Believing in Santa. Believing in God/Satan.

[ImNotMad2]

Originally posted by IWLN
How is this not a montrous plan?

Most religions in the world claim exclusivity, yet each contradict the other in some way that makes them incompatible. Only a relativistic view can claim that all religions essentially believe in the same God, with all the various requirements for salvation being equally valid. I haven’t gotten the impression that you are a relativist. Am I wrong? Do you truely think that contradictory requrements for salvation can be equally valid?

…but I guarantee you if I was raised in the Jewish faith, for example; I wouldn’t get the message, because I was raised to believe it was false. I don’t know for sure, but I think it’s probably rare for a Jew to convert to Christianity.

I understand your thinking here. I often wonder if I were raised in the home of a different belief, if I would hold fast to those beliefs. But I discover that many people raised in conservative evangelical Christian homes, going to church every Sunday, etc. don’t believe the way they were raised. Also, there are many Jewish people who do believe that Jesus is their Messiah and trust him as their Savior and Lord.

I just can’t agree that you have solid evidence. If by some chance the NT was falsified, you have no religion.

Falsified in what way? The authors of the New Testament documents had nothing to gain by writing the things they did–except persecution and execution. The manuscript evidence we have today indicate that the New Testament documents we have today are accurate to the originals to over 99% certainty.

You are trusting your feelings. That’s what faith is. Only someone who’s never felt G-d’s presence could think there is a way to mistake it for anything else. And experiences with G-d aren’t anything but the truth. Pure.

There is a difference between faith, and blind faith. Because God has kept the promises he made in the past, I know that He will keep the promises He makes now. That’s faith: that I believe God will do what He has not yet done, based on the evidence of what he has already done. “Blind” faith is just stupid, because there is much in this world that tries to lead us the wrong way. Be warned: there are “false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light” 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 NIV. Not everything called “Christian” is of Christ, and not everything that “feels” like God is of God.

Does it ever strike you as odd that G-d created our sin, allowed us to be separated and then gave us a way to make it up to him?

God did not create sin; he did create the potential for sin. Sin was not actualized until Adam disobeyed God. Yes, God did know that man would fall; but consider this: people have children to love them, and hope that their children will return their love. They know ahead of time that there will be times when children will disobey, show rebellious attitudes, etc. causing grief for the parent; but they have the kids anyway, because the desire for the relationship is greater than the pain caused when they rebel.

I have a hard time thinking that Jesus could get us off without us making ammends for our sin. A just G-d would give all mankind an equal chance and I don’t see that it is.

Jesus expects us to repent of our sins and to trust him to keep his promise, that he will extend grace–getting good things we don’t deserve–and forgive us, so that we can stand before God blameless. But there is still atonement for our sins; you can look at it like this: Jesus is our scapegoat.

I get the part that basically G-d’s love is the only thing that can wipe the slate clean, I just don’t see why the message isn’t more about repentence. This event, the crucifixtion is too much like a free pass for the few chosen.

Actually, it’s God’s grace that wipes the slate clean; because of God’s love for us, he offers us grace; we can choose to accept it or to reject it. But I see your point: that a person can claim to believe yet not repent? A person’s actions are a direct reflection of what he believes (Would you agree?). A person who does not repent; a person who does not obey God’s commands, yet claims to believe? The evidence would clearly be against him; but God knows his mind: a person may be able to deceive another man, but a person thinking to deceive God is only deceiving himself.

[lynn73]

*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic *
**
I also don’t understand why righteousness wouldn’t be good enough for God. Why isn’t it good enough to be a good person? WHY would a loving God require perfection in a creature that HE CREATED TO BE IMPERFECT? **

I guess I don’t know what to tell you except the Bible says that all our righteousness (any goodness we think we have, good deeds, good life, etc.) is like filthy rags in His sight. We can’t be good enough. We would have to live a perfect, sinless, life in thought, word, and deed and how many of us can do that? Jesus is the only sinless Person to walk this earth. And He was God in the flesh, Colossians 2:9. How long do you think heaven would be heaven if God let sin in? Sin has to go and it’s only through Christ that we can get rid of it, not have it accounted to us. The Bible also says there is none good, no, not one. In God’s sight not a one of us are good, despite what we may think about our goodness. That’s what God says.

Also, I don’t think God created us to be imperfect. We messed that up ourselves. Adam and Eve were created perfect, but they disobeyed God and sin entered the human race.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

*Originally posted by ImNotMad2 *
Most religions in the world claim exclusivity, yet each contradict the other in some way that makes them incompatible. Only a relativistic view can claim that all religions essentially believe in the same God, with all the various requirements for salvation being equally valid. I haven’t gotten the impression that you are a relativist. Am I wrong? Do you truely think that contradictory requrements for salvation can be equally valid?

You’re wrong in your first assertion that all religions claim exclusivity, at least as it pertains to “salvation” (which is not even a universal goal of all religions).

Christianity is, in fact, the only major religion which teaches that people of other rewligions can’t be “saved” or enlightned or whatever. In judaism and in islam, God judges people on their actions and their personal righteousness. Jews don’t think that you have to be Jewish to go to Heaven and Muslims don’t believe you have to be Muslim.

If religion is looked at as all just diffrent metaphorical strategies for communing with God then there is no problem. It’s all just diffrent fingers pointing at the same moon.

Jewish people who do believe that Jesus is their Messiah and trust him as their Savior and Lord.

No, there are Jewish people who convert to Christianity, at which time they are no longer religiously Jewish. Citing Jewish conversion to Christianity is missing the point that you think God burns Jews in hell.

Falsified in what way? The authors of the New Testament documents had nothing to gain by writing the things they did–except persecution and execution. The manuscript evidence we have today indicate that the New Testament documents we have today are accurate to the originals to over 99% certainty.

What “documents” are you talking about and what “manuscripts” are you comparing them to?

Anyway, the NT is a compilation of religious and mythological statements not a factual history. What the authors had to “gain” was more adherents to their religion and more political power. Verifiable facts did not have much importance back then.

There is a difference between faith, and blind faith.

And the difference is what? Faith, by definition, is belief without knowledge.

Because God has kept the promises he made in the past, I know that He will keep the promises He makes now.

Cite that “God” made any promises in the past? Cite that he kept them? What are you talking about ?

That’s faith:

That’s blind faith.

** that I believe God will do what He has not yet done, based on the evidence of what he has already done.**

What “evidence” would that be? I’m still waiting to see exhibit A.

"Blind" faith is just stupid

Sing it, sister.

**because there is much in this world that tries to lead us the wrong way. Be warned: there are “false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light” 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 NIV. Not everything called “Christian” is of Christ, and not everything that “feels” like God is of God.

**
I think fundamentalist Christianity is proof of all that.

God did not create sin; he did create the potential for sin. Sin was not actualized until Adam disobeyed God.

God created sin. God chose to create beings that would sin, therefore God created sin. It was all God’s choice.

And what do mean by “Adam” exactly? Do you think there was really an Adam who really ate an apple? If so, how do you reconcile that belief with the reality of evolution? Also, Gensesis says that Adam and Eve did not know good from evil until after they ate the fruit, so that means it couldn’t have been a sin because it they could not have known it was wrong. Furthermore, how does one guy eating an apple have anything to do with me? Is “sin” passed down genetically? was I born with it? If so, it’s not my fault is it? How can God hold people culpable for something they were born with?

Yes, God did know that man would fall; but consider this: people have children to love them, and hope that their children will return their love. They know ahead of time that there will be times when children will disobey, show rebellious attitudes, etc. causing grief for the parent; but they have the kids anyway, because the desire for the relationship is greater than the pain caused when they rebel.

Nonsense, God wasn’t “hoping” for anything, nor could he. He knew precisel;y what would happen and he chose to create precisely the people who would behave precisely as he inteded them to behave?

Who created the serpent? Didn’t God know exactly what that serpent would do? Why did he create it then? Saying it’s not God’s choice is like creating a killer robot and then saying it wsas the robot’s choice to kill people.

Jesus expects us to repent of our sins and to trust him to keep his promise, that he will extend grace–getting good things we don’t deserve–and forgive us, so that we can stand before God blameless. But there is still atonement for our sins; you can look at it like this: Jesus is our scapegoat.

Scapegoat for WHAT sins? What have most people done that’s so horribly unforgivable? You’re saying we all desrve to be tortured forever? What a hateful God you worship.

anyway, how does a “scapegoat” pay for my sins? What gratification does god derive from a blood sacrifice?

And why didn’t he pick a more effective strategy?

Actually, it’s God’s grace that wipes the slate clean; because of God’s love for us, he offers us grace; we can choose to accept it or to reject it.

peopel accept God’s grace in a myriad of other ways than Chrsitianity. Why aren’t those other ways good enough?

But I see your point: that a person can claim to believe yet not repent?

I would say that people can and do repent without any belief in Chrisitianity or in any God.

A person’s actions are a direct reflection of what he believes (Would you agree?).

No. I would say there is very little correlation between religious belief (or lack thereof) and personal behavior. I’ve certainly seen no evidence of it.

**A person who does not repent; a person who does not obey God’s commands, yet claims to believe? The evidence would clearly be against him; but God knows his mind: a person may be able to deceive another man, but a person thinking to deceive God is only deceiving himself. **

God’s “commands” are to love your neighbor as yourself. The rest is commentary.

[IWLN]

*Originally posted by ImNotMad2 *
Most religions in the world claim exclusivity, yet each contradict the other in some way that makes them incompatible. Only a relativistic view can claim that all religions essentially believe in the same God, with all the various requirements for salvation being equally valid. I haven’t gotten the impression that you are a relativist. Am I wrong? Do you truely think that contradictory requrements for salvation can be equally valid?

I guess that would make me relativistic, although I’m not familar with the term. Does that make me more hopeless? I have compared religion to a journey to explain my beliefs to people. We are all headed toward the same destination (G-d). To get there we use many different routes and modes of transportation (religion). Although I don’t think religion is the only vehicle. A good decent life has as much or more value on the journey. The most important part of the journey is the destination. If G-d had wanted this any different, he would have created it so. There are no requirements for salvation other than to show love to G-d through those that he loves. Even Christianity is valid as long as your works are good. Christianity’s message is cruel, but I don’t believe the cruelty is intentional. I HATE the exclusitivity of it. In this discussion we are having between the Christian, the lapsed Christian and the agnostic, I find myself agreeing with more of what he’s saying than the Christian message. I do love irony, though.

I understand your thinking here. I often wonder if I were raised in the home of a different belief, if I would hold fast to those beliefs. But I discover that many people raised in conservative evangelical Christian homes, going to church every Sunday, etc. don’t believe the way they were raised. Also, there are many Jewish people who do believe that Jesus is their Messiah and trust him as their Savior and Lord.

I think it would be much more likely that a Christian could become a Jew. We share a lot of the same beliefs, but Christ is considered somewhat of a blaphemous aberation to the Jewish faith. I have never had a Jew tell me I would go to Hell for my beliefs though. I can honestly say that if I’d been raised differently, I probably wouldn’t have questioned it. What made me question Christianity is the concept of a G-d who fails to save most of the world. It’s too sad and it contradicts what I know of G-d.

Falsified in what way? The authors of the New Testament documents had nothing to gain by writing the things they did–except persecution and execution. The manuscript evidence we have today indicate that the New Testament documents we have today are accurate to the originals to over 99% certainty.

I have only just begun to look at other information and historical events and their affect on the Bible. I’m not really as concerned as I’m sure you think I should be as to the Bible’s authenticity. It doesn’t change the fact that men wrote it and were subject to all the influences any man is. I believe Jesus existed. As an example only, a teacher. Whether or not the NT is true matters very little to me. If tomorrow it were found to be a hoax, I would still have the same faith, the same relationship with G-d. My religion, whatever that is, is not dependent on a book.

There is a difference between faith, and blind faith. Because God has kept the promises he made in the past, I know that He will keep the promises He makes now. That’s faith: that I believe God will do what He has not yet done, based on the evidence of what he has already done. “Blind” faith is just stupid, because there is much in this world that tries to lead us the wrong way. Be warned: there are “false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light” 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 NIV. Not everything called “Christian” is of Christ, and not everything that “feels” like God is of God.

I have faith in regards to all the details of our existence and continued existnece. I don’t have “faith” in G-d’s existence. I have experience, personal proof, conviction of his existence. I don’t need faith. I know he exists. (Diogenes, don’t bust me on that one, I don’t have any cites to share with you) To say I believe he exists is too weak for what I feel. I have knowledge. I have lately, frequently been cautioned by Christians to beware of what I “feel”. That I could be deceived into thinking what I feel is G-d, when it isn’t. Again, I assure you that only G-d really feels like G-d. His presence is unmistakeable and it’s only purpose is love. Love is such a lame word, because G-d’s love is very different than man’s version. If I start suddenly having evil impulses, the urge to eat raw meat or sacrifice small children; I’ll re-evaluate.

God did not create sin; he did create the potential for sin. Sin was not actualized until Adam disobeyed God. Yes, God did know that man would fall; but consider this: people have children to love them, and hope that their children will return their love. They know ahead of time that there will be times when children will disobey, show rebellious attitudes, etc. causing grief for the parent; but they have the kids anyway, because the desire for the relationship is greater than the pain caused when they rebel.

G-d did create sin in all it’s ugly glory. Not the potential, but sin itself. Sin was a gift. That is one of the big parts missing in Christianity, when sin can be simply removed with words of acceptance of Jesus. Sin and all it’s implications are with us so that we can learn and grown. Rebellion and disobedience are part of this wonderful journey we’re on. We learn from these things and learn how to rise above them and become more. G-d only feels grief when we fail to grow. I don’t want or need a “parent” to get me out of the consequences of my actions. It’s in my best interest and my “parent’s” for me to take responsibility, to feel remorse, to make amends and above all learn from these things. Sin was a gift of love because G-d wanted us to become all there is to be. Oddly enough, it’s one of the aspects of G-d’s plan that I think is the most awesome. The freedom to choose and become. Way to go G-d!!

Jesus expects us to repent of our sins and to trust him to keep his promise, that he will extend grace–getting good things we don’t deserve–and forgive us, so that we can stand before God blameless. But there is still atonement for our sins; you can look at it like this: Jesus is our scapegoat.

I don’t need one. I am not blameless, but willing to work at whatever it takes to become as good as I can be. Hell as we know it was created by man. Failing G-d simply means we have more learning, work, growing to do, not an eternal ring of fire dance.

Actually, it’s God’s grace that wipes the slate clean; because of God’s love for us, he offers us grace; we can choose to accept it or to reject it. But I see your point: that a person can claim to believe yet not repent? A person’s actions are a direct reflection of what he believes (Would you agree?). A person who does not repent; a person who does not obey God’s commands, yet claims to believe? The evidence would clearly be against him; but God knows his mind: a person may be able to deceive another man, but a person thinking to deceive God is only deceiving himself.

I was on a Christian website not too long ago. It made me cry. It was a messageboard and “Christians” were talking about gays. If I had to judge, which thankfully I don’t, I would say that a large percentage of those people with their hate-filled, smug opinions are not familar with G-d in spite of their claim to him. They have missed the message. No love or repentance there. I do understand that wearing the title of Christian or any other religion really means nothing without the works, the example.

[lynn73]

Cite that “God” made any promises in the past? Cite that he kept them? What are you talking about?

What are you talking about? They’re in the Bible. So is sin.

The Bible dictionary definition of sin can be found at:

http://www.biblelearn.com/s_frame.htm

[lynn73]

** We are all headed toward the same destination (G-d). To get there we use many different routes and modes of transportation (religion). Although I don’t think religion is the only vehicle.**

Ah, but what you’re saying isn’t what the Bible says. It doesn’t teach that there are different routes to God, only one: Jesus Christ. Religion won’t get people there either. Religion is man’s efforts at trying to be good and please God himself, Christianity is God Himself reaching down to man through Christ. We must go to God His way, not ours.

[lynn73]

Here are a few examples of promises or prophecies fulfilled, Diogenes:

http://www.messiahrevealed.org/genesis.html

http://www.kensmen.com/catholic/israelverses.html

[vanilla]

youre on a roll, lynn.

[lynn73]

Hi vanilla.

[vanilla]

The Bible IS God’s word,you know.

[lynn73]

Yes, I know it from the bottom of my heart.

[vanilla]

Thats probably a straight line, but I’m sure someone will come up with something.

God didn’t write it, but He dictated it, as it were.
He said we could drink tea.

[IWLN]

*Originally posted by lynn73 *
**Here are a few examples of promises or prophecies fulfilled, Diogenes:

http://www.messiahrevealed.org/genesis.html

http://www.kensmen.com/catholic/israelverses.html **

Would you like the cites and scriptures that seem to contradict this. They’re just as convincing. This is a good one. You should study these too, so you can make informed choices.

[lynn73]

That’s interesting, ILWN, but doesn’t change what I believe of course just as nothing I put forth changes what you believe. But it’s fun to talk about it anyway. Also, all the prophecies aren’t fulfilled yet. Some are past, some are future when Christ comes back again.

By the way, Happy New Year.

[IWLN]

*Originally posted by lynn73 *
Ah, but what you’re saying isn’t what the Bible says. It doesn’t teach that there are different routes to God, only one: Jesus Christ. Religion won’t get people there either. Religion is man’s efforts at trying to be good and please God himself, Christianity is God Himself reaching down to man through Christ. We must go to God His way, not ours.

No I’m not quoting the NT. I asked G-d. You should try it. You’ll never find the right way if you look at things the same way everytime.

[vanilla]

He’sreturning on May 33rd.

(inside joke,lynn)

[IWLN]

*Originally posted by lynn73 *
**That’s interesting, ILWN, but doesn’t change what I believe of course just as nothing I put forth changes what you believe. But it’s fun to talk about it anyway. Also, all the prophecies aren’t fulfilled yet. Some are past, some are future when Christ comes back again.

By the way, Happy New Year. **

I used to believe what you believe. Now I know better. It is possible to change when something is wrong. Are you afraid to read the information if it comes from another religion? Knowledge is always good. Can you have a Happy New Year when you believe most of the people now on earth are bound for Hell? I don’t get it. But I know you’re wrong, so Happy New Year to you to.

[lynn73]

:eek: Hmm, now vanilla, you know that we can’t know the exact time, duhhh. Just kidding, girl. I know you know that. Tell me that inside joke, pretty please?

Well, ILWN, that’s find and good I guess, but how do you determine whether you’re hearing from God or a deceiving spirit? Not by what how it make you feel, I hope. There has to be a solid guideline to go by or else we’re liable to believe anything. If you’re hearing from God, do you think he’s going to contradict anything He’s said in His word? I myself don’t think so. But that’s just me, and a lot of other folk also.

[vanilla]

First of all,IWLN, you don’t know lynn is wrong.
You think so.

She could be praying tonight for lots of lost people, you don’t KNOW that now, do you?

lynn, it was a long thread.
I never even read it so I don’t know the answer.
Something, I wish someone would tell me, too.
But its cute cause there IS no May 33rd.

[lynn73]

I guess I thought it was a misprint and you meant May 23. Duhhhhhhh

You got a pm over at you know where.