the teachings of Scripture inspired by God.1 Tim.4:13-16; 2 Tim.3:16. All doctrine is important but not all doctrine is equal. Paul labored to preach the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27). The reason churches get off balance and narrow their ministry to a certain doctrine is because they neglect to teach all of the word day in and day out. How do we determine if something an essential? Is it is repeated and practiced in the book of Acts; is it taught to and practiced by the church in the epistles. Certain teachings need to be the foundation to build on for a new believer to have correct growth. Without it they will grow crooked and will be dulled later in their walk. So it is of the utmost importance to lay the right foundation and build on it with the essentials of the faith to be productive as the years go by. Imagine laying a foundation that is only slightly crooked, by the second floor it may not be noticed but by the tenth or twentieth it certainly will.
Doctrines are not sideways only but 3D. (A tree has a trunk and branches go out all around the tree) all doctrine has to do with God, His nature and His work with mankind. We are encouraged to study doctrine and the teachings. If the core teachings are not settled by those who teach or upheld by them, they are teaching incorrectly and if approached and they do not repent and correct their teaching they can be categorized as a false teacher and should be made known to all. “If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions” (1 Timothy 6:3-4). People who twist doctrines and change the meanings are not God’s anointed teachers; they are empowered with pride not wanting to submit them-selves to what the word actually says.
Christian doctrine also explains the nature of man and what makes Jesus Christ different from other men? The factor of SIN. Christianity teaches all men are BORN sinners. This is called the sin nature that all mankind has inherited from Adam meaning we are naturally attracted and inclined to do what is wrong and even evil in God’s eyes. Sin is sin whether one does it intentionally or not. Sin is when someone is defied, offended, or hurt. This can pertain to people or God although all sin is offending God since he is the standard by either His word, law or person. Sin means we break the standard, disobeying anything He commands.
Gal. 3:22 “But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe” (by the law). Paul further writes whatever is not done in faith is sin.
The Sinfulness of man and our need for salvation are essential to being a Christian. This means NO ONE is born a Christian. Like in other religions people are born into the faith of the family. To become a Christian one must make a conscious decision using faith to follow Christ. You are reborn spiritually. If you do not believe you were sinful (or that you still are) you are denying the very fact for having a savior. Then there is no need for Jesus’ sacrifice being applied to you. One must believe they are sinful to have Jesus as their savior for their sin.
The Blood of Christ
The importance of the blood of Jesus cannot be underestimated. It becomes our covenant with God. The New Covenant is based upon the shed blood of Jesus on the cross. Not before in Gethsemane nor after the atonement was finished in the ninth hour. At the Last Supper, which was the same Passover the Jews had celebrated for almost 1500 years Jesus told His disciples, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you”(Lk 22:20). Our very salvation depends on the purity of the blood of Jesus because the perfect blood sacrifice offered to the Father had to be sinless. No other man or woman's blood could suffice. Why? Because we all are sons of Adam sharing his sinful blood flowing through our veins. That's why it is absolutely vital that Jesus is conceived supernaturally by the Holy Spirit and not by man. If Jesus were not born of a virgin, apart from any man His blood could not have provided the sinless sacrifice. With no perfect sacrifice, we human beings are still under the sin of Adam and there is no salvation!
God, by the Holy Spirit, caused Mary to conceive making the Son of man sinless, no sin of Adam that all humanity shares in was passed on to him. For the first time since the creation of Adam a sinless seed formed the blood that flowed through the veins of a man, the God-man Jesus. Bypassing the human condition caused Jesus' blood to be holy and sinless.
Jesus came ultimately to free humankind from the curse put on it by the sin of Adam. The wages of sin is death (Rom 6:23). In order to free humans from that death, Jesus had to be pure at birth, and to maintain that purity all during His lifetime. He had to lead a perfect sinless life living under the law of God while here on earth to be qualified as the savior. He was the only Jew to live the law perfectly. Had Jesus ever committed a sin, (by breaking God’s word) He would have failed in His mission and been disqualified as our Savior. But it was not his perfect sinless life that saves us. It was His death on the cross, He was the perfect and complete sinless sacrifice needed to defeat death! Scripture tells us: “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet was without sin” (Heb. 4:15).
The law in the Scripture says “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness [of sin]” (Heb 9:22). The spiritual principle is - A man (Adam) had caused this separation therefore a Man must correct it. Paul put it this way, “The first man Adam became a living being,” the last Adam [Jesus], a life-giving spirit.” (1 Cor. 15:45) Jesus did this by his resurrection and giving new life to all who believe on him.
We are corporately either in Adam or in Christ. Adam caused himself and all men after him to be separated from God because of his sin. When Adam sinned he entered into a sinful, corrupted state. Since all of mankind flows from Adam, all men are inescapably sinful (Rom. 3:23). God recognizes only two sons, two groups of people, Adam and Jesus (the last Adam) -- those who are unsaved, both Jews and Gentiles and those who are saved, both Jews and Gentiles. Those of us who are born again are in Christ by his Holy Spirit (God adopts those of us who are born again as His sons and daughters) and those who are not (are condemned under Adam’s headship).
Salvation
The new birth (spiritual birth) is given through the good news - the Gospel (Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection) by grace through faith alone in Christ alone. God has given us a certain way, through His only Son and by the crucifixion. (1 Cor. 1:18, 21, 25)
It is by God’s grace we are saved through faith, this is fundamental to the Gospel and how God works through the new covenant. “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” (Eph. 2:8-9).
This occurs by placing our faith in Christ's sacrifice, and subsequent resurrection. That Christ was raised physically in the same body and glorified. This is what is called the gospel. Paul calls anything that is subtracted from it or added and changed another gospel. Such as when he spoke to Galatians for adding parts of the Old Testament law. Gal. 1:6 “I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel.” So it is a gospel that operates by grace.
The very scripture upon which we rely on for the gospel (1 Cor 15:1-4) contains the necessary phrase “according to the scriptures.” This would include all that the scriptures have to say relating to Jesus and the gospel. As Jesus pointed to the Scripture constantly for the fulfillment of what he did.
The gospel that Paul delivered and we stand in is explained in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. It is centered on Christ dying for our sin and rising again. When one accepts the conditions of the gospel to believe on Jesus, (as Lord -Yahweh) and repents, (admitting their sinful condition willing to change their life by following him) they receive the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 1:13). We then abide in our salvation by trusting in His completed work on the cross. As Paul says “in which we stand” (1 Cor.15:1-4)
The Gospel is the center point of God and man being reconciled to have fellowship. In the gospel presentation we need to explain who Christ is and why he came. I believe this is a serious matter that is often neglected. Let me explain why. The virgin birth, deity of Christ, etc., not being mentioned every time the gospel is briefly summarized in Scripture does not mean that they are not essential elements for those who want to be saved must believe. Every detail need not be specifically mentioned, because each would be understood having been stated elsewhere.
Paul's declaration in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 is a summary of the gospel content he delivered to the church. If we are to preach Christ accurately it means more than merely saying to someone to call on Jesus Christ who died in your place, and rose again without explaining who He is! How can we ask someone to believe in Jesus without explaining fully who the biblical Jesus is?
More than one doctrine is connected to salvation. The primary one is that Christ is God in the flesh, Jesus said the Church would be built upon Peter’s confession “thou are the Christ the Son of the living God.” How can we call upon him who became man unless we are told whom we are calling on?
Jesus is the proper object of faith. It is not simply enough to have faith. Faith is only as valid as what it is put in. You must put your faith in the proper object. Cults have false objects of faith; therefore, their faith is useless--no matter how sincere they are.
If you put your faith in a being that is an Angel or a Jesus that is not God, then you will be in a lot of trouble on the day of judgment. You might have great faith, but so what. It is in something that can't save you.
The Gospel- Resurrection of Christ
1 Cor. 15:1-4 defines what the gospel is: “Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.”
“And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith” (1 Cor. 15:14). “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins” (1 Cor. 5:17). These verses clearly state that if you say that Jesus did not rise from the dead (in the same body He died in (John 2:19-21; Jn.20; Lk.24:39), then your faith is useless.
To deny the physical resurrection is to deny Jesus' sacrifice, resurrection and even our resurrection. For Scripture says 1 John 3:2-3 “When He is revealed we shall be like Him for we shall see Him as He is).
Salvation by Grace through Faith
Here we come to the most important part of the essentials. This divides the Church who is the pillar and ground of truth with the cults who teach a portion of the truth and distort or remove the essentials.
“ For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith -- and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God -- not by works, so that no one can boast” (Eph. 2:8-9).
Once we understand whom we are saved by we cannot claim any credit in anything we have ever done to have earned or deserved it.
“You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace” (Gal. 5:4). Works were connected to obedience by the law. In the teaching of grace we work because we have been saved, not to be saved. This will either sever you or connect you to a relationship with the Lord.
Plainly this verse in context teaches that if you believe that you are saved by faith through or with works then you are not saved at all. This is the common error in the cults on salvation as well as world religions. Because they have a false Jesus, they have a false doctrine of salvation one error leads to another (Romans chapters 3-5 and Galatians chapters 3-5). This is why there is only one way - it is by the person and work of Jesus Christ, by grace through faith we are entering this work for us.
Again, we are required to do certain things once we have put our faith in Christ, but not for salvation, because He has already saved us. By obedience we prove the fruits of salvation we possess. Rom. 11:6 “And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.”
A work would be anything you do physical, be it a ritual commandment or good deed. Faith is not a physical work. As Eph.2 says, not of yourselves not by any physical work even of obedience, this would include baptism.
Titus 3:5 says, “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us through the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Spirit” (1 Pet. 1:3). This is Jn.3:3-5 , the born again experience.
God saves a person based on their faith in response to the gospel message, they are justified by God by faith (Rom. 3:24, 28). “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Romans 5:1)
“Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin” (Rom. 3:20).
“However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness” (Rom. 4:5).
“Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law” (Gal. 3:21).Here Paul makes a distinction between what the law required and what faith has done, this area of Scripture needs to be read in its full context.
Justification- a legal declaration giving one right standing before God pronouncing a sinner righteous because of Christ’s merit, (not making them righteous) Rom.5:1,18 Isa.53:11 Rom.4:5
We are not making true converts if we do not clearly preach the correct gospel according to the scriptures. This is a serious matter, because “the gospel...is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believes” (Rom 1:16). This means that if someone believes something less than, or more than, or contrary to the gospel Paul has preached to the Church he is not saved and is promoting a different gospel.
The Giving of the Holy Spirit to the Believer
Eph. 1:13-14 “And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession--to the praise of his glory.”
2 Cor. 2:21-22 Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, set his seal of ownership on us,and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.
We hear the word- the gospel- faith is exercised as the truth is received and the Holy Spirit is dispensed. It coincides together
We all enter in the same way to become part of the church universal “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-- whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free-- and have all been made to drink into one Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:13).
This baptism despite what some say is not by water for it clearly says by the Spirit.
As a result All believers have the Holy Spirit inside them “ For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”(Gal 3:26-27). This Scripture show again it is not water but by faith we enter into Christ and the Scripture makes it clear buy its examples.
Acts 11:15-17 “And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, as upon us at the beginning. Then I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, 'John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”’ If therefore God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?” This was the Gentiles salvation experience to be baptized in the Spirit.
In discussing this event of when the Gentiles were saved and also brought into the body Peter at the Jerusalem council said (Acts 15:8-9) “So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, “and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.” It has and always will be by faith in the gospel message.
Rom 8:9 the Spirit of Christ, is the believers possession proving they are in Christ (Rom. 8:11) having eternal life, so the believer becomes the temple of the Spirit who is literally in the believer (1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19). So the Holy Spirit has been with the church and will continue to be with individuals throughout all ages.
We do not have a part of him but complete. Yet the Bible does mention subsequent fillings as we are commanded to be continually filled with the Spirit (Eph.5:18) so we can be fruitful and lead a life pleasing to the Lord. Every believer has the Holy Spirit.
The Return of Christ
The second coming of Christ to earth to establish His kingdom is a cornerstone of Biblical doctrine. If you do not believe Jesus is coming back bodily to rule and reign on earth you are unorthodox. The Lord promised it in Scripture, the apostles preached it, and the book of Revelation explains it.
Matthew 26:64 “But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Mansitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
Luke 21:27: “At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory” (Matthew 24:29-30).
John 14:1-3: “Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am.”
The return of Christ is visible, not come in secret; All mankind will witness His coming, there will be no dispute. He comes back just as he left (Acts 1:11). When He returns it is in clouds (glory), it will be in the same body he rose in but eternal and glorified.
So it is the churches hope Titus 2:13 “while we wait for the blessed hope-- the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
We all know that many come to Christ with an imperfect understanding. God knows whether the heart is sincere and will reveal Him-self to the earnest seeker, but that is no excuse for our being vague or inaccurate in our presentation of the gospel. Nor does it excuse the church for not building people up in the foundations of their faith immediately after they have professed Christ as Lord and savior.
To answer the question that is the title of this article When is a Christian is not a Christian. When they claim they are Christian but do not hold to the core doctrines of the faith that make them a Christian.
When we no longer put up walls to hold to the original standard we will eventually be overcome by another standard. As Paul instructs us “... mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them” (Rom. 16:17). Instead of avoiding them we say nothing and give them the same platforms that genuine teachers of the word have. True believers do not twist or distort the Word of God (the essentials especially) to promote their ministries or themselves.
There are some things we should never back down on the core teachings. Peter said to give everyone who asks an answer-- this was outside the church. Jude said to contend earnestly for the faith-- this was to be inside the church. He meant to strive intensely to hold to what the apostles had already delivered. The faith delivered once to all the saints. This means a set system of beliefs (which we call doctrines) Jesus delivered to the apostles and became ownership of the church. At a time when historic Biblical Christianity is ravenously attacked from without and within, it is only the true saints that are filled with the Holy Spirit of truth that will have the courage to speak up and expose the error. We are to maintain the unity of the faith, the doctrine that the Holy Spirit has united us in. These are the core doctrines that make each of us a Christian, and brings one into the body of Christ
Paul says in 1 Timothy 1:3 “That you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine”Peter says of the Apostles’ doctrine: Acts 2:42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. 2 Jn 1:10 “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him.”
As Christians we have the option and the freedom to ask questions which is not to be construed as unbelief or even opposition but for pursuing knowledge and confirming our faith as true. As Christians we should know what we believe and why we believe it. It is to help us understand Christ and Christianity in contradistinction to the other religions and cults that claim to represent him. It is essential to know that what we believe today is what the Bible actually teaches.
I will end in this prayer of Paul who wrote and affirmed these doctrines. Phil. 1:9-11 “And this I pray, that your love may abound still more and more in knowledge and all discernment, that you may approve the things that are excellent, that you may be sincere and without offense till the day of Christ, being filled with the fruits of righteousness which are by Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God”"
Terence, you lost me when I sawe the name Bill Keller, then with this last when whoever wrote it called Hinduism, Mormonism and Bhudism a "cult". None of
those are any more a cult than any other major religion. And, even if we Mormons are completely and utterly wrong, despite what you say, we are absolutely,
undeniably Christian, both in what we believe, and hopefully, how we act. If you've read the Book of Mormon, attended our church service, read really any talks at all from our general authorities, you would know that Jesus Christ is as central to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints as he
is to any other Christian faiths; maybe even moreso in some cases.
But I digress. This post has gotten quite a long way from where it was when last I was here. All I'm going to say to everyone is, please be aware that Christianity
is vast. I'm not saying we're right, but I am saying our beliefs are quite wide ranging. There have been many blanket statements about Christianity on this
topic. Issues pertaining to free will, child-like innocense, the nature of existence, adam and eve. I won't ask everyone to look into what each church
believes about all these things. indeed, it bodes ill for Christianity that we do have so many differing beliefs all stemming from essentially the same
scriptural basis. When you consider throughout history, all Christianity has done, all the many changes it has underwent, all the people who have influenced
it, from Constantine, to King Henry VII, to Martin Luther, etc, it's no wonder it is so fractured. In the LDS church, we have a name for the 1800 years
between Christ, and the "restoration of the church". It's called the great apostocy, and it is a time in which we believe many aspects of the gospel were
either lost, or altered. Not all parts you understand, but enough to greatly differentiate it from the church Christ himself set up with his apostles. We
have events such as the Nicean creed to thank for this, not to mention the ambitions of others. Any student of history can tell you about all the vast
changes and fractured groups Christianity has become. Cody, Leo, and others, you all talk about all the nastiness quite often. And sadly, you're not wrong.
There are some Christians who have been responsible for horrible attrocities, great and small throughout history. The same can be said of all religions, and
humans in general. And yes, at face value, and yes, even a bit beneath the surface at times, the bible, particularly the old testament seems to be nearly the
antithesis of a loving, merciful God. I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise. and Again, I'm not using this to say Mormons are right. I'd like to believe makes a great deal more sense to me, but I don't have that certainty; nor would I wish to force anyone into my way of thinking if I did. What I will ask you all to do is remember that the beliefs of Christian sects are wide ranging, and one sects belief - and yes, I'm including my own - doesn't necessarily mesh with another. Neither does one person's understanding of their own faith always represent the whole of that faith's beliefs. I can't speak for everyone, but I'm pretty sure most of us are going to spend our lives trying to figure it out. It takes a lifetime - and be3yond - to figure things out. If you must, judge us, but do so on an individual basis. If you've had terrible experiences with Christians, I hope you will understand that we are not all those same people who gave you those experiences. And please, please be wairy about forming your oppinions based on other people's oppinions of us.
I usually take issue with specific bits and contradictions I see. It's rarely personal. I can tell you that I don't hate anyone, don't look down on anyone either. At worst, arrogance about who's right makes me sad if it's wielded on others like a club, and sadly that happens a lot.
But I hear you loud and clear about not tarring all Christians with the same brush. The only time that's applicable is if I'm analyzing a core belief that is central to the religion as a whole. Sometimes I am doing that. But I definitely recognize that there are many Christians who believe in God and Jesus and all that, but who aren't a hundred percent sold on absolutely everything they've been told.
All I can tell you, BG, being married to a Christian and having a Christian
daughter, is that I've learned that faith is not the symmetrical one-size-fits-all
version the fundamentalist evangelicals of my youth would have us believe.
Sure, in order to be both fundamentalist and evangelical, they had to assert
that they were right, and I in many ways was increasingly wrong (especially
during the waning years of my faith), and I resent none of it. They wish to be
the Navy Seals of Christianity, the Few Good Men, that's technically their right.
As it is for my daughter now to be a liberal Christian, tell me "not all Christians
are like that," try to convince me of some things, but also be accepting of her
atheist dad.
Most atheists are "not convinced," regarding religion. That's different from
"being right."
The challenge comes with Christianity as I understood it, it is based in large part
on what you believe. So for my part my finding myself out to be atheist started
by my realization that I didn't believe some very basic tenants, and hadn't
believed any of those for some time when I discovered it. Was I pushed by
fundamentalists? Sure, they generally are verifying to see who's in and who's
out, whether they mean to or not. That's a property of being the "narrow way,"
and "a few good men." Do I resent it? No, not now, if I ever did. Sure it was
tough for awhile but I regret none of their pushback. They've a right to make
that determination for themselves and their group, and it's really tough to prove
you're "right belief". Probably one reason they are so heavily invested into a
political situation which some of us consider unsustainable.
But I technically have few opinions on the Mormon sects, save for the
differences between their beliefs and North American archeology. Maybe some
of them talk like my daughter does now, about things being symbols and
metaphors, stuff that frankly eludes me.
All I can say though for sure is: my father in law just died, and I have to be
honest. Without a god / middle man to worry about anymore, I was never
anxious about whether or not he made it to the proverbial other side. Few
outside of evangelicalism can appreciate how staggering a concern that actually
is, even for someone who is questioning it all. The notion that someone who
didn't outwardly demonstrate anything faith based would raise questions in the
minds of others, when they died, as to whether or not "they made it." It's pretty
traumatic to even entertain the notion of people you actually know going to
Hell. Sure it's all under the rug these days but Hell is still major player in
fundamentalism.
People including people of the more softer spiritual persuasions might try to tell
us that the god is a comforting type situation, I don't know. My daughter didn't
try to push anything although she was curious enough to ask, so I explained I
had no worries about what the middle man just might do or not do in my father-
in-law's case.
I think Taerrance here believes what he's saying to a point, and the arduous
part of being an evangelical Christian is they think that if they don't they could
be in some form responsible for another ending up in Hell. I was not the
preachy sort, more the kind who thought that living one's life would be
testimony enough. Of course the problem with that one is that you're still the
proverbial brother sticking up for another and trying to prevent that other from
taking a beating or some kind of abuse. Speaking from a bit of personal
experience on that one.
BG, some of us heathens now refer to evangelical churches as atheist factories,
or reprobate farms, not around those people of course. But among ourselves as
a joke, sort of when we call one another what it is we ourselves used to be
called by those folks. Kind of what the daughter calls "owning it". But anyhow,
that is in large part probably true. When enough belief requirements are out of
sync with what makes rational sense, you're likely to lose people. But I think
any secular person who has ever been in can't justifiably call a fundamentalist a
hater, because we already know. We've been up late nights in secret when
nobody was around, after a friend died of AIDS, or when other people knew
someone that died who wasn't a Christian, or is presumed not to have been a
Christian, or perhaps been the wrong kind. The god is a tenuous situation to the
evangelical mind, only a few make it, and the odds are pretty slim any human
would technically find a match and have picked the right idea of god to gain
acceptance.
This only impacts people who were brought up around that, and I would say the
70s / 80s were particularly focused this way because of the Moral Majority and
other political systems whose god(s) were so strong and powerful that they
greatly needed billions of dollars worth of government support and countless
one-issue politicians to prop it / them up. Some of us had perhaps found that
system unsustainable for years, perhaps decades if properly pushed, and that is
the long and short of it.
Look at Kim Davis. I know people on both sides of the isle on this one.
Christians like my daughter were upset telling some of us how wrong this lady
was, etc. But then the real game changer was when Kim Davis outed her true
motive by saying she was restricting access to gay marriage licenses because
she feared she'd go to hell if she did otherwise. That's how secure their god is,
so secure that it has to emulate the bootleggers of the 1920s, tell the local
populations they can choose whether or not to abide by the protection racket,
but their choice will have consequences. I could not see that lady in the same
light once I heard that. She to my mind was neither hater nor political
ideologue, but a scared-as-fuck human being trying to keep out of the way of a
rather abusive situation and stay in the protection racket.
So yes, as the daughter is so fond of saying to me these days, not all Christians
are like that. And we know the difference. I understand the Mormons don't think
us lot are likely to end up in a lake of fire for not accepting the right god, or any
god in particular. My Wife's parents are methodist, so I have no idea what the
father-in-law thought one way or the other, though when he and I discussed
anything remotely related to that stuff he seemed as atheist as I am in the ways
I understood things at least. But nobody really knows. And it's usually the
groups that push who find out. Those groups who want to shake out what can
be shaken, for instance. Some of us perhaps did fall out, picked ourselves up as
we always had done before, by ourselves, by our own boot straps, and walked
way once we found we were already on the other side of the door.
But you've got a right to not wish to be tarred with the same brush, as my Wife
and Daughter both do. There's plenty of us atheist types that aren't part of the
secular humanist movement, which is in some ways as authoritarian as any
fundamentalist group, what with their dedication to censorship of ideas, etc. I
know a few evangelical types who were surprised to learn not all atheists
oppose the second amendment, etc. Quite a few of us are pretty individualistic,
especially those of us who tend towards pragmatism and some form of
rationalism. Especially us somewhat anarchist types.
So you have my apologies if I've made it sound like I tarred you as "one of
them," or attached the personal experiences of some with what your faith
purports to believe.
FIRST, KIM DAVIS, who's DEFINITELY an OUTSTANDING WOMAN of GOD for DARING to BLATANTLY DEFY this BABYLONIAN SYSTEM the VERY WAY that SHE DID, I'm VERY sure, was CERTAINLY NOT, WHATSOEVER, under ANY FEAR of being thrown into HELL if she HADN'T, NOR am I saying that she would've THEN cooperated and signed that license under the FALSE ASSURENCE that GOD would've made an exception in HER case, because of ANY FEAR that she COULD'VE had of being thrown into JAIL/PRISON, EITHER. It's ONLY BECAUSE of the ONLY FACT that HER HEAVENLY FATHER, who IS a HOLY, JUST, and SOVERGN GOD, who DOES REQUIRE ABSOLUTE PURITY in HIS SIGHT, who WILL CONDEMN ANY of us to the VERY LAKE of FIRE that was ONLY MEANT to be for LUCIFER/SATAN and HIS ANGELIC-OUTCASTS FOLLOWERS for REJECTING UNCONDITIONAL LOVE that ABSOLUTELY NONE, but EVERLASTINGLY NONE of us EVER DESERVE to EVER HAVE, in the FIRST place, TOTALLY STRIPPED HIMSELF of ALL of HIS GODHOOD, to COMPLETELY LOWER HIMSELF to become TOTALLY HUMAN, so that HE was JUST as much HUMAN as HE is GOD, meaning that HE was the ONLY HUMAN that EVER LIVED that was TOTALLY WITHOUT SIN--PERFECT in FULL NATURE, which is CERTAINLY NOT what JOSEPH SMITH, MOHAMAD (misspelled, perhaps), BUDDHA, or ANY of whoever ELSE that you follow, were, who FULLY SUFFERED EVERY ELEMENT of ALL that WE go through--PERSECUTION, OSTRICIZATION, being SPAT UPON, BETRAYAL, VIOLATION, FORSAKEN, ETC., and FINALLY CRUCIFIXION and DEATH on a WOODEN CROSS for the VERY THING that HE, not only DIDN'T, but SIMPLY COULDN'T EVER COMMIT, ONLY BECAUSE HE'S the VERY HOLY GOD that was above-described, who FIRST LOVED HER, just as ALL, INCLUDING YOU, THAT MUCH, EVEN IF ANY ONE of us was the ONLY SINFUL HUMAN BEING on EARTH, which CLEARLY EXPLAINS HER VERY RESPONSE to such PERFECT LOVE, which is the VERY MAKE-UP of her HEROIC DISOBEDIENCE against an (misspelled, perhaps) APPOSTATE GOVERNMENT that has chosen to be under GOD'S JUDGEMENT, instead of HIS DIVINE PROTECTION any longer.
SECOND, below is a playlist of videoes from an EX-MORMON, who gives HIS testimony of having been delivered from such a DEMONIC CULT that it is, PLUS MORE:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHKhteXquhZMDZBIV3Sa4OhJWVvSsN-88
My ass itches.
Terrance, although I dislike Pascal's wager about as much as Pascal himself ultimately did:
What if you're wrong and the liberal Christians are right instead? I'm not sure where they think people like you, or perhaps worse, us atheists, ultimately end up? If you end up with them, I take it you'd be disappointed some. End up with us? You'd probably bore us to death while we're busy innovating (as we usually do) our way outa hell.
LeoGuardian, what matter is it about ME being either right or wrong, when it's REALLY GOD'S INERRENT WORD, ALONE, that you take issue with?
Terrance, the liberals think you're wrong, pure and simple. They have other
words for it, but that's how they roll. They read the same book you do and get
different results. If you and your apologist types weren't such yellow-bellied
chickenshits you'd debate the liberals. But since you are such cowards the best
you've got is us atheists who were raised in the same stuff you were and finally
saw the man behind the curtain for what it isn't.
You know what, man? You can't compete with their talk of metaphors and
symbols, and neither can I. Only I, unlike you, have the honor to admit it. I
dunno how they pick which is metaphor and which is symbol, and what all else,
but you don't know how to fix a bug in software either like I do. They apparently
don't see the buybull as the quadratic equation people like us were brought up
to, and people like us atheists that found our way out of it, figured it doesn't
solve for anything.
We're kind of low-hanging fruit, don't you think? You pump out that tired old
sludge we've all heard since Jerry Falwell's amoral minority in the 1970s, and
you could take a bet with your friends on how one of us atheist is likely to
respond. Maybe not specifically, but you know we'll use science and politics to
give you an answer.
You know why you haven't stood up to the liberals? Because you can't. Hell I'm
an atheist and an engineer and I can't either. I don't really understand the first
thing about their arguments. But you're the one pitching the party line, making
the positive claim, so one would think if you weren't so chicken you'd present a
civil challenge to them. Bet you'd catch a break, they're probably nicer than us.
That's JUST IT, Leo--it's ONLY BECAUSE of the VERY SOLID, ETERNAL FACT that GOD'S ETERNAL WORD isn't what's endangered; it ISN'T because of YOUR SCIENTIFIC, ATHEISTIC COMFORT ZONE that happens to be your FALSE SENSE of SECURITY that poses as ANY THREAT, WHATSOEVER, to the ABSOLUTE ETERNALITY of GOD; Neither YOU, the "LIBERALS," as you're referring to, nor even I, have the BLATANT CAPACITY to PROOVE GOD'S EVER-PRESENCE, because HE'S ALREADY DONE that, before this VERY UNIVERSE was EVER SPOKEN into EXISTANCE, which by the way, if you have NEVER denied the existence of the UNIVERSE, even though you might CLAIM to be (PROBABLY) a totally HARD-CORE ATHEIST, and if you NEVER WILL, ONLY BECAUSE even YOU, YOURSELF, know that you SIMPLY CAN'T, how can such NON-DENIAL be the PERFECT PRESERVATION for YOUR CLAIM of "DEVOUT ATHEISM," AGAIN, ONLY IF you just CAN'T be ANY MORE ATHEISTIC than you say you REALLY ARE? To CLEARLY DEFINE my QUESTION, I'm TOTALLY NOT SURE, but I THINK that in PROBABLY the GREEK language, if you were to divide "UNIVERSE" into TWO WORDS, the FIRST, like I said, which MIGHT be GREEK, is "UNI," which means "ONE (1)," and a "VERSE (LET THERE BE LIGHT)," such as THAT, which was DIVINELY SPOKEN, that the EARTH IMMEDIATELY BEGAN, is a SENTENCE, and sentences can ONLY be either VERBAL or WRITTEN, what COMPLETELY-LAUGHABLE/MOCKABLE ATHEISTIC ARGUMENT, which ALL of them ARE, REGARDLESS of ANY HEIGHTENED LEVEL of "FOOLISH INTELLIGENCE," that you're CLEVERLY ENDOWED with, which Satan's BLINDINGLY MISLEADING you to be "EDUCATED" by, do you DARE to concoct, as YET ANOTHER FAILED ATTEMPT to DISPROOVE the ONE/ONLY TRUE, ETERNAL GOD?
Let's all just put Terrance on ignore and go home.
Only I will say this for the benefit of anyone watching, not Terrance because he
ought to know better by now.
No such thing as a devout atheist, because on the belief spectrum (which is a
scale), the atheist is simply not convinced that any one of the existing gods are
plausible. and using the Kinsey scale as a model where 7 is absolute belief and
0 is absolute lack of belief, the further you get towards 0, the more you are
unconvinced it's possible for us to be convinced that whatever god or gods there
might have been out there has any interest in us, or has been able to
communicate with us in any meaningful way.
To be devout is to be devoted to a set of religious principles. Being unconvinced
is not being devout.
You are not a devout disbeliever in Vishnu, Thor, Buddha, Allah, or any number
of the other god concepts that exist out there, even though each one has its
own set of apologetics and scriptures that are there to try and convince you of
their existence.
Atheism is a religion in the same way that bald is a hair color, off is a TV
channel, and not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Actually, Leo, you're ABSOLUTELY WRONG, ONLY BECAUSE of the VERY FACT that UNCONVINCED or NOT, YOU KNOW, INTERNALLY/SUBCONCIOUSLY, PERHAPS, that GOD, HIMSELF, is MORE than just a FORCE/HIGHER POWER, but a PERSON, by whom YOU choose to not be under ANY CONTROL, WHATSOEVER, thus making YOURSELF YOUR OWN GOD--EVERYBODY serves SOMEBODY or SOMETHING; there's ABSOLUTELY NOONE that serves NOONE/NOTHING, so THEREFORE, you ARE a "DEVOUT ATHEIST," because YOUR CHOICE to be "UNCONVINCED," as YOU put it, of the VERY ETERNAL EXISTANCE of the ONE and ONLY TRUE GOD, for which, BESIDES HIM, there's ABSOLUTELY NO OTHER, is WHAT YOU SERVE, so THEREFORE, ATHEISM is YOUR god. YOUR POSTS in defense of your ATHEISTIC LIFE-CHOICE always proves it. Wanting to be your OWN MASTER indicates, like I said earlier in this post, YOUR RECOGNITION of GOD as YOUR ENEMY, which is the VERY SATANIC LIE that you've chosen to invest in, the VERY MILOSECOND that you used your GOD-GIVEN FREE WILL, FOOLISHLY, to become an ATHEIST.
I can't be the only person who thinks these threads are the result of some sort of deep,
buried desire hidden within mygodchosenbride&i4lifefinally. I mean, this is chris-chan
levels of derp and we all know what happened to him. AHEM. I mean her.
You SURE you're not just making these threads because you have some other problem?
p.s. those posts must be incredibly annoying to read with a screen reader
Definitely not my own god. Then I'd have all the same philosophical problems against myself that I previously had against the notion of deity.
In other words, if I thought I was god, then I'd have the same problems with myself re: the problem of evil, the trilemma situation of omnipotence, oniscience and omnibenevolence.
Seriously, I realize that's a foundational argument -- this notion that we think we're the god --, but stop and just think how ridiculous that sounds. Because part of escaping the very notion of deity makes it logically impossible for us to see ourselves as deity.
Go hang out with Teal Swan or some other squishy new ager if you want to talk to people like that.
When you evangelicals talk like this, you are being as silly and ridiculous as the likes of Teal Swan, no less.
I hope anyone curious thinks about his. What does that tell you about a philosophy and its foundations when it resorts to such circular notions?
Imagine if I was arguing with a technological luddite, someone who has reasons why they eschew smart phones and other modern technologies. Instead of presenting my raitonal argument, if I was to say: "You just want to be your own social network, and have your pen and paper be your own smart phone."
The other crack in this argument is their claim we all "serve" someone.
Actually I agree with that: I send the government a check every April 15, whether I want to do so or not. I serve my immediate family by being the opne who brings in the most money right now, and by being the domestic around here. None of that requires circular arguments.
But what if I was to tell that technological luddite: "You're going to talk to someone, so you may as well have an iPhone. People are going to write about you on social media, so you're already actually using that technology."
Just because an argument sounds clever, is paid for by a multi-billion-dollar industry, and is repeated every week at Sunday school and church doesn't make that argument reasonable, rationable or sensible.
Terrance won't care or listen to what I'm saying, but anyone else who's just a little curious might do so, and challenge any flaws in my perspective. Because unlike evangelicals amd other closed systems, some of us already reconcile that our thought processes are naturally incomplete.
Daigonite, yeah. Insecurity problems.
EXACTLY MY POINT in my LAST POST: the VERY FACT in ALL of your FLAWED COMEBACKS IS the COMPLETE RESULT of whom YOU'VE CHOSEN as YOUR "GOD," and of COURSE, the VERY DENIAL of ANY god-existence that YOU'LL continue to constantly sputter ALWAYS renders YOUR argument TOTALLY DEFENSELESS--I did ALL to keep from LAUGHING as though I COMPLETELY LOST MY MIND at POST 102--ALL THAT CREATIVE TALENT, gone to waste! For SHAME, even though it IS LAUGHABLE!
Terrance, you apparently have little to no reading comprehension abilities.
I have not chosen a god, I merely found out the god of my upbringing / the dominant American culture to be mythos grandiose.
Now, if your argument had any merit ...
Do you believe in Santa Claus? No? Well then, you choose to have the Abominable Snowman as your Father Christmas.
That makes as much sense as your argument does.
AGAIN, Leo, TRY, if you MUST, but you'll ALWAYS FAIL the VERY CHALLENGE that ONLY YOU created for YOURSELF, because NOT ONLY have you OBVIOUSLY CONTRADICTED yourself when you said: " I have not chosen a god, I merely found out the god of my upbringing / the dominant American culture to be mythos grandiose," because it's PICTURE-PERFECT-CLEAR that when YOU, YOURSELF, say that you "merely found out the god of my upbringing," which is EXACTLY what/whom YOU'D RATHER CHOOSE to COMPLETELY GOVERN YOUR LIFE, that such action IS, NOT ONLY A, but YOUR CHOICE, that NOONE ELSE, BUT YOURSELF, can make, REGARDLESS of how YOU WORD it, with ANY/ALL of your HIGHLY-SKILLED INTELLECTUAL WORDING, which CERTAINLY does you NO AMOUNT of ANY GOOD, WHATSOEVER, by the way, although while SIMULTANEOUSLY CREDITING you for PROPERLY ACKNOWLEDGING that I don't believe in SANTA CLAUS (ANY LONGER, I THANKFULLY add), I'll DEFINITELY NOT HESITATE, even a FRACTION of a MILOSECOND, to CORRECGIVELY, if you will, INFORM you that IN ADDITION to NO LONGER believing in the pagan god, SANTA CLAUS, the ABOMINABLE SNOWMAN isn't who I trust to be MY LORD and KING, EITHER. The VERY ONE with whom YOU'RE FIGHTING with, and ALWAYS LOSING TO, no doubt, ISN'T EVER ME, even though I just happen to be the one to ALLERT you to this fact, but it's ALWAYS the VERY GOD, who's the ONLY TRUE GOD, who's the ETERNAL GOD of the UNIVERSE.
Please stop. Just put away the sausages and just ... let it die. This isn't even a conversation anymore, but a shallow nitpicking constantly bringing this bloated topic back up to the surface like a putrifying corpse. Stop beating the dead body!
It's JUST AS WELL--I'm preparing a new topic, ANYWAY.