[HoustonHorn]

Does it seem like looking back on the progression of religion that it's gotten easier to be faithful? I don't mean the belief in a diety, but in the actual requirements of the religion.

For example, look at the fundamental Jews living in Israel. They have to pray at that wall. Well, I assume they have to. I've seen lots of video, but never had it explained to me. And the list of laws and food restrictions seem pretty severe.

Or Islam where they have to pray at a certain time facing a certain direction every day.

And I'm sure there are more examples, but I'm not up on other religions enough to know.

Which brings us to Christianity. The Catholic church, who claims to be the original, requires works to get to Heaven and even if somebody doesn't get there their relatives can perform some sort of task to help them along. Protestent Christianity makes it even easier - believe in Jesus and you'll get to Heaven. You can be labeled a Christian by saying you believe in Jesus. You don't even have to offer proof.

Does it seem like people have been making religion easier as they go. Maybe they got tired of going to church every day so now it's once a week but they'll pray every night. Or they pray over major stuff. Or church only on Holidays.

And could that explain why Christianity is so popular? It seems to be the easiest of the religions. Again, not easy as in the diety to believe in, but the actual requirements to be labeled a Christian.

This post has been edited by HoustonHorn: 23 July 2006 - 08:49 PM

[Llwellyn]

This is a pretty reasonable prediction that would come from a memetic critique of religion; as time progresses, religions become more adapted for their survival and reproduction, and the most successful religions displace less successful religions.

In Christianity, the benefits of holding the thoughts in your head grow as the hell that is escaped gets hotter. The costs of holding the religion fall as "justification" comes by "faith" only and there are no rituals or works necessary.

[OnceConvinced]

Yeah, I think you probably have a point Houstonhorn. People so much want to preach an encouraging message. They want to encourage you to become a christian, make the picture look rosey. I think over the years people have sugar coated a lot of things and have come up with convincing arguments to support what they're preaching. It's probably why there are so many more liberal Christians around than what there used to be.

[Varokhar]

That's very true - many Xians are making Xianity much easier to be a part of. Certainly the Catholic community I grew up in did a fine job of that. All I had to do was breathe to be a good Catholic. It's hard to deny something that doesn't place many heavy burdens on you in the first place.

Then again, Judaism and Is-lame never really were questioned from within their own ranks to the extent Xianity was. There were no Martin Luthers, et al, as far as I know, and if there were, clearly they had little effect on liberalizing those religions. But Xianity has had plenty of them, and plenty of trends in the West have sprouted up which question and deny Xianity. It's just our nature out here to constantly revise and remodel what we have or believe in and Xianity was doomed to face that, eventually. And when you go as low as Xianity, the only way to evolve the religion is toward something better.

[wideawake42]

I'm going to quote Bill Hicks here.

"The reason our institutions, our traditional religions, are all crumbling is because...they're no longer relevant."

Every era of humanity develops something they can believe in. People seem to need something to believe in, something to motivate them, because a lot of people can't yet handle personal responsibility or the idea that we are it, that we are free children of the universe with minds that can imagine anything.

Way back in the very beginning of humanity, when people worshipped fertility goddesses, what was that about? It was about the fact that we were a new race, we hadn't overpopulated the earth yet, and we desired to procreate and to expand. Then we moved on to sun/moon gods, what was that for? Well, we'd developed agriculture, we needed light to grow our crops and continue surviving. Polytheism, things like Hinduism and the great ancient Greco-Roman gods? We needed new explanations. We were beginning to explore philosophy, the "how things work", the "why". It's raining outside. Why is it raining? Oh, there must be a rain god. Etc.

Judaism came along, what else was going on in the world around that time? Laws. We had developed laws. We realized that law was necessary for the formation of society. Hammurabi's code, written about 1792 BCE, about two hundred years before Moses came along and founded Judaism. And so Judaism is shrouded with law, with new ideas about good and evil, and how to make amends for past wrongdoings.

In between Judaism and Christianity, we got more philosophy, more mysticism, the Bhagavad-gita, Taoism, Plato, and the I Ching. Song of Solomon was written around 350 years before the birth of Christ. We began to realize that love was a driving force which governed us. Love was the most powerful thing we could imagine, so we began to equate it with God. Judaism was continually being persecuted and was in desperate need of reform, at least in the eyes of some of its followers. Is it any wonder they latched on to Christ's message with such force? They were tired of waiting for the prophesied messiah, and they saw one that kind of fit the bill, and what's more, he took away the burden of all the blood sacrifices that were previously required. Animal sacrifice was getting a bit crude already at this point.

Islam really came along as an Arabic alternative to Christianity, and those three main monotheistic religions have continued up until this point.

We are now developing new ways of understanding things via science such that we no longer require a supernatural explanation for things. We are developing a complex society in which good and evil are no longer black and white laws but many shades of grey to be debated upon. The need for spirituality is still strong within us, and many people have turned to various New Age beliefs. But the makeshift Gods of the past are indeed "no longer relevant" and one can expect new and more expandable philosophies to be born in centuries to come, as soon as people are ready to let go of these time-worn cherished beliefs.

[chaz]

HoustonHorn, on Jul 23 2006, 07:48 PM, said:

You can be labeled a Christian by saying you believe in Jesus. You don't even have to offer proof.

Yes, one can be labeled anything he desires, but it’s the furnace of adversity or trial that proves any label to be true.

As far as offering proof, I believe you will see proof of someone claiming to be something when hardship or testing arrives; its what the person does next that proves or disproves his tag.

In the end, when that person stands before God, it will be at that time when solid proof of his Christian label will be demanded.

HoustonHorn, on Jul 23 2006, 07:48 PM, said:

It seems to be the easiest of the religions. Again, not easy as in the diety to believe in, but the actual requirements to be labeled a Christian.

Again, being labeled something and actually performing under that label are two different things. I can claim to be Christian to all my neighbors, even offering minimal proof by going to church on Sundays, but when my neighbor overhears me curse, or sees me checking out porn, or partying down with a couple of suitcases of brew and some babes, I am not proving my label as a Christian.

However, if I am claiming to be a Christian and my life proves that I am, even offering evidence of a changed life, one would have to conclude that I am indeed a true Christian as I have labeled myself to be.


You state that Christianity is the easiest of all religions, and in one sense you are correct, for all it takes to gain eternal life is surrendering your life to God by asking Jesus into your heart as your Lord and Savior.

But on the other hand, if Christianity is as easy as you claim it to be and getting to heaven is included with that simplicity, then why do all of you here reject it? Could it be that it is extremely difficult for you to submit to a Lord of your life? So I see it in that sense, very difficult.


chaz

[snookums]

chaz, on Jul 26 2006, 01:36 PM, said:

HoustonHorn, on Jul 23 2006, 07:48 PM, said:

You can be labeled a Christian by saying you believe in Jesus. You don't even have to offer proof.

Yes, one can be labeled anything he desires, but it’s the furnace of adversity or trial that proves any label to be true.

As far as offering proof, I believe you will see proof of someone claiming to be something when hardship or testing arrives; its what the person does next that proves or disproves his tag.

In the end, when that person stands before God, it will be at that time when solid proof of his Christian label will be demanded.

HoustonHorn, on Jul 23 2006, 07:48 PM, said:

It seems to be the easiest of the religions. Again, not easy as in the diety to believe in, but the actual requirements to be labeled a Christian.

Again, being labeled something and actually performing under that label are two different things. I can claim to be Christian to all my neighbors, even offering minimal proof by going to church on Sundays, but when my neighbor overhears me curse, or sees me checking out porn, or partying down with a couple of suitcases of brew and some babes, I am not proving my label as a Christian.

However, if I am claiming to be a Christian and my life proves that I am, even offering evidence of a changed life, one would have to conclude that I am indeed a true Christian as I have labeled myself to be.


You state that Christianity is the easiest of all religions, and in one sense you are correct, for all it takes to gain eternal life is surrendering your life to God by asking Jesus into your heart as your Lord and Savior.

But on the other hand, if Christianity is as easy as you claim it to be and getting to heaven is included with that simplicity, then why do all of you here reject it? Could it be that it is extremely difficult for you to submit to a Lord of your life? So I see it in that sense, very difficult.


chaz

Is that why christian's love to be persecuted so much - its the only way they can think of to 'prove' they are christian? Its set them apart from the rest of the world....

No thanks! I'm off hacking bit off myself today.

Can you offer me something other than 'heaven'.......because that's is way too easy - something you cannot prove exists. btw... YOu believe it ..so you prove it.

This post has been edited by snookums: 26 July 2006 - 01:00 AM

[HoustonHorn]

Quote

But on the other hand, if Christianity is as easy as you claim it to be and getting to heaven is included with that simplicity, then why do all of you here reject it? Could it be that it is extremely difficult for you to submit to a Lord of your life? So I see it in that sense, very difficult.

I, like many others here, have in the past "submitted to a Lord of [my] life". Just because I do not now believe in the Christian god doesn't mean that I never have. In fact, one of the most difficult things I have gone through is the period between calling myself a Christian and calling myself an agnostic. You make the assumption that I chose to be agnostic because it's easy, when it was extremely difficult mentally to make the transition.

It makes me wonder though how many people that call themselves Christian are just doing so to fit in and how many actually believe on day they'll literally be in front of God.

And as far as your comment about how people react to adversity and hardships defining their labels I believe I am more "Christ-like" since becoming agnostic. I no longer look down on other people because of their beliefs. I no longer hate others because they choose not to believe in the same god as I did. And I know you're going to have problems with the word "hate", but that's what it is. You can label your actions all you want, but it's the actions that define love vs. hate. And Christians tend not to show love to other groups. Sure, they may show their best side when dealing with other groups. But I've seen more hatred, racism, and prejudice towards other religions among groups of Christians than I have from any other groups. And telling someone their beliefs are wrong is prejudicial no matter your reasoning.

Just for the record, here is my current belief. If there turns out to be a day when I have to stand in front of a creator and justify my life I will be more confident telling Him that I deserve to get in because of how I lived my life rather than telling Him I deserve to get in just because I believe in Jesus so all my "sins" don't really matter.

[Vigile]

I wish they would just reduce it to a pill; taken once, saved, and forgotten. Then we could get this religious foolishness behind us.

[chaz]

snookums, on Jul 25 2006, 11:57 PM, said:

Is that why christian's love to be persecuted so much - its the only way they can think of to 'prove' they are christian? Its set them apart from the rest of the world....

Thank you for your response.

No, what sets apart the Christian from the rest of the world is the moral life Christ has called His followers to live, and the love, joy, and peace within each believer. Admittedly, some Christians do not exemplify these characteristics.

snookums, on Jul 25 2006, 11:57 PM, said:

Can you offer me something other than 'heaven'.......because that's is way too easy

Yeah, how about hell? And it is much easier to arrive at that destination than it is the alternative.

snookums, on Jul 25 2006, 11:57 PM, said:

something you cannot prove exists. btw... YOu believe it ..so you prove it.

Atheists are continually crying, “Prove it, prove it, and prove it!!”

Well, snookums, why don’t you prove “heaven” does not exist—can you do that???


chaz

[chaz]

HoustonHorn, on Jul 26 2006, 05:40 AM, said:

I, like many others here, have in the past "submitted to a Lord of [my] life". Just because I do not now believe in the Christian god doesn't mean that I never have.

You say you have submitted to a Lord of your life, but it is obvious you have never made Christ the Lord of your life. There is a difference between a life-changing submission and calling yourself a Christian.

HoustonHorn, on Jul 26 2006, 05:40 AM, said:

It makes me wonder though how many people that call themselves Christian are just doing so to fit in and how many actually believe on day they'll literally be in front of God.

You have a very, very good point, HoustonHorn. That day will definitely be a rude awakening for many a so-called believer.

HoustonHorn, on Jul 26 2006, 05:40 AM, said:

I no longer look down on other people because of their beliefs. I no longer hate others because they choose not to believe in the same god as I did.

This is a very twisted perception of biblical Christianity. All men are created equal and God loves each and every man, just because one is a Christian and one is not does not make one better than the other.

Now, I cannot speak on behalf of Calvinists who believe that some are chosen to go to heaven and some are chosen to go to hell. This kind of perversion of the love of God has given Christianity a bad name. But this should not disuade one from searching for the truth of a God and entering into a personal relationship with Him.

HoustonHorn, on Jul 26 2006, 05:40 AM, said:

And Christians tend not to show love to other groups. Sure, they may show their best side when dealing with other groups. But I've seen more hatred, racism, and prejudice towards other religions among groups of Christians than I have from any other groups.

Man! It sounds like you’ve been around some rotten Christians!! Unfortunately, many so-called Christians today do not live up to the standards of the bible. I wish I could excuse the bad ones, but I cannot. All I can do with a statement like yours is assure you that there are some very loving, kind, generous, and gracious Christians out there, and I truly hope you can experience their friendships.

One more thing that I might add, Jesus did ask a rhetorical question in Luke 18:8 that when He comes back, will He find faith on the earth? Jesus also stated in Matthew 24:12 that because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold. I truly believe you have described what Jesus was speaking about on these two occasions.

HoustonHorn, on Jul 26 2006, 05:40 AM, said:

And telling someone their beliefs are wrong is prejudicial no matter your reasoning.

No it is not, and let me explain why.

I would like to ask you, HoustonHorn, do you think Jesus and the writers of the New Testament believed in absolutes? Do you think there are absolutes? What I mean is, there has to be an absolute truth for everything in existence, and who better to represent the truth than the Creator of the universe, right? If Jesus proved who He was and none was able to find fault in Him, His character is proven trustworthy and reliable.

If Jesus (the Creator), who was absolutely true in everything He said and did, set apart believing in He alone for salvation and the only way in which man can gain eternal life, then this is not prejudicial but only establishing the truth.

Therefore, since this truth has been recorded and canonized for all to read, one can legitimately declare to the Mormon or to the Jehovah’s Witness or to the Atheist that if they do not believe in the Jesus of the bible they will not gain eternal life. This is not prejudicial but it is stating a fact. This absolute fact was established by God Himself.

HoustonHorn, on Jul 26 2006, 05:40 AM, said:

Just for the record, here is my current belief. If there turns out to be a day when I have to stand in front of a creator and justify my life I will be more confident telling Him that I deserve to get in because of how I lived my life rather than telling Him I deserve to get in just because I believe in Jesus so all my "sins" don't really matter.

I completely understand what you’re saying, but I have a feeling you know the bible says the opposite! I know you wouldn’t want a load of bible verses quoted to you, but please allow me to quote one, Acts 4:12: “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”

Salvation is not gained through you, or any other, it is only gained through submission and trust in the Jesus of the bible. If you’re standing before Jesus and you’re telling Him you deserve to get in because of how you lived your life, why should He let you in if He has already told you that you cannot enter without salvation through Him?!

One thing you must understand is that your “sins” really do matter, for this is the reason Jesus came and died upon a cross, rising from the grave three days later. If your personal sins do not matter and your entrance into eternal paradise is garnered by your own justification, then Jesus died needlessly and every person who has believed in Christ has believed in vain.

Do you really expect to hear God say, “Well, come on in HoustonHorn, Jesus didn’t really need to die for you, you were too good for Him!”


chaz

[HoustonHorn]

Quote

Yeah, how about hell? And it is much easier to arrive at that destination than it is the alternative.

Personally, the threat of Hell made it easier to dismiss the Christian God. If whoever is deciding my eternal fate is that petty that not making one claim caused me to be punished forever, that is not someone that I want to worship.

If I were to base my belief system on the fear of where I might go after I die I would probably be Islamic - from what I understand their Hell is much worse and their Heaven is much better (for men only, though).

Quote

Atheists are continually crying, “Prove it, prove it, and prove it!!”

Well, snookums, why don’t you prove “heaven” does not exist—can you do that???

Burden of proof is set up so that those with the claim need to make the proof, not the other way around. Look at our courts. It's the prosecution making the claim that needs to prove guilt, not the other way around. Same idea, it should be the Christians proving the existence of God, not the other way around.

Why don't you disprove Allah, Zeus, Odin, Santa Claus, and the Tooth Fairy (without using the Bible) and then we'll talk about why the burden of proof for God falls upon you.

Quote

No, what sets apart the Christian from the rest of the world is the moral life Christ has called His followers to live, and the love, joy, and peace within each believer. Admittedly, some Christians do not exemplify these characteristics.

So, if we take the definition of a Christian as somebody that has decided to follow Christ; how are these calling themselves Christian but not following Christ going to end up? Are you going to use the "not a true Christian" argument? If you go down that road please tell us how we can recognize a true Christian so that we can ignore those that are not. Obviously we cannot just use the fact that they call themselves Christian.

[HoustonHorn]

Quote

You say you have submitted to a Lord of your life, but it is obvious you have never made Christ the Lord of your life. There is a difference between a life-changing submission and calling yourself a Christian.

You know nothing about me other than what's on this site, so you have no ground to make the claim that it is "obvious [I] have never made Christ the Lord of [my] life". You are free to make any assumptions based on the information on this site you feel are warranted, but whether I truly had a "life-changing" submission is not something open to assumption.

Let me tell you about the day I was "saved". I walked to the front of the aisle and told the pastor that I wanted to trust Jesus and would like to be baptised. He asked me all the questions about whether I accepted Jesus as my savior and that sort of thing, which I of course agreed with. For the next 20 minutes I was literally shaking, which I attributed to the Holy Spirit coming in to my body.

And it wasn't a snap decision. At the time I believe I actually made the "submission" a week before after several weeks of "the Holy Spirit working on me".

Looking back it was the fact that church members took part in the Lord's Supper while non-members sat at the back of the church. It wasn't set up so that they just asked non-members to pass the crackers without taking one; they actually made us get up and go to the back. I believe my mental state was altered because I wanted to be part of the group.

And before you pull a quote out of that and tell me I wasn't truly saved, read the rest. At that time I truly believed I was saved and truly felt that God had come into my life for a reason. Church was no longer an option, but the way I wanted to spend my Sundays and Wednesday nights. I was as certain of my salvation as I assume you are of yours.

Quote

This is a very twisted perception of biblical Christianity. All men are created equal and God loves each and every man, just because one is a Christian and one is not does not make one better than the other.

And yet, it's the Christianity that I have been exposed to.

I respect that you feel that being a Christian doesn't make you better than one who isn't, but that's only in words; a label to go back to the original post. A Christian believes they are going to Heaven and any non-Christians are going to Hell. By definition those that are going to Heaven are better, or more loved, than those going to Hell.

Quote

Now, I cannot speak on behalf of Calvinists

Which denomination should I pick? How am I supposed to know? And you can't tell me that God will lead me to where I supposed to be because He leads some people to Baptist churches, some to Catholic churches, some to Jewish temples, some to Islamic mosques, some to the forest to worship trees, and some to their couch to watch football on Sunday mornings. If He were to truly lead me to a church, everybody in the world would be a member of that church; or at least the same denomination.

I was Baptist during my "Christian walk" and went to a Methodist church a few times growing up.

Quote

Man! It sounds like you’ve been around some rotten Christians!! Unfortunately, many so-called Christians today do not live up to the standards of the bible. I wish I could excuse the bad ones, but I cannot. All I can do with a statement like yours is assure you that there are some very loving, kind, generous, and gracious Christians out there, and I truly hope you can experience their friendships.

I see it as being around some rotten people. And I believe you when you tell me that there are loving, kind, generous, and gracious Christians. But the same can be said of any group. I've met loving, kind, generous, and gracious Muslims, Christians, agnostics, and atheists - and those are just the ones whose religion (or lack of) I knew. I'm not going to ask a person's faith before I decide if they are loving, kind, generous, or gracious. That decision is going to be based on how they act, not on where they sit Sunday mornings.

Quote

Therefore, since this truth has been recorded and canonized for all to read, one can legitimately declare to the Mormon or to the Jehovah’s Witness or to the Atheist that if they do not believe in the Jesus of the bible they will not gain eternal life. This is not prejudicial but it is stating a fact. This absolute fact was established by God Himself.

Just because something is recorded does not make it fact, no matter how many people believe it. As a child I read fiction books that I truly believed were fact. The Book of Mormon is as valid of a record of history as the rest of the Bible, but you dismiss it because it was not included in the original canon. Why does that make it less valid? How do you know that God inspired Paul to write his parts of the Bible but didn't inspire Joseph Smith?

Quote

You have a very, very good point, HoustonHorn. That day will definitely be a rude awakening for many a so-called believer.

How am I supposed to know whether I was truly taken over by the Holy Spirit or just taken over by a church? A lot of so-called Christians are going to be wrong, so how are you supposed to know which group to join? They all believe they are acting in God's will.

Quote

I completely understand what you’re saying, but I have a feeling you know the bible says the opposite! I know you wouldn’t want a load of bible verses quoted to you, but please allow me to quote one, Acts 4:12: “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”

Yes I know the Bible doesn't support my beliefs, and I really appreciate you not quoting many verses from the Bible. It would be like a Mormon quoting the Book of Mormon or a Muslim quoting the Quran to you to prove their God is the right God. It's just not effective.

Quote

One thing you must understand is that your “sins” really do matter, for this is the reason Jesus came and died upon a cross, rising from the grave three days later. If your personal sins do not matter and your entrance into eternal paradise is garnered by your own justification, then Jesus died needlessly and every person who has believed in Christ has believed in vain.

So you're saying your sins are not as bad as mine because you believe Jesus died for yours and I don't? If you have a lustful thought about someone on TV it's less sinful than if I do it?

Quote

Do you really expect to hear God say, “Well, come on in HoustonHorn, Jesus didn’t really need to die for you, you were too good for Him!”

No, I figure he'll use my real name :grin:

What I really expect is that one day I'll close my eyes, stop breathing, and that'll be it. Same idea as years ago when I started breathing and opened my eyes.

[aynalhub]

HoustonHorn, on Jul 28 2006, 10:26 AM, said:

If I were to base my belief system on the fear of where I might go after I die I would probably be Islamic - from what I understand their Hell is much worse and their Heaven is much better (for men only, though).

Yet another lie of the 19th century arabists which has yet to die. I love everything else you're saying but that little men-only thing is a myth. And the 72 virgins thing is a bad mix of different sources and things. Both men and women are promised 'companions' and every reward, in the same measure.

[Vigile]

chaz, on Jul 27 2006, 09:19 PM, said:

Atheists are continually crying, “Prove it, prove it, and prove it!!”

Well, snookums, why don’t you prove “heaven” does not exist—can you do that???


chaz

I'll take that challenge if you will agree to prove that the tooth fairy does not exist. You go first.

[HoustonHorn]

Quote

Yet another lie of the 19th century arabists which has yet to die. I love everything else you're saying but that little men-only thing is a myth. And the 72 virgins thing is a bad mix of different sources and things. Both men and women are promised 'companions' and every reward, in the same measure.

Admittedly I know very little about the Islamic faith, and am going off of what I've heard and read from other sources. I stand corrected :grin:

[droskey]

HoustonHorn

Quote

And telling someone their beliefs are wrong is prejudicial no matter your reasoning.

I think that you probably meant to say that telling someone that their beliefs are wrong is a form of bigotry. I have to disagree with this sentiment. Simply disagreeing with someone and vocalizing that disagreement is not bigotry. Nor is it prejudicial, as the person may have very good reasons for holding the opinions that they do. I mean, if I hear someone make the statement that the earth is not round but is really flat and I tell them that they are mistaken, I am not being prejudicial or a bigot. They ARE mistaken according to all of the information that I am aware of.

I think, probably what you are trying to get at is that Christians don't really have any more information than the rest of us. But that fact doesn't keep them from asserting that they are right and everyone else is wrong. As far as we are able to tell, they have no reason to make this assertion. So, on that level, I suppose that they are being prejudicial (although, they clearly don't see it that way). However, they aren't being prejudicial by merely telling someone that his beliefs are wrong. They are prejudicial because they are making that judgement on faith alone without substantial evidence to back it up.

I guess I'm being a little nitpicky, but the statement kind of jumped out at me and so I thought that it might be important.

Cheers.

[Checkmate]

I wouldn't say that it's getting "easier". It has ALWAYS been "easy" being "religious". Just being born into a religious family is enough to "be" religious. What is "hard" is escaping the religion! (As we ALL know around here.) It isn't "easy" being an unbeliever, because you will suffer persecution (ridicule, prejudice, discrimination, physical/emotional/psychological abuse and even DEATH) just for declaring your doubt or unbelief.

Anyone can claim to be a believer in any faith and get away with it. Not much proof is ever demanded. (Any ONE of us could claim to be "Christian" or "Muslim" today, and NO ONE would doubt our word.) Just go along with the status quo, go through the motions and you'll be fine. It has always been that "easy".

And if common sense isn't enough evidence, for those of you who desire/demand "proof", you can look here, at this site
http://www.religious....org/christ.htm for more information.

[Notblinded]

chaz, on Jul 25 2006, 10:36 PM, said:

But on the other hand, if Christianity is as easy as you claim it to be and getting to heaven is included with that simplicity, then why do all of you here reject it?

Probably the same reason that you reject all the other religions. The question should be, why we don't choose it, then you will probably get some insightful answers. It's all in the way you ask. When you ask why we reject it, it puts a negative connation on us and a positive one on you. If you ask why we no longer choose it, it is seen as a neutral and genuine question.

I would agree with droskey in stating the when the truth is being argued, it is not arrogant or being prejudicial, but what you are arguing has not been proven to be the Truth™. You are an exclusivist that holds your way is the only way. If there is a God, this Being would not be favorable towards any one group. You set yourself above others by claiming you have the only way to God. You are saying that everyone can get to heaven, but only if they are Christians. Why add that little stipulation? Does it give your ego a boost?

[chaz]

notblindedbytheblight, on Jul 28 2006, 12:03 PM, said:

chaz, on Jul 25 2006, 10:36 PM, said:

But on the other hand, if Christianity is as easy as you claim it to be and getting to heaven is included with that simplicity, then why do all of you here reject it?

The question should be, why we don't choose it, then you will probably get some insightful answers.

Thank you for your response.

It isn’t necessary for me to ask why you don’t choose Christianity because I already know your answers. Therefore, I stand by my original question, if Christianity is as easy as you make it seem, why do you reject it?

notblindedbytheblight, on Jul 28 2006, 12:03 PM, said:

When you ask why we reject it, it puts a negative connation on us and a positive one on you.

Absolutely. And this is in fact what God has said, that whoever rejects Jesus will not see eternal life, and God’s wrath remains on him. If this doesn’t carry a negative connotation then I don’t know what does.

When you choose to reject Jesus and the wonderful life He offers, you are keeping yourself in a negative and unfavorable position with God.

notblindedbytheblight, on Jul 28 2006, 12:03 PM, said:

You are an exclusivist that holds your way is the only way.

No, I am holding that God’s way is the only way (John 14:6); and yes, this is exclusivity….And I’m referring to the God of the bible, by the way. I have never asserted that one should follow me, but that one should follow Jesus.

Whether you like it or not salvation is exclusive, if it weren’t then man would be free to do as he pleased with no consequences in the end.

Tell me, does the following statement from Jesus explain exclusivity or a common salvation for all?

Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it (Matt 7:13-14).

notblindedbytheblight, on Jul 28 2006, 12:03 PM, said:

If there is a God, this Being would not be favorable towards any one group.

How do you know this statement to be true?? You reject the God of the universe yet you assume to speak on His behalf??

You Atheists are so extremely presumptuous its not even funny.

notblindedbytheblight, on Jul 28 2006, 12:03 PM, said:

You set yourself above others by claiming you have the only way to God.

In my very few posts here (less than 12 so far), show me one place, just one where I have set myself above any other person.

I also have never claimed that I have the only way to God. If you read through what I have posted so far, you will clearly see that I have ONLY stated that Jesus is the way to God. And again, I’m referring to the Jesus of the bible.

Your statement is presuming that I fall into the category you have placed me in.

notblindedbytheblight, on Jul 28 2006, 12:03 PM, said:

You are saying that everyone can get to heaven, but only if they are Christians.

Jesus has stated that if anyone desires to gain eternal life he must believe and accept His way of salvation and no other. The term ‘Christian’ only refers to one who follows Christ (from the Greek, Christianos).

notblindedbytheblight, on Jul 28 2006, 12:03 PM, said:

Why add that little stipulation? Does it give your ego a boost?

Who is adding a stipulation?!! Where have I exhibited any kind of egotism??

Let me tell you that God is the one who has added the stipulation, the condition, and the requirement that if a person does not accept Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior that person cannot gain eternal life!!

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him (John 3:36).


chaz