|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: do you really Believe we are damned? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
I'd just like to say that any Christian who talks about Jesus or hell is being disobedient if he or she does not do so with the utmost respect, love, and lack of judgment, as the Bible says (I know some verses here and there, but I'm awful with the location, so forgive me). Obviously there are a lot of people who profess to have relationship with God but who do not show the fruit that is said to come from that. The Crusaders, abortion doctor killers, and others who disregard the commandments to love God and others are such people. When the gospel is shared with people, it should be done out of concern for that person, not out of judgment. One person put it well when they said that it should be like one homeless beggar going to another and saying, "hey, I know where we can find food." Anything done with more pride or judgment is wrong. I hope that makes sense.
I had so many things I wanted to say, but they mostly escape me now. I'll leave it at this for now  .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
quote: What kind of evidence should God provide? Maybe some supernatural healings, command of nature, raising the dead? Perhaps this should be accompanied with people to record the evidence for subsequent generations? Sounds like he took care of that part. Of course, many people don't accept the Bible, and by doing so they deny the very evidence that you call for. You say it's disingenuous for God to leave us without evidence, and then you do all within your power and beyond to discredit and disregard this very evidence (I don't mean you in particular, just the general mood of the site.) Your comment in regards to hearing the gospel would require a whole new string, so I take your point and won't offer a response here. As for your comment about not finding Christianity fulfilling, I would most confidently argue that when one truly experiences God, it is not dissatisfying. It is humbling, awesome, and eerily clarifying, and too often people substitute the "religious stuff" for Christianity. That is such a shame. Christianity is a personal and very real relationship with God through Jesus. If someone "becomes a Christian" and then decides they're not satisfied, then either they are offering an excuse or they had never truly received the Holy Spirit. Obviously there's no evidence I can offer to support my claims of communion with God, and I won't attempt to. The gospel message was validated at the time with the supernatural, and if the same were done today, many people would doggedly try to discredit it. I have been blessed to have experienced God in a very personal and supernatural way, but it was only after I submitted to him. Ok, I'm done preaching . I don't mean this message to debate or try to prove anything you said wrong. Even if I tried to do so, without a doubt it would be dismissed as the ramblings of a simple, unscientific person who would rather "feel good" than accept the truth. Hehe, oh well. I just felt like sharing some thoughts. Thanks for putting up with my ramblings, and I've enjoyed the feedback. Take care guys. Jake [This message has been edited by Jake22, 07-30-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
Hehe, sorry for the confusion. Jake the token Christian to the rescue!
From a Christian view, the second commandment forbids one from elevating a thing/person/idea to a position worthy of worship. Also contained in the Law was the system of sacrifice to justify the Israelites before a perfect God. The Bible says only through blood can there be forgiveness for sins. It would then be accurate to say, from a Christian perspective, that the Israelites were justified to share in God's forgiveness and presence through the sacrifice. Jesus had a similar purpose as a sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins, except that his sacrifice was permanent and extended to all who would accept. In this way the Levitical Law was a precursor to Christ, God's ultimate redemptive plan. Thus, to say that one has a relationship with God through Jesus is to say that Jesus' death gives the justification before God and thus the ability for one to have communion with God and to belong to him (as the Israelites did). Also, something that I mentioned once before, which someone basically said, "no, you're wrong," is that I've been told the phrase "have no other gods before me" is more accurately translated as having no other gods "in my face." I heard this from Howard Jackson. Jackson is is a published scholar of the late second temple and early Roman imperial periods (hehe, interestingly he was the technical consultant for the Last Temptation of Christ). He speaks and teaches Hebrew and Greek, along with biblical studies, and he told me that the best translation is one that suggests a flaunting of objects of worship before God. All I have is his word for it, so take that as you will, but he is an immensely smart fellow . Okay, here is the general Christian view of being justified to God through Jesus. Instead of like having a:
quote:, it's more like having a real relationship with your wife through touch, speech, and other modes that allow you to directly "commune" with her (to use some churchy jargon). That may be a pretty lame analogy, but it kinda gets the point across, eh? Thanks for the reply and especially for the respectful tone of your message! Jake
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
I'll try to just briefly address all of your enjoyable posts
.
TheOne writes: You having a relationship with MY WIFE....through touch and speech and just what other modes are we talking about here? And Jesus is in on it? Hehe, my deepest apologies. I'll stop calling, I swear, but I make no guarantees for JC.
IrishRockhound writes: That is merely your opinion. There are a few people on this site that left Christianity for other reasons, myself included. Is it so hard to admit that Christianity may be in some way flawed, or that it is capable of driving people away? You're completely right, I only offer my own opinion. I know that many people worldwide "feel" God, but I think in most cases it is an emotional, counterfeit response (including, and maybe especially, Christians). I mean no disrespect at all to anyone on the site, as so far I have nothing but admiration for nearly everyone here. I don't doubt that sincere people turn to Christianity and then are driven away. I personally believe that "religion" gets in the way of God and prevents people from knowing him. When we start focusing on the establishment or on ourselves instead of God himself, it's easy to get sidetracked. This is accompanied with judgmental yet lackadaisical attitudes, religious politics, and trying to be moral for others instead of focusing on God, his plan, and his worship. Some people get past the impeding churchiness and still don't find God, and this is something with which I personally struggle, and for which I have no answer. Some people will tell you it's predestination, or that they were brainwashed to believe otherwise (hehe, it's funny that Christians use that word too). I don't know. I certainly will not stand on a soap box and tell people that they gave up without trying...I know some (including I think crash, shraf, or someone else's post that I read) persevered through much hardship and concluded that everything they had been taught was false. I respect them for sincerely trying to make things click. I went for nearly 15 years as a Christian and there were maybe 5 times that I experienced God insomuch that I received a deep and almost supernatural peace and assurance during prayer. A few times it was regarding a request that God answered, and it always happened according to what I was told in prayer (including "no" to my request, but knowing he answered according to his plan for my life was very reassuring in an odd way). Just to note, I am comforted during prayer all the time, but nothing that convinces me beyond all doubt that I am experiencing God. Now, the Bible warns against feelings, saying that they don't prove whether or not one has the Holy Spirit. I know that God spoke to me at those times, but I would never expect anyone else to have confidence in my experience. Whenever I hear someone talk about their experiences of God, my reaction is skepticism. Perhaps I'm jaded, but I think there's a danger in thinking you "feel" God when it's really just your self-induced emotional experience. Okay, back to what I was saying...I didn't experience God in a certain and unexplained way until I had known him for 15 years (perhaps more accurately 9 years, as the first 6 consisted of only church, saying grace, etc. and I doubt in retrospect if I had a true relationship at that point). I had an issue that was causing me much pain, and it was a point of anguish and constant prayer. The Bible guarantees that Christians will suffer for their faith, in order to mold character or just because it's a crappy world, and I didn't know if God was using the experience for something. In short, he eventually answered me in a truly supernatural way, unexplained by anything except his touch and revelation. It was kind of weird and awe-inspiring. I won't get into the details, as it pretty personal...but if you guys are sincerely curious (as opposed to wanting to tell me what a weirdo I am ), I'll certainly share. We are never guaranteed to have supernatural experiences with God (well, aside from spiritual stuff like receiving the Holy Spirit). At any rate, they certainly don't occur often, at least in my experience. I have 100% faith in God and Christianity, and I sometimes wish he would have used that experience on someone who was questioning instead of wasting it on me, so to speak. This was the only thing in my entire relationship with God that could not be dismissed as coincidence no matter how hard one tried. Okay, I guess my faith is more like 90% ...it must be our natures to doubt, even with proof. Like that Bible says...something like, "Lord I believe! Help me in my unbelief." Sorry, I'm rambling and not getting to any points. I believe when people reject Christianity it is often because of pride, guilt, fear of change, or other factors that make them want to doubt. However, I wholeheartedly agree that many sincere people are driven away from Christianity. Oftentimes, the flaws of human nature (pride, selfishness, etc.) on the part of those claiming to be Christians are responsible. In these cases, I blame those "Christians" nearly 100%, and I mean no condescending attitude whatsoever.
Rrhain writes: You're basically impugning the integrity of anybody who has left Christianity. Not a very nice thing to do. If you're not willing to accept other people as being honest about their personal revelations, why should people accept yours? I hope I addressed the integrity issue above. As for accepting other people as honest, I don't doubt that people feel what they feel. What I doubt is that it is genuinely from God. I certainly don't have it all together, and I am learning every day and trying to walk with God (and stumbling along the way). I don't expect people to accept my revelations, as trust of a random internet personality is naive at best . I am not trying to prove anything, but I guess I felt like sharing my own experiences. Alright, this is a long, boring post and I commend anyone who has suffered enough to make it this far! Thanks for taking the time to read my thoughts, and please know they are conveyed with the utmost respect. By the way, that New Guinea post...hilarious. Jake
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
quote: Hey crash. I mean no disresepct, but please don't take me for a Christian who can't think for myself. I have conducted extensive research into the veracity of the Bible. The way you respond shows that you think I am someone who lives by blind faith and is willing to ignore everything I don't want to see. I guess I'm asking for you not to label me . I know this is treading on thin ice with this crowd, but I have conducted much inquiry into the Bible and its reliability. I have struggled with a lot along the way, but I haven't been exposed to evidence that has taken my faith out of the Bible as God's word. Granted, I probably can't help but unconsciously approach some evidence from a Christian background, but I have also been trained to be able to take an objective approach to anything. In my own studies I have rarely had someone make a point that could not be explained or refuted from a biblical perspective with further evidence or thought. Occasionally there are some that you just have to say, "that doesn't prove anything, but I can't explain it." The same is certainly true for the opposing side, in my experience. I make no challenge to anyone here, as I am sure nearly all points you may make have come up at one point or another in literature and discussions. The same may be true for any arguments that I may present, so I'd like it if we could put that off for some other time. My point is only that I have put the Bible under close scrutiny, ready to be deeply challenged. I have been, and each time my faith is bolstered. You say it's easy to refute the Bible, and most informed Christians would say that it's easy to support the Bible. Depends on where we want to come from, I suppose. I think any Christian who accepts the Bible without query and discernment is cheating himself out of a degree of spiritual maturity. Faith without testing can be a bit of a crutch, and blind faith is not usually true faith, in my humble opinion. I have admiration for those who accept the Bible as truth without ever hearing both sides of the story, but I certainly don't identify.
quote: Your point is taken regarding evidence being revealed after one believes. It is not evidence in the sense of being useful to persuade myself, as I have weighed both sides and have already been persuaded by other means. It is nonetheless evidence in the sense that it supports the existence of God. Real evidence is objective and convincing, of course. I have had that evidence from God, and it is just as valuable and convincing to someone else as to me, provided my word is worth anything. In short, something was revealed to me before it happened, to someone whom I didn't know. The "revelation" came in a dream, from which I woke up with confidence that it was from God. A close friend was also involved, as something pivotal happened in her life (in the dream). The next day the first event came true, with someone I had never met and who I recognized solely from my dream, exactly as had been revealed. I took that to be God's promise that the second event (involving my friend) would occur. A year later it happened just as I saw it. Take that as you will, although I'm sure it will be dismissed (hehe, as I would probably do if someone else told me ). I told some people what I had been shown by God, and they considered it very hard evidence when they saw things come true just as God said it would. One of them was an athiest but now is a Christian. I realize this doesn't mean a whole lot after the fact, but it shows that my own experiences of God can be evidence for others. However, this kind of experience doesn't seem to be an everyday experience and, as I mentioned above, is not something all Christians will necessarily have. Okay, enough out of me. It's your guys' faults I'm wasting all this time! hehe, thanks again for the replies. Jake (edited for a bit of grammar )[This message has been edited by Jake22, 07-31-2003] [This message has been edited by Jake22, 07-31-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
quote: hehe .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
quote: No, I wouldn't accept that evidence, and I do not claim that what I described is evidence for everyone, such as you. I claim it was evidence for those who experienced the fulfillment of a dream. I don't blame you if you don't believe me. Hehe, in fact, I would trust your sense of judgment far more than someone who responds with, "wow, cool!" My point was merely that the experience was evidence of a revealing God for two other people, and thus a supernatural revelation was not merely a personal occurrance. Evidence is not characterized by universality of experience. I have no evidence that my father had a baseball card collection as a kid. No pictures, no cards, nothing, just his word. My grandmother saw the cards and was exposed to them many years ago. Was seeing the baseball cards in my father's hands not evidence to my grandmother that he had a collection? Sure it was, but it is not evidence to me because I don't share in that experience. It is nonetheless evidence, or am I missing something important?
quote: I have indeed explored both sides. I am confident that I have researched the issue far more than most people, whether they accept or reject the Bible. One reason I like this site is because most people here have indeed researched the issue, although I do feel that there are some who blindly accept evidence that they wish to believe. We are all guilty of that to some extent, though. There are several issues in your quote, and I won't address them all. I will simply sum up by saying that I have not found any evidence that makes a convincing case to the contrary. There is evidence, and yes there is also evidence for the truths found in the Bible. As I mentioned before, though, I'd like to keep that for some other post, as I'm sure the debate has been extensively covered here. I don't mean to pass judgment at all, but please do not stereotype me and assume I am seeking subjective ends. Again, I don't mean any sort of offense or challenge, and I very much enjoy reading the respectful material this site offers, but please do not insult me with assumptions. [This message has been edited by Jake22, 07-31-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
Hey Mark...
quote: I certainly see what you're saying and I agree. My grandmother seeing and touching baseball cards is not evidence of a card collection to me or anyone else. It is not "admissible" evidence. My point is that for my grandmother, who saw and touched, it was evidence that convinced her. It was evidence to her, by very definition. Her subsequent testimony would be hearsay, but that is not the point. She was convinced with evidence. You are right, some evidence cannot be repeated or made available to all. This does not invalidate its role as evidence within its original, limited context. The scientific method calls for repeatability, but why do you assume evidence requires that parameter as well? I don't want to continue to argue specifics than neither of us really case about . By definition, what I described was evidence to the two people I mentioned. I do not claim it is evidence for you or anyone else.
quote: I mentioned twice that this is not the point of my post. I don't wish to debate the matter...it would be exhausting and accomplish nothing for anyone. I'm sorry if that's evasive to you.
quote: I merely would contend that something like what I described was evidence, and quite objective within its limited context. I've offered my reasoning, and I understand that people will twist words and ignore relevant aspects to disagree (which I am not accusing you of, by the way). When I tell people about it, it is only hearsay, yes. That is why I am not trying to argue that it "really happened." It was very real evidence in forming a conclusion for those involved. As I said, I just wanted to share because it was relevant to the discussion, not using it as evidence here. Please don't misunderstand me. Phew! I gotta go grab some more coffee! Interesting posts, Mike. Thanks. Oh, and when I mentioned your assumptions, I meant about me, not in your logic. Jake P.S. I don't think the 6 days are critical to Christianity at all.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jake22 Inactive Member |
quote: You may very well be right about the literal six days being important to Christianity in that way. This is not something that I have spent much time exploring, so I'm sure you folks know more than I. I have heard the cliche Christian evolutionist view that the days may be symbolic of ages. Some even say that the Hebrew word is interchangeable? What you said certainly makes sense, and if I knew more about it then I'd have something to say . However, even if one argues that the days must be literal days, I don't see that as central to Christianity. What I mean is this...in God's plan of justification for mankind (according to Christianity), there are some key beliefs one must hold concerning sin, Jesus, God, etc. The rest is certainly important but not pivotal. If someone believes that Moses never existed, they may be wrong but still have relationship with God. If someone believes that Jesus never existed, then they are not justified before God and are not a "Christian." Does that make sense? If God did create the world in 6 days and a Christian believes in an old earth, they would be wrong but would be set straight in heaven . It's not a central belief in that way. This is all, of course, according to Christian belief. I would lastly note that the ten commandments are a part of Christianity, but generally only in a historical sense (although other Christians I'm sure would disagree). Christians are not bound by the Ten Commandments in the ways that the Israelites were (I posted on the idea of deliverance from the Mosaic Law in more detail elsewhere). In short, the Law was fulfilled so that those accepting Jesus' sacrifice are delivered from it. A new standard of morality was set forth in the NT, and interestingly only 9 of the 10 commandments were reiterated as moral conduct Christians were to have. The only command not "carried over" was that regarding the Sabbath, which of course got Jesus into some trouble with the religious folk. Thanks db for the info. What is your impression of the day/age issue...is it the same Hebrew word or symbolic, or is it a compromise that doesn't fit the wording? I always thought that this didn't fit with the account in Genesis mentioning that the sun rose and set, and that was the nth day. Then again, I suppose that could be symbolic, too . Jake [This message has been edited by Jake22, 08-01-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
