Sex! Woohoo!

[NH Baritone]

A37 wrote:

So I guess I always figured, you either believe the old tales or you don't. Sure there are different religions, but it always seemed to be a trivial thing -- like different coffee houses, or different grocery stores. Everyone has their favorite but they're all pretty much the same. I guess not, huh?

Are you kidding, some denominations are as different as a coffee house and a karaoke bar! They can be as opposite as night and day in both their theology and their practices. yet most believe theirs has "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help them God";
So if someone says, "Will the real Christians please stand up!", they'll all rise.

... and then try to knock most of the rest back into their seats.

I think if Mitt Romney fails to get the Republican Party's 2012 presidential nomination, it will largely be because Mormon's think Christians should wear magic underwear.

[tonyenglish7]

Yes, thanks for sharing. I mean this in the most positive way... reading your stories is almost like reading about Maasai tribesmen or something. It is really fascinating and strange.

You see, I was raised outside of any faith, my wife was raised the same way, there are maybe two people in our extended families who even attend a church of any kind. So I guess I always figured, you either believe the old tales or you don't. Sure there are different religions, but it always seemed to be a trivial thing -- like different coffee houses, or different grocery stores. Everyone has their favorite but they're all pretty much the same. I guess not, huh?

You know what; I fully understand your view. My father was a full raging atheist and my Mom was Catholic. My father was very logical, well spoken, articulate about his views and my Mom was silly and foolish in her superstitions. So, from the age of about 10 years old, I was convinced that all the ideas of God were stupid and foolish. I would mock Christians whenever I had the chance and I would argue with them as well. I was like Damien when it came to Sunday mornings. I would appeal to my father to save me from the torture of going to church. I even flattened my Mom's tires one morning in an effort to escape the torment of church. I knew as a kid that the whole system was a joke,... sin, confess, say a few hail Mary’s and you are good to go? "What a joke!", I would think.... and still do.

I actually started reading the New Testament when I was 17 in order to argue better with one of my teachers who was trying to convert me. But when I read it, I was interested and started researching, the more I researched and learned I realized that Jesus really did what they said he did, namely, rise from the dead. That is a long conversation as to how I came to that conclusion but at that point I started trying to seek God, as if that was possible and wow, did things change in my life.

I have come to realize that the general way that humans are going is wrong, they are on their way to death, eternal death, in their individual sins. God, the creator of the universe, does exist and he is planning on saving a minority of people, not based upon class, race, intelligence, riches, or even religion, it is based upon his own will.

13 ¶“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.
14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
15 ¶“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
and
26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep.
27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.
29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.
30 I and the Father are one.”
31 ¶Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him,

You can dismiss Jesus as telling "old tales",(enjoy the cultural anthropology), or you can research a little and see He is who he claims to be.

You know, I was talking to Emery and I told him, he will never experience the satisfaction of being right, and I will never face the humiliation of being wrong. Because if he is right, (all is physical and death is the end), that is it, nothing. I am the only one who as hope, the hope of being right. Atheist have no hope of even being right.

What is life like when you have no hope? No hope to see your loved ones again? No hope for justice? No hope for purpose? No hope of anything? Eternal sleep is the best you can hope for? And not even knowing if you are right about that?

I may be wrong, but I have a rational, philosophically defensible, internally consistent and reasonable hope. And I am not alone; there have been billions like me, experiencing the spiritual side of reality with a hope of eternity. I actually believe my view is the most rational as well. (Better explanation of the facts).

[whoosanightowl]

Tony wrote:

I actually started reading the New Testament when I was 17 in order to argue better with one of my teachers who was trying to convert me.

Was that a public school teacher?? If so, shame on him/her!

You can dismiss Jesus as telling "old tales",(enjoy the cultural anthropology), or you can research a little and see He is who he claims to be.

FYI, most of us have researched Christianity extensively before coming to the conclusion, kicking and screaming, that there's just not enough verifiable evidence to believe the bible is either morally authoritative or ordained by any God, at least not one that we'd care to worship.

You know, I was talking to Emery and I told him, he will never experience the satisfaction of being right, and I will never face the humiliation of being wrong. Because if he is right, (all is physical and death is the end), that is it, nothing. I am the only one who as hope, the hope of being right. Atheist have no hope of even being right.

Unless you are also wrong! There are billions of people who worship a God/Gods other than the one of Christianity, and one of them could just as easily be right. I'm sure they all see their faith as rational and reasonable just like you do. Have you ever spent time investigating other religions objectively, without the preconceived idea that they're all wrong?

What is life like when you have no hope? No hope to see your loved ones again? No hope for justice? No hope for purpose? No hope of anything? Eternal sleep is the best you can hope for? And not even knowing if you are right about that?

I don't know of any non/ex-Christians who have no hope, our hope is just not in the supernatural. We accept and are at peace with the idea that when our lives are over here on earth, it's over. We are not concerned with an after life, being together again with our loved ones to sing God's praises for all of eternity. In fact that idea repulses many of us.

I may be wrong, but I have a rational, philosophically defensible, internally consistent and reasonable hope. And I am not alone; there have been billions like me, experiencing the spiritual side of reality with a hope of eternity. I actually believe my view is the most rational as well. (Better explanation of the facts).

.

No you are not alone, but just as there have been billions like you, but there have also been billions not like you who have failed to see the rational, defensible, consistent, reasonable claims of Christianity or of the supernatural in general. And they actually believe their positions are the most rational.

Just to let you know, Tony, when you quote Bible verses to non-Christians, it would be like us quoting Mother Goose as evidence for our belief in fairy tales. I'm glad you normally keep them to a minimum, but really none are going to make an inkling of difference to those of us who don't accept the Bible as anything more than the thoughts and ideas of ancient men.

[tonyenglish7]

Tony wrote:

I actually started reading the New Testament when I was 17 in order to argue better with one of my teachers who was trying to convert me.

Was that a public school teacher?? If so, shame on him/her!

You can dismiss Jesus as telling "old tales",(enjoy the cultural anthropology), or you can research a little and see He is who he claims to be.

FYI, most of us have researched Christianity extensively before coming to the conclusion, kicking and screaming, that there's just not enough verifiable evidence to believe the bible is either morally authoritative or ordained by any God, at least not one that we'd care to worship.

You know, I was talking to Emery and I told him, he will never experience the satisfaction of being right, and I will never face the humiliation of being wrong. Because if he is right, (all is physical and death is the end), that is it, nothing. I am the only one who as hope, the hope of being right. Atheist have no hope of even being right.

Unless you are also wrong! There are billions of people who worship a God/Gods other than the one of Christianity, and one of them could just as easily be right. I'm sure they all see their faith as rational and reasonable just like you do. Have you ever spent time investigating other religions objectively, without the preconceived idea that they're all wrong?

What is life like when you have no hope? No hope to see your loved ones again? No hope for justice? No hope for purpose? No hope of anything? Eternal sleep is the best you can hope for? And not even knowing if you are right about that?

I don't know of any non/ex-Christians who have no hope, our hope is just not in the supernatural. We accept and are at peace with the idea that when our lives are over here on earth, it's over. We are not concerned with an after life, being together again with our loved ones to sing God's praises for all of eternity. In fact that idea repulses many of us.

I may be wrong, but I have a rational, philosophically defensible, internally consistent and reasonable hope. And I am not alone; there have been billions like me, experiencing the spiritual side of reality with a hope of eternity. I actually believe my view is the most rational as well. (Better explanation of the facts).

.

No you are not alone, but just as there have been billions like you, but there have also been billions not like you who have failed to see the rational, defensible, consistent, reasonable claims of Christianity or of the supernatural in general. And they actually believe their positions are the most rational.

Just to let you know, Tony, when you quote Bible verses to non-Christians, it would be like us quoting Mother Goose as evidence for our belief in fairy tales. I'm glad you normally keep them to a minimum, but really none are going to make an inkling of difference to those of us who don't accept the Bible as anything more than the thoughts and ideas of ancient men.

well I disagree! (:-)

[whoosanightowl]

Tony wrote:

well I disagree! (:-)

And that's fine, I expected you would.
I respect you and your right to disagree.

[tonyenglish7]

Tony wrote:

well I disagree! (:-)

And that's fine, I expected you would.
I respect you and your right to disagree.

Thanks, I appreciate it. It would be boring if everyone agreed with me....

I want to take you to task for your sub line saying at the bottom of your postings, "[i]It's funny how the invisible and the non-existent look exactly the same"[/]

This is a category error in logic. It is like saying, "isn't it funny how an idea that is true and one that is false look the same." Ideas are not seen, they are organized information, so to claim that it must be seen to be true is self refuting. The very statement is unseen, so it commits suicide on itself. I know the statement is tongue in cheek but it is simply wrong in that it is saying nothing. A computer disk with random information and one with this sentence in binary code weigh exactly the same yet one carries meaning and the other is not. How can that be? Why doesn't meaning weigh anything? So, isn't it funny how wrong ideas and right ideas weigh the same amount? That is a similar statement yet is clearly meaningless. Or, isn't funny how the color red and the color green taste the same?

Rubbish... I think you need a more intelligent saying at the bottom of your posts to promote your theological assertion that there is no God, only random, chance.

[tonyenglish7]

One of the more difficult things for me is know when to keep my "theological ponderings" to myself. Since I am a pastor of a church, It behooves me not to shake things up too much. If I weren't a pastor, I think it would be much easier to question different aspects of my faith.

Scott, I was wondering, do you believe that Jesus is the only way to God or do you hold that other roads lead to God as well?

[TheFonz]

One of the more difficult things for me is know when to keep my "theological ponderings" to myself. Since I am a pastor of a church, It behooves me not to shake things up too much. If I weren't a pastor, I think it would be much easier to question different aspects of my faith.

Scott, I was wondering, do you believe that Jesus is the only way to God or do you hold that other roads lead to God as well?

Hi Tony,
I appreciated your comments above to A37. Good job articulating your frame of reference.

Regarding your questions to Scott; I would not presume to speak on his behalf, but I would be very surprised to hear of any Christian who believes there are other ways "to God" beyond Christ. I understand the phrase "to God" can mean different things,but most evangelical Christians would call themselves followers of Christ and his teachings. His teachings leave no gray area or doubt on how to know God. A knowledge and recognition of his blood sacrifice is the only to come to the Father.
Have you had experiences on the contrary?

I know Scott a little, and while he may bit left leaning, he is a Christ follower.

My apologies to the atheists on this thread. I know this conversation is off topic and not within your interests. We can move it to a different thread if needed.

Fonz out...

[whoosanightowl]

Tony wrote:

well I disagree! (:-)

And that's fine, I expected you would.
I respect you and your right to disagree.

Thanks, I appreciate it. It would be boring if everyone agreed with me....

I want to take you to task for your sub line saying at the bottom of your postings, "[i]It's funny how the invisible and the non-existent look exactly the same"[/]

This is a category error in logic. It is like saying, "isn't it funny how an idea that is true and one that is false look the same." Ideas are not seen, they are organized information, so to claim that it must be seen to be true is self refuting. The very statement is unseen, so it commits suicide on itself. I know the statement is tongue in cheek but it is simply wrong in that it is saying nothing. A computer disk with random information and one with this sentence in binary code weigh exactly the same yet one carries meaning and the other is not. How can that be? Why doesn't meaning weigh anything? So, isn't it funny how wrong ideas and right ideas weigh the same amount? That is a similar statement yet is clearly meaningless. Or, isn't funny how the color red and the color green taste the same?

Rubbish... I think you need a more intelligent saying at the bottom of your posts to promote your theological assertion that there is no God, only random, chance.

Tony,
I didn't make it up myself, but I liked it because it made sense to me.

The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike.
Delos B. McKown Quote

I've had several other signature quotes here in the past. One of them I wish I could remember, but I can't. So I will find another one, and I hope it will make more sense to you.

[ScottBarger]

One of the more difficult things for me is know when to keep my "theological ponderings" to myself. Since I am a pastor of a church, It behooves me not to shake things up too much. If I weren't a pastor, I think it would be much easier to question different aspects of my faith.

Scott, I was wondering, do you believe that Jesus is the only way to God or do you hold that other roads lead to God as well?

Tony,

Yes, I believe that Jesus is the only way to restored relationship with God. I believe this unflinchingly. Though, I sometimes wonder what that requires in terms of human response.

Here are some other things I believe are core doctrines of the Christian faith (iow if you don't believe these things you cannot call yourself a Christian, in my opinion)

- Humanity/Divinity of Jesus
- Death, Burial, Resurrection of Jesus
- Salvation by Grace
- We all have sinned


There are probably more where that came from. Here are some runners up, they didn't make the above list because I think many Christians are confused as to what they believe about these things, even though they may claim to believe then.

- Literal, bodily resurrection of the dead (or at the least, the "dead in Christ")
- The present existence and power of "the Kingdom"
- The Ultimate redemption of the cosmos
- the authority of the Bible
- The sacred relationship between Christ and the church

[whoosanightowl]

Scott said:

I think you need a more intelligent saying at the bottom of your posts to promote your theological assertion that there is no God, only random, chance.

Scott, I just want to clarify something here. I am NOT an atheist, therefore I don't believe there is NO God, just not most God(s), including the Biblical God(s). My position is there may very well be a "first cause" type of "God" being that brought the universe into existence, but that's all. Not an interactive, loving, personal, prayer answering type of God who has plans for our lives and rewards of eternal life for believers. To me that's just pure nonsense.
There's just no evidence to support such a deity, and much to disprove it, such as lack of intervention in the lives of those in this world who are suffering and dying daily from severe malnutrition and horrific disease; lack of protection for children who suffer from abuse and neglect at the hands of those meant to love and protect them; lack of answers to sincere, earnest prayers of the faithful, which have no better results than wishing on a star, etc.
So anyway, I just wanted to clear that up. I am not an atheist, although I admit I'm far closer to that end than to Christianity.

[ScottBarger]

I am not sure I said that. I don't think I did.

[whoosanightowl]

Scott, '
I'm so sorry, I need to be more careful! I was actually quoting Tony. Please forgive me...

[ScottBarger]

No worries!

[tonyenglish7]

One of the more difficult things for me is know when to keep my "theological ponderings" to myself. Since I am a pastor of a church, It behooves me not to shake things up too much. If I weren't a pastor, I think it would be much easier to question different aspects of my faith.

Scott, I was wondering, do you believe that Jesus is the only way to God or do you hold that other roads lead to God as well?

Hi Tony,
I appreciated your comments above to A37. Good job articulating your frame of reference.

Regarding your questions to Scott; I would not presume to speak on his behalf, but I would be very surprised to hear of any Christian who believes there are other ways "to God" beyond Christ. I understand the phrase "to God" can mean different things,but most evangelical Christians would call themselves followers of Christ and his teachings. His teachings leave no gray area or doubt on how to know God. A knowledge and recognition of his blood sacrifice is the only to come to the Father.
Have you had experiences on the contrary?

I know Scott a little, and while he may bit left leaning, he is a Christ follower.

My apologies to the atheists on this thread. I know this conversation is off topic and not within your interests. We can move it to a different thread if needed.

Fonz out...

Thanks brother! Yes, this "universalism" is one of the new tenets of the "Emergent Church" and is coming into the church in droves. In fact, in "Religious Americans: My faith Isn't the only way, Associated Press, June 23, 2008 more then half of EVANGELICALS surveyed, believe that Jesus is not the only way. This is not new to Catholics, Mother Teresa used to say "...we should help a Hindu become a better Hindu, a Muslim becomes a better Muslin, a Catholic become a better Catholic..." The Catholic Church holds to a very clear Universalist doctrine.

This is a central feature in liberal Christianity, and it goes like this. Since Abraham and David are assumed to have been saved and Christ had not been here yet, then that opens the door to others being saved as well, even if they never accepted the offer of Jesus. As long as they are "sincere", in their spirituality.

But as you rightly stated, there is no gray area in the bible. The bible never teaches "sincerity" as an acceptable path. We see that in Acts 10 a very sincere man was sought out by God for being sincere in his prayers. The Holy Spirit sent Peter to go witness to him and he repented, and was baptized. He put his faith in the offer of Jesus because his sincerity was not enough, it was enough to get the offer from God but not enough to save him. If sincerity was enough, why did Peter have to travel there and go through the exercise?

Jesus came to earth and was a very specific dividing line. I can give many many scriptures and teachings out of the scriptures that show the narrow road to God and that is only through confessing Jesus specifically. Even Jesus claimed he would divide families and friends against each other. He promised persecution for believing in him as the only way, and many more things of which I know you agree.

But don't be naive to think that all Christians know this; they are being "progressive" in their attempts to not be "judgmental" and "dogmatic". Is there room for discussion on the judgment? Yes, I believe that those who die in their sins will have less of a severe judgment if they have never heard the gospel. But those who end up being glorified in the Country of Heaven will all have been there via faith in Jesus. BTW, Jesus said, the least in the Kingdom of Heaven will be greater then John the Baptist. And all the events in the old testament occurred for our sake! i.e. believers in Jesus.

Sorry for the long post but this is a vital issue. I still have not heard from Scott and am very curious as to his views?