RELIGION THREAD GO!

If our eternal destinies weren't at stake, this would be so much fun, but they are. Who wins an argument is a small matter; the issues you raise are no small matter.

As one of Dostoevsky's characters once said (I can't remember which one), it wasn't that he didn't believe in God, he didn't like Him. The god you describe above would not have won my heart, the One who gave Himself for me, and all of His creation, did. He had the judicial right to condemn, but He choose rather to redeem, an act of incomprehensible love. Trust me, I will not argue you into the Kingdom of His restoration, but I pray that by the power of His Living Spirit He will open your eyes.

You are obviously bright, reflective, and concerned or you wouldn't take the time to raise these issues. This is not about American Christianity which with some exceptions is not the witness to the Truth. The Jesus of "modern" Churchanity is not the Jesus of history. Just read the first four chapters of the book of John, and just say one prayer, "God, I am mad at you, I don't like things the way they are, I think you are unfair, I am not sure you even exist, BUT, if you are real, show me, speak to me, help me see beyond the print into the realm of the spiritual." That is all I ask.

I don't want to argue further, I think it will prove fruitless. I am concerned about you. I do want you to see what I see. But, I didn't come to see what I see by my own effort. I couldn't get there through reading hundreds of books, for reflecting countless hours. It has to come to us. I pray it will come to you.

 

Agree.
I'd rather "burn in hell" than waste my time believing in something I don't even know exists.

 

I think Solid was pointing out to you that being unsure of eternity is problematic.

You keep leaving Jesus dying on the cross out of your discussion when it is the central point and purpose of Jesus coming to earth and people believing in Him.

I think you would be better served focusing on the relevance of Jesus on the cross.

Free will, conscience and reason make you responsible for moral action. Basically, are you selfish or self serving; or are you loving?

You should only worship God if you love Him and believe in Him. Only God can reveal what our hearts are like. Man cannot know his own heart apart from God.

God revealed His own character when Jesus died for the sins of mankind.

He wasn't trying to start a religion, He was appealing to our hearts, He desires to reveal His love and forgiveness.

The real question is can you have a pure and perfect and unselfish love apart from God giving it to you?

You are a Christian. I don't really know what that means anymore. I see people in big churches saying crazy things and they say they are Christians. I see people on TV fleecing people for money and they say they are Christians. I see people destroying their own kids getting divorces acting as selfish as humanly possible and they say they are Christians.

That means little to me, I am encouraged when I see Jesus character and nature working in someone's heart. I know that takes a miracle from God.

Humility, love, joy, peace... I love how Jesus changes and affects a life.

I love Jesus and yes, I wish everyone in the world did love Jesus.

Jesus died for the sins of man, and yes, I wish everyone in the world believed that.

Peter said we must repent... turn to Jesus. That is silly to the self righteous person who has it all together. But it means alot to me.

 

Believing is the only way to know.

And I must disagree with you, you don't want to burn in hell.

You don't believe in a just judgment.

 

I can't/won't reconcile free will and eternal destiny with a loving God. I'd need a logical or philosophical answer for me to consider it, or 1st hand evidence from a dead man who came back to life.

 

uh. ok.

I really don't care if you believe it's just a story, or the venerable word of the almighty spaghetti monster, written by his noodly appendage.

The objective of my commentary had to do with religion as a socio-political power mechanism, not the validity of [insert religion here]'s particular special tome.

 

I think L. Ron Hubbard proved that you could start your own religion, he just followed in the footsteps of other religions.....

Religion to me is like people standing up in a room and pounding their chest and yelling out "I AM RIGHT"

Each one pushing their own "Righteousness" when IMO, they are all just guessing.

DD

 

Coming very late to this thread but very interesting and I wished I had read through it before I started my thread on Deathbed Conversions.

Just weighing in on some of the main topics kicked about here. The basis of this thread and much of the discussion seems to be regarding the problem of exclusivity of religion, for instance criticizing Christianity for believing in one true god while the others are false. Since the issue of faith is ultimately not rational, and I mean that not as a slight but as something that transcends empiracal evidence, I don't think that is something that Christianity should be criticized anymore than any other religion. It seems to me that to a certain extent belief, particularly monotheistic belief, has to be exclusive as that would define your faith. For example if you believed that Jesus is the key to salvation but so is Vishnu what would be the advantage of believing one or the other? Would a Christian that believed in Vishnu still be a Christian?

The problem is that none of us can empiracally prove whether when we die we don't go to some place with harps and wings or are reborn as a cow. The empiracal evidence is we are worm meat but once we accept the idea of a soul or something metaphysical then its all fair game. Understandably people get upset when someone tells them you are going to Hell if you don't believe exactly as I do but in the end why get upset if you don't believe in what that person says in the first place?

The issue to me comes down not so much as what one believes but how one treats others. I don't believe that we can or even should get to the point of saying that all beliefs are equal on an individual or even a tribal level but as a whole society we can tolerate the presence of other beliefs and as much as possible run a society based on shared principles that transcend single religious groups.

For me I find Christain and other theology intellectually interesting and there is a lot to learn from it but whether a Christian thinks I'm going to Heaven or going to burn in Hell isn't something that I worry about anymore than they worry whether I think they will come back as Vince Young or a chicken in the next life. Now if a Christian is going to try to legislate how I live my life or make a scientific argument based on the Bible or make that is another matter.

Regarding poltics and religion I have to agree with DaDakota that to a certain extent all religion is political. The concept of separating religion and politics I think in the history of humanity is a relatively new concept and if you were to ask someone living in a tribal society there would be no differentiation. The chief rules because he has a divine mandate from the Gods. Even beyond tribalism the Roman and Chinese Emperors were gods, while Charlemagne ruled due to God's grace. Under that structure any religious challenge was automatically a political challenge so while early Christians might've felt they were trying to avoid politics it was inevitable that they would be looked at politically and eventually become a political force themselves. Since religion isn't just a belief system but an organizing structure at that point it can't be divorced from religion except to the point where someone might completely reject the idea of organized religion in terms of completely personal faith unswayed by any outside view.

 

You might want to checkout Aquinas' Divisions and Methods of the Sciences. Faith isn't exactly not rational.

 

i have faith that if god is christian he'll spare me, otherwise, toodles.

 

Yes, the history of the Israelites was very important in the context of Jesus teachings and his life, death and resurrection. He was their messiah. The annointed one who was to restore their kingdom (spiritually).

Yes, I think it did happen in a historical vacuum as far as the world at that time had context for it. There was no historical understanding that messiah must suffer for the sins of mankind; except as Jesus attempted to reveal that to the Jews. In fact in the context of their history the Jews of that time expected a messiah who would overthrow the Roman Empire, restore the earthly throne of King David and raise up the Jewish kindgom in Palestine, the crucifixion and the resurrection happened in a historical vacuum and that left the Pharisees and the teachers of the law upset by Jesus.

Fear is a selfish motivator. It is the highest form of self-centeredness. But it is not the motivator of a Christian. The Jews were motivated by fear (that is what trying to keep the laws by human effort produces)

A Christian is motivated by love. Loving God and God fearing reflect the same motivator. Let me explain. If my father was also the city judge and his character was flawless, perfect in righteousness, love, truth and mercy; I would love him deeply because he shows me perfect love and I would desire to please him and emulate him. But knowing his position and his fairness and justice, I would not expect him to show me partiality over other people in regards to him being a city judge. It is my love and respect for his character that would cause me to be extra careful to please him. In fact motivated by love I would not even need the laws because just pleasing my father would be sufficient motivation to do what is right. Only love can accomplish this. There is no selfish motivation in this kind of fear. The bible says the fear of the Lord is pure, it says the fear of the Lord is to hate sin. Genuine love is the only true motivator that produces that kind of fear. The fear of the Lord actually produces peace of mind and heart.

The fear that brings torment is a selfish fear that is motivated by being scared of punishment. A Christian would rather be punished than get away with something and dishonor Father God. I would rather my sins be exposed and healed than to get away with them. That dishonors the God I love.

Christians sin; they aren't perfect; a willingness to humbly expose, confess and forsake sin is a mark of love for God, it is the pure fear of the Lord. It is the Christian's humilty, honesty and love for Jesus that motivates a transparent responsibility and a brokenness towards our own short comings. God's grace fills the humble of heart and gives us the power to love God that much more. To whom much is forgiven, the same loves much more. That is Christian motivation.

I agree.

The 'sweet bye and bye' is a motivation for us, but not as a motivation to live in a magical happy land in our lives, but a motivation to live out God's will on earth. As it has been stated our redemption restores us to a redeeming love that leads us to love others and serve others in the here and now. Because heaven (God's will) fills us now we live out the kingdom of God right now on earth. We are the body of Christ, serving and loving others through Him and Him through us.

kokopuffs, awesome stuff, would love to get to meet you. Email me.

 

I read Aquinas and a few other philosophers who tried to reconcile science and religion awhile ago but admit I am rusty. I should be a bit more careful with my terms as by not being rational I'm not saying there isn't a logical thought structure behind but that there is no empiracal absolute proof. The better term might be "empiracal" versus "rational."

 

I think this is getting at the issue I was raising in the "Deathbed Conversion" thread. To me a deathbed conversion would be a conversion that is based on fear and selfishness. When someone faced with the prospect of an eternity that they have been told is either one of suffering or bliss chooses the path of bliss even though is actions in life might not have been in accordance with that path. So if your view of God's will on Earth is to live what most of us would consider a moral life how is someone who has not lived a moral life on Earth then deserving of a blissful life in the here after?

 

It's not that dogmatic

It's not a check-the-box event. The question is sincerity. We're presuming that someone would be doing something merely out of fear or hedging bets. There's a lot of God in the Bible saying, "i'm tired of your religion...your dogma...i care about your hearts." Jesus' brother, James, says: "true religion is this...take care of the orphans and widows and keep yourself from being polluted by the powers of the world."

In the Gospel accounts of Jesus' death he on a cross with two others. One mocks him and says, "if you're the son of god, get us out of this mess!!!" The other says, "He's innocent...we're getting what we deserve." Then he asks Jesus to remember him. And Jesus says, "you'll be with me today in Paradise."

Jesus' resurrection is about establishing the kingdom of god here and now immediately and for all eternity going forward....he's literally saying the old kings (powers of the earth) are dying. Caesar isn't Caesar. And that looks like kindness, service, humility and, most important, love. For all humanity. No matter their choices. God doesn't force himself on anyone, as far as I can tell. He pursues, I believe...but he's not a cosmic rapist. These things...the heart of which is love...is the heart of God. When those things aren't present, it's hell. I think that's true whether you're dead or alive. In this dimension or another. Whatever all that means.

 

This little anecdote will make you a lot of friends here on the bbs.

J/K Greatest summation of my idea of what's behind Christianity I've seen in such a concise form. Well done

 

nothing like preaching judgment to win friends

 

I think living a loving life is a moral life. I believe love demands actions which speak louder than words. And I believe love is for the right now here on earth.

I also believe that is what 'salvation' provides us in Jesus- the grace or help to love. There is a change that Jesus works in and through us by His spirit.

That is the metaphysical realm of Christianity that can only be seen by the 'fruits'

And anyone who does not live in this kind of love is falling short- mostly all of us, especially me... so I do not look at it as what am I doing, I look at it as help from Jesus to love others. Instead of judging my own morality I focus on Jesus and His love in and through me.

Love takes care of law. When I love God, I take joy in obedience; so to speak.

The concept of forgiveness from God, even at death is a deep and gracious as the death of Jesus on the cross.

The bible says God is plentious in mercy, that His forgiveness is abundant and that all who trust in Him will not be disappointed.

 

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: "I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God." That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a good moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic-on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg-or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great moral teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.

-C.S. Lewis