Question For The Christians

November 18, 2010

(.)(.)

/ \

( v )

l l

l l

Where's her head End?

('')

(.)(.)

/ \

( v )

l l

sorry, I thought you stipulated important.

November 18, 2010

there is a void, a 'God-shaped hole' in every human heart.

No there isn't.

I agree. There isn't. There certaintly is not in me. My life was full of miserable holes that I was trying to plug with 'jesus', and now that I have seen christianity for the charade that it is, my life is richer, fuller, and better than it ever was when I was a christian, mainly because I do not need to keep forcing myself to believe that burning people for eternity is evidence of god's 'love'.

November 18, 2010

Furthermore, the New Testament itself states that there were false gospels and false teachers spreading “wrong” stories about Jesus.

Embellishment and myth making were going on for decades after “Jesus” died.

There are numerous gospels that never made it into the modern New Testament Bible, whose canon was determined by the Catholic Church long after Jesus had died.

To say nothing of the fact that the early church destroyed documents to make certain that their selected version of things was the only one that survived.

November 18, 2010

"Told you so!"

BAA.

Was that being applied to LNC too?

Hah! Nice one, Agnosticator, but no.

For all of LNC's faults, he is consistent (if grindingly s-l-o-w) when it comes to responding to us. He's up to Sept 24 right now and since I posted something on the 27th, he should be getting round to me sometime soon. I was angry with him when I typed it out - can you tell from this sample?

In case you hadn't noticed, you've touched a raw nerve!

Since you have adopted children, let me put a hypothetical to you.

Let's suppose that these kids were your natural children. Would it be just and fair (even in human terms) for you to set a regulation for one child while the other is in your wife's womb, then when the older one breaks it, wait until the younger one is born and then punish the babe for the other's misdemeanor? Would it also have been fair not to tell the older what you had planned?

Well?

If I believed in such things, I'd say that the innocence of my unborn sister accuses you from beyond the grave. Shame on you!

BAA.

Tho' he can make me flare up, I do have some respect for him.

That "Told you so!" was intended solely for the adamantly perverse and quintessentially stubborn, Raysickdude, whom I have no respect for.

BAA.

November 18, 2010

Rayskidude wrote...

And all your talk of 'sleep' is blather. Do you not understand 'metaphor?

Just a bit more for you on the metaphorical nature of the 'sleep' of death, Ray. This time from the Old Testament.

Ezekiel 37 : 1 - 14 (ESV)

The Valley of Dry Bones

1(A) The hand of the LORD was upon me, and he brought me out in the Spirit of the LORD and set me down in the middle of the valley;[a] it was full of bones. 2And he led me around among them, and behold, there were very many on the surface of the valley, and behold, they were very dry. 3And he said to me,© "Son of man,(D) can these bones live?" And(E) I answered, "O Lord GOD, you know." 4Then he said to me,(F) "Prophesy over these bones, and say to them,(G) O dry bones, hear the word of the LORD. 5Thus says the Lord GOD to these bones: Behold, I will cause(H) breath to enter you, and you shall live. 6(I) And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and(J) cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live, and you shall know that I am the LORD."

7So I prophesied(K) as I was commanded. And as I prophesied, there was a sound, and behold,(L) a rattling,[c] and the bones came together, bone to its bone. 8And I looked, and behold, there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them. But(M) there was no breath in them. 9Then he said to me,(N) "Prophesy to the breath; prophesy,(O) son of man, and say to the breath, Thus says the Lord GOD: Come from(P) the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live." 10So I prophesied(Q) as he commanded me, and® the breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.

11Then he said to me,(S) "Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. Behold, they say, 'Our bones are dried up, and(T) our hope is lost;(U) we are indeed cut off.' 12Therefore(V) prophesy, and say to them, Thus says the Lord GOD: Behold,(W) I will open your graves and raise you from your graves, O my people. And(X) I will bring you into the land of Israel. 13And(Y) you shall know that I am the LORD, when I open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people. 14And(Z) I will put my Spirit within you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I am the LORD;(AA) I have spoken, and I will do it, declares the LORD."

This was written when Ezekiel was an exile, far from the land of his birth - Israel. If you read this passage in that context, it's clear that when God says, "I will place you in your own land." He is referring to the land of Israel in the Middle East.

Yet, there is a metaphorical meaning to this passage too. The New Israel will be re-made in a similar way, at God's appointed time.

This looks forward, not to a time when the exiles returned to the land of Israel, but to the Last Day, when all those 'asleep' in death will be roused by the Last Trumpet, raised from this temporary condition and then re-made in imperishable, immortal and eternal flesh. This has not happened yet, but according to the very scripture you (supposedly) hold to be God's perfect truth, it will - because He has declared that He will do it.

Calling God a liar now are we, Ananias?

BAA.

November 18, 2010

there is a void, a 'God-shaped hole' in every human heart.

No there isn't.

I agree. There isn't. There certaintly is not in me. My life was full of miserable holes that I was trying to plug with 'jesus', and now that I have seen christianity for the charade that it is, my life is richer, fuller, and better than it ever was when I was a christian, mainly because I do not need to keep forcing myself to believe that burning people for eternity is evidence of god's 'love'.

This "void in every heart" and the claim that it's "God-shaped" is just another variation of the evangelical sales pitch that says "Jesus is the answer [to you-name-it]". There is in fact this thing called the human condition and there are certain universal aspects to it, including the need to make meaning and find purpose, and the desire for connection in order to assuage the fact that we are born, live, and die, ultimately, alone -- which is a burden given our self-awareness and ability to anticipate. A primitive response to this is to borrow someone else's invention of a ready-made purpose and an invisible friend.

There are more sophisticated and ultimately more effective responses, like making your own meaning and finding real meaningful relationships. It's more work in the short run than drinking the evangelical kool-aid, but in the long run, it ends up being less work because you don't have to construct ever more baroque rationalizations to reconcile dogma with reality.

November 18, 2010

1. Since the time of Adam's first disobedience people have been falling asleep - that is dying a true, physical death.

2. Apart from a few (Enoch, Elijah, etc.) who have been taken up alive into heaven, every human who ever lived and fell asleep (died) is still asleep - unjudged and awaiting the Day of the Lord.

3. The only exception to this is Jesus, the very first to be raised from the (metaphorical) sleep of death.

4. He is in heaven now, seated at the right hand of the Father.

5. Only when the day of the Lord comes, will it be time for all the (metaphorically) sleeping dead to rise.

6. The signal for this event will be the Last Trumpet. Even when this happens, nobody is judged. That doesn't happen until the Book of Life is opened by the only one fit to break it's seals - Jesus Christ.

7. The trumpet sounds and in an instant, everyone will be changed into the new, imperishable flesh.

8. Those who are still alive (i.e., those who haven't yet fallen 'asleep') will also be changed.

9. Everyone who ever lived will be changed and made immortal.

10. Then everyone will face judgement. All will be found wanting, but Christ will intercede for the faithful and they will be spared the Father's wrath.

11. Those not knowing Christ will feel the force of the Father's wrath and be cast into the Lake of Fire, their final destination.

12. Because these sinners have been changed and cannot die, they will suffer in this place for all eternity.

So, this talk about 'sleep' is not blather, it's fully founded on scripture (see above). Yes, the word sleep is a metaphor, but it's a Biblical description of something that is real enough - death. You're wrong to dismiss what scripture says about the dead sleeping, Ray.

Are you saying all the dead are now unconscious until Jesus the Messiah calls them from the grave? If so, how do you square this with the account of Lazarus and the rich man? Thus the 'blather' comment.

Re #9 - I assume by immortal you are referring to their physical bodies only.

Re #10 > all are not found wanting, because all believers are already clothed with the righteousness of Christ.

4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

The Defeat of Satan

7 And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will come out to deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea. 9 And they marched up over the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, but fire came down from heaven and consumed them, 10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Judgment Before the Great White Throne

11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. 13 And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Rev 20:4–21:1). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

Note the two resurrections; and two bases for judgement. Unbelievers are judged from the books re: what they had done, believers are 'judged' from the Book of Life . based on their faith in Christ.

November 18, 2010

He is like the mormon kid that say its true because it is and travels door to door because of that confidence. Or the fundy that says the bible is true because it says so. That is what that quote reminds me of. To me that sounds like he is saying, he would believe it even without the supposed rational arguments.

I understand the Mormon thing - with their 'burning in the bosom' as their basis for faith. But the Book of Mormon has a plethora of supposed geographical locations in Mexico that cannot be located. Yet the Bible has a plethora of geographical sites that we can all visit today. Biblical history continues to be verified, Mormon history continues to confound researchers, who have mainly given up looking for places with huge fortresses such as Zarahemla (? - going off old memories here)

Is there nontheological proof of the existence of satan. Theological figures don't cut it. I say this over and over again because its so true.

Are there not several sources re: truth? Aren't theological, philosophical, social, psychological, etc truths true. Have you artificially limited the sources of truth? God, and other spiritual beings, are seen through their effects - and by special revelation, and by our reasoning through the most plausible explanations for the phenomena of the universe & life.

5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (John 3:5–8). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

Can you prove the existence of the devil with only fact?

Yes - in the same manner as I would prove the existence of love.

November 18, 2010

I know this post will make no impression on you because you are so invested in your beliefs but I just can't stay silent when I see someone really okay with this. I find this complete lack of empathy and concern for others to be the most disturbing thing to me and ultimately why I left the church.

Why would you think that the fact that real people will spend their eternity in Hell as of no concern for believers? Churches devote a huge amount of their energies in reaching out to the lost, both locally and globally. I'm sure you're aware of this fact, which is why I wonder about "a complete lack of empathy" comment.

Re: "being OK with this" >> I simply acknowledge what is true in life. Many people reject and want nothing to do with God, for them He does not even exist. They have no interest in God's Law, neither His love, neither His grace, whatever. This is truly a sad and foolish state of mind >> all the more reason why so many believers live a lifestyle of developing creative means of communicating the Gospel to the lost.

Yet, ultimately - all people will receive that which they have desired. For those who humbly admit their sin & need of salvation, they will turn to God and experience His grace; but for those who reject His existence and grace - they will receive their desire, an eternity away from God.

Did your church not devote itself to fervent evangelism?

November 18, 2010

God, and other spiritual beings, are seen through their effects - and by special revelation, and by our reasoning through the most plausible explanations for the phenomena of the universe & life.

I had to look up "special revelation" as I'm rusty on this stuff, but by this I take it you mean something along these lines:

Evangelical theologians use the term "special revelation" for the belief in God's intervention to make God's will and knowledge available that would not otherwise be available through general revelation. They believe that disclosure of this "special revelation" is at specific times to specific persons, and believed by Christian Theologians, to have been generally given through scripture, miracles, and through the person and ministry of Jesus Christ.

I am going to leave aside all of this other than "miracles" because few here would be interested in yet more Bible verses, nor would they give credence to the person and ministry of Christ since this can only be known through scripture or through some "personal relationship" which most of us here have experienced as bogus. Were we to ever witness a genuine miracle we would not reject it out of hand, so I'll leave that on the table.

I would agree, though, that any spiritual being could in theory be "seen through their effects" via manifestations or miracles, or, as you suggest, we would see them as plausible causes for natural phenomena.

Since I have not seen any such miracles nor do I see discarnate entities as the "most plausible explanation" for any aspect of my physical reality (nor, indeed, have most people since the Enlightenment), I don't know what this leaves us. We're asking for evidence that's not self-referential, that is, other than "the Bible says so".

So I ask myself, if there were an anthropomorphic, omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent god (leaving aside legitimate philosophical questions about how all those attributes could be simultaneously true), what effects could we expect to see in the universe? What would be god's signature?

The answer would depend somewhat on the exact nature of god, but let's assume for the sake of argument that god is the god of the Bible, more specifically as interpreted by conservative evangelical Christianity. And mind you, that's throwing you a HUGE bone. But I digress.

Since Jesus established his church and wanted this church to live in love and unity in order to show that it was genuine, we would expect, particularly two millenia on, that his church would be a cohesive, single entity with a unified purpose and message. However, unless you define "his church" as a tiny remnant of, say, Bible churches or Southern Baptist Convention churches (a highly suspicious claim since neither entity can trace itself back through a historical church that has, in the main, had views quite divergent from these modern conservative denominations) what we see instead is the shattered fragments of thousands of denominations, often with tremendous enmity between them (such as the strife between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland). So -- no imprint of god to be found there.

Since Jesus sought to establish his spiritual kingdom in the hearts of man we should expect, particularly two millenia on, that huge swaths of humanity would by now be living in love and harmony, actively establishing god's benevolent hegemony over the face of the earth. What we see instead is what you'd expect to see if man were slowly and painfully evolving a viable society: a glacial progression towards imperfect structures like democracy, with many false starts and failures and reboots; a glacial progression towards rational thought and away from magical thinking, and the like. Looks more like the imprint of man than of god.

Since Jesus sought to establish faith in the hearts of men, such that faith as tiny as a grain of mustard seed could move mountains; since he prophesied that his followers would heal the sick and raise the dead; one would expect, particularly two millenia on, that we'd have little need of hospitals and graveyards and public works projects. What one sees instead, again, is glacial progress towards longer and healthier lifespans, greater knowledge of things like sanitation and hygiene, and certain problems like cancer being very stubborn. Again, not the imprint of god, or at least not of this particular god-man and his followers.

Christianity has had 2000 years to prove its mettle, but it has produced only the usual admixture of brilliant ideas and abysmally bad ones. Crusades and charities, condemnation and comfort, power plays and selflessness. In short, the church is nothing more than a human organization. I'd argue that it's seen its day and is making way for more highly evolved societal structures, but regardless, it doesn't bear the mark of any god worth the name.

Christianity (or at least, your flavor and the flavor I came out of) promises way more than it (has or can or will) deliver, if you hold it to its actual claims and ignore its prevarications and rationalizations and deferments.

My wife was a perfect example. Her believing relatives are well-regarded "intercessory prayer warriors". She herself was a believer to the end, who led an exemplary life by Christian standards. Her parents and aunt and uncle spent literally on average two hours a day in intercessory prayer for her, 365 days a year, for years, and all the while she deteriorated and suffered beyond my ability to convey it, and ultimately died horribly, in searing pain. No imprint of god there at all. Oh, you could rationalize and speak of her patience, humility, persistence and hope and how it inspired everyone around her. But does that prove something about some god or does it actually prove something about her personal strength and quality of character -- making it an gross insult to her memory to detract from it? You can rationalize that for some ineffable reason it was god's will for her to suffer so terribly for so long with so little hope and so much humiliation and deprivation. But if such pointless suffering is actually god's will, how could you possibly square it with his benevolence? I know, I know, you have a zillion rationalizations at your disposal. But all the hand waving in the world is just that -- hand waving. It doesn't change the fact that someone who loved life and whose existence mattered -- to herself and to many others -- is so many ashes in the wind, while people who hate life and burden the existence of others live a relatively comfortable existence as stains on the soul of humanity.

I am not asking for sympathy here and certainly not for empathy -- you're incapable of either anyway absent stepping away from your dogma for a minute -- nor am I suggesting that her situation is particularly unique. Similar sad stories are repeated endlessly all over the world all the time. All I'm saying is, if this kind of thing reflects god, he should take along look at his reflection.

The truth is that life is way too short, either to expend the energy on impotent rage at such patent injustices, or on multilayered rationalizations and excuses for such injustices. The only way out of the forest for me has been to quit imagining that life, either directly or through some proxy like some alleged promises of god, owes me anything or cares about me or mine. Existence is what it is. Deal with it.

November 18, 2010

I understand the Mormon thing - with their 'burning in the bosom' as their basis for faith. But the Book of Mormon has a plethora of supposed geographical locations in Mexico that cannot be located. Yet the Bible has a plethora of geographical sites that we can all visit today. Biblical history continues to be verified, Mormon history continues to confound researchers, who have mainly given up looking for places with huge fortresses such as Zarahemla (? - going off old memories here)

Red herring much, I am saying, I think he would believe it, regardless of supposed rational arguments and verification.

Are there not several sources re: truth? Aren't theological, philosophical, social, psychological, etc truths true. Have you artificially limited the sources of truth? God, and other spiritual beings, are seen through their effects - and by special revelation, and by our reasoning through the most plausible explanations for the phenomena of the universe & life.

Yes - in the same manner as I would prove the existence of love.

Theology is not much of a realm of truth, since its based off of assumptions. Religious truth assumes there should be a religion. Also the sensation of love is a byproduct, which just value it in a high way. So ray do you believe the devil causes mental illness via demons or that some people are just legitimately messed up in the head? Ever noticed how god and particularly the devil get smaller in responsibility. What is now known as mental illness, was always assumed to just be the devil, just to use an example. So the failings of the human body are better explain by sin problems then medical science ray? People also used to believe that. If god was the be all end all of explanations, things like those would still be true.

BTW, the bible verse sucks as a argument that I just don't get it.

November 18, 2010

Something strange going on here. Trying to edit and it creates new posts??!

November 18, 2010

1. Since the time of Adam's first disobedience people have been falling asleep - that is dying a true, physical death.

2. Apart from a few (Enoch, Elijah, etc.) who have been taken up alive into heaven, every human who ever lived and fell asleep (died) is still asleep - unjudged and awaiting the Day of the Lord.

3. The only exception to this is Jesus, the very first to be raised from the (metaphorical) sleep of death.

4. He is in heaven now, seated at the right hand of the Father.

5. Only when the day of the Lord comes, will it be time for all the (metaphorically) sleeping dead to rise.

6. The signal for this event will be the Last Trumpet. Even when this happens, nobody is judged. That doesn't happen until the Book of Life is opened by the only one fit to break it's seals - Jesus Christ.

7. The trumpet sounds and in an instant, everyone will be changed into the new, imperishable flesh.

8. Those who are still alive (i.e., those who haven't yet fallen 'asleep') will also be changed.

9. Everyone who ever lived will be changed and made immortal.

10. Then everyone will face judgement. All will be found wanting, but Christ will intercede for the faithful and they will be spared the Father's wrath.

11. Those not knowing Christ will feel the force of the Father's wrath and be cast into the Lake of Fire, their final destination.

12. Because these sinners have been changed and cannot die, they will suffer in this place for all eternity.

So, this talk about 'sleep' is not blather, it's fully founded on scripture (see above). Yes, the word sleep is a metaphor, but it's a Biblical description of something that is real enough - death. You're wrong to dismiss what scripture says about the dead sleeping, Ray.

Are you saying all the dead are now unconscious until Jesus the Messiah calls them from the grave?

No. I'm not... the Apostle Paul is.

In the 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians quotes that you've either overlooked, misunderstood or (more likely) deliberately ignored. If you genuinely believe that Paul's words are inspired by God, go back and read them again - this time with an open mind.

If so, how do you square this with the account of Lazarus and the rich man? Thus the 'blather' comment.

You... Mr.Metaphor himself ...are actually asking me this?

Oh very well then, if I have to spell it out for you.

Lazarus and the rich man (and Ezekiel in the valley of dry bones) are not actual accounts of real events. They are symbols, metaphors told in the form of parables to increase the understanding of those hearing and reading these words. There is a difference between a parable and reality, you know Ray!

Do you think Jesus actually meant that the person with a plank of wood lodged in his eye, actually had a chunk of hickory stuck between his eyelid and his cornea? NO! It's a metaphor. It's not meant to be taken literally.

(Yes, I know you Creationists have a real problem distinguishing between what is meant literally and what is meant metaphorically, but stick with me on this.)

So, the dialog between Lazarus and the rich man never actually happened, ok?

Firstly, it's a parable, so it shouldn't be taken literally as a verbatim record of a conversation between two individuals. Parables are linguistic devices that are used to convey important ideas and messages to their intended audience. They don't necessarily have to be 100% true accounts of actual events. The important point you seem to be consistently missing here is the value of the message over the medium. In a parable, the message is paramount, not the medium. If you still have a problem with this, please consider this question carefully.

Q. If Jesus tells a parable to convey an important truth to his audience, but the actual details of what he says are neither physically possible nor totally representative of reality (like a man with a plank in his eye), does this make Jesus a liar?

(Hint: If your answer is 'Yes' Ray, then I pity you. Being unable to tell the difference between metaphor and reality excludes you from understanding much of what Jesus said. Even if he was just a man, he still said some wise things.)

Secondly, you cannot take this parable to be set in the future, that is, after Judgement Day. The rich man is not in the Lake of Fire. Ok, it says Lazarus was in 'Abraham's bosom' and the rich man was in a fiery pit, but take note! The rich man's five brothers are still alive. Therefore, this tale is set before the dead have been called out of their tombs by the Last Trumpet, before Judgement and before the Lake of Fire receives anyone. Jesus couched this parable in present day terms, so that it would have maximum relevance to those hearing it - which was his intention all along. Since the dead (Lazarus and the rich man included) are all still sleeping until the Day of the Lord, this conversation is impossible. Why? Because communication between the 'sleeping' dead is impossible. God can communicate with them (see Ezekiel 37:11), but that's because he's God. Nothing (supposedly) is impossible for Him. In fact, it would be entirely consistent for me to say that He foreknew what the spirits of this dead multitude would say, even before he created the universe.

Lastly, look at 2 Peter 2 : 4 and Jude 1 : 6. Compare the differing ways humans and angels are kept, awaiting judgement. Angels, because they are spirits, cannot die as humans die. They are immortal and eternal creatures. That is why they must be restrained by God. We are different. Humans, being both physical and non-physical (possessing souls) cease to be active once we die. That is why Hebrews 9:27 says that we are destined to live only once and then to face judgement. No interval. Nothing in between the moment of death and the moment of resurrection. That is why the Bible uses the metaphor of sleep to describe this condition. It's the closest physical analogy to the timeless time a dead person undergoes, while they await the Second Coming. The sensation of dreamless sleep is the nearest thing we can ever know. That is why the Apostles used this metaphor to describe death. See it now?

Re #9 - I assume by immortal you are referring to their physical bodies only.

(Sighs.) Read it again and try to understand it this time. I've highlighted the salient points.

The Resurrection Body

35But someone will ask,(AX) "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?" 36You foolish person!(AY) What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37And what you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. 38But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body. 39For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish. 40There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is of one kind, and the glory of the earthly is of another. 41There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.

42(AZ) So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. 43It is sown in dishonor;(BA) it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. 44It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45Thus it is written,(BB) "The first man Adam became a living being";[e](BC) the last Adam became a(BD) life-giving spirit. 46But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual. 47(BE) The first man was from the earth,(BF) a man of dust;(BG) the second man is from heaven. 48As was the man of dust, so also are those who are of the dust, and as is the man of heaven,(BH) so also are those who are of heaven. 49Just(BI) as we have borne the image of the man of dust,(BJ) we shall[f] also bear the image of the man of heaven.

Mystery and Victory

50I tell you this, brothers:(BK) flesh and blood(BL) cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51Behold! I tell you a mystery.(BM) We shall not all sleep,(BN) but we shall all be changed, 52in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For(BO) the trumpet will sound, and(BP) the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. 53For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and(BQ) this mortal body must put on immortality. 54When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:

(BR) "Death is swallowed up in victory." 55(BS) "O death, where is your victory?

O death, where is your sting?"

56The sting of death is sin, and(BT) the power of sin is the law. 57But thanks be to God,(BU) who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

It's simple Ray.

Dust to dust. Adam was made of the dust and to the dust we all return. Can this dust inherit heaven? No. Of course not. We are not just dust though. God breathed into Adam's nostrils and he came to life. So, once we return to the dust, that God-created part of us (our spirits) will sleep until God bring us back to life, with new bodies. Guess when? Yep. That last trumpet again!

Just as Jesus was raised with an imperishable, immortal, indestructible body, so will all believers do the same. Christ kept the wounds he'd acquired to prove to the disciples that He really was the man they saw scourged, crucified and pierced thru the side. But did these injuries give him any pain? Was there any blood or water seeping or gushing out? No. His resurrection body could show off these wounds and these life-ending traumas had no effect on him whatsoever. No pain. No shock. No loss of blood. No corruption. No gangrene. Nothing. That's because his new body was imperishable. It was eternal too. Fit for an eternity in heaven.

Corruptible, temporary flesh and blood (dust) cannot inherit the incorruptible, can it? That is why God said that he would make everything new. Not just a new heaven and a new earth, but new bodies for the co-inheritors of the kingdom of God. Yes?

Re #10 > all are not found wanting, because all believers are already clothed with the righteousness of Christ.

All are found wanting, because all have sinned and fallen short.

However, all believers are clothed in the righteousness of Christ once they put their faith and trust in Him, not before. This happens during their lifetimes, whenever they lived. This explains why Abraham and other OT personages are considered righteous (and saved) before Jesus was even born of the virgin Mary. His saving sacrifice is an timeless act of intercession, sparing those who believe from the wrath of the Father, no matter when and where they lived and died. Past, present or future - it doesn't matter. So Christ has been, is now and will continue to intercede until His return. That is the nature of his death on the cross. It works for all time. There was nothing wrong with what I wrote Ray - you just chose to take it in it's narrowest, most limited form so that you could score a cheap point.

Failed!

4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

The Defeat of Satan

7 And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will come out to deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea. 9 And they marched up over the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, but fire came down from heaven and consumed them, 10 and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Judgment Before the Great White Throne

11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, according to what they had done. 13 And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them, and they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 15 And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Rev 20:4–21:1). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

Note the two resurrections; and two bases for judgement. Unbelievers are judged from the books re: what they had done, believers are 'judged' from the Book of Life . based on their faith in Christ.

Wrong again.

Look at the precise description of those who reigned with Christ for a thousand years - it's very specific.

These are those believers who have been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God. Not shot, drowned, starved or burned alive. Nope. Beheaded under very special circumstances. Got that? Also those believers who had not worshipped the beast or it's image and had not received it's mark on their foreheads or it's hands.

So when does this beast first appear?

After the Seven Seals are opened, after the Seven Angels have sounded their trumpets, after the three woes and not until Revelation 13 : 11 does this Beast appear. Catch? The proper context for understanding which category of believer rises in the first resurrection is to look at the proper sequence of events that precede it. Have the seven seals been opened yet? Have the seven angels sounded their trumpets yet? Have three woes occurred?

No, no and no again.

Therefore, all those believers who are to rise and reign with Christ for a thousand years have yet to be born. Until these signs and events happen at their appointed times and until the Beast arises, no Christians living now, nor those who've died will be among this number.

So Ray, you are right that there are two resurrections, but you are wrong in identifying who they apply to.

The first resurrection applies only to a subset of all Christian believers - only those who have been beheaded and those who have refused the mark of the Beast, no one else. They rise and reign with Christ for a thousand years.

After this come the Seven Bowls of God's Wrath, the Fall of babylon, the chaining of Satan in the Abyss for a thousand years and then his release and final defeat. Then, everyone else (Christians who fall outside that above category, included) are raised to stand before the Great White Throne and face judgement.

So, a person of faith like C.S. Lewis would die (fall asleep) and then rise to stand before the throne of God. For him, there is nothing in between these two events. His mortal eyes close for the last time on his deathbed and his imperishable eyes open for the first time, once the last trumpet sounds - as is written in scripture. He sleeps and knows nothing, says nothing, understands nothing. Got that?

An unbeliever would experience the same series of events. First mortal life, then death, then 'sleep', then resurrection in an imperishable body, then judgement and then the Lake of Fire.

You are correct about the different books used in judgement Ray, but you are way, way off base about this sleep blather, as you call it.

You're wrong. Give it up and stop digging.

BAA.

November 18, 2010

Attempted editorial correction resulted in duplicate post. Solly.

November 18, 2010

That "Told you so!" was intended solely for the adamantly perverse and quintessentially stubborn, Raysickdude, whom I have no respect for.

BAA.

Oh, I see. You have righteous indignation towards LNC, and no respect whatsoever towards Rayskidude.

Carry on!

November 19, 2010

I know this post will make no impression on you because you are so invested in your beliefs but I just can't stay silent when I see someone really okay with this. I find this complete lack of empathy and concern for others to be the most disturbing thing to me and ultimately why I left the church.

Why would you think that the fact that real people will spend their eternity in Hell as of no concern for believers? Churches devote a huge amount of their energies in reaching out to the lost, both locally and globally. I'm sure you're aware of this fact, which is why I wonder about "a complete lack of empathy" comment.

Re: "being OK with this" >> I simply acknowledge what is true in life. Many people reject and want nothing to do with God, for them He does not even exist. They have no interest in God's Law, neither His love, neither His grace, whatever. This is truly a sad and foolish state of mind >> all the more reason why so many believers live a lifestyle of developing creative means of communicating the Gospel to the lost.

Yet, ultimately - all people will receive that which they have desired. For those who humbly admit their sin & need of salvation, they will turn to God and experience His grace; but for those who reject His existence and grace - they will receive their desire, an eternity away from God.

Did your church not devote itself to fervent evangelism?

You say that real people spending their eternity in hell is something that concerns you. Yet you can't bring yourself to look at a god who would send these people to hell eternally for what are, in the grand scheme of things, trivial, finite infractions, like not believing in god, and dare to say "THAT IS EVIL."

I am not going to try to convince myself that a god who would do that is 'good' when such a situation is the antithesis of good. The fact that you continue to try to convince yourself that such depravity is in fact 'good' is very depressing. Only a man made god would fail so dismally to be 'godlike'.

November 19, 2010

Since I have not seen any such miracles nor do I see discarnate entities as the "most plausible explanation" for any aspect of my physical reality (nor, indeed, have most people since the Enlightenment), I don't know what this leaves us. We're asking for evidence that's not self-referential, that is, other than "the Bible says so". So I ask myself, if there were an anthropomorphic, omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent god (leaving aside legitimate philosophical questions about how all those attributes could be simultaneously true), what effects could we expect to see in the universe? What would be god's signature?

Bob, as always you bring up good points to consider.

Since Jesus established his church and wanted this church to live in love and unity in order to show that it was genuine, we would expect, particularly two millenia on, that his church would be a cohesive, single entity with a unified purpose and message. However, unless you define "his church" as a tiny remnant of, say, Bible churches or Southern Baptist Convention churches (a highly suspicious claim since neither entity can trace itself back through a historical church that has, in the main, had views quite divergent from these modern conservative denominations) what we see instead is the shattered fragments of thousands of denominations, often with tremendous enmity between them (such as the strife between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland). So -- no imprint of god to be found there.

Jesus certainly prayed for unity among believers in John 17, and I think believers seek for unity - but unity and union are two different, though related, aspects of religion. I think Jesus knows the hearts of men, that we're woefully fallible. I think Jesus emphasizes unity, so that we'll prioritize unity. But remember that even Paul & Barnabas went their separate ways in a disagreement over placing John Mark in ministry. There are disagreements among Christians re: mode of baptism, church gov't, the nature of Man's will, the means of grace in the church ordinances, infant vs believer's baptism, etc. These are not cardinal doctrines, though they are important >> and so Christians serve together with other believer's with similar beliefs about these issues. But also, churches which differ in these areas also cooperate together - despite their differences - to accomplish Gospel goals. I think there's something to be said for Christians with some divergent opinions working together for the common good.

Since Jesus sought to establish his spiritual kingdom in the hearts of man we should expect, particularly two millenia on, that huge swaths of humanity would by now be living in love and harmony, actively establishing god's benevolent hegemony over the face of the earth. What we see instead is what you'd expect to see if man were slowly and painfully evolving a viable society: a glacial progression towards imperfect structures like democracy, with many false starts and failures and reboots; a glacial progression towards rational thought and away from magical thinking, and the like. Looks more like the imprint of man than of god.

Many millions of Christians for these last two millennia have lived selfless lives, placing themselves in danger - from disease, war, persecution, etc - to serve others in times of great turmoil and tragedy. But also, God has said throughout Scripture that His people would always be a 'remnant' - a small percentage of the population. And yet through that remnant, God and His people accomplish amazing things. God's people follow that narrow path which few find.

Since Jesus sought to establish faith in the hearts of men, such that faith as tiny as a grain of mustard seed could move mountains; since he prophesied that his followers would heal the sick and raise the dead; one would expect, particularly two millenia on, that we'd have little need of hospitals and graveyards and public works projects. What one sees instead, again, is glacial progress towards longer and healthier lifespans, greater knowledge of things like sanitation and hygiene, and certain problems like cancer being very stubborn. Again, not the imprint of god, or at least not of this particular god-man and his followers.

The effects of sin are wide-ranging and powerful. Sin will not be eradicated in this present world. But God will establish a sinless future in which there will be no more crying, sorrow, mourning, sickness, death, etc - after He has accomplished His purposes in this world. And certainly, Christians have worked to relieve suffering in this world, by establishing hospitals, orphanages, rescue missions, soup kitchens, schools, agriculture and water projects, etc. God calls us to love others in real tangible ways.

Christianity has had 2000 years to prove its mettle, but it has produced only the usual admixture of brilliant ideas and abysmally bad ones. Crusades and charities, condemnation and comfort, power plays and selflessness. In short, the church is nothing more than a human organization. I'd argue that it's seen its day and is making way for more highly evolved societal structures, but regardless, it doesn't bear the mark of any god worth the name.

The Church is in many ways a human organization - populated and operated by humans, and so subject to human foibles. But also, God has instituted the Church - and He accomplished many good things thru His people. I think Church history is replete with examples of the good impact of the Gospel on societies. I know that there might be some pushback here, but Catholicism is not Christianity - hasn't been since around 400AD.

My wife was a perfect example. Her believing relatives are well-regarded "intercessory prayer warriors". She herself was a believer to the end, who led an exemplary life by Christian standards. Her parents and aunt and uncle spent literally on average two hours a day in intercessory prayer for her, 365 days a year, for years, and all the while she deteriorated and suffered beyond my ability to convey it, and ultimately died horribly, in searing pain. No imprint of god there at all. Oh, you could rationalize and speak of her patience, humility, persistence and hope and how it inspired everyone around her. But does that prove something about some god or does it actually prove something about her personal strength and quality of character -- making it an gross insult to her memory to detract from it? You can rationalize that for some ineffable reason it was god's will for her to suffer so terribly for so long with so little hope and so much humiliation and deprivation. But if such pointless suffering is actually god's will, how could you possibly square it with his benevolence? I know, I know, you have a zillion rationalizations at your disposal. But all the hand waving in the world is just that -- hand waving. It doesn't change the fact that someone who loved life and whose existence mattered -- to herself and to many others -- is so many ashes in the wind, while people who hate life and burden the existence of others live a relatively comfortable existence as stains on the soul of humanity.

These are the very thoughts which the writer of Psalm 73 wrestled with >> why do the wicked often prosper, while the righteous suffer? Your wife's experience - along with your family's involvement in that process - is truly a sorrowful situation. Who would not grieve whenever anyone is suffering, esp for someone who's life was exemplary? However, I would not call her suffering 'pointless' - and I think if you were to review all that happened in her heart, in her family, with her friends & church, etc; that many good things came out of that situation. As a believer, most all of us love life - as it is a gift from God to be lived for His glory and the good of others. But theologically we know that "for me to live is Christ, and to die is gain."

This does not remove the real sorrow and suffering, but it does provide a context for what God is doing in the midst of tragedy.

The truth is that life is way too short, either to expend the energy on impotent rage at such patent injustices, or on multilayered rationalizations and excuses for such injustices. The only way out of the forest for me has been to quit imagining that life, either directly or through some proxy like some alleged promises of god, owes me anything or cares about me or mine. Existence is what it is. Deal with it.

But does this really satisfy your soul? Please don't take my comments as trite and cliched, but God reminds us not to love this life >> but to love Him and to look forward to our eternity together with Him and others. Tragedies in this world remind us of the ruination of sin - and we all feel its effects. God delivers from sin, sometimes here - but sometimes not. But God does and will deliver us from all sinful influence and effects in heaven.

If suffering is pointless - there is no comfort, no higher purpose, no lasting good, nothing of any worth. But God sent His Son to suffer & die - an unjust death for the Righteous Son of God. And yet God took that huge injustice and secured the salvation of all who would believe for all eternity. Thus the wisdom & power of God.

November 19, 2010

Theology is not much of a realm of truth, since its based off of assumptions. Religious truth assumes there should be a religion. Also the sensation of love is a byproduct, which just value it in a high way. So ray do you believe the devil causes mental illness via demons or that some people are just legitimately messed up in the head? Ever noticed how god and particularly the devil get smaller in responsibility. What is now known as mental illness, was always assumed to just be the devil, just to use an example. So the failings of the human body are better explain by sin problems then medical science ray? People also used to believe that. If god was the be all end all of explanations, things like those would still be true.

In the hard sciences, we take many truths as axiomatic - does that stop us from believing what we see? Assumptions are not inherently wrong as valid starting points, as long as the assumptions are correct.

There are both spiritual and physical causes for what we observe in life, these are not mutually exclusive. Medical experts realize that a person's 'spiritual' outlook has a real effect on their health - should we discount that fact since it doesn't have a physical basis? Man is not an automobile whose problems can be fixed by replacing or repairing faulty parts. Man is a person, a soul, whose material & immaterial aspects together define Man - and both aspects are crucial in caring for people.

And, I don't think that WL Craig would believe in Jesus if all the data pointed in the opposite direction - that is irrational. Faith is not against reason, but faith does go beyond reason. Faith can believe and accept truths that are not obvious - and having believed, faith can then reason through why a 'counter-intuitive truth' is actually (or can actually be) true.

This is not so different from antenna design. As I understand it - we cannot design an antenna beforehand that will best accomplish a specific purpose. However, we test several designs and then choose the best one. Once chosen, we can then determine why that specific design was the best - but we didn't know that previously.

November 19, 2010

Lazarus and the rich man... not actual accounts of real events. They are symbols, metaphors told in the form of parables to increase the understanding of those hearing and reading these words. There is a difference between a parable and reality, you know Ray! So, the dialog between Lazarus and the rich man never actually happened, ok?

You are simply wrong. Scripture does not preface this account by stating this is a parable. And Jesus uses actual names for real people - not characteristic of parables. SO your talk of 'soul sleep' remains blather.

Humans, being both physical and non-physical (possessing souls) cease to be active once we die. That is why Hebrews 9:27 says that we are destined to live only once and then to face judgement. No interval. Nothing in between the moment of death and the moment of resurrection. That is why the Bible uses the metaphor of sleep to describe this condition. It's the closest physical analogy to the timeless time a dead person undergoes, while they await the Second Coming. The sensation of dreamless sleep is the nearest thing we can ever know. That is why the Apostles used this metaphor to describe death. See it now?

Actually - this is just nutty.

6 So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight. 8 Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9 So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him.

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (2 Cor 5:6–9). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

See, when we are away from our bodies - we are at home with the Lord. To paraphrase Tom Hanks - "There's no sleeping in heaven!"

40 But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Luke 23:40–43). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

So lemme get this straight - in BAA's paradise, we're just sleeping in 'timeless time.' Gee, this is so appealing - no wonder so many want to go to heaven.

but that with full courage now as always Christ will be honored in my body, whether by life or by death. 21 For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. 22 If I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. Yet which I shall choose I cannot tell. 23 I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Php 1:20–23). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

So again - we see that the gain in physical death is sleeping in 'timeless time' and Jesus must be sleeping, too. After all, Paul said he desired to be with Christ. If he's unconscious, how does he know Christ is even there? Wow - the 'far better' is timeless sleeping >> BAA, I can't wait!!!

Seriously - where did you learn this wacky theology? Is this from Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copelend, Kenneth Hagin, & Jim Bakker?

This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

So, your theology would restrict this first resurrection, given to the blessed and holy - and over which the second death (being cast into the Lake of Fire) has no power as applying only to a subset of Christians?

BAA - that is truly whacked! No wonder you're an ex-C >> if this is an example of the theology you were subjected to previously.

So, a person of faith like C.S. Lewis would die (fall asleep) and then rise to stand before the throne of God. For him, there is nothing in between these two events. His mortal eyes close for the last time on his deathbed and his imperishable eyes open for the first time, once the last trumpet sounds - as is written in scripture. He sleeps and knows nothing, says nothing, understands nothing. Got that?

Paul anticipated (and Paul even experienced when he was caught up to the third heaven), as did the thief on the cross (from Jesus' own promise) - and we also see in the experience of Lazarus - that after physical death there is a conscious existence in Paradise, in the Lord's presence. You are so wrong about all this. Is there a school somewhere that teaches this nonsense?

November 19, 2010

Seriously - where did you learn this wacky theology? Is this from Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copelend, Kenneth Hagin, & Jim Bakker?

Exactly.

I grew up Pentecostal. But when I was around 20, I joined a church that had connection to these guys. And I heard them preach many times.

Then I moved to USA and left that church behind, and joined a Vineyard church. I was a member there for many years before one day I realized it's all made up. People believe in these fairy tales because they need something above and outside themselves to hold on to. But I grew up and don't need it anymore.

I feel fantastic without it!

November 19, 2010

There are disagreements among Christians re: mode of baptism, church gov't, the nature of Man's will, the means of grace in the church ordinances, infant vs believer's baptism, etc. These are not cardinal doctrines, though they are important >> and so Christians serve together with other believer's with similar beliefs about these issues. But also, churches which differ in these areas also cooperate together - despite their differences - to accomplish Gospel goals. I think there's something to be said for Christians with some divergent opinions working together for the common good.

In the context of this particular sub-exchange, which is about whether or not this shows the mark of divine influence, I think it fails the test. Many coalitions of organizations for common cause exist in the world. So yes, there's something to be said for different Christian groups working together, but it's not that this is evidence of god at work.

God has said throughout Scripture that His people would always be a 'remnant' - a small percentage of the population. And yet through that remnant, God and His people accomplish amazing things. God's people follow that narrow path which few find.

Seems a little schizophrenic. Is the goal to establish the kingdom of god, either spiritually or physically, or is it the romantic notion of a plucky remnant surviving against all odds? Is it to manifest god's power or to maintain an outpost of mostly overlooked witness? These are rhetorical questions and I don't expect an answer; my recollection is that scripture speaks out both sides of its mouth in this respect, and it's one of the reasons for divergence within the church. You have your mainline denominations spending centuries building cathedrals for the ages, and you have your evangelicals hastily throwing up pole barns to harvest as many souls as possible before the imminent rapture. Whatever.

Again, though, I don't see the hand of god in this. I see idealism, empathy, love, and a desire to make meaning. Purely human traits -- that they happen to come at times under the umbrella of a particular religious organization does not impress me.

The effects of sin are wide-ranging and powerful. Sin will not be eradicated in this present world. But God will establish a sinless future in which there will be no more crying, sorrow, mourning, sickness, death, etc - after He has accomplished His purposes in this world. And certainly, Christians have worked to relieve suffering in this world, by establishing hospitals, orphanages, rescue missions, soup kitchens, schools, agriculture and water projects, etc. God calls us to love others in real tangible ways.

Secular groups (and Catholics, whom you don't classify as Christian) have also worked selflessly and often at great cost to relieve suffering in this world.

Even god seemed to realize that to displace a "no more crying, sorrow, mourning, sickeness, death" entirely into the indeterminate future and, often, not even a future in this dimension, wasn't going to cut it. That's why the Bible recounts so many demonstrations of god's power (miracles). Yet even these are conveniently displaced into the distant past, with most Christian groups circumspectly saying in one way or another, "miracles are not for today". But in truth, miracles would not be necessary -- steady progress towards better quality of life, safety, and stability visible over time and with an unmistakable causal connection between god's people and this progress would actually suffice. But I don't see that, either.

The Church is in many ways a human organization ... But ... I think Church history is replete with examples of the good impact of the Gospel on societies. I know that there might be some pushback here, but Catholicism is not Christianity - hasn't been since around 400AD.

Secular and church history are both replete with examples of good and bad impact of their activities upon societies. As for your minority view on Catholicism, it's not really germane for purposes of this discussion, as it simply places that particular denomination into the secular realm.

These are the very thoughts which the writer of Psalm 73 wrestled with >> why do the wicked often prosper, while the righteous suffer? Your wife's experience - along with your family's involvement in that process - is truly a sorrowful situation. Who would not grieve whenever anyone is suffering, esp for someone who's life was exemplary? However, I would not call her suffering 'pointless' - and I think if you were to review all that happened in her heart, in her family, with her friends & church, etc; that many good things came out of that situation.

From a certain perspective, nothing is "pointless" in the sense that you can always make a certain amount of lemonade out of lemons. But if I had the power to do so I would not, on balance, wish my life on someone else -- it would be an unkindness. All the truer concerning my wife, who had no quality of life at all for years and was really squeezing blood out of a turnip in that regard most of her adult life, which was cut off at the knees in her mid-twenties.

That said, my life would be, from the perspective of my wife, or some street beggar in Calcutta, or some denizen of a gulag somewhere in Sadististan, or even from the perspective of many people reading this diatribe, a great blessing. For that I am genuinely grateful and appreciative. But from the perspective of my own legitimate hopes, dreams, and aspirations, the most charitable thing I can say is that it's ... disappointing. If reincarnation were true and I had actually chosen this incarnation for myself, I would like to bitch slap myself silly over that.

Why do we wax poetic over the fact that "it could be much worse"? Nothing's so bad that it couldn't be at least a little worse. So what? What people really want is for their lives to be compelling, or short of that, to be meaningful by making the lives of others truly compelling in some way. Simply perpetuating the rinse-and-repeat cycle of suffering and uncertainty and worry is not, excuse me, worth the trouble. In my quest for something truly satisfying, I have found Christianity a time consuming and empty waste of time. I wish I could say I've found something better -- I'm man enough to admit I have not -- but I'm now convinced beyond any shadow of doubt I'll never find it in the bosom of the faith.

As a believer, most all of us love life - as it is a gift from God to be lived for His glory and the good of others. But theologically we know that "for me to live is Christ, and to die is gain."

This does not remove the real sorrow and suffering, but it does provide a context for what God is doing in the midst of tragedy.

Life? A gift? I don't know. It's an opportunity, a fighting chance to exist meaningfully. The fact that I'm sticking around to see what's next shows that life (or at least life's implied proposition of meaning) is not something I'm willing to give up lightly. But if even the Apostle Paul could admit that "to die is gain [for me]" then even a giant of the faith grows weary and detached and lets go. And that's a sad commentary on the whole proposition. Neither of us was consulted about being brought into existence. Whether it was a random conjugation of parental gametes or something more portentous that brings us to this conversation, it has cost us something to make it this far and it will cost us something to get to the clearing at the end of the path. Will we be justly compensated for that cost? Should we be? That is the fundamental question of human existence. My provisional answers: no, and yes.

The truth is that life is way too short, either to expend the energy on impotent rage at such patent injustices, or on multilayered rationalizations and excuses for such injustices. The only way out of the forest for me has been to quit imagining that life, either directly or through some proxy like some alleged promises of god, owes me anything or cares about me or mine. Existence is what it is. Deal with it.

But does this really satisfy your soul? Please don't take my comments as trite and cliched, but God reminds us not to love this life but to love Him and to look forward to our eternity together with Him and others. Tragedies in this world remind us of the ruination of sin - and we all feel its effects. God delivers from sin, sometimes here - but sometimes not. But God does and will deliver us from all sinful influence and effects in heaven.

Of course it doesn't satisfy my soul. But neither did pie-in-the-sky-by-and-by. I am not afraid to tell a Christian that I don't have a satisfying answer -- but neither am I afraid to say that I don't believe he has, either. Look what you just did -- you philosophically displaced all justice, meaning and comfort into the future. And not only the future, into a different plane of existence that you haven't seen, can't prove, and which isn't likely to exist. And this is supposed to be a more compelling proposition? Only for those capable of wishful thinking.

If suffering is pointless - there is no comfort, no higher purpose, no lasting good, nothing of any worth.

Ray, when I labeled my wife's suffering "pointless" I didn't mean it in some absolute sense. I meant that if "god is in control" as you folks are so fond of saying, and he wanted to make some kind of point by, to or through her by allowing or causing her to suffer, that point had long since been exhausted. It is rather like me wanting to make a point by crashing my car into your house, but then feeling the need to blow it up, bulldoze it, bury it, plant a park over it, and then nuke it. Alright already, we get it. You're pissed. We figured that out a long time ago.

That kind of pointless.

You would rightly think I had anger issues or a sadistic bent, and you'd be right.

And guess what, that's what I would have to think about your god, if I were able to still believe in him.

I've read The Problem of Pain and all the other attempts to deal with this. It doesn't provide even nearly sufficient rationalization for this kind of thing. I doubt that little Zara Baker probably would have found such ideas comforting as she was fed to the wood chipper, either. The work of the devil? Well where is the cavalry when you need it?

But God sent His Son to suffer & die - an unjust death for the Righteous Son of God. And yet God took that huge injustice and secured the salvation of all who would believe for all eternity. Thus the wisdom & power of God.

Salvation?? From a doom he himself imposed? Thankyewverymuch. Salvation?? From the pain and suffering of the world he provided for us? Thankyewverymuch. I don't know what to say to this anymore. I didn't ask to be born and I wasn't a naughty boy. I repented anyway and followed him. He treated me like crap. I can no longer exist in the alternate reality that is the Christian understanding of existence. It's too surreal and too fundamentally sadistic for me to bear.

If there were no Christianity I would have independently arrived at the conclusions I now hold to. These conclusions are based on observing what goes on around me and what happens to me without attempting to superimpose any hoped-for "higher" reality on it. Basically, I am nothing more (nor less) than an individuated bit of awareness that finds itself in a random, indifferent universe doing the best I can, along with other bits of awareness. If I had never been led by my faith to expect anything more than that, I would have been much more at peace about the whole thing, and I would have lived the life of detached curiosity that such an existence would inspire. I would not have counted on permanence in an existence where all is impermanent and transitory and finite and mortal. I would not have had my Bible-inspired immortality projects. I would have been much better off.

November 19, 2010

I went back and forth on what happened after death as a Christian. As BAA points out, quite well I think, there is a case to be made for a time of "sleep" after death and before the Judgement day when all are raised together. The parable of the rich man and Lazurus gives it a different spin that we are in a sort of holding area but conscious after death and then are raised together for judgement when we get to go to heaven/ hell. Either way we all are judged at the same time and the people who have died are not in heaven or hell now they are still waiting.

My church taught that the parable of the rich man and Lazurus told the truth about a real place that we go to after we die. They called the whole place Hades and said it was divided between Abraham's Bosom and the grave (the bad side). So there was a nice place and a bad place but not as good or bad as heaven or hell. So you die, breathe your last breath and end up in Hades. Its too late to repent, all you can do is wait for the end to come on Earth to be judged with every person who has ever lived. We did not believe in a rapture or in a 1000 year literal reign on earth. Judgement Day would be instantaneous and applicable to everyone.

I decided that the story was in fact a parable only meant to be a stern warning and not a literal story of a real place and that the dead 'sleep' a timeless, dreamless sleep until Jesus comes back. Exactly what BAA lays out is the conclusion I came to after studying the bible on the topic. Because death and the afterlife exist outside of time its really like everyone dies and comes to judgement at the same time. It made more sense than having an intermediate holding area for the dead, which is a very pagan concept (um hello "Hades"??). Of course a lot of Christians think people go straight to Heaven or Hell when they die but the Bible seems pretty clear that no one goes to either until after the day of Judgement when Jesus returns to Earth.

November 19, 2010

Lazarus and the rich man... not actual accounts of real events. They are symbols, metaphors told in the form of parables to increase the understanding of those hearing and reading these words. There is a difference between a parable and reality, you know Ray! So, the dialog between Lazarus and the rich man never actually happened, ok?

You are simply wrong. Scripture does not preface this account by stating this is a parable. And Jesus uses actual names for real people - not characteristic of parables. SO your talk of 'soul sleep' remains blather.

Predictable!

Ray's so in bondage to his slavish, robotic literalism that he needs God to preface every last parable, so that he knows when to take something literally and when not to! Walk! Don't walk!

So everything in verses 1 thru 13, highlighted in red below, is a p-a-r-a-b-l-e and doesn't involve actual people. Whereas verses 19 to 31 (in green) ,having no preface, must therefore be literally true and real, because God cannot tell a story to illustrate an important point?

Wowee Ray! Isn't it just great that God has indicated in scripture when you have to turn your 'Literalism' switch to the "On" position?

That must save you thinking for yourself and actually working out the real meaning of scripture!

Luke 16 (English Standard Version)

Luke 16

The Parable of the Dishonest Manager (Parable Alert!!!! Do not take this section literally!!!)

1He also said to the disciples, "There was a rich man who had(A) a manager, and charges were brought to him that this man was wasting his possessions. 2And he called him and said to him, 'What is this that I hear about you? Turn in the account of your( management, for you can no longer be manager.' 3And the manager said to himself, 'What shall I do, since my master is taking the management away from me? I am not strong enough to dig, and I am ashamed to beg. 4I have decided what to do, so that when I am removed from management, people may receive me into their houses.' 5So, summoning his master’s debtors one by one, he said to the first, 'How much do you owe my master?' 6He said, 'A hundred measures[a] of oil.' He said to him, 'Take your bill, and sit down quickly and write fifty.' 7Then he said to another, 'And how much do you owe?' He said, 'A hundred measures of wheat.' He said to him, 'Take your bill, and write eighty.' 8The master commended the dishonest manager for his© shrewdness. For(D) the sons of this world[c] are(E) more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light. 9And I tell you,(F) make friends for yourselves by means of(G) unrighteous wealth,[d] so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal dwellings.

10(H) "One who is(I) faithful in a very little is also faithful in much, and one who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much. 11If then you have not been faithful in the unrighteous wealth, who will entrust to you the true riches? 12And if you have not been faithful in(J) that which is another’s, who will give you that which is your own? 13(K) No servant can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money."

The Law and the Kingdom of God

14(L) The Pharisees, who were(M) lovers of money, heard all these things, and they(N) ridiculed him. 15And he said to them, "You are those who(O) justify yourselves before men, but(P) God knows your hearts. For what is exalted among men(Q) is an abomination in the sight of God.

16® "The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then(S) the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and(T) everyone forces his way into it.[e] 17But(U) it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.

Divorce and Remarriage

18(V) "Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.

The Rich Man and Lazarus (Literal Truth Advisory Notice. Treat this section as an absolutely correct, 100% verbatim report of actual events.)

19"There was a rich man who was clothed in(W) purple and fine linen and(X) who feasted sumptuously every day. 20And at his gate(Y) was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21who desired to be fed with(Z) what fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22The poor man died and was carried by(AA) the angels(AB) to Abraham’s side.[f] The rich man also died and was buried, 23and in(AC) Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and(AD) saw Abraham far off and Lazarus(AE) at his side. 24And he called out,(AF) 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and(AG) cool my tongue, for(AH) I am in anguish in this flame.' 25But Abraham said, 'Child, remember that(AI) you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. 26And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.' 27And he said, 'Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house— 28for I have five brothers[g]—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.' 29But Abraham said, 'They have(AJ) Moses and the Prophets;(AK) let them hear them.' 30And he said, 'No,(AL) father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' 31He said to him, 'If they do not hear(AM) Moses and the Prophets,(AN) neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.'"

Do you really think that the OT and NT writers actually wrote down scripture, all neatly broken down into chapters and verses, along with helpful heading like, "The Parable of..."?

No sir! Originally, the Hebrew and Koine scriptures had no such lines of demarcation. Nor any guidance as to what was parable and what wasn't. It was left to the readers to use their God-given brains and discover what God meant literally and what He didn't.

Here... http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/luk16.pdf Find me the heading that instructs you to take any part of this as parable. No, better still Ray. Find me any explanatory headings at all, anywhere in the Greek NT.

Don't bother, 'cos you won't. They aren't there. They were never there in the first place. They were added later, by men, who took it upon themselves to splice and dice both Testaments up into chapter and verse, to add marginal notes, footnotes and 'helpful' headings. You can try it in the OT too, if you like... http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm You'll make the same progress as with the NT - none at all.

The headings which you Literalists need to help you sort out what's true and what isn't, are a post-Biblical structure introduced into the pages of scripture by well-meaning Christians, centuries later. They never existed in God's original word. Sorry pal, but if you need them, then you're relying on pointers and guides which are NOT scripture. Kind of ironic, don't you think? Your obsession with literal truth has caused you stop thinking about the meaning of scripture and to start relying heavily on men's opinions and judgements. As I said before, it's your funeral.

Metaphor Alert!!! (No Ray. I didn't mean that you are about to die. It was a play on words, designed to convey a point. It's not literally true.)

Humans, being both physical and non-physical (possessing souls) cease to be active once we die. That is why Hebrews 9:27 says that we are destined to live only once and then to face judgement. No interval. Nothing in between the moment of death and the moment of resurrection. That is why the Bible uses the metaphor of sleep to describe this condition. It's the closest physical analogy to the timeless time a dead person undergoes, while they await the Second Coming. The sensation of dreamless sleep is the nearest thing we can ever know. That is why the Apostles used this metaphor to describe death. See it now?

Actually - this is just nutty.

That's good Ray. If you can't refute something or even present a decent counter-argument, just use insults.

6 So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight. 8 Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. 9 So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him.

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (2 Cor 5:6–9). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

See, when we are away from our bodies - we are at home with the Lord. To paraphrase Tom Hanks - "There's no sleeping in heaven!"

Did I say anything about sleeping in heaven? No.

So your feeble attempt to insinuate that I did fails. You've deliberately misinterpreted what I clearly and succinctly wrote - probably because you can't abide the thought of being shown to be wrong about anything!. Perversely unyielding to the core, eh Ray?

I said (and quoted the Apostle Paul who first wrote it) that the dead sleep until the Day of the Lord and then, once judged, they either enter the New Heaven or enter The Lake of Fire. Nobody sleeps in heaven. Nobody sleeps in The Lake of Fire. I never said that anyone sleeps in heaven, so shame on you for lying about my written words!

It's sequential. First mortal life, then the sleep of death, then resurrection, then judgement and then heaven. So the sleep of death is separated from heaven by what scripture says will happen - the resurrection and then the judgement of all.

Actually, you've shot yourself in the foot with the above quote Ray. It's not a counter-argument, because it backs up my p.o.v. Here's how...

"While we are at home in the body", refers to this life. "When we are at home with the Lord", refers to our new lives in heaven. Do you see how Paul talks about two and only two conditions? Home or away. There is no third or intermediate condition. That's because Paul is writing to Christian believers and couching his words of encouragement in terms of what they will experience. At home in their mortal bodies, they are un-judged and unclothed in their new imperishable bodies. Both of these things need to happen before they can be at home in heaven, with God. So, they will die (fall asleep) and then awaken to be judged and clothed with imperishable bodies. They will experience nothing in between. From their p.o.v., it's instantaneous (Paul uses the phrase, "in the twinkling of an eye", remember?) - one moment they are coming to the end of their mortal lives. Then, they awake in new bodies to rise and go home and be with God in heaven. No sleeping in heaven! The sleep precedes the Second Coming, as Paul eloquently describes.

Also, i notice that you slyly snipped out these verses...

1For we know that if(A) the tent that is( our earthly home is destroyed, we have a building from God,© a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. 2For in this tent(D) we groan, longing to(E) put on our heavenly dwelling, 3if indeed by putting it on[a] we may not be found naked. 4For while we are still in this tent, we groan, being burdened—not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed, so that what is mortal(F) may be swallowed up by life. 5He who has prepared us for this very thing is God,(G) who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.

Metaphor Alert!!!

The tent is not a real tent Ray. It's a metaphor for the transitory nature of this life and the temporary nature of our flesh and blood bodies. God has prepared an eternal home for us which Christians cannot inherit with mortal bodies. That is what putting on our heavenly dwelling means. No. Not using a building as an item of clothing. It's metaphorical. A tent is a temporary structure which is put up for a short time, lived in for a while and then taken down again. Paul is speaking in metaphorical terms about the temporary bodies that Christian souls inhabit in this life. Once their lives are over, the tent is taken down. It is not a structure that is fit for the permanence of heaven. That which is mortal will be swallowed up by (the true) life that begins when God makes everything new.

40 But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” 43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Luke 23:40–43). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

Here we see Jesus comforting the dying man by telling him about what he will experience. From the criminals p.o.v., he would be with Jesus the instant he died.

So, even though Jesus was hanging in agony on his cross, he still had compassion on a man he'd never met before. This man would have been in acute pain and torment too. What better way was there to ease the man's mind and give him hope? Hope of immediate deliverance from his current agony and deliverance from any fears the thief might have had about his sinful life - fears about eternal suffering and similar.

Did Jesus have the time and opportunity to patiently explain to the man that he would actually have to sleep until the Jesus returned? Perhaps for many millennia? Would the pain-stricken thief have understood? Wouldn't he desperately want deliverance from his agony as soon as possible? Yes, indeed! And Jesus promised this to him. Not in relentlessly literal detail, but in the best way that man could ask for - in terms of immediate comfort and peace on that day.

According to Ray, ON THAT DAY has to literally mean on that Tuesday or Saturday or whenever the crucifixion took place. There can be no other interpretation. Jesus cannot use a metaphor in this case. It's impossible! Never mind that it contradicts scripture.

So lemme get this straight - in BAA's paradise, we're just sleeping in 'timeless time.' Gee, this is so appealing - no wonder so many want to go to heaven.

Wrong again. Deliberately so. I did not say that paradise is a timeless time. The sleep of death, prior to the Second coming of Jesus is. Twisting my words to make a point is such a cheap and mean-spirited tactic Ray. Typical of you tho'.

but that with full courage now as always Christ will be honored in my body, whether by life or by death. 21 For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. 22 If I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. Yet which I shall choose I cannot tell. 23 I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better

The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Php 1:20–23). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

So again - we see that the gain in physical death is sleeping in 'timeless time' and Jesus must be sleeping, too.

By your twisted reasoning then Ray, if Jesus is sleeping then he must be dead. Are you denying His resurrection? Sounds like it.

After all, Paul said he desired to be with Christ. If he's unconscious, how does he know Christ is even there?

Paul will be with Christ, in just the same way as I described C.S. Lewis' transition.

Wow - the 'far better' is timeless sleeping >> BAA, I can't wait!!!

Seriously - where did you learn this wacky theology? Is this from Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copelend, Kenneth Hagin, & Jim Bakker?

You want me to join you in insulting other people? Sorry Ray, I don't mind insulting you - you've earned it. But I won't go where you are.

This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

So, your theology would restrict this first resurrection, given to the blessed and holy - and over which the second death (being cast into the Lake of Fire) has no power as applying only to a subset of Christians?

Correct! But you forget one salient detail. Look at verses 7 to 10. After that thousand years Satan is released and decieves the nations. Over these decieved, evil-doing people, the Lake of Fire does have power. They end up there!

BAA - that is truly whacked! No wonder you're an ex-C >> if this is an example of the theology you were subjected to previously.

An insult against the Pastor, Elders and congregation of the church I used to be a member of. Yes, Ray. We surely know you by your fruits.

So, a person of faith like C.S. Lewis would die (fall asleep) and then rise to stand before the throne of God. For him, there is nothing in between these two events. His mortal eyes close for the last time on his deathbed and his imperishable eyes open for the first time, once the last trumpet sounds - as is written in scripture. He sleeps and knows nothing, says nothing, understands nothing. Got that?

Paul anticipated (and Paul even experienced when he was caught up to the third heaven), as did the thief on the cross (from Jesus' own promise) - and we also see in the experience of Lazarus - that after physical death there is a conscious existence in Paradise, in the Lord's presence. You are so wrong about all this. Is there a school somewhere that teaches this nonsense?

Paul's experience in the third heaven was temporary and not in the body. Look at what scripture says about it 2 Corinthians 12 : 1 - 4. Even Paul, who experienced it wasn't sure if it happened in the body or not. But there is another way of finding out. A simple question.

Q. Did his companions see him vanish from the road leading to Damascus, only to re-appear again?

A. No they didn't.

Therefore, his physical body never left the Earth. His spirit was caught up to third heaven, not his physical body. I've covered this already. Our flesh and blood bodies cannot exist or endure in heaven, in God's presence. You should know this.

I've covered the instances of lazarus and the thief. If your literalism blinds you Ray. So be it.

BAA.

November 19, 2010

Ray is so dense. He doesn't get that he's preaching to the choir, and that these choir members already spied the marionette's strings attached to the conductor's limbs. The N.T. writers continue to pull all the christian leaders' strings, while congregations are mindlessly enraptured with the music. We're done singing the same old tunes, and have moved on to more beautiful and meaningful music.

November 20, 2010

rayskidude >> Paul anticipated - and Paul even experienced when he was caught up to the third heaven- as did the thief on the cross (from Jesus' own promise) - and we also see in the experience of Lazarus - that after physical death there is a conscious existence in Paradise, in the Lord's presence. You are so wrong about all this. Is there a school somewhere that teaches this nonsense?

Actually - you're understanding of the three passages I presented are simply wrong-headed. I'm happy to have anyone look at these verses - it's obvious that having passed from this life, believers are in paradise, God's presence. There's no 'soul sleep' afterwards; that's just a metaphor employed to communicate that physical death is a temporary state.

You're wrong in context - again you didn't answer what I said about Luke 16, not stated by Jesus as being a parable, and the use of proper names. And youn are way wrong about the thief on the cross. And did you even really address Paul's statements in II Cor and Philippians?

Again I ask a simple question - what is the Christian school which promotes such poor hermeneutics and who are the Christian authorities/theologians who teach these wrong-headed notions?

Question For The Christians

Recommended Posts

Guest end3

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

DesertBob

DesertBob

Mister Pappy

Posted Images

Crazy Donna

Link to comment

Share on other sites

bdp

Link to comment

Share on other sites

bornagainathiest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

bornagainathiest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

DesertBob

Link to comment

Share on other sites

rayskidude

Link to comment

Share on other sites

rayskidude

Link to comment

Share on other sites

rayskidude

Link to comment

Share on other sites

DesertBob

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest Valk0010

Link to comment

Share on other sites

DesertBob

Link to comment

Share on other sites

bornagainathiest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

DesertBob

Link to comment

Share on other sites

agnosticator

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Crazy Donna

Link to comment

Share on other sites

rayskidude

Link to comment

Share on other sites

rayskidude

Link to comment

Share on other sites

rayskidude

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Ouroboros

Link to comment

Share on other sites

DesertBob

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Midnight-mindwanderings

Link to comment

Share on other sites

bornagainathiest

Link to comment

Share on other sites