Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+ Something nonbelievers should ponder on

[ana]

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...u-npc062905.php

[andthebeast13]

If we are indeed in the End Times -- and the evidence that we are is overwhelming, for those truly immersed in the Bible -- then good Christians must double, triple, their efforts to win souls to Christ.

One of the requirements for doing this is money. Money to pay for TV time, leaflets, to sponsor missionaries, etc.

I am willing to supply some of this money.

Here's the deal: decide among yourselves what is the absolute maximum of time we have left. Ten years, twenty, thirty, whatever.

Then sign all your property over to me and my heirs, with the right for you to continue to live in it for the next ten, or twenty, or thirty years, plus one or two years for good measure.

In return, I will pay you ten percent of the assessed value of your property.

Of course, the Apocalypse will have happened before I can collect, so you will have gotten several thousands, or even tens of thousands of dollars, to win souls to Christ, and I will get nothing.

You can't lose.

All who truly believe the End Times are near will take me up on this offer, and be looked on with favor in Heaven. Those who, way down deep, don't really believe it, will find some sneaky way to evade taking up my offer -- Satan will supply them with rationalizations.

But God will know His own.

lol this is a classic...
its a major guilt trip
if someone has faith in God, they will sign their money and possesions over. otherwise they are a servant of satans...

on the topic of this forum.
the Bible says "no-one knows the day nor the hour".
"it will come upon you like a thief in the night"
predictions on the appocolypse do not work. it has been proven time and again
and whether it is coming in our lifetime or not not should not affect a Christian's lifestyle.

and honestly... is fear the best tool to use to witness to others?
just a few of my thoughts

[FloodG8-9595]

Glad to be back guys. not that anyone remembers me.

Let me say that the REAL problem I have with "Fundamentalists" in any religion is that they rarley know any more than they have to about the history of the religion they choose. Many of them know enough to blow the socks off any lamen who dared question them (ie. Bible verses to convince one a Bible verse is true just doesn't make any sence but, if you're not paying attention it'll catch you off guard) but that doesn't mean that they've gone out of their way to learn even the things that don't add up to the way they think things should be.

The truth is that Christianity isn't nor has it ever been "solid". As far back as just after the death and resurection of Christ there were Premillennialists who believed that Christ would be back within 1000 years. There were and are those who believe that the "rapture" that we know so well was created by 4th or 6th or century preachers.
Fundamentalists quote other religious texts and choose not to mention that their believe is based not on the Bible but on other texts writen by well respected holy men. I could name many of the texts that are used by religious scholers and misquoted as biblical but, I won't waste anyones time with more pointless reading.

in a sermon most often attribited to Ephraem the Syrian from a Look on TheLast Times, The Antichrist, and The End of the World.(written sometime around the 4th century AD.) The rapture really took on physical meaning and became more than just an interpritation of poetry and literaturary symbolism. (not to mention that the bible and most other documents have already been translated from a language we barley know how to read correctly anymore)

My point is really that If you know the history of the Church and how many times they have re-written docterin and pretended that it was that way all along, you can't help but think that half of the crap that we now "know" in the Christian religion is just made up hoobajoo to get the good little ship under yet another thumb.

I could go on but, I won't I belive in a God of sorts. I believe that Jesus lived and died and that, my friends is all I need to believe in regard to that old story that I know so well. Personally I think anyone who accepts ANYTHING at face value is falling victim to one of the oldest peices of knowledge.

"People are stupid and can be made to believe anything, because they want to belive it's true or because they are afraid that it's true." -The First Wizards Rule.

[Bookworm]

The truth is that Christianity isn't nor has it ever been "solid".

I don't know about that. It seems to have been pretty solid back in the first century when those Christians were getting fed to the lions.

[Red Squirrel]

And those people that survived being in a furnace for all that time. Oh wait, they had fire suits on.

[FloodG8-9595]

??? My point was that even right after the death of Christ his followers couldn't agree on what was the right way to worship or the right thing to believe and they LIVED back then. How anyone in this day and age be so arrogant as to believe that they have all the answers.

The HISTORY of Christianity is filled with holes not to mention a great amount of treason, conspiricy and other such things. Most of them happened in the worst times in human history in which not much was written down and even what you believed could be subject to criminal punishment. ( A practice you so eloquently reminded us has been around since before Christ)

I won't go into this very deep but, there is a whole buch more of the same in regards to the old testement and the God Yahweh. In many places the Old testement mentions "other Gods"

In closing let me just say that WE DON"T KNOW EVERYTHING and probably never will. Thinking anything else is pure arrogance and nothing else. No one has all the answers and that, if anything, is the way God wants it.

[Reaper]

I honestly hate religious discussions like this one.

[FloodG8-9595]

yeah me too.... thats why I participate in them.

I'm not trying to bring illumination to anyone (espcially not Red: I don't think God himself could enlighten a view point like that... no offense Red you're a great guy I just happen to disagree with you in a humorus way) but, I do find it's good to let out a little of how you feel once in a while and if thats in the form of a religious discussion then so be it. Maybe someone will be intruigued by what I have to say but, they won't be the ones I'm talking directly to.

This post has been edited by FloodG8-9595: Sep 7 2006, 05:35 PM

[Bookworm]

??? My point was that even right after the death of Christ his followers couldn't agree on what was the right way to worship or the right thing to believe and they LIVED back then.

What point of disagreement are you referencing here? It seems to me that when there was a disagreement, God would inspire one of the apostles with the correct answer, and we have the inspired Word of God yet today.

In closing let me just say that WE DON"T KNOW EVERYTHING and probably never will. Thinking anything else is pure arrogance and nothing else. No one has all the answers and that, if anything, is the way God wants it.

I don't know who you're arguing against here because I don't think many Christians even would claim to KNOW EVERYTHING.

but, I do find it's good to let out a little of how you feel once in a while and if thats in the form of a religious discussion then so be it.

Yeah, the main thing is to express your thoughts and be willing to be disagreed with. If there was no discussion of things, this wouldn't be much debate section.

[Minnie]

yeah me too.... thats why I participate in them.

I'm not trying to bring illumination to anyone (espcially not Red: I don't think God himself could enlighten a view point like that... no offense Red you're a great guy I just happen to disagree with you in a humorus way) but, I do find it's good to let out a little of how you feel once in a while and if thats in the form of a religious discussion then so be it. Maybe someone will be intruigued by what I have to say but, they won't be the ones I'm talking directly to.

well said

[FloodG8-9595]

What point of disagreement are you referencing here? It seems to me that when there was a disagreement, God would inspire one of the apostles with the correct answer, and we have the inspired Word of God yet today.

There are many points of disagreement between the followers of Christ following his death and resurection, both immediatly and forever and ever amen I wasn't really referencing one in particular but going more for the overall idea that even back then no one could agree on the exact right way to do things. Some examples follow and are spread out over the centurys since Christ's death

Mary's roll as a possible apostle or close personal adivsor to Christ. (some of the apostles had a problem with this)
Premillienialism (The hard and stedfast belief that Jesus would return before a period 1000 years)
Wether or not to take Revelations literaly or figurativly
Jesus's Devinity
What books to place in the holy scriptures and which to brand Aprocrapha (this took quite a whileand there was quite a bit of decent)
Ad absurdum

These are all things that we've had to do by ourselves. God wasn't pointing his devine finger down and saying "this is how it is" He left us with a mess to sort through and anytime we touch somthing we taint it, we use it to our own benifit. Much how the Christian Romans demonized pagan gods who to this day are identified with the devil. (ie. Baal ) and the charateristics of those gods became also i.d'd with evil (horns, hooves, lycanthropy, pitchforks)

You hit on somthing I totally agree with (in a sense) We do have the inspired word of God today. I think that great lessons are taught everyday by novelist's that are being inspired by some outside force we may call God.

I don't know who you're arguing against here because I don't think many Christians even would claim to KNOW EVERYTHING.

perhaps my language WAS a little blanket... sorry. What I meant to say here was that we as, Christians or otherwize will never know the extent of the true history of such a long past time. I've heard many Christians quote the Bible as being infalable and I say that there is not one reason in this world that I know of to belive that. It is an illogical conclusion given all the information that we both have and don't have available. The facts don't play out.

I'm always willing to discuss this topic because I like to hear a reasoned and reaonable response to questions and information that I have in my head. You've always done a good job of responding to posts in that way bookworm. I thank you for the conversation.

[Red Squirrel]

I kind of stopped the whole religious argument thing. I think the tribulation will argue for itself when it happends.

[FloodG8-9595]

and when it does... my most apropriate response will be.

"I'll be damned...."

[Reaper]

Haha, that's funny.

[Bookworm]

What point of disagreement are you referencing here? It seems to me that when there was a disagreement, God would inspire one of the apostles with the correct answer, and we have the inspired Word of God yet today.

There are many points of disagreement between the followers of Christ following his death and resurection, both immediatly and forever and ever amen I wasn't really referencing one in particular but going more for the overall idea that even back then no one could agree on the exact right way to do things. Some examples follow and are spread out over the centurys since Christ's death

My question directly related to your comment about disagreements immediately after the death of Christ. I said earlier that Christianity was pretty solid in the first century. I can't argue with the idea that some people took parts of Christianity later and started to deny them to suit their own purposes. The divinity of Christ, for example. I don't think there is a question that the early apostles were believing in the divinity of Christ. Even some of the epistles were referencing comments to unbelievers who would seek to deny the divinity of Christ.

I've heard many Christians quote the Bible as being infalable and I say that there is not one reason in this world that I know of to belive that. It is an illogical conclusion given all the information that we both have and don't have available. The facts don't play out.

Well, I'd have to say I believe the Bible is infallible, but our human understanding of what God is trying to tell us is fallible. The disagreements over Revelation would fall into this line of thought. The stuff in that book is going to happen, but our understanding of whether the stuff is literal or figurative is not always apparent. I personally take a more literal approach to Revelation, but I have to constantly be aware that I as a human could be wrong about my particular understanding of things. That doesn't mean that the Bible itself is fallible, though.

I'm always willing to discuss this topic because I like to hear a reasoned and reaonable response to questions and information that I have in my head. You've always done a good job of responding to posts in that way bookworm. I thank you for the conversation.

Aw, you're making me blush.

[Stasi]

My question directly related to your comment about disagreements immediately after the death of Christ. I said earlier that Christianity was pretty solid in the first century. I can't argue with the idea that some people took parts of Christianity later and started to deny them to suit their own purposes. The divinity of Christ, for example. I don't think there is a question that the early apostles were believing in the divinity of Christ. Even some of the epistles were referencing comments to unbelievers who would seek to deny the divinity of Christ.

How do you know Christianity was pretty solid in the first century? Also, if I was going to construct a religious belief system, I would speak of evil people and their evil ways, including their actively seeking to deny the divinity of whatever god-being I came up with.

Well, I'd have to say I believe the Bible is infallible, but our human understanding of what God is trying to tell us is fallible. The disagreements over Revelation would fall into this line of thought. The stuff in that book is going to happen, but our understanding of whether the stuff is literal or figurative is not always apparent. I personally take a more literal approach to Revelation, but I have to constantly be aware that I as a human could be wrong about my particular understanding of things. That doesn't mean that the Bible itself is fallible, though.

Which version of the Bible is infallible and why?

I kind of stopped the whole religious argument thing. I think the tribulation will argue for itself when it happends.

Let me guess, you stopped the whole religious argument thing because no one ever buys into your well-thought out, rational, cogent arguments, analogies, and miscellaneous statements, right?

You hit on somthing I totally agree with (in a sense) We do have the inspired word of God today. I think that great lessons are taught everyday by novelist's that are being inspired by some outside force we may call God.

Some may refer to these forces as 'thetans' brought about by the evil alien overlord known as 'Lord Xenu'. By reading this you agree to indemnify the author of this post from having any association, real or implied, with the holy churcH of scientologY, either formally, philosophically, or sympathetically.

I honestly hate religious discussions like this one.

Why?

[FloodG8-9595]

Some may refer to these forces as 'thetans' brought about by the evil alien overlord known as 'Lord Xenu'. By reading this you agree to indemnify the author of this post from having any association, real or implied, with the holy churcH of scientologY, either formally, philosophically, or sympathetically.

Iyiyi.... don't even get me started on Scientology.

I guess I was trying to put my argument in a way that would make sense in context. Inspiration (divine or thetan), wherever it may come from, has not gone away it's simply changed its style, because we changed our interpretation... I look at the bible as a novelisation of an event in history (this is just my personal belief). I truly wish I could know the real story but, like "based on a true story" movies and books some things I feel were embellished and changed by the authors own bias even IF it was wrought from the very mind of the almighty. I don't imagine the God would be the type to MAKE someone write down the story the way he'd write it (if that’s even possible). We do have free will.

[Stasi]

Oh, I got what you were saying. I was just being a dork.

[FloodG8-9595]

[Stasi]

[flowergirlajg]

I just realized I could strech the skin on my elbow 1 and a half inches!!

[Bookworm]

I just realized I could strech the skin on my elbow 1 and a half inches!!

Hey, this section of the forum is for strictly on-topic discussions.

[Listerlnx666]

wouldn't surprise me...if there is a god, he is a dick

[Stasi]

Wonderful contribution to the discussion. Thanks for wasting bandwidth.

[robonightmare]

will somebody please explain to me what all of this "apocalypse" crap is? for god's sakes, the universe will end in the big crunch, prolly. and besides, when that rolls around 10 billion years from now, we will know how to stop it! End of story. bye bye. why would god have created us with an urge to survive, and superior intelligance beyond anything else on earth? We are built to succeed where animals failed, and excel where they succeeded! think about it!!!