philologos wrote: » Disillusioned with religion? - Anyone can be disillusioned with religious institutions.
philologos wrote: » As a Christian. I acknowledge that that means that I am a follower of Jesus, that I accept by His death and resurrection that He stood in my rightful place and took away my sin. As a result, I live in acknowledgement of God and I seek to serve Him fully. The church from a Biblical point of view is simply a grassroots movement of those who follow Him. Ultimately, belief Biblically is just a wholehearted acknowledgement of Jesus, and walking in it. It isn't a "feeling" or anything else that you've described. It's simply a well founded trust in who God is and what He did through Jesus. Belief doesn't have much to do with feeling from a Christian perspective. Irrespective of what people think or not about Christianity, ultimately something is true about God whether we like it or not. I believe in Jesus, because there is simply put good reason for me to put my trust in Him. Muslims aren't convinced by Christianity in a similar way that you aren't convinced by Christianity. It's either because one hasn't sought out God in fullness, or it is because one has never heard of God. It could be also because people want to run from Him, because they are not willing to acknowledge that in His sight their works are evil. Jesus ultimately demands a transformation, that is costly. It can lose us friends and family, it can lose people their jobs, and ultimately people are in some regions of the world killed for believing in Jesus.
philologos wrote: » Limbo has nothing to do with Biblical Christianity. The concept isn't listed in the Bible once. I'm a non-Catholic Christian, I simply defend God's word on boards.ie.
philologos wrote: » The rejection of God is profoundly wrong. It separates us from our Creator, and ultimately leads us into the delusion that we can better guide ourselves rather than accepting the rightful standard of God. At best it is a mistake, at worst it is a lie that denies the fundamental truth about reality.
Fanny Cradock wrote: » Is there any reason why you have given us only two options? "Yes or no. Do you still beat your wife?"
marienbad wrote: » Only some have been offered the gift of salvation Fanny .
marienbad wrote: » Just the limits of my knowledge , are there other options ? Despite what Philologos may say about my agressive and rhetorical posts I am genuinely interested in the discussion.
marienbad wrote: » If for no other reason than to try to bridge the gap between this position and the convesation earlier on natural justice and overarching rights . Or to get my mind round the notion that Hitler and Himmler could be in Heaven and the 6 million jews are in Hell.
Fanny Cradock wrote: » How so?
ISAW wrote: » so if you believe science is contextually linked to society and society itself isnt reducable to physical equations then science is not internally determined. it isn,t sufficient. the HD method is reliant on HPS.
Fanny Cradock wrote: » Well, it is clear that you are angry - which isn't in and of itself a bad thing. But I do wonder why you are so angry about something you don't believe in. Do you go to Hindu or Buddhist forums to get angry about the concept of Karma? And, yes, there are other options. But it didn't really look like you were of a mind to ask for them. So the options are that Hitler and Himmler are in Heaven and the 6 million people they killed aren't? Sorry, but why should anyone here have to defend that position?
marienbad As for the Hitler conundrum ? What is wrong with asking it ? Either I am wrong or not according to Christianity. If I am wrong show me and if i am not , then accept the consequence of your belief . If you don't know - say so - it is not a crime.
tommy2bad wrote: » We don't know about anyone else we only know that Jesus came to redeem the world and if we accept Him we too can be redeemed. "I am the way the truth and the light" Did He mean that His mission was to set up a Christian church that could give out passes into heaven or did He mean that His death and resurrection made the gates of heaven open to everyone? I go with the latter, it makes more sense for God to do that than to set up a franchise.
tommy2bad wrote: » It's a fair question and deserves an answer. You know I'll have a go According to Christian theology Adolf has as much chance of getting into heaven as anyone else. He was baptized and lived a good life, oh wait no he didn't. Well he has the option of repentance and for all we know may have in his last hours repented and sought forgiveness, I hope he did. And even if the rotten basterd didn't we should at least ask God to show mercy feel a little saddened for his destruction in the fiery lake. Now the Jews. not baptized but chosen people who presumably led good lives and suffered through no fault of their own, no idea, best ask God for mercy and pray for their souls. Hows that?
marienbad wrote: » But the chosen people are the Old Testament Jews , are they not ? The New Testament made the Chosen People avenue obsolete so to speak. Now they were in direct contact with Jesus and the Christian message but refused that invitation and so are consigned to Hell. Correct ?
tommy2bad wrote: » Not correct, no one is consigned to hell. Start from the point of view of God, He wants man to live with him, man FUBARS, God fixes. What happens now? The idea that God done a botch job of fixing it or that man broke it so it couldn't be fixed and a kind of back door was patched on is nonsense. We as Christians have a true method of getting to heaven, whatever that is, everyone else must be able to gain the same but we don't know the how that works so we can only say ' this' not 'that' Any one who claims that they have the only way are either Jesus back for the apocalypse or wrong. Christians say they have the way that Jesus taught them and know it to be true.
marienbad wrote: » But is the Christian way the only way ?
tommy2bad wrote: » Might be, might not. All we know is that it a sure way. Look I'm a believer, a bit heterodox but who isn't nowadays, all I know is the basic message Jesus gave was (I'm paraphrasing) Cop on and get on with each other. He came with a mission, didn't do much preaching and changer the world. We trust in God to save us and we have to trust that He wont turn away anyone who lives in His way just because their form wasn't stamped at all the correct places. Anyway I don't even believe in the God as presented by some of the bible authors, the God who runs the whole way through the bible like the writing in a stick of rock on the other hand.....
marienbad wrote: » I don't think most Christans would agree with you- as far as I know they believe the Christian way is the only way and I venture to say if you don't accept that you are not really a Christian.
tommy2bad wrote: » Not correct, no one is consigned to hell.
Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come
Andrewf20 wrote: » I was referring to the core of religon, i.e. the Bible in the case of Christianity. ... Or that a Muslim considers the Koran as the word of God for the exact reasons you consider the bible to be the one true religon.
Ive read your reply but I still dont feel satisfied that my question has been answered, why is belief so important. I ask again, name a moral or ethical act done by a believer that could not be done by a non believer?
Thats a fair point, however the bible (Mark 16) says: "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved", implying that if you are not baptized you wont be saved. Elsewhere it implies you dont need baptism to be saved but this creates confusion as sentences conflict with others elsewhere.
Your comment ("rejection of God") suggests that these people who dont believe in God are completely immoral with no ethics, charity or compassion which may not be the case.
These can be people who help the poor, are good parents, ethical, law abiding citizens. They dont steal, or kill etc etc. I would also argue that a person who does a moral or charitable act without a hope of eternal reward (a non believer) is perhaps a more noble person than someone who does a charitable act mainly because they believe they will be rewarded in the next life. Surely some credit would be due here?
dj357 wrote: » 1 Except for those who commit the sin mentioned in Matthew 12:31-32:2 It is also commonly bandied about, at least by US Christians, that to personally deny Jesus in such a way that one would never repent that denial has earned unpardonable condemnation. Anyone who rejects the Christian doctrine and does so, even in part, due to the reprehensible morality expounded by Jesus would surely be in such a situation and is, therefore, consigned to hell.3 And can I point out, related to this, that the doctrine of Vicarious Redemption through Ol' J.C. is one of the most broken moral lessons ever to see the light of day. One need only read a little of Christopher Hitchens to understand how truly reprehensible this doctrine is.
lmaopml wrote: » No, they still fall under the old Covenant and must follow that law if they don't accept Jesus. They are still God's chosen people, with a Covenant -
lmaopml wrote: » The Gospel is for everybody who has ears to hear it and understand. A Christian would understand that all the generations gone by everywhere for all time prior to the Gospel will be judged by the same judge, who judges the heart of a person perfectly, and ones 'works' are tested by fire by Christ who is God. So, nobody in fact comes to the father except through the son, past, present or future, Christian or not.
lmaopml wrote: » The Roman Catholic Church claims the fullness of faith is found in her, that she is in fact Christ's Church built on the rock, along with all the other rites that are in communion. It's a big statement - but it's there, nonetheless. She won't tell anybody they are saved though or indeed that they aren't unless they wilfully have chosen not to be.
Wh1stler wrote: » And are consigned to hell because no man can keep the law of God. i.e., Jews who reject Jesus must go to hell. But the son is the father is He not? And didn't Jesus Himself say that those who deny Him will be denied by Him? What could that mean? And to deny that Jesus is the son of God means a trip to eternal damnation. Jews and Muslims are going to hell according to Jesus.
marienbad wrote: » Those that have never encountered Christianity have not been offered that opportunity.
marienbad wrote: » And as to why I post here ? are you seriously asking that question ? Why have a christian/atheist thread if atheists are not welcome ?
As for the Hitler conundrum ? What is wrong with asking it ? Either I am wrong or not according to Christianity. If I am wrong show me and if i am not , then accept the consequence of your belief . If you don't know - say so - it is not a crime.
Wh1stler wrote: » So when Jesus said, 'no-one comes to my father but through me' He meant, 'no-one comes to my father but through me, except everyone who does'? He went even further, even calling Jesus 'Lord!' (having faith) is not enough. 'The gate is narrow' and all that. Also, according to Jesus' words, if you deny Him, He will deny you. Where did the ambiguity of Jesus' words come from? And when Jesus instructed that the gospel be taken to all nations, which nations were tacitly exempted? According to the words of Jesus, if you don't recognise Him as God, or the son of God, then you go to hell.
ISAW wrote: » You dont seem to understand. Read it again. the christian would say " that cannot be God" the Muslim would say "it is gods will"
ISAW wrote: » that is handwaving! WHAT is illogical or against reason in Christian theology?
ISAW wrote: » you keep trying to assert that. Noone except you claimed Christian theology says it.
ISAW wrote: » that is unfair. PDN admitted he didnt have the answer to all the unknowns. It was not a case of "it is allahs will"
ISAW wrote: » that is nonsense. the same logic and reason is used by mathematics and science .
tommy2bad wrote: » It might have something to do with...I'll let Jesus tell you himself.Matthew 25: 35-40 "‘For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; 36 naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.’ 37 “Then the righteous will answer Him, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink? 38 ‘And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You? 39 ‘When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 “The King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’ " We meet and reject Jesus everyday, think on that.
tommy2bad wrote: » If thats how you want to read it, then you better get saved fast or your going to hell.:p Whats your point? That Jesus was ambiguous in His explanation of salvation theology? That its too damn hard to get to heaven? That none of it makes sense in a nice simple easy to understand way? How about this;Galatians 5:14 The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." This stuff isn't hard to grasp, just to put into practice. Tacitly excluded??? I give up. Whats the answer?
