# Yet Another Movie That Might Change Your Life ... or At Least Make You Think **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 7, 2001, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069 "2001-03-07T06:17:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![pldennison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9fc29f/32.png) [@pldennison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pldennison)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2001, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/221 "2001-03-24T14:24:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FriendofGod \* > \*\ ***pldennison** said, rather forcefully: > > > [@](#): > > > > First off, I bet there are plenty of Christians on the SDMB and elsewhere who have never run into a Fundamentalist in their lives > > I’m sure you are right. In fact, this whole situation has reminded me of something my former pastor in Atlanta had said once: that for the first 11 years of his life when he lived in the north, he never once met a single Christian, which to this day blows my mind! Of course when his family moved to Atlanta he had a bit of culture shock \*\* ::: cough:::: Malarkey. Utter crap. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > You say you have never heard of a believer who didn’t believe the Bible was inerrant and literally true? Until I was 19 years old, I had never heard of one who did. > > I can believe that. Again, I’ll bet it depends on the area of the country and even the specific city you’re from. Uh, no, see, some of us don’t spend our entire lives in one place. Before I was 19, I had lived in Ohio, Massachusetts, Arizona, Virginia, Missouri, and Germany, and had visited California, Hawaii, Texas, Rhode Island, and (if you’re going to run into a Fundie somewhere) West-by-God Virginia. Never met a literalist. At least to my knowledge. Certainly in my family, who are Christian, there aren’t any. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > You know, FoG, this is what gets people’s dander up–this idea that the rest of us are just, well, not experienced enough to know what you’re talking about … Don’t assume that when you go off on your little exegeses about matters Christian that we don’t understand–we simply disagree. > > Well hold on. The impression I got was that people were saying honestly that they didn’t ‘get’ this whole idea of believing you can go to church and not be a Christian. If they ‘got’ it and just disagreed, I simply misread. The didn’t “get” it as in, “DId I hear that, or did I only imagine I heard it, because it’s pretty flippin’ unbelievable that someone would actually say that.” > [@](#): > > Pl … forgive me for being honest here, but I busted out laughing at this. This is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard! If you want a starter kit for what the Bible actually says about this, here you go: I’ve read it, thanks. I have four different translations on the shelf behind me (KJV, NIV, RSV, Living Bible). Nowhere does it say you must have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It says you must accept that he died to save your from your sins, pray in his name, and profess the good news to the world. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2001, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/222 "2001-03-24T15:12:41Z")
Maybe I missed it buried above, but has **FoG** ever said what he means by “personal relationship with JC”? In what way does it differ from other posters’ formula for salvation? ---
**Author:** ![vanilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f19dbf/32.png) [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2001, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/223 "2001-03-24T18:46:13Z")
FriendofGod, I kindly ask you to try again. Please give me a “prophecy”. Maybe it’ll work better than matt’s did. Seriously. Go ahead. I will be objective. ---
**Author:** ![Ben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/df788c/32.png) [@Ben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2001, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/224 "2001-03-24T19:46:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by vanilla \* > \*\*FriendofGod, > I kindly ask you to try again. > Please give me a “prophecy”. > Maybe it’ll work better than matt’s did. > Seriously. Go ahead. I will be objective. \*\* The problem is that FoG was willing to give a vague “prophecy,” but when I asked him to give a prophecy that would be too specific to be faked, he complained that “God doesn’t do magic tricks.” That, to me, is a good reason to class FoG with Uri Geller: he wants us to believe in superpowers, but then complains that the superpowers will vanish if you look too closely. FoG, my original offer still stands. I have studied Christianity, and as far as I am concerned, it is completely false. There is no reason whatsoever why I would convert to Christianity (particularly your version of it) over, say, Islam. If you could give me a specific, unfakable prophecy from God, that would demonstrate to me that of all the religions in the world, Christianity is the one that stands out as having something that the others do not. I would then give very, very serious consideration to the question of whether Christianity is true. The terms of my challenge are quite simple. As I write this, there is a book on the desk in front of me. Name it. You claim that with faith as large as a mustard seed you can move mountains. I suggest that if you take your mission as a Christian seriously, you should use your faith to convert me. -Ben ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2001, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/225 "2001-03-24T19:55:07Z")
Seeing as FoG continues to act as though he’s the fourth part of the Trinity (yes, I know that doesn’t make sense - see any posting by FoG to understand why), I will, from this moment forth, refer to him as “ **F** [sub]ourth[/sub] **o** [sub]f[/sub] **G** [sub]od[/sub].” Feel free to vote on this new moniker in the thread, “FoG, the Drinking game” ([http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=63901](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=63901)) thread. ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2001, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/226 "2001-03-24T20:13:02Z")
**Protesilaus** said: > [@](#): > > A hamburger is the product sold by McDonald’s (just like pets are the product sold by pet stores), but unless your church is very, very different than the ones I’ve seen, one does not go to a church in order to purchase Christians. That particular analogy is indeed weak, but it’s too fun sounding to pass up ;). Besides, you can get the point without it being a perfect analogy. A better analogy might be: suppose you’re a contract worker and you have a contract job with one company that lasts 3 months. Walking into their building to do your contract work doesn’t mean they are now your employer. Yes you’re in their building, participating, even contributing something to their cause: but you haven’t _switched_ _employers_. The employer is still the company you work for that sends you out to do contract work. Walking into a church doesn’t mean you’ve _switched_ _masters_ to Jesus Christ. Now, here’s one I simply must ask about. **Cervaise** , I originally said this: > [@](#): > > I don’t want it at all to sound like I think you can look at someone and say, “Hmmm … long hair … only one button unbuttoned on the shirt … yup, that one’s a Christian”. I’m not at all saying it’s always easy to _tell_ who’s who, but simply that walking into a church building and even regularly attending doesn’t make you a Christian. You responded with: > [@](#): > > I don’t know how the rest of y’all reacted to the above statement, but I’m simply flabbergasted by the judgmental arrogance on display here. So … when the _entire_ point of this paragraph is to say that you _can’t_ judge who is and isn’t a Christian based on outward appearance, I’d like to see how you drew your conclusion that this contained ‘judgmental arrogance’. **Pariah** … thank you for quoting Mt 7:21-23. That was one of several passages I had in mind. **tracer** said: > [@](#): > > With the hamburger analogy: > > Does that mean in order to become a Christian, you not only need to go to church, you need to be killed, ground up in a meat grinder, sent to church, molded into little patties, and then cooked on a grill for a couple of minutes? Yes. You’ve never read 1st and 2nd Whopper? 😃 **jenkinsfan** said: > [@](#): > > Um, Friend of God, you started this thread to talk about a couple of movies. Now…forget it. Shake the dust. Admit you made a mistake with the prophecy thing and walk away. Well I admitted my prophesy goof when it happened way back when, and as for ‘shaking the dust’ … I probably should. This doesn’t appear to be accomplishing anything. I will probably stick around another day or two at least. I’ll continue with more later … ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/227 "2001-03-25T00:18:00Z")
**Kate99** said: > [@](#): > > But you see - you don’t know whether or not someone _actually_ has a personal relationship with G-d, so you make these judgements off of your personal perceptions, which is essentially the definition of an “evaluation”. The fact is, it’s your opinion as to whether or not they have a personal relationship with G-d, not a factual thing like you seem to feel it is. The only ones who know about the nature of the relationship are the individual involved and G-d. If you’ll look at some of my most recent replies, you’ll see that I basically agree. If you want to be really technical, the _only_ person on the planet I’m 100% sure is a Christian is me. But that doesn’t preclude common sense assumptions and guesses. If someone _SAYS_ to me “I hate God and have no desire to do anything with him”, am I really “judging” him by saying he’s not a Christian, or just using common sense? There’s about a 0.00000001% chance he’s faking saying this for some reason. If someone _says_ to me that they love Jesus Christ with all their heart and soul, and their life matches up … what’s the chances that they’re involved in a conspiracy to fool everyone into thinking they’re saved? Slim to none, though I suppose it is possible. And again, those in the “gray area” you just have to say ‘I dont know’. > [@](#): > > There are no outside indicators of whether or not an individual has a relationship with G-d I would have to disagree. There _ARE_ outside evidences (not _proofs_, just evidences). Jesus outright said there were. Here are a few (emphasis mine): > [@](#): > > Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but _only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven_. – Matt 7:21 > > If you love me, _you will obey what I command_. – John 14:15 > > By this all men will _know_ that you are my disciples, if you _love one another_. – John 13:35 I could go on but you get the drift. So I think you _can_ observe and use common sense, without just drawing 100% outright conclusions. > [@](#): > > How do you have the ability to know my thoughts, or the status of my personal relationships? I can’t, which is why, as Jesus says above, actions have to be observed. Actions don’t give _proof_, but they do give _evidence_. **Monty** … I will momentarily break my silence toward you with one comment: your growing hysterical rant against me has become the most entertaining part of this thread to me! Please don’t stop 😃 **Ben** … on the other hand seems to be in a more pleasant state now. You said: > [@](#): > > Firstly, FoG, why does someone need a personal relationship with Jesus in order to go to heaven? Great question! It’s not that you ‘need a personal relationship with Jesus to get to heaven’. It’s that you need to be cleansed and forgiven of your sins _in order to get to heaven AND have a personal relationship with Jesus_. In other words, heaven, having a personal walk with God, and actually many OTHER things are the _benefits_ of “getting saved” or “born again” or pick your cliche. In other words, having a relationship with God is one of the _GOALS_, just as much as getting to heaven is! In fact, more accurately, having a relationship with God is _THE_ goal, and heaven is nothing more than an extension of the relationship that begins while you’re still on earth. Just to clarify: a Christian is someone who has a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ. If you want to _expand_ that definition, you could say: A Christian is someone who has a personal relationship with God because they have accepted forgiveness of their sins through Jesus Christ, and they will spend eternity with God forever. > [@](#): > > It’s already been pointed out that FoG is using a theological definition of Christianity (ie, a Christian is someone who is going to heaven, and the only people going to heaven are the ones with a personal relationship with Jesus.) People have criticised this definition, and, more to the point, have pointed out that it conflicts with a sociological definition (that a “Christian” is someone who worships Jesus.) Believe it or not, I _do_ fully understand that there are many people in the USA who use the term ‘Christian’ loosely. Some people think just being _born_ in America practically makes you a Christian! (Thats a _slight_ exaggeration but you get the point ;)). But, as I believe that the Bible definition is the correct one, I use it deliberately. > [@](#): > > I think part of the confusion also stems from the fact that FoG is not entirely consistent in his own use of the word “Christian.” First of all, he himself seems to switch between the theological and sociological definitions without acknowledging that he is doing so. After all, he says a Christian has more to fear from bigotry than an atheist. Does he really expect the bigots to carefully gauge whether someone has a personal relationship with Jesus before deciding to harass them? Or is he saying that someone who openly declares themself to be a worshipper of Jesus is more likely to have problems? How and where am I switching? I’ve been consistantly using the Bible definition. Show me an example if I’ve used the so called ‘sociological’ definition. Your last line most accurately comes close to reflecting my thinking. Most believers are pretty _outspoken_ about their beliefs, and there are some who love to take potshots at them for it. > [@](#): > > This is further complicated by the fact that even in terms of his theological definition, FoG seems to have two definitions. His de jure definition is that anyone, no matter what the denomination, can be a Christian if they have a personal relationship with Christ. This seems to be (in a sense, at least) very open-minded, right? Thanks … I think ;). I’m still reading … > [@](#): > > But think of FoG’s statements about the movie “The Rapture.” He states that Mimi Rogers’ character might have had a relationship with a “false Jesus.” Why? Ultimately, because her religion’s dogma differed with FoG’s. Thus we see the de facto dimension of FoG’s definition: in reality, the more your denomination’s dogma differs from FoG’s, the less likely FoG considers it to be that you’ll have a real relationship with Jesus. This appears to be the reason why FoG states that you can’t be a practicing homosexual and a Christian. FoG says that homosexuality is a sin, and if you have no intention of stopping your sinning, you can’t be a Christian. The idea that some Christians don’t think that Jesus condemns homosexuality never enters into the equation. Could it be that FoG feels that any Jesus that would condone homosexuality is a false Jesus? Maybe I should have explained my objection to ‘The Rapture’ better. It’s not that her dogma differed from mine: it’s that she never exhibited any outside signs that she had a true relationship with God. If anything, she gave all outward signs that she and those in her cult were more than a little bit nuts. Waiting in the desert for the rapture to come? Give me a break! Now, to be fair, you’ll recall that I _did_ allow for the _possibility_ that she was a true believer who was just very very deceived. As for the whole homosexuality thing, I did indeed say what Ben quoted. In fact, I would say the same thing about any sinful lifestyle. So how does that fit with what I’m saying? Easy: you can’t know what’s in a person’s heart. If you know someone who says they love God and is a practicing homosexual, that’s a contradiction. But who knows the context? As I said earlier in the thread, it could be that God is dealing with other areas of their growth at the moment and He’ll get to that area in His timing. Ie, they don’t _realize_ that what they’re doing is a contradiction. _Or_, maybe God has confronted them on it and they have refused to listen and they are in blatant rebellion. Who can know? Again, common sense enters into the picture. You can’t know but you can observe. For example, if you are friends with someone in this situation and they _tell_ you they are struggling with this sin and want to be free from it, why should I not believe them? I think those who believe that homosexuality is not a sin are tragically mistaken, but believing that doesn’t mean you aren’t saved. As I said before, Christians can be wrong and still be Christians. **quixotic78** said: > [@](#): > > FriendofGod, do you have ANY Scriptural backing for your phrase “personal relationship with Jesus Christ”? I want to see that EXACT phrase, as you’ve used that EXACT phrase a number of times, as if it’s Gospel. You will not find that specific phrase anywhere in the Bible that I know of. That specific phrase is more of a late 20th century cliche to _describe_ what the Bible says in a simple nutshell. But if you read the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation you’ll see that one of the key themes throughout is God and man in fellowship with each other. It was perfect fellowship in the Garden of Eden, then when we screwed things up, the whole rest of the Bible was about trying to _restore_ that fellowship! The NT is about God restoring that fellowship through Jesus Christ. Read John 14-17 especially in which Jesus focuses on the fact that He now can call us His friends (hence my username :D). > [@](#): > > He would go so far as to say, “Can you nail down the exact moment you found Jesus? If not, then you’re not a Christian.” I have actually heard a believer talk like this as well. I’m sure they mean well, but what they’re doing is projecting what they experienced onto others and expecting everyone to have the exact same experience. Not everyone records down the date and time that they got right with God. I know one person who told me it happened sort of gradually over the course of a week. **Allworthy** said: > [@](#): > > Hey FoG, for the purposes of discussion on this board, how about referring to those who meet your particular definition of a true Christian as “saved” or “redeemed” or “in a state of grace” or “born again” and save everyone a major headache? (Please don’t take my quotes as intended irony; I’m just listing the terms that are more specific.) I understand what you’re saying, ie trying to cut down on the confusion. To be honest, I _deliberately_ usually avoid the words you mentioned because they sound too super-spiritual to me! I’ll consider your suggestion though. > [@](#): > > Also, isn’t having a “personal relationship with Jesus Christ” an insufficient formulation in comparison to the classic “accept Jesus as one’s personal savior?” After all, Judas had a personal relationship with Jesus and still rejected him in the end. LOL, good point! Actually I’ve never liked the ‘accept Jesus as your personal savior’ _phrase_, simply because it’s become _SUCH_ a cliche that it’s almost meaningless. I suppose the same might could be said for ‘personal relationship with Jesus’. Maybe it’s time we American Christians found a new and fresh way to describe things, eh? 😉 That’s all I have time for now, I’ll try to catch up some more tomorrow more than likely. By the way, on my last post I was _trying_ to use a smilie I’ve seen on other boards, : eek : (without spaces) which shows a guy with bug out eyes, but apparently it doesnt work here. So that’s what the :eek: was all about! catch you later. ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/228 "2001-03-25T00:26:14Z")
:eek: So it _DOES_ work! I must’ve been doing something wrong before … just ignore the last part of my last post!! :eek: :eek: :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/229 "2001-03-25T01:39:53Z")
Hysterical? Rant? FoG: Please be so kind as to define both words, and provide proof that I’m hysterical or ranting. ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/230 "2001-03-25T02:02:29Z")
Is there a smilie for throwing your hands up in the air? Have at it, boys - he’s way too far gone for me. Esprix ---
**Author:** ![Allworthy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/7cd45c/32.png) [@Allworthy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Allworthy)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/231 "2001-03-25T03:03:44Z")
In defending his definiton of Christian, **FoG** issues the challenge > [@](#): > > Show me an example if I’ve used the so called ‘sociological’ definition In the original post to this very thread, **FoG** wrote: > [@](#): > > For those who don’t know Carman is a very popular Christian artist Wouldn’t most people understand this to mean that Carman is an artist whose work deals primarily in Christian themes, rather than that Carman is an artist who has a personal relationship with Jesus? **FoG** also describes films and books as Christian, even though as a matter of common sense non-persons cannot have a personal relationship with Jesus. > [@](#): > > Allworthy said: > > > [@](#): > > > > Hey FoG, for the purposes of discussion on this board, how about referring to those who meet your particular definition of a true Christian as “saved” or “redeemed” or “in a state of grace” or “born again” and save everyone a major headache? > > I understand what you’re saying, ie trying to cut down on the confusion. To be honest, I _deliberately_ usually avoid the words you mentioned because they sound too super-spiritual to me! I’ll consider your suggestion though. Hmph. Is it really possible to overstate the spiritual significance of a personal relationship with JC? **FoG** wrote: > [@](#): > > Maybe it’s time we American Christians found a new and fresh way to describe things, eh? I’ve got it! Adherent of the belief system of the Christian religion = Christian Christian enjoying a personal relationship with Jesus Christ = Christian++ Let me know when I can expect the call from the Nobel folks regarding the dynamite money. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/232 "2001-03-25T05:23:46Z")
Allworthy wrote: > [@](#): > > I’ve got it! > > Adherent of the belief system of the Christian religion = Christian > Christian enjoying a personal relationship with Jesus Christ = Christian++ I’ve always preferred programing in Objective Christian, rather than Christian++. The whole “virtual salvation” mechanism in Christian++ seems _sooooo_ tacked on to the language as a hack. And don’t even get me started on “templates”! ---
**Author:** ![Flymaster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c4cdca/32.png) [@Flymaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flymaster)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/233 "2001-03-25T06:29:29Z")
I can’t help but notice the lack of response to the 2 posts about FoG’s lying pastor. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Lao](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/2bfe46/32.png) [@Dr.Lao](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Lao)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 8:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/234 "2001-03-25T08:29:53Z")
One thing I don’t understand. **FoG** says that you are not a Christian just because you act like a Christian(churches and McDonalds), while at the same time he says he can tell if someone is a true Christian by watching how they act (professes a love for Jesus, attends church, lives by the Bible). Isn’t there an obvious contradiction here? ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/235 "2001-03-25T19:01:36Z")
My prayers have been answered. I’ve been really concerned about what is happening to the Gospel message in this thread – with FoG (I think unintentionally) saying that it depends on believing as _I_ believe, and everybody else jumping every contradictory point that he makes in the process of attempting to clarify what he’s said. :::hands **FoG** a towel to dry the saliva off his feet, from when they were in his mouth ::: One long Bible quote (Luke 15 in full) following. Please don’t skip over it, because it’s important to resolving the mess this thread has gone through. > [@](#): > > 1 One day when many tax collectors and other outcasts came to listen to Jesus, 2 the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law started grumbling, “This man welcomes outcasts and even eats with them!” 3 So Jesus told them this parable: 4 "Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them—what do you do? You leave the other ninety-nine sheep in the pasture and go looking for the one that got lost until you find it. 5 When you find it, you are so happy that you put it on your shoulders 6 and carry it back home. Then you call your friends and neighbors together and say to them, "I am so happy I found my lost sheep. Let us celebrate!’ 7 In the same way, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine respectable people who do not need to repent. 8 "Or suppose a woman who has ten silver coins loses one of them—what does she do? She lights a lamp, sweeps her house, and looks carefully everywhere until she finds it. 9 When she finds it, she calls her friends and neighbors together, and says to them, “I am so happy I found the coin I lost. Let us celebrate!’ 10 In the same way, I tell you, the angels of God rejoice over one sinner who repents.” > > 11 Jesus went on to say, "There was once a man who had two sons. 12 The younger one said to him, "Father, give me my share of the property now.’ So the man divided his property between his two sons. 13 After a few days the younger son sold his part of the property and left home with the money. He went to a country far away, where he wasted his money in reckless living. 14 He spent everything he had. Then a severe famine spread over that country, and he was left without a thing. 15 So he went to work for one of the citizens of that country, who sent him out to his farm to take care of the pigs. 16 He wished he could fill himself with the bean pods the pigs ate, but no one gave him anything to eat. 17 At last he came to his senses and said, "All my father’s hired workers have more than they can eat, and here I am about to starve! 18 I will get up and go to my father and say, “Father, I have sinned against God and against you. 19 I am no longer fit to be called your son; treat me as one of your hired workers.” ’ 20 So he got up and started back to his father. > > "He was still a long way from home when his father saw him; his heart was filled with pity, and he ran, threw his arms around his son, and kissed him. 21 "Father,’ the son said, "I have sinned against God and against you. I am no longer fit to be called your son.’ 22 But the father called to his servants. "Hurry!’ he said. "Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and shoes on his feet. 23 Then go and get the prize calf and kill it, and let us celebrate with a feast! 24 For this son of mine was dead, but now he is alive; he was lost, but now he has been found.’ And so the feasting began. 25 "In the meantime the older son was out in the field. On his way back, when he came close to the house, he heard the music and dancing. 26 So he called one of the servants and asked him, "What’s going on?’ 27 "Your brother has come back home,’ the servant answered, "and your father has killed the prize calf, because he got him back safe and sound.’ 28 The older brother was so angry that he would not go into the house; so his father came out and begged him to come in. 29 But he spoke back to his father, "Look, all these years I have worked for you like a slave, and I have never disobeyed your orders. What have you given me? Not even a goat for me to have a feast with my friends! 30 But this son of yours wasted all your property on prostitutes, and when he comes back home, you kill the prize calf for him!’ 31 "My son,’ the father answered, "you are always here with me, and everything I have is yours. 32 But we had to celebrate and be happy, because your brother was dead, but now he is alive; he was lost, but now he has been found.’ " I am not, personally, particularly interested in whom **FoG** defines as a Christian, or why. I **am** quite interested in whom **God** defines as a Christian. And there’s a series of important messages in this passage that speak to me: [ul] [li]The younger son (traditionally “the Prodigal Son”) “wants it **now** ” He’s not content to wait for the Father to give it to him, but demands it immediately.[/li][li]Inevitably, he screws up.[/li][li]He comes back home, admitting he’s made a mistake.[/li][li]He’s welcomed with open arms, in love, and his return is celebrated.[/li][li]The older brother is peeved about this.[/li][li]He figures that “keeping the rules” is what matters.[/li][li]The father bawls him out for this attitude.[/li][li]The father stresses that love – **his** love for his son – is what matters.[/li][/ul] In short, theological errors are forgiveable, sin is forgiveable, inerrantism is not necessary, “having a personal relationship” is only quasi-necessary (one assumes one loves whom one knows), God’s love is available to **all** his children – no matter what. Here endeth the Lesson, as they say in my parts. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![SkeptiJess](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea666f/32.png) [@SkeptiJess](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SkeptiJess)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/236 "2001-03-25T20:43:40Z")
> [@](#): > > If someone _SAYS_ to me “I hate God and have no desire to do anything with him”, am I really “judging” him by saying he’s not a Christian, or just using common sense? Certainly, **FoG** , if someone says this to you, you are justified in assuming that that person is not a Christian… > [@](#): > > If someone _says_ to me that they love Jesus Christ with all their heart and soul, and their life matches up … what’s the chances that they’re involved in a conspiracy to fool everyone into thinking they’re saved? and in this case, you are entirely justified in assuming that this person _is_ a Christian. I’m with you so far. My question is this: Imagine that someone comes to you and says, “Sure, I’m a Christian. I’ve been baptised. I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and that he was born on Earth to redeem our sins on the cross. I go to church regularly and try to lead a Christian life. I disagree with you on a few minor points, though. I don’t believe that homosexuality is a sin. I _do_ believe in evolution. I don’t believe that the bible is inerrant. I believe that much of the bible is allegory and that its many translations through the ages mean that much of it is colored less by God than by the culture and prejudices of the men who translated it.” Would you consider this person to be a Christian? ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/237 "2001-03-25T20:49:48Z")
> [@](#): > > **FoG:** Now, here’s one I simply must ask about. > > > [@](#): > > > > **FoG:** I don’t want it at all to sound like I think you can look at someone and say, “Hmmm … long hair … only one button unbuttoned on the shirt … yup, that one’s a Christian”. I’m not at all saying it’s always easy to _tell_ who’s who, but simply that walking into a church building and even regularly attending doesn’t make you a Christian. > > > > **Cervaise:** I don’t know how the rest of y’all reacted to the above statement, but I’m simply flabbergasted by the judgmental arrogance on display here. > > So … when the _entire_ point of this paragraph is to say that you _can’t_ judge who is and isn’t a Christian based on outward appearance, I’d like to see how you drew your conclusion that this contained ‘judgmental arrogance’. The arrogance is the subtle implication that you have the right or obligation to judge who is and isn’t a Christian _ **at all.** _ You’ve said over and over that what really matters is in one’s heart. And yet you’ve also said over and over that just because somebody has all the outward signs of Christianity, that doesn’t mean that person is a “true” Christian; it’s impossible to tell what’s in that person’s heart, which is what really matters. You seem to be making this distinction as a means of dismissing and disqualifying Christians who you find inconvenient to your rather narrow definition of what Christianity means, by establishing a basis by which you can say “that one doesn’t count.” It seems to me a true Christian wouldn’t be so obsessed with what’s in other people’s hearts. It seems to me a true Christian would be primarily focused on what is in his **own** heart. It seems to me to be the height of ignorance and arrogance for a self-professed Christian to be spending so much time extrapolating his own experience onto the lives of other people and using his own belief system as the ultimate objective yardstick of what makes a Christian a “real” Christian. And it seems to me that this is exactly what you are doing. I agree with **Esprix.** This is getting us nowhere. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/238 "2001-03-25T21:04:58Z")
Jess, not to put words in **FriendofGod** ’s mouth, but… I did. He does. Case dismissed. ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/239 "2001-03-25T21:26:21Z")
… I’m going to respond to these last few posts, and then I’d like to try to wrap this up. It’s obviously not accomplishing a whole lot of anything. My whole point for returning to the SDMB was to let everyone know about the LB movie, and then I ended up promo-ing Judgment which, to me, is a much better movie. Somehow it ended up in a debate over prophesy, who is a real Christian, and harassment in the media (???) Why does this always happen? 😉 Anyway, let me try to respond to these most recent posts: **quixotic78** … without going blow by blow through your post, let me just repeat what I said yesterday, which is that the term ‘personal relationship’ appears nowhere in the Bible that I know of, but that doesn’t mean the _concept_ isn’t all throughout the Bible. I agree that, as James says, faith without works is dead. Works is like the _evidence_ of your faith. It doesn’t “get you saved”, but it can “prove” that you’re saved. **Ben** … you listed alternatives on what I believe. I can simplify it: virtually every Christian I’ve ever known believes the Bible to be 100% the Word of God. It’s that simple. In fact, the only ones I’ve ever met that _didn’t_ think this (at least that I can think of) are on this board. **Flymaster** said: > [@](#): > > Either your pastor was pathetically undersocialized, absolutely oblivious to the REAL world, delusional, blind and deaf, using some pathetically disgustingly definiton of the word Christian, or lying. To claim that one could live a halfway normal life in the north without meeting a single Christian is truely laughable. Ahhhh … or, it’s possible he just grew up in a neighborhood where there were few or no Christians? Do you really think that it’s that impossible? **Icerigger** asked: > [@](#): > > F.O.G. of the approximately 1.5 billion people who profess to be Christian in the world today what percentage of them in your opinion are “true Christians” like yourself? Please give an answer I am really curious to know this. I don’t know. Not very impressive, I know, but I really have no idea. _All_ I know is that according to the passages referred to earlier in this thread, there will be “many” who _think_ they should go to heaven who will not. **pldennison** said: > [@](#): > > Uh, no, see, some of us don’t spend our entire lives in one place. Before I was 19, I had lived in Ohio, Massachusetts, Arizona, Virginia, Missouri, and Germany, and had visited California, Hawaii, Texas, Rhode Island, and (if you’re going to run into a Fundie somewhere) West-by-God Virginia. Never met a literalist. At least to my knowledge. Certainly in my family, who are Christian, there aren’t any. Well, I’ve moved around a few times myself: Texas and Georgia in addition to Alabama. I guess you’re right - it might be less _where_ you live as much as _who_ you hang out with in the places you live in. > [@](#): > > Nowhere does it say you must have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It says you must accept that he died to save your from your sins, pray in his name, and profess the good news to the world. As I said earlier on this page, having a relationship with God _and_ heaven for eternity are the _results_ of salvation. They are the _reason_ you get saved, not _how_ you get saved. **minty green** said: > [@](#): > > Maybe I missed it buried above, but has FoG ever said what he means by “personal relationship with JC”? Not sure how to describe/define it: it’s a relationship unlike any human relationship you can have. It’s soooo much deeper. I mean, you’re relating to someone who can see right through you into every single thing inside your heart … things even _YOU_ can’t see … and this person still loves you unconditionally. It’s pretty mindblowing. Other aspects: you never _have_ to experience loneliness again, because He’s _always_ there. When you go through a horrible tragedy, He is there to comfort you. When you don’t know how to handle a situation, He is there to help guide you into wisdom that you don’t even have. I could go on and on, but you get the idea. **vanilla** and **Ben** … you’ve _got_ to be kidding me! Let me be honest, if I _were_ truly a prophet and was extraordinarily accurate … I would _never_ use it in this way. It appears to me that you are looking for a loophole for faith, but there is none. You cannot demand or expect from God, via _any_ vehicle be it prophesy or something else, that He “prove” Himself to you. There will _always_ have to be an element of faith. **Allworthy** said: > [@](#): > > Wouldn’t most people understand this to mean that Carman is an artist whose work deals primarily in Christian themes, rather than that Carman is an artist who has a personal relationship with Jesus? FoG also describes films and books as Christian, even though as a matter of common sense non-persons cannot have a personal relationship with Jesus. Well truthfully, I tend to think of it as the 2nd example you gave: someone who has a personal relationship with Jesus … and yes, that affects his worldview when he makes music. As for “Christian films and books”, what I mean is simply books written from a Christian worldview perspective. **Dr. Lao** … hi! You always show up when I’m about to wrap up, just like before ;). > [@](#): > > One thing I don’t understand. FoG says that you are not a Christian just because you act like a Christian(churches and McDonalds), while at the same time he says he can tell if someone is a true Christian by watching how they act (professes a love for Jesus, attends church, lives by the Bible). Isn’t there an obvious contradiction here? Good question, and let me clarify. The problem is in the first half of the sentence: “You are not a Christian just because you act like a Christian”. That is true, but that is more of a point for individuals to take to heart within themselves. Actions do tend to point toward someone being a believer or not being one, but they aren’t foolproof. You can’t know 100% for sure. The point of saying that you can go to church your whole life and not be a Christian is a point that gets made a lot to cause those who _ARE_ in that position to sit up, take notice, and realize where they’re at. I hope that makes sense. **Polycarp** … hey you can never hear the good ole Prodigal Son too much! Awesome. I love your bulleted summary. I’ll only comment on this one point: > [@](#): > > “having a personal relationship” is only quasi-necessary (one assumes one loves whom one knows) Exactly! This story illustrates the point. He was off on his own and returned to a loving Father. Perhaps I should amend the descriptive phrase and say, “having a LOVING personal relationship with God”, just to clarify. **Jess** , you asked: > [@](#): > > Imagine that someone comes to you and says, “Sure, I’m a Christian. I’ve been baptised. I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God and that he was born on Earth to redeem our sins on the cross. I go to church regularly and try to lead a Christian life. I disagree with you on a few minor points, though. I don’t believe that homosexuality is a sin. I do believe in evolution. I don’t believe that the bible is inerrant. I believe that much of the bible is allegory and that its many translations through the ages mean that much of it is colored less by God than by the culture and prejudices of the men who translated it.” Would you consider this person to be a Christian? Sure! I think they’re wrong on every count as far as the issues you cited, but that doesn’t make them unsaved. All it requires is having a loving relationship with a loving God through Jesus Christ. (Hey I like this amended version!) Okay … I’m caught up! :eek: That never happens! I’ll stick around to see the responses to this segment of the thread, but I’m about ready to wrap it up. It’s been an interesting month or so that I’ve been back, or however long it’s been. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2001, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/240 "2001-03-25T21:52:20Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by FriendofGod_ > Not sure how to describe/define it: it’s a relationship unlike any human relationship you can have. It’s soooo much deeper. I mean, you’re relating to someone who can see right through you into every single thing inside your heart … things even _YOU_ can’t see … and this person still loves you unconditionally. It’s pretty mindblowing. > > Other aspects: you never _have_ to experience loneliness again, because He’s _always_ there. When you go through a horrible tragedy, He is there to comfort you. When you don’t know how to handle a situation, He is there to help guide you into wisdom that you don’t even have. I could go on and on, but you get the idea. You mean that’s all there is to the “personal relationship” thing you’ve been going on and on about to distinguish between real and pseudo-Christians? Jeepers, that’s pretty weak–I was expecting actual conversations with the Big Guy and being on His listserv, or something else along those lines. I’d venture to say that 99% of all self-professed Christians have exactly what you describe as a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, **FoG** , even in the most liberal churches in the land. Good lord, that’s the whole point of being a Christian, isn’t it? And that makes me wonder whether your “personal relationship” criterion is primarily a cover for your doctrinal differences with non-fundamentalist Christians. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069.md?page=13)