View Full Version : Taking Things Literally
Cellar_Door
10-30-08, 07:32 AM
Fundamentalist -------->> Someone who lives a 'normal life' except for a vague belief in God.
At what point does someone lose the right to call themselves religious?
cosmictraveler
10-30-08, 07:37 AM
When they fail to see that their religion or others are really what they say they are. When someone understands that religions are only a way to control people. When a person realizes that their prayers never are answered.
Fundamentalist -------->> Someone who lives a 'normal life' except for a vague belief in God.
Where did you get that description?
At what point does someone lose the right to call themselves religious?
When they become athiest.
All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Mr. Hamtastic
10-30-08, 12:15 PM
Actually, fundamentalists tend to be extreme in one fashion or another. Southern Baptists Fundamentalist Christians, for example, prosletyze about the literal exactness of the Bible. Pointing things out to them about the fact they do not follow the ancient laws from numbers and deuteronomy seldom stops them. They have taken an idea, added some concrete, and called it good. Evangelism may or may not be their thing. Some Evangelists I know are Atheists, however, I don't think this makes them Fundamentalist atheists.
Fundamentalist -------->> Someone who lives a 'normal life' except for a vague belief in God.
At what point does someone lose the right to call themselves religious?
The moment they veer off their doctrines that demand worship and obedience to their god, of course.
Fundamentalist -------->> Someone who lives a 'normal life' except for a vague belief in God.
At what point does someone lose the right to call themselves religious?
At no point do they lose that right. Anyone can call themselves religious whenever they want to.
Cellar_Door
10-30-08, 05:14 PM
Adstar -
Where did you get that description?
Which one?
Enmos -
At no point do they lose that right. Anyone can call themselves religious whenever they want to.
And at which point will that claim become untrue? Or rather, at what point does it become correct?
Is a Christian someone who:
wears a cross around their neck.
isn't scared of death because they believe they will go to heaven.
claims the Bible is a far-fetched metaphor for God and has never read it all the way through.
Or do these sentences describe people who are not Christians? How much picking and choosing is allowed?
Which one?
Enmos -
And at which point will that claim become untrue? Or rather, at what point does it become correct?
Is a Christian someone who:
wears a cross around their neck.
isn't scared of death because they believe they will go to heaven.
claims the Bible is a far-fetched metaphor for God and has never read it all the way through.
Or are the people described not Christians? How much picking and choosing is allowed?
It is untrue if they really do not believe in a god. But that is impossible to establish.
Cellar_Door
10-30-08, 05:18 PM
It is untrue if they really do not believe in a god. But that is impossible to establish.
Then they are Theist, but a Christian?
Then they are Theist, but a Christian?
All we have to go on is what they say they believe in. There is no way to check, I guess.
Cellar_Door
10-30-08, 05:23 PM
All we have to go on is what they say they believe in. There is no way to check, I guess.
If they believe in God, they are a Theist.
Surely a Christian follows the teachings of Christ? If so, how can teachings be selected to suit the reader?
If they believe in God, they are a Theist.
Surely a Christian follows the teachings of Christ? If so, how can teachings be selected to suit the reader?
I don't understand want you mean.
visceral_instinct
10-30-08, 06:37 PM
I think that most religions are meant as metaphors, problems arise when people take them literally.
CutsieMarie89
10-30-08, 06:39 PM
I've said it once and I'll say it again. If you believe Jesus is the son of God and believe him to be your personal savior, your a Christian. And according to the Bible the guy who kind of believes in Jesus Christ, but accepts that he is the the son of God has an equal chance of getting to heaven as a die-hard "I believe every single thing the Bible says" fundamentalist.
What about xtians who don't believe that?
Which particular bible is the one that counts?
I've said it once and I'll say it again. If you believe Jesus is the son of God and believe him to be your personal savior, your a Christian.
Why does Christianity offer exactly the same options as a light switch?
And according to the Bible the guy who kind of believes in Jesus Christ, but accepts that he is the the son of God has an equal chance of getting to heaven as a die-hard "I believe every single thing the Bible says" fundamentalist.
So what? I can murder thousands, millions of innocent people, make the same statement as the one above on my deathbed, and *poof* I'm in heaven. Seems anyone can get in to heaven no matter what they did, and they can completely ignore the word of god and his command to obey him with no consequences whatsoever.
:bugeye:
Mr. Hamtastic
11-02-08, 01:42 PM
Q-You do your homework, right? Just out of curiosity, where is the commandment,"Thou shalt obey the Bible literally"? I know about most of the commands, but that one isn't familiar.
Cellar_Door
11-02-08, 01:54 PM
Q-You do your homework, right? Just out of curiosity, where is the commandment,"Thou shalt obey the Bible literally"? I know about most of the commands, but that one isn't familiar.
Well if not then all the other commandments seem to lose their purpose.
"Oh, I like the bit about not murdering but I don't see what's wrong with coveting my neighbour's wife."
But its ok to covet your neighbour's husband, children and goats.
Mr. Hamtastic
11-03-08, 05:22 AM
Well if not then all the other commandments seem to lose their purpose.
"Oh, I like the bit about not murdering but I don't see what's wrong with coveting my neighbour's wife."
Common sense and thoughtfulness help when regarding any kind of literature. Should Darwinists believe that Darwin was correct about all of his speculations?
I will waste my breath again, but please take note, I don't know if I will feel like explaining this too many more times. God did not write the Bible. God inspired the writers of the Bible to do so. Two men, inspired by the same flower, may write totally different descriptions of the flower. Men interpreted God's inspiration. Men are imperfect. Thus, the Bible is probably imperfect. Were the ten commandments of exodus and deuteronomy valid? As valid as Hammurabi's laws, I'd say. Were there Giants in those days? Maybe, I wasn't there. Absolute decision of factuality about a collection of writings will probably be incorrect. If you have a tub of bathwater, with a baby in it, do you throw out the entire container?
Mr. Hamtastic
11-03-08, 05:23 AM
Well if not then all the other commandments seem to lose their purpose.
"Oh, I like the bit about not murdering but I don't see what's wrong with coveting my neighbour's wife."
Common sense and thoughtfulness help when regarding any kind of literature. Should Darwinists believe that Darwin was correct about all of his speculations?
I will waste my breath again, but please take note, I don't know if I will feel like explaining this too many more times. God did not write the Bible. God inspired the writers of the Bible to do so. Two men, inspired by the same flower, may write totally different descriptions of the flower. Men interpreted God's inspiration. Men are imperfect. Thus, the Bible is probably imperfect. Were the ten commandments of exodus and deuteronomy valid? As valid as Hammurabi's laws, I'd say. Were there Giants in those days? Maybe, I wasn't there. Absolute decision of factuality about a collection of writings will probably be incorrect. If you have a tub of bathwater, with a baby in it, do you throw out the entire container?
amark317
11-03-08, 08:05 AM
http://www.myconfinedspace.com/?attachment_id=27623
http://www.myconfinedspace.com/?attachment_id=21248
Cellar_Door
11-03-08, 04:15 PM
Common sense and thoughtfulness help when regarding any kind of literature. Should Darwinists believe that Darwin was correct about all of his speculations?
I will waste my breath again, but please take note, I don't know if I will feel like explaining this too many more times. God did not write the Bible. God inspired the writers of the Bible to do so. Two men, inspired by the same flower, may write totally different descriptions of the flower. Men interpreted God's inspiration. Men are imperfect. Thus, the Bible is probably imperfect. Were the ten commandments of exodus and deuteronomy valid? As valid as Hammurabi's laws, I'd say. Were there Giants in those days? Maybe, I wasn't there. Absolute decision of factuality about a collection of writings will probably be incorrect. If you have a tub of bathwater, with a baby in it, do you throw out the entire container?
The breath you have wasted during typing that response is no different to the despicable amounts of perfectly good air you consistently waste everyday. Plus, Darwinism is not a religion - you would do well to note the fundamental differences between respect and dogma.
The ten commandments are actually the 'word of God', being the words he spoke to Moses, unlike the majority of the Bible as you have pointed out. Therefore, surely it is blasphemous to follow some of them but discount the others? How can a Christian trust anything written in the Bible at all if they must first admit to the many gaping inaccuracies?
Now to go back to the original point: I fail to see how, for example, a number of rappers can call themselves Christians with huge guns sticking out of their trousers and lyrics rife with swear words and references to fucking their 'bitches'. Did Jesus not speak out openly against violence and the oppression of women? All I'm asking is, at what point does someone fail to live up to the name of a true Christian?
if you consider what god is supposed to be, then wouldn't it be silly to think that human imperfection could thwart his efforts? if his efforts were to communicate a message and he is omnipotent and omniscient, then he could consider and allow for any human errors, or malintent regarding the transmission of that message.
God did not write the Bible. God inspired the writers of the Bible to do so.
Which is essentially one and the same thing. If you don't accept that, then the bible is merely just another book of fiction.
Two men, inspired by the same flower, may write totally different descriptions of the flower. Men interpreted God's inspiration. Men are imperfect. Thus, the Bible is probably imperfect.
But, that is something you cannot judge, as it is supposed to be the word of a perfect god. Clearly, god being the omniscient being he is purported to be would easily make sure his words are not imperfect.
Clearly, god being the omniscient being he is purported to be would easily make sure his words are not imperfect.
So if someone cannot understand, there is something wrong with the knowledge?
lightgigantic
11-03-08, 08:07 PM
So if someone cannot understand, there is something wrong with the knowledge?
sometimes (http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=FQjgsQ5G8ug&feature=related)
:D
So if someone cannot understand, there is something wrong with the knowledge?
That's impossible, we're talking about god here, his word is perfect, concise and clear, there can be no misunderstanding between the creator and his creation. This does not constitute the notion that the creation is perfect, of course, but also does not mean the creation isn't able to understand perfection. Even those with serious mental problems will be able to understand gods message as god will speak directly to them so that they will understand his perfect word.
Your point is entirely moot.
That's impossible, we're talking about god here, his word is perfect, concise and clear, there can be no misunderstanding between the creator and his creation. This does not constitute the notion that the creation is perfect, of course, but also does not mean the creation isn't able to understand perfection. Even those with serious mental problems will be able to understand gods message as god will speak directly to them so that they will understand his perfect word.
Your point is entirely moot.
That makes no sense. Fortunately, its all your fault.
Simon Anders
11-03-08, 08:57 PM
That's impossible, we're talking about god here, his word is perfect, concise and clear, there can be no misunderstanding between the creator and his creation. This does not constitute the notion that the creation is perfect, of course, but also does not mean the creation isn't able to understand perfection. Even those with serious mental problems will be able to understand gods message as god will speak directly to them so that they will understand his perfect word.
Your point is entirely moot.
This should hold true in relationships between experts and lay people, but it doesn't.
It also assumes all intentions on God's part would be like ours.
It doesn't remotely address the way, for example, lightgigantic and certain mystics would look at the issue, where one does, in fact, understand, but refuses to notice for varied reasons.
Consider the possibility that God wants some sort of ongoing evolving process, rather than the sudden enlightenment of all creatures.
You continue to make the claim that if there was a God, this God MUST act in a certain way.
This is as big a claim as the theist who asserts there is a God.
Hell, I can't even figure out the motives of some people I know well on all occasions.
I doubt monkeys can figure out human motives, nor children always their parents motives or reasons for doing things a certain way.
But Q, you know
1) what God's motives must be
2) how God MUST go about achieving goals
(if there is a God)
Welcome to the faith club.
That makes no sense.
Brilliant comeback. :rolleyes:
This should hold true in relationships between experts and lay people, but it doesn't.
It also assumes all intentions on God's part would be like ours.
Gods intentions are revealed in the bible, we have no say in the matter.
It doesn't remotely address the way, for example, lightgigantic and certain mystics would look at the issue, where one does, in fact, understand, but refuses to notice for varied reasons.
The nonexistence of a god would address it.
Consider the possibility that God wants some sort of ongoing evolving process, rather than the sudden enlightenment of all creatures.
Can we consider that which is already written in the bible stating otherwise?
You continue to make the claim that if there was a God, this God MUST act in a certain way.
This is as big a claim as the theist who asserts there is a God.
You are once again mistaken in that it is not I who makes these claims, they are gods commands. Gods message is revealed in the bible and is revealed to his followers personally. There are probably hundreds of posts in these forums alone from theists claiming they have heard god speaking to them.
God IS acting a certain way. It is written.
Brilliant comeback. :rolleyes:
That was amazingly easy to understand. Good job, there, bro. ;)
That was amazingly easy to understand. Good job, there, bro. ;)
Sorry, I used way too many words for your attention span.
Simon Anders
11-03-08, 10:41 PM
Gods intentions are revealed in the bible, we have no say in the matter. Christian fundamentalists agree with you. Others realize that a document can't validate itself.
The nonexistence of a god would address it.Beside the point.
Can we consider that which is already written in the bible stating otherwise?
You can consider anything you like. I am not a fundamentalist Christian, nor am I a Christian for that matter, but you will only find, ironically, agreement with those you most fear.
You are once again mistaken in that it is not I who makes these claims, they are gods commands.You are making the claim, it seems, that if there is a God, that God must have produced a document that is to be taken literally and to be taken as in its entirety as correct. This means you know a lot of things about what a God must be, which is an interesting stand for an atheist to take.
The atheist as expert in what a God must be like and must do.
Gods message is revealed in the bible and is revealed to his followers personally. There are probably hundreds of posts in these forums alone from theists claiming they have heard god speaking to them.And that should tell you something about repeatedly saying the Bible, for example, must be literally true - or, implicitly, there is no God. I think it is too much to ask for us to connect the dots there for you.
You, Q, seem to have a need to be a purist about religion and to tell religious people what their God must be like. I can see no justification for this in terms of your expertise or experience. I can see reasons why it steamlines arguing your case. I can't be sure what your motives are, but until something shifts in you, I'll keep considering your fundamentalism something you choose for an intended rhetorical edge. You may or may not be aware of this.
Simon Anders
11-03-08, 10:45 PM
Sorry, I used way too many words for your attention span.In fact my post was longer than most of yours. Even your ideas of what 'easy to understand' MUST be are in need of EXPANSION.
Tell you what Q.
I'll check back in a few weeks and see if you are still driving this line. If not, perhaps the discussion will get interesting.
I do think it is fair to add that this line you have recently taken WAS interesting and it made you a more dynamic debater. You maintained lines of argument and debated rather than degenerating into ad homs and shooting from a distance. You came in, got your hands dirty and I think it made for some interesting discussions. Really. I enjoyed seeing if the box you made was really a box. I enjoyed pointing out how I think it is not.
So, seriously, hats off. This line you have taken also splits theists into the fundamentalists and the non-fundamentalists, which is also a good point. Long before you brought up this line, I have argued with fundamentalists - who basically make the same claims you do but not from the subjunctive position. But other theists may have found themselves having to be more specific about what kind of theist they are and are not. This is also good.
But it's not the magic bullet.
So get another line and keep us on our toes. Don't be a one trick pony. We both lose something if you are.
Christian fundamentalists agree with you. Others realize that a document can't validate itself.
Only a true Christian would agree. Others cannot validate the word of god.
You can consider anything you like. I am not a fundamentalist Christian, nor am I a Christian for that matter, but you will only find, ironically, agreement with those you most fear.
A Christian is one who obeys his god, hence it is not the people to fear, but their gods commands.
You are making the claim
Why do you keep saying that? I make no claims, the claims are from god, not me.
This means you know a lot of things about what a God must be, which is an interesting stand for an atheist to take.
Why is that a problem? Anyone can read the bible and know gods word.
The atheist as expert in what a God must be like and must do.
God says what he must be like and must do, in the bible.
And that should tell you something about repeatedly saying the Bible, for example, must be literally true - or, implicitly, there is no God. I think it is too much to ask for us to connect the dots there for you.
I have been attempting to connect the dots for you. The fact that I may or may not believe a word of the bible doesn't preclude the fact that others do, and they obey it, simply because that is what god commands.
You, Q, seem to have a need to be a purist about religion and to tell religious people what their God must be like. I can see no justification for this in terms of your expertise or experience. I can see reasons why it steamlines arguing your case. I can't be sure what your motives are, but until something shifts in you, I'll keep considering your fundamentalism something you choose for an intended rhetorical edge. You may or may not be aware of this.
I am no purist about religion, it is the religion itself that is self-explanatory of what theists should and shouldn't do, and who they should obey and worship. I have no motives other than to demonstrate the hypocrisy of theists.
I'll check back in a few weeks and see if you are still driving this line. If not, perhaps the discussion will get interesting.
No need to check back at all. The discussion was over some time ago. You just didn't know that yet. :)
So get another line and keep us on our toes. Don't be a one trick pony. We both lose something if you are.
It was hardly any trouble at all pointing out the bleeding obvious.
Tell you what, since you're handing out free advice, I'll give you some.
Don't be such a pompous ass. There's a good fellow.
his message has been loud and clear to me. this isn't nearly as difficult as many people would like it to be.
Cellar_Door
11-04-08, 01:01 PM
Ok so we seem to be establishing an answer here (although what follows is mostly from (Q))
- what has been communicated down to earth is exactly as God intended. Ergo, if you disobey any part of the Bible then you are rejecting God's word. Moreover, those who do so have no basis for calling themselves 'Christians' as they show disregard for parts of the Bible. To put it simply: take it in its entirety, or leave it.
That is to say - perfection is obviously not required; we can be forgiven for our sins and still be good Christian people. But to make violence or dishonesty (for example )a part of your lifestyle would be a different matter altogether.
"good Christian people"...
eh...that made me cringe just now.
everyone is violent and dishonest.
greenberg
11-04-08, 01:44 PM
everyone is violent and dishonest.
... among many other things they also are.
Why does Christianity offer exactly the same options as a light switch?
So what? I can murder thousands, millions of innocent people, make the same statement as the one above on my deathbed, and *poof* I'm in heaven. Seems anyone can get in to heaven no matter what they did, and they can completely ignore the word of god and his command to obey him with no consequences whatsoever.
:bugeye:
Innocent of what? Only God knows another's heart (ie: true self).
... among many other things they also are.
yes sir. i don't like it when christians judge (against doctrine), or try to think they're "good" (contrary to scripture), or better than another person because they follow certain rules or exhibit or don't exhibit certain behaviors. just the other day i had one of my myspace friends comment on one of my pics where i'm wearing my favorite hoodie that says "jesus rocks" on it. for the caption i wrote "jesus...he fucking rocks". the comment left was something like, "yeah jesus does rock, but don't use the f word please." typical christian tight-ass.
Cellar_Door
11-04-08, 02:33 PM
Innocent of what? Only God knows another's heart (ie: true self).
Thus all theocracies are fatally flawed.
However, it's hard to disagree with even a pretentious and ridiculous statement like yours without getting into the whole 'God isn't real' argument. So I'll simply ask you: should all judgement and punishment be left to 'higher forces'?
there's something to be said here for defending yourself and being sincere. when hearts and the truth are applied, as opposed to egos and their lies, it all becomes crystal clear.
so i questioned dude's intentions regarding trying to tell me how to talk, and he deleted me as a friend. heh, heh, heh. you gotta love those christians...
Thus all theocracies are fatally flawed.
However, it's hard to disagree with even a pretentious and ridiculous statement like yours without getting into the whole 'God isn't real' argument. So I'll simply ask you: should all judgement and punishment be left to 'higher forces'?
No.
synthesizer-patel
11-05-08, 07:31 AM
if you consider what god is supposed to be, then wouldn't it be silly to think that human imperfection could thwart his efforts? if his efforts were to communicate a message and he is omnipotent and omniscient, then he could consider and allow for any human errors, or malintent regarding the transmission of that message.
Very well put - proof that god does not exist - or at least does not exist as an omnipotent and omniscient being
Very well put - proof that god does not exist - or at least does not exist as an omnipotent and omniscient being
he is accomplishing his purpose all around you. i've gotten that message loud and clear. as i speak from personal experience, i'm the only thing that's ever gotten in the way of his communication with me. the bible's message is clear.
Cellar_Door
11-05-08, 01:12 PM
No.
So others apart from God can judge you; they can condemn you in the eyes of the law, of your peers, of your family and of society as a whole.
So others apart from God can judge you; they can condemn you in the eyes of the law, of your peers, of your family and of society as a whole.
Yes.
Why does Christianity offer exactly the same options as a light switch?
So what? I can murder thousands, millions of innocent people, make the same statement as the one above on my deathbed, and *poof* I'm in heaven. Seems anyone can get in to heaven no matter what they did, and they can completely ignore the word of god and his command to obey him with no consequences whatsoever.
:bugeye:
Innocent of what? Only God knows another's heart (ie: true self).
Thus all theocracies are fatally flawed.
However, it's hard to disagree with even a pretentious and ridiculous statement like yours without getting into the whole 'God isn't real' argument. So I'll simply ask you: should all judgement and punishment be left to 'higher forces'?
No.
So others apart from God can judge you; they can condemn you in the eyes of the law, of your peers, of your family and of society as a whole.
Yes.
Q was questioning the promise of heaven and being with God, and how an apparently "evil" person may enter the kingdom of heaven. This seems contradictory in light of what the Bible preachs, but it is not necessarily so. It is very hard to grasp, ageed, but our place in this world as human's is not to judge one another in try to figure out if they are going heaven. As humans we do not have enough information to make an informed decision as to disposistion of someone else's eternal soul. Defending yourself from violence and having a rule of conduct, or law, for a society seems prudent as well.
Somewhere in the Bible it states that goods deeds alone wont get you into to heaven, so that does offer food for thought.
Mr. Hamtastic
11-05-08, 07:16 PM
The breath you have wasted during typing that response is no different to the despicable amounts of perfectly good air you consistently waste everyday. Plus, Darwinism is not a religion - you would do well to note the fundamental differences between respect and dogma.
The ten commandments are actually the 'word of God', being the words he spoke to Moses, unlike the majority of the Bible as you have pointed out. Therefore, surely it is blasphemous to follow some of them but discount the others? How can a Christian trust anything written in the Bible at all if they must first admit to the many gaping inaccuracies?
Now to go back to the original point: I fail to see how, for example, a number of rappers can call themselves Christians with huge guns sticking out of their trousers and lyrics rife with swear words and references to fucking their 'bitches'. Did Jesus not speak out openly against violence and the oppression of women? All I'm asking is, at what point does someone fail to live up to the name of a true Christian?
<sigh> Ok. The ten commandments were condensed by JC. I refer to the "most important" commandment question asked of him. Also, consider that Micah said,"The lord has showed you what is right, and what does he want of you? But to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God." This suggests that the Ten Commandments were secondary to trying to have a close relationship with God.
To the original point: The question is for God to answer, not us mortals. "Judge not lest ye be judged" Whatever hoop I expect someone else to jump through to be a christian, I must demand of myself. Lyrics are just words, guns are no more than a fashion item for some. There are no words against weapons, and Paul thought fairly lowly of women. I reject Paul's suggestion about "head coverings" and sift through the rest looking for Gold.
Mr. Hamtastic
11-05-08, 07:19 PM
rjr6-just a note, correct me if I am wrong. You are NOT saying that the societal judgement decides the heavenly judgement. A serial pedophile rapist and capital murderer who repents and asks JC into his life on death row, is accepted by God as readily as the kindly priest who fulfills God's word to the letter, whose only sin is pride.
Mr. Hamtastic
11-05-08, 07:23 PM
so i questioned dude's intentions regarding trying to tell me how to talk, and he deleted me as a friend. heh, heh, heh. you gotta love those christians...
Jesus does fucking rock. Bear in mind that all christians are imperfect. Don't judge him for his silliness. Pray for him that he will be relieved of such a weight as literary sin.
Mr. Hamtastic
11-05-08, 07:24 PM
CD-better? Those links in the other thread are hilarious, BTW. I hope you looked at them. :D
<sigh> Ok. The ten commandments were condensed by JC. I refer to the "most important" commandment question asked of him. Also, consider that Micah said,"The lord has showed you what is right, and what does he want of you? But to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God." This suggests that the Ten Commandments were secondary to trying to have a close relationship with God.
To the original point: The question is for God to answer, not us mortals. "Judge not lest ye be judged" Whatever hoop I expect someone else to jump through to be a christian, I must demand of myself. Lyrics are just words, guns are no more than a fashion item for some. There are no words against weapons, and Paul thought fairly lowly of women. I reject Paul's suggestion about "head coverings" and sift through the rest looking for Gold.
Why the fuck should anyone take your interpretation, sinner? Who the fuck do you think you are, blasphemer? How dare you tell us what you think the bible should say, evil-doer? Begone with your heresies and pray god doesn't strike you down this very moment for your transgressions against him, devil-muncher.
Mr. Hamtastic
11-05-08, 07:31 PM
If God strikes me down, causing you to believe, Q, I will die in ecstacy. :D
If God strikes me down, causing you to believe, Q, I will die in ecstacy. :D
http://www.smileyhut.com/laughing/lol1.gif (http://www.smileyhut.com)
rjr6-just a note, correct me if I am wrong. You are NOT saying that the societal judgement decides the heavenly judgement. A serial pedophile rapist and capital murderer who repents and asks JC into his life on death row, is accepted by God as readily as the kindly priest who fulfills God's word to the letter, whose only sin is pride.
That is up to God. Pride is a pretty big sin, a violation of the ten commandments.
Cellar_Door
11-06-08, 01:11 PM
In conclusion, as long as you love God in your heart and repent on your deathbed, following the Bible is completely irrelevant to being a Christian.
So - why bother?
greenberg
11-06-08, 01:33 PM
In conclusion, as long as you love God in your heart and repent on your deathbed, following the Bible is completely irrelevant to being a Christian.
So - why bother?
Because if you don't follow the Bible throughout the course of your life,
then the chances that you will think of repenting while you are on your deathbed are next to zero.
If God strikes me down, causing you to believe, Q, I will die in ecstacy.
What? not dead yet? Must be your god is lazy.
In conclusion, as long as you love God in your heart and repent on your deathbed, following the Bible is completely irrelevant to being a Christian.
So - why bother?
What makes you sure you will die in your bed?
Because if you don't follow the Bible throughout the course of your life,
then the chances that you will think of repenting while you are on your deathbed are next to zero.
How many Christians actually do follow the bible? Less than 1%, maybe?
Mr. Hamtastic
11-08-08, 11:08 AM
What? not dead yet? Must be your god is lazy.
Maybe God knows that doing so would be ineffective. :D
Maybe God knows that doing so would be ineffective.
Or, more likely, he is impotent to do anything.
Maybe God knows that doing so would be ineffective. :D
Are you saying your god is impotent?
StrangerInAStrangeLa
11-09-08, 10:39 AM
Well, I challenged it to a fight but the coward never showed.
1111
Where is his god when you need him?
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.