Question For Christians About Biblical Inerrancy

[Phanta]

I appreciate the post P....in the course of debate over the last couple years, relationships have been made...some good, some pretty darn good, and some bad. Certainly it would be nice to have some of these realtionships develop into really good friendships, but the difference of belief certainly is a factor for further development.

 

I hear you saying in your analogy something like, "Doc, if you use that particular medicine, it will kill me". Is this close?

 

That is it, End.

 

Of course, we are not talking killing me here, we are talking separation (which does feel like a wound when pressed into awareness). Your use of certain Evangelizing methods on me (and many others here) drives us farther apart. What you're doing right here, right now in this post, has brought us just a little closer together again. Not because you agree, but because I feel understood. Even if you disagree with me, I feel like I am me in this dynamic, not a construct of your imagination or your belief system, not a project for you to fix or change, not a stepping stone in your agenda.

 

Thank you.

 

Phanta

[Sconnor]

Oh boy end; we've certainly come a long way -- haven't we?

 

Remember way back when, where you deliberately tried to deceive me with your divine powers of E.S.P.?

 

"I think your name begins with an S......."

 

"I feel your name is Scott?"

 

"Aren't you intrigued how I knew your name?"

 

I was on to you, at the get go. You're a conniving little bullshit artist, just like the little pricks who supposedly speak to the dead. They too insanely pretend to "know" things -- like names. They too use the same fraudulent techniques you employed. It was so patently obvious that you were lying through your delusional teeth -- it was almost comical, if it wasn't so pathetic.

 

And to add insult to injury, you decided to construct an even more deluded scheme by coupling our supposed divine coincidences and supposed connections with your powers of E.S.P. to mislead me into believing god had some "eerie" reason for bringing us together to discuss issues.

 

But when you met with my bullheadedness, where I relentlessly challenged your outlandish claims and bullshit -- ALL of a sudden your extraordinary claim that god brought us together to discuss, went flying out the door. Your fraudulent scheme back-fired and you had to bail.

 

Your screwy mind constructed a fantasy where you believed god brought us together to converse.

 

You considered yourself ordained by god to help me, fix me, point out my psychological flaws, or some other ulterior motive but ALL you were really doing was throwing darts at a dart board -- seeing if anything would stick. And NOTHING did.

 

Additionally, you finally realized that you were over your head, trying to deal with a person who is suffering the immeasurable misery of having their son die.

 

You finally came to the conclusion that you were morbidly ill-equipped to deal with a person who will NOT gladly lap up your shitty church platitudes and your warped view of reality, as it pertains to a parent who experienced the most devastating, soul-ripping, blow in their lives -- the death of their child -- coupled with ALL the complexities and variables of a loss of that magnitude.

 

If god ordained you to deal with me -- you and god have done a shitty-ass job.

 

Which should tell you something...

 

God had absolutely nothing to do with us communicating...

 

...that you conjured up the whole thing and and attributed the coincidences and connections to a divine spirit, when in reality it was NOTHING but your stunted imagination.

 

But will the deluded, end, recognize this? Will he be ashamed?

 

Will he -- for once in his life -- be honest and come clean? Hell no -- he's too deluded for that.

 

And his only recourse is to bury his head in the sand.

 

 

It is really quite pathetic that you will NOT address the finer points of my arguments in my last few posts.

 

Later on when you feel "intrigued" by one of my posts -- the issues you did NOT address will inevitably be brought up again.

 

Which by all accounts is just a big waste of time.

 

So why don't you be a big boy and fully address my posts, now -- so we can avoid wasting all that time, in the future.

 

#1409, #1410, #1412, & #1454 needs to be addressed......

 

Patiently waiting.....................

 

--S.

[rayskidude]

That's the beauty of a secular society. We should be able to live together. We might not agree, but we should allow each other to have different views.

 

To the artist formerly known as Han Solo, I ask; Where in the New Testamant would you go to show that Christians are not called to live together peacably with those with whom we disagree?

[Ouroboros]

That's the beauty of a secular society. We should be able to live together. We might not agree, but we should allow each other to have different views.

 

To the artist formerly known as Han Solo, I ask; Where in the New Testamant would you go to show that Christians are not called to live together peacably with those with whom we disagree?

Did I ever say they Christians couldn't?

 

I think Christians can, but it takes a certain kind of personality to do it. Some Christians can't, and it's not because of their religion, but because of their fear of people questioning their faith. (Just look at some of the Southern states where being atheist is feared as cholera.)

 

But again, it's mostly in the secular society you can see this be realized.

 

According to the Bible, Christians shouldn't get involved too much in politics because supposedly the leaders are put there by God and not by man.

 

My response to End3 was to point out that it's wonderful that he and I can disagree and yet not kill each other in religious fervor.

 

Or do you have a different view?

[rayskidude]

Rayskidude says >> To the artist formerly known as Han Solo, I ask; Where in the New Testamant would you go to show that Christians are not called to live together peacably with those with whom we disagree?

 

Did I ever say they Christians couldn't? I think Christians can, but it takes a certain kind of personality to do it. Some Christians can't, and it's not because of their religion, but because of their fear of people questioning their faith. (Just look at some of the Southern states where being atheist is feared as cholera.)

 

I wouldn't classify their response as abject fear - though there would be some fear that undue influence might be foisted upon their chlidren by atheists - whom they would regard as inherently immoral (and this is not without warrant, BTW). Many Christians, unfortunately, don't really believe in the sovereignty of God. In their love and zeal for truth and holiness, they lose sight of the fact of the parable of the Prodigal Son and that God saved Nebuchadnezzar, or that nothing or nobody can thwart God's plan and purposes.

 

Now - they are right to be concerned that some worldly influences will lead some of their loved ones to a destructive lifestyle that will incur both physical harm and damage to relationships >> but ultimately, God will draw His children to Himself - and He may well use chastisement. So they want to keep their loved ones from what they know will not really deliver on its promises - namely, the atheist philosphy.

 

But again, it's mostly in the secular society you can see this be realized. According to the Bible, Christians shouldn't get involved too much in politics because supposedly the leaders are put there by God and not by man.

 

I can only disagree with this statement >> as there are a plethora of examples throughout history of Christians reaching out to folks of other religions. Even today, there are multiplied dozens of Christian groups in Haiti - Christians who've donated vacation or work time, supported by Christians who've donated much $$ and time in prayer. World Relief continues its efforts to find people in refugee camps all over the globe and bring them to the USA, where Christian familes and churches welcome & acclimate them to life in America.

 

Secular societies - such as the USSR, Red China (an even China on the 1800's), Albania, Yugoslavia, French Revolution, etc - well, history has shown that these distinctly secular societies have persecuted religion - as a threat to their BENEVOLENT (???????) gov't >> and they've killed millions of people in the 20th century.

 

My response to End3 was to point out that it's wonderful that he and I can disagree and yet not kill each other in religious fervor.

 

This is a good thing.

[Ouroboros]

But again, it's mostly in the secular society you can see this be realized. According to the Bible, Christians shouldn't get involved too much in politics because supposedly the leaders are put there by God and not by man.

 

I can only disagree with this statement >> as there are a plethora of examples throughout history of Christians reaching out to folks of other religions. Even today, there are multiplied dozens of Christian groups in Haiti - Christians who've donated vacation or work time, supported by Christians who've donated much $$ and time in prayer. World Relief continues its efforts to find people in refugee camps all over the globe and bring them to the USA, where Christian familes and churches welcome & acclimate them to life in America.

False analogy.

 

What individual Christians do is not the same as what a Christian government would do.

 

Secular societies - such as the USSR, Red China (an even China on the 1800's), Albania, Yugoslavia, French Revolution, etc - well, history has shown that these distinctly secular societies have persecuted religion - as a threat to their BENEVOLENT (???????) gov't >> and they've killed millions of people in the 20th century.

Obviously you don't know what the word "secular" means. It's a government or social structure where religion is not in control, but it does not mean it's a government or society where religion is outlawed.

 

America is a secular society (or supposed to be).

 

Turkey is a secular society.

 

Europe is secular.

 

China, USSR, and other communist countries were not secular in that sense. A secular society allow religion to exist and even flourish. Secular means that society has different religious groups, but not one of them is in total control.

 

So your comparison is again between apples and oranges. You're basically saying that America (secular society) is bad because Soviet was bad (communist society).

 

As a word, "secular" means "worldly." In other words, something which is based on the here-and-know known things about this world. Not dogma. Not a specific religious extremism. Not a political or ideological extremism either. But an open society which allows all to co-exist.

 

I think it was you who made the claim once that the majority of Christians in America are nominal Christians and not true Christians. Or let's call them for what they are, worldly Christians, or in another word, secular Christians. So if the majority is secular in America, what would you call America?

[Kuroikaze]

I wouldn't classify their response as abject fear - though there would be some fear that undue influence might be foisted upon their chlidren by atheists - whom they would regard as inherently immoral (and this is not without warrant, BTW).

 

It IS without warrant. 100% totally without warrant.

 

Don't look everyone, Rays bigotry is showing

 

 

Here is your post restated with ONE word changed.

 

though there would be some fear that undue influence might be foisted upon their chlidren by blacks - whom they would regard as inherently immoral (and this is not without warrant, BTW).

 

Does this seem like a horrible thing to say? It should. Now ask yourself why it is that you would be verbally assaulted by nearly everyone for saying this, in nearly any church, but your (very similar) statement will rarely get anything but a nod of agreement.

 

Now do you understand why so many of us find Christians frustratingly impossible to deal with?

We are one of the only minority groups in this country for which it is still socially acceptable to bash.

[bornagainathiest]

A quick note to Ray.

 

Please don't forget that the question I put to you on January 26 is still awaiting an answer.

 

Thanks.

 

BAA.

[oddbird1963]

Don't look everyone, Rays bigotry is showing

 

 

Here is your post restated with ONE word changed.

 

though there would be some fear that undue influence might be foisted upon their chlidren by blacks - whom they would regard as inherently immoral (and this is not without warrant, BTW).

 

Does this seem like a horrible thing to say? It should. Now ask yourself why it is that you would be verbally assaulted by nearly everyone for saying this, in nearly any church, but your (very similar) statement will rarely get anything but a nod of agreement.

 

Now do you understand why so many of us find Christians frustratingly impossible to deal with?

We are one of the only minority groups in this country for which it is still socially acceptable to bash.

 

Nice approach!

[rayskidude]

I wouldn't classify their response as abject fear - though there would be some fear that undue influence might be foisted upon their chlidren by atheists - whom they would regard as inherently immoral (and this is not without warrant, BTW).

 

It IS without warrant. 100% totally without warrant.

 

Don't look everyone, Rays bigotry is showing

 

 

Here is your post restated with ONE word changed.

 

though there would be some fear that undue influence might be foisted upon their chlidren by blacks - whom they would regard as inherently immoral (and this is not without warrant, BTW).

 

Does this seem like a horrible thing to say? It should. Now ask yourself why it is that you would be verbally assaulted by nearly everyone for saying this, in nearly any church, but your (very similar) statement will rarely get anything but a nod of agreement.

 

Now do you understand why so many of us find Christians frustratingly impossible to deal with?

We are one of the only minority groups in this country for which it is still socially acceptable to bash.

 

I cannot believe that you post this as a serious response to what I have said - and what makes you think you can insert words that I have never thought or intended - AND THEN accuse me of wrongdoing.

 

My statement simply acknowledges that some atheists follow their godless logic to its end - and realize that in the absence of God there are no such things as objective morals; certainly Nietschze said as much. Therefore, my statement is that some atheists will foist their mistaken viewpoint on the weaker minds of children in order to take advantage of them.

 

Your statement that what I said is 100% without warrant is patently false. All I need to do is show one instance of one atheist doing such a thing - a very simple and easy exercise.

 

BTW - we are all inherently immoral - Christian, Jew, atheist, Muslim, agnostic, etc. However, that fact about human nature is the reason the LORD Jesus Christ died in our place, on our behalf. His death took the punishment and guilt of our sin - so we can be reconciled to a holy God.

 

Bash atheists? Praytell, where does this dastardly deed occur in the public arena? Atheists are tauted as the "enlightened" scientists; the unbiased secularists of our day, etc etc etc.

 

Take a deep breath, check-in to reality, and RSVP.

[rayskidude]

A quick note to Ray.

Please don't forget that the question I put to you on January 26 is still awaiting an answer.

Thanks.

BAA.

 

I do apologize - plz remind me what the question was - I will attempt a response.

 

To all - I will try to be more regular, sorry for my unannounced hiatus. I appreciate your patience.

[J.W.]

I have just one question for Christians to answer. Why must the bible be the 100% literally true and perfect, inerrant word of god for the bible to have any value to it?

 

 

Thats only for protestants.. and thats because they ditched the authority of the Catholic Church. The Catholics hold that you need priests to decipher the meaning of the Bibles, and the priests views have to be consistant with the pope (a spin from Latin "father"). The pope is supposed to be a living apostle of Christ. Since protestants dont have either authority "church or pope" they put all of it on the Bible

[Shyone]

I cannot believe that you post this as a serious response to what I have said - and what makes you think you can insert words that I have never thought or intended - AND THEN accuse me of wrongdoing.

 

My statement simply acknowledges that some atheists follow their godless logic to its end - and realize that in the absence of God there are no such things as objective morals; certainly Nietschze said as much. Therefore, my statement is that some atheists will foist their mistaken viewpoint on the weaker minds of children in order to take advantage of them.

 

Your statement that what I said is 100% without warrant is patently false. All I need to do is show one instance of one atheist doing such a thing - a very simple and easy exercise.

 

Your statement was much broader than you admit: "upon their chlidren by atheists - whom they would regard as inherently immoral (and this is not without warrant, BTW)."

 

Not "some of whom."

 

His analogy was clear and to the point. You and others feel free to accuse atheists in particular of immorality, while applying this same accusation to any other distinguishable group, divided by race or religion, would be bigoted, and therefore the accusation is bigoted. It's just true that you are a bigot.

 

BTW - we are all inherently immoral - Christian, Jew, atheist, Muslim, agnostic, etc. However, that fact about human nature is the reason the LORD Jesus Christ died in our place, on our behalf. His death took the punishment and guilt of our sin - so we can be reconciled to a holy God.

 

Bash atheists? Praytell, where does this dastardly deed occur in the public arena? Atheists are tauted as the "enlightened" scientists; the unbiased secularists of our day, etc etc etc.

 

This is the public arena. Churches are public. George H. W. Bush was not speaking privately when he responded to the question of whether Atheists should be considered citizens. The boy scouts exclusion of atheists is public.

 

And your theology is unique. Jesus died for human nature? No "original sin"? Yeah, that idea is all passé, cliché and old fashioned. And untrue.

 

And if he died for all those people who don't believe in him and never will, what is the point of all that religious baggage? Church, confession, sacraments, human sacrifice, or whatever y'all do on Sundays.

[bornagainathiest]

A quick note to Ray.

Please don't forget that the question I put to you on January 26 is still awaiting an answer.

Thanks.

BAA.

 

I do apologize - plz remind me what the question was - I will attempt a response.

 

To all - I will try to be more regular, sorry for my unannounced hiatus. I appreciate your patience.

 

Ok Ray.

 

I posted this link... http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/MRO/multimedia/mro20091215.html ...and asked you the following question.

 

"Using only YEC geology, please tell us why there is a flood-created canyon on Mars?"

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[Deva]

BTW - we are all inherently immoral - Christian, Jew, atheist, Muslim, agnostic, etc. However, that fact about human nature is the reason the LORD Jesus Christ died in our place, on our behalf. His death took the punishment and guilt of our sin - so we can be reconciled to a holy God.

 

Very neatly sums up one of the major reasons I reject Christianity. The "inherently immoral" view of human nature. That's it, bingo.

[NotBlinded]

BTW - we are all inherently immoral - Christian, Jew, atheist, Muslim, agnostic, etc. However, that fact about human nature is the reason the LORD Jesus Christ died in our place, on our behalf. His death took the punishment and guilt of our sin - so we can be reconciled to a holy God.

 

Very neatly sums up one of the major reasons I reject Christianity. The "inherently immoral" view of human nature. That's it, bingo.

That is a pretty disgusting thing to believe isn't it? And...that somehow, somewhere, someone has to die to clean us from our own nature.

 

It's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Someone else dies so our "inherently immoral" nature can be forgiven. Then why didn't it cure this inherently immoral nature? Why is it still something that is inherited then? It wasn't a cure, it was just a little snake oil that makes us think we are saved, although still immoral.

 

He says that this is a fact about humanity. Well, I guess it is if notions in fantasy are considered facts.

[Deva]

BTW - we are all inherently immoral - Christian, Jew, atheist, Muslim, agnostic, etc. However, that fact about human nature is the reason the LORD Jesus Christ died in our place, on our behalf. His death took the punishment and guilt of our sin - so we can be reconciled to a holy God.

 

Very neatly sums up one of the major reasons I reject Christianity. The "inherently immoral" view of human nature. That's it, bingo.

That is a pretty disgusting thing to believe isn't it? And...that somehow, somewhere, someone has to die to clean us from our own nature.

 

It's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Someone else dies so our "inherently immoral" nature can be forgiven. Then why didn't it cure this inherently immoral nature? Why is it still something that is inherited then? It wasn't a cure, it was just a little snake oil that makes us think we are saved, although still immoral.

 

He says that this is a fact about humanity. Well, I guess it is if notions in fantasy are considered facts.

 

 

It IS a disgusting thing to believe and it must color your view of your fellow human beings. How do you know who you are dealing with has been "cleansed" or is still a disgusting corrupt, immoral sinner? I mean you just meet someone at work or at the store, or something, someone you don't know well.

 

Don't you have to judge people on this level all the time? Don't you have to assume they are immoral from the outset until you find out differently? How can anyone live this way?

 

Furthermore, how do you ever have the certainty that you are forgiven and clean? You know, Christians don't look or for the most part act differently than everyone else. What a bunch of crap all of it is.

[NotBlinded]

It IS a disgusting thing to believe and it must color your view of your fellow human beings. How do you know who you are dealing with has been "cleansed" or is still a disgusting corrupt, immoral sinner? I mean you just meet someone at work or at the store, or something, someone you don't know well.

 

Don't you have to judge people on this level all the time? Don't you have to assume they are immoral from the outset until you find out differently? How can anyone live this way?

 

Furthermore, how do you ever have the certainty that you are forgiven and clean? You know, Christians don't look or for the most part act differently than everyone else. What a bunch of crap all of it is.

We know for a fact that they think anyone that doesn't accept Jesus is immoral. What would be really, really be funny is to know someone for about five years and having them believe you have accepted Jesus and be your usual loving, moral self and have them find out that you are not a Christian.

 

Ok, well, that may be a little mean (immoral?), but it would teach them a lesson.

 

Actually, most Christians I know don't think non-believers are immoral. How they get around that, I'm not sure.

[Deva]

Actually, most Christians I know don't think non-believers are immoral. How they get around that, I'm not sure.

 

That's right. They don't act as if "sin" is a reality and they don't act as if most of the human population is headed for hell. They can feel free to ignore what their religion says on any other day but Sunday. Bleechh!

 

In fact, I think many do not know or believe what Christianity teaches. Focus on the warm and fuzzy parts and forget the contradictions.

[centauri]

BTW - we are all inherently immoral - Christian, Jew, atheist, Muslim, agnostic, etc. However, that fact about human nature is the reason the LORD Jesus Christ died in our place, on our behalf. His death took the punishment and guilt of our sin - so we can be reconciled to a holy God.

And this is your usual sermonizing, which hasn't been established as true or binding on anyone, agnostic or otherwise.

A human sacrifice doesn't atone for the sin of anyone according to the law of the "holy God" you keep trying to sell as "reality".

 

Bash atheists? Praytell, where does this dastardly deed occur in the public arena? Atheists are tauted as the "enlightened" scientists; the unbiased secularists of our day, etc etc etc.Take a deep breath, check-in to reality, and RSVP.

I suggest you do exactly that.

The radio waves in particular are dominated by Christian operatives that have no problem declaring atheists and agnostics as deluded, lost, wallowing in evil, tools of Satan, liberals, communists, Marxists, Nazis, etc etc.

They pump this propaganda in the public arena 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

They're helped out by Fox News radio and TV operatives such as Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly, to name only a few.

Ann Coulter spews her venom as a regular contributor on these shows, having no problem associating atheism with evil.

Yes indeed, why don't you try checking in with reality.

[Skankboy]

Don't foget Bush saying that atheists shouldn't be considred citizens...

 

[edited for fat-finger typing]

[rayskidude]

BTW - we are all inherently immoral - Christian, Jew, atheist, Muslim, agnostic, etc. However, that fact about human nature is the reason the LORD Jesus Christ died in our place, on our behalf. His death took the punishment and guilt of our sin - so we can be reconciled to a holy God.

 

Very neatly sums up one of the major reasons I reject Christianity. The "inherently immoral" view of human nature. That's it, bingo.

That is a pretty disgusting thing to believe isn't it? And...that somehow, somewhere, someone has to die to clean us from our own nature.

 

It's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Someone else dies so our "inherently immoral" nature can be forgiven. Then why didn't it cure this inherently immoral nature? Why is it still something that is inherited then? It wasn't a cure, it was just a little snake oil that makes us think we are saved, although still immoral.

 

It IS a disgusting thing to believe and it must color your view of your fellow human beings. How do you know who you are dealing with has been "cleansed" or is still a disgusting corrupt, immoral sinner? I mean you just meet someone at work or at the store, or something, someone you don't know well.

 

Don't you have to judge people on this level all the time? Don't you have to assume they are immoral from the outset until you find out differently? How can anyone live this way?

 

Furthermore, how do you ever have the certainty that you are forgiven and clean? You know, Christians don't look or for the most part act differently than everyone else. What a bunch of crap all of it is.

 

Guyz - when the Bible says that all are sinners by nature (inherently immoral) - it does not means that everyone always acts in an immoral manner. God has given to each a moral conscience and human sensibilities >> but these aspects of our nature cannot overcome our sin nature.

 

Why do we sin?

 

Because we are sinners.

 

If we're not sinners - why are there locks? passwords? contracts? police & courts? wars?

 

It is because all men are sinners and cannot be trusted to always act in a moral manner - in fact many will be wicked, esp if they think they can get away with it. So we have instituted technology and laws and jurisprudence to control human behavior and protect us from dishonesty and brutality.

 

Do you not recognize this?

 

This is all I am saying - how do you leap to judging people you meet in a store? This is reducto ad absurdam.

 

Just take what people say at face value - and don't read into a statement your own perspective. I will endeavor to do the same.

 

Thank you.

[rayskidude]

BTW - we are all inherently immoral - Christian, Jew, atheist, Muslim, agnostic, etc. However, that fact about human nature is the reason the LORD Jesus Christ died in our place, on our behalf. His death took the punishment and guilt of our sin - so we can be reconciled to a holy God.

 

Very neatly sums up one of the major reasons I reject Christianity. The "inherently immoral" view of human nature. That's it, bingo.

That is a pretty disgusting thing to believe isn't it? And...that somehow, somewhere, someone has to die to clean us from our own nature.

 

It's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Someone else dies so our "inherently immoral" nature can be forgiven. Then why didn't it cure this inherently immoral nature? Why is it still something that is inherited then? It wasn't a cure, it was just a little snake oil that makes us think we are saved, although still immoral.

 

He says that this is a fact about humanity. Well, I guess it is if notions in fantasy are considered facts.

 

The fact that we been reconciled to a holy God by the death of Christ - this saves our eternal soul from the condemnation that is well-deserved. However, we still inhabit physical bodies that are awaiting final redemption. So, until that point in time, God is working in our hearts - by His Bible, His Spirit, His people - to confrom us to the image of Christ.

 

Each Christian is to strive to be more loving, more kind, more forgiving, more generous, etc. If we call ourselves children of God - then we should look somewht like our Father. Right?

 

So just as physical children process through a journey of growth & maturation as they learn how to live properly from their parents - that same principle applies to spiritual children, we progress to become more like Christ in His character.

 

Rom 8:16 The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

Rom 8:17 and if children, then heirs--heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.

Rom 8:18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.

Rom 8:19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God.

Rom 8:20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope

Rom 8:21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.

Rom 8:22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.

Rom 8:23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.

 

Until God brings about this fulfillment - we groan over our sin, seeking to be more like Him in all we do. But is is a process.

[oddbird1963]

Sin is a meaningless concept that does no one any good.

 

It is only relevant within the confines of a particular religious viewpoint.

 

Human behavior is better explained by sociology, psychology and economics. Much better than the silly tautology of "we sin because we are sinners."

[rayskidude]

Actually, most Christians I know don't think non-believers are immoral. How they get around that, I'm not sure.

 

That's right. They don't act as if "sin" is a reality and they don't act as if most of the human population is headed for hell. They can feel free to ignore what their religion says on any other day but Sunday. Bleechh!

 

In fact, I think many do not know or believe what Christianity teaches. Focus on the warm and fuzzy parts and forget the contradictions.

 

To whatever extent Christians act as hypocrites, we desearve the ridicule and confrontation that comes our way. But on the other hand, to live as Christ lived is a high calling - beyond the abilities of any mortal.

 

So when Christians do outstanding acts of charity and mercy, we also should be reconized for that.

 

No one can live with predominant thoughts of Hell - nor Heaven either. Life must be lived with balance, and as God brings us into various situation, we apply our theology as the situation warrants.

 

Would you want a Christian to think of Hell predominantly? Or heaven? Or food? Or fun Or sex? Or money? Or their kidz?

 

I would hope you'd say "no." I hope you'd say; "You think about whatever truth is most applicable to life at this moment in time."

 

Just some random thots.