Why Some Christians Leave Such a Bad Taste in One's Mouth After They Speak

Skwim · Jun 10, 2018

The following is from an article in Answers in Genesis by Dr. Georgia Purdom, *

"It was a rainy Monday evening when I arrived on the campus of my alma mater, Ohio State University, to watch the movie The Unbelievers. The movie was an insider look at the travels and ideas of famed atheists Dr. Richard Dawkins and Dr. Lawrence Krauss as they traverse the world in their crusade “against religion and for science.” Many of the moviegoers proudly wore shirts emblazoned with a red letter “A” for atheism, and some even brought their children. Dawkins and Krauss were present at the event and participated in a Q&A after the showing.

The tagline for the movie was, “What are you willing to believe?” but that is not really the correct question. Atheists inherently know the God of the Bible exists, so the question should be, “Why do you willfully suppress what you already know is true?” (Romans 1:18).

Then there was this little bit of contrived creationist misrepresentation, which comes as no surprise.

By far the biggest fallacy in the movie was the equivocation of observational science with historical science. One example of this was when Dawkins, in trying to correct what he considered people’s false views concerning evolution, said that there was never a first rabbit or first human—that everything born from its parents looks like it parents. He explained the reason for this is that change is so slow and gradual that it is imperceptible. Of course this excuses evolutionists from having to find fossil evidence of evolution (so-called transitional forms) because the changes are so minute that they presumably wouldn’t be detectable in the fossils.
source

* "Dr. Georgia Purdom holds a PhD in molecular genetics from The Ohio State University. Dr. Purdom is the Ministry Content Administrator." Whatever that is.

.

.

Subduction Zone · Jun 10, 2018

It is hard to find a more disgusting Christian than Dr. Purdham. She works for Answers in Genesis where one has to swear not to use the scientific method. That makes her attacks on scientists incredibly hypocritical.

Samantha Rinne · Jun 10, 2018

Christians are "mean" to atheists because they are human, and get angry and everything like that. Btw, you're making the same exact mistake as the Pharisees of old. That could have something to do with their reproach.

New Atheists Are the New Pharisees -

You get mad at Christians for preaching to you, or especially being judgemental to you. But that's some serious blind spot or double standard there. It's like this. You want them to be morally perfect, but you aren't morally perfect. In fact nobody is. So why want them to be that way? There are Christians that try to be morally perfect, but these guys are insufferable. To be human is to be imperfect.

Atheists think as many Christians mistakenly do, that to be Christian is to be morally perfect. But moralism isn't Christianity. To be Christian is to be a drunk, a whore, a weirdo, an outcast. And to know it. And still know you are loved by God, and to reach out to others.

Thief · Jun 10, 2018

Samantha Rinne said:
Christians are "mean" to atheists because they are human, and get angry and everything like that. Btw, you're making the same exact mistake as the Pharisees of old. That could have something to do with their reproach.

New Atheists Are the New Pharisees -

You get mad at Christians for preaching to you, or especially being judgemental to you. But that's some serious blind spot or double standard there. It's like this. You want them to be morally perfect, but you aren't morally perfect. In fact nobody is. So why want them to be that way? There are Christians that try to be morally perfect, but these guys are insufferable. To be human is to be imperfect.

Atheists think as many Christians mistakenly do, that to be Christian is to be morally perfect. But moralism isn't Christianity. To be Christian is to be a drunk, a whore, a weirdo, an outcast. And to know it. And still know you are loved by God, and to reach out to others.

and Jesus is quoted to say.....
Be thou perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect

high standard
and can anyone do so?

I try......but I doubt the standard will be mine

Samantha Rinne · Jun 10, 2018

Thief said:
and Jesus is quoted to say.....
Be thou perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect

high standard
and can anyone do so?

I try......but I doubt the standard will be mine

Yes, he does say that. And it's deeply misunderstood.

An Imperfect God

The idea of God as perfect translates from Greek. But the Hebrew concept of God is different. Read the Old Testament and tell me how that measures up to the concept of perfect. It doesn't.

I used to believe as you guys do (but then I took an arrow to the knee) but then I read a book The Gifts of Imperfection. It's not a religious book really, it's a self-help book. But then I was in a church one Sunday and the guy was explaining that there are 612 laws in the Jewish code. "Why are there so many?" he asks rhetorically. "So you'll fail." Like the threshing in the Dark Prism book, you're supposed to fail (almost two people didn't, but they were basically with abilities outside what could be tested). Grace is about not being perfect. It is about being perfect as God is perfect, and loved for it. But God is not perfect. I seem to remember Jesus himself basically killing a helpless fig tree for no good reason. But he loves us. All of us. Even when we fail to do that to others.

Btw, life isn't perfect either. Right now, my parents are having some sort of argument. And my house has cracks from frequent rain. And yet, I wouldn't leave either. Nor my church, even though the priest has a wildly different take on the gospel from me.

Subduction Zone · Jun 10, 2018

Samantha Rinne said:
Christians are "mean" to atheists because they are human, and get angry and everything like that. Btw, you're making the same exact mistake as the Pharisees of old. That could have something to do with their reproach.

New Atheists Are the New Pharisees -

You get mad at Christians for preaching to you, or especially being judgemental to you. But that's some serious blind spot or double standard there. It's like this. You want them to be morally perfect, but you aren't morally perfect. In fact nobody is. So why want them to be that way? There are Christians that try to be morally perfect, but these guys are insufferable. To be human is to be imperfect.

Atheists think as many Christians mistakenly do, that to be Christian is to be morally perfect. But moralism isn't Christianity. To be Christian is to be a drunk, a whore, a weirdo, an outcast. And to know it. And still know you are loved by God, and to reach out to others.

Rather poor article by an admittedly immoral person. He can't see how people can be moral without God. That is an admission to a lack of morals of his own. What he sadly does not realize that even the God of the Bible does not have a "transcendent moral standard". The God of the Bible clearly has poorer morals than atheists and most people in general. Morals do not need a transcendent source, or an objective source. That is a rather ignorant demand to say the least.

Skwim · Jun 10, 2018

Samantha Rinne said:
Christians are "mean" to atheists because they are human, and get angry and everything like that. Btw, you're making the same exact mistake as the Pharisees of old. That could have something to do with their reproach.
You get mad at Christians for preaching to you, or especially being judgemental to you. But that's some serious blind spot or double standard there. It's like this. You want them to be morally perfect, but you aren't morally perfect. In fact nobody is. So why want them to be that way? There are Christians that try to be morally perfect, but these guys are insufferable. To be human is to be imperfect.
Atheists think as many Christians mistakenly do, that to be Christian is to be morally perfect. But moralism isn't Christianity. To be Christian is to be a drunk, a whore, a weirdo, an outcast. And to know it. And still know you are loved by God, and to reach out to others.

Just chock-full of generalizations and pompous conceit aren't you. Kind of amusing.

.

Samantha Rinne · Jun 11, 2018

Ah right, that's why it looked so empty, I wasn't seeing Skwim due to block/hide. To answer that question, I am only reporting what I'm seeing.

You hold others to impossible standards, yet you fail to understand that this was never what Jesus was about.

The Greeks believed, as you do, Subduction, that a God who is imperfect moral standard (flooding the Earth cuz he's upset or send fire and brimstone come to mind) would be looked down upon, that such a God is beneath what regular people are like, so they shy away from describing God that way. Omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, omniscient. They want to see God as beyond reproach, perfect, etc. The Muslims also see Allah this way, that he's some sort of being we cannot possibly understand.

But I tell you this is a false god.

When a deity is beyond understanding, beyond faults, how can he possibly listen to our prayers? At the very best, he would be like a patronizing father who acted like we were just idiots that couldn't get it right. Somewhere in the middle, it is completely irrelevant to worship this guy, as he's basically a narcissist that doesn't care about humans, or might as well be as he never gets mad at us nor praises us. At the worst, any sin at all, anything not reaching perfection would be completely abhorrent to him. That a god hated his people would be imperfect as well, but the wrong kind of imperfect. This would be a god we would have nothing to do with, not a God to worship.

To answer your question, yes, people can be moral without God. But being moral was never what this was about.

John 7:63. Laws are about physical actions, but these are arbitrary, and don't help anyone. A moral code is something given by every system, but it isn't the purpose of Christianity. If that were so, we could stop at Judaism. But it's not so. I'll tell you another priest story. I had left home, I was having trouble securing jobs, and I found would at a farm that was also the site of a California chapter of Twelve Tribes, a 7th Day Adventist offshoot. Basically, they were a cult. They had marriage "pre-enactments", they slept in yurts, one of the other people there burned all of his art because the elder said it was no good, another person ran screaming into the water to be baptized, and they talked endlessly (it was near Easter Passover) about "removing the leaven from your life." I snuck out the back, and packed up. I had one of the elders try to tell me that because my parents weren't a part of their church, they were going to second death (a minority view in Christianity, I assure you). I know you guys don't know me well, but I have a bit of a yandere (protective scary psycho type) side to me. People hurt my friends or family, and I get kinda creepy. I gave him my best "I'll kill you if you keep talking" glare and kept packing. I drove out of the cult gate, out of the mountain, and got as far away as possible driving from Valley Center (yes seriously that was the name), CA all the way up to a campground outside Sacramento. The next day, I cleaned myself up, and went to a random church. So, for the Easter sermon, the priest started talking about Jewish blood offerings for atonement of sins. It was very dry, and I didn't see the point, but then she did basically a beat pause employed by actors and comedians, and then said something powerful, "We don't have to do that anymore." You don't have to do that anymore! You don't have to live about how much money you make. Or how good a person you are, or how many people like you. Or whether celebrities know your name, or whether you have been living your life well as opposed to frittering your time playing video games. You don't have to abide by someone's morality. You don't have to keep making those sacrifices of your time or money or energy, trying to please other people. You don't have to bother with that stuff. The offering was made, it's cool.

This is about a love relationship with God. As Bride and Groom, in fact.

Isaiah 54:5: “For your Maker is your husband, the LORD of hosts is his name; and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer, the God of the whole earth he is called."

Ephesians 5:25: “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, ..."

The Church (the people of God, not the building) are the Bride of Christ. It says similar stuff throughout the Bible.

I know of God, but I don't call God by any of the formal names. You know what I call God? Emily. And I call Jesus as Kara. Our relationship is meant to be personal, and possibly romantic. Go to your girlfriend or boyfriend, today, and tell them you love them. That's all you will need to be in Heaven. But do it fast before they break up with you, and send you to Hell.

Jainarayan · Jun 11, 2018

Anyone wanting to find these "non-existent" transitional fossils need look no further than the evolution of whales. Evolution of cetaceans - Wikipedia

Samantha Rinne · Jun 11, 2018

Okay... Are you on the wrong thread?

outlawState · Jun 11, 2018

Samantha Rinne said:
Christians are "mean" to atheists because they are human, and get angry and everything like that. Btw, you're making the same exact mistake as the Pharisees of old. That could have something to do with their reproach.

New Atheists Are the New Pharisees -

Yes, atheists are hypocrites, for sure.

Samantha Rinne said:
You get mad at Christians for preaching to you, or especially being judgemental to you. But that's some serious blind spot or double standard there. It's like this. You want them to be morally perfect, but you aren't morally perfect. In fact nobody is. So why want them to be that way? There are Christians that try to be morally perfect, but these guys are insufferable. To be human is to be imperfect.

There are Christians who confound moral perfection with political correctness that are utterly insufferable - in fact one doubts that they are Christians - but moral perfection is certainly not insufferable, although its parody is. As you say, moral perfection doesn't exist.

Samantha Rinne said:
Atheists think as many Christians mistakenly do, that to be Christian is to be morally perfect. But moralism isn't Christianity. To be Christian is to be a drunk, a whore, a weirdo, an outcast. And to know it. And still know you are loved by God, and to reach out to others.

No, there are definitely no Christian "whores" or "drunkards" unless they are repentent and it is in the past.

Samantha Rinne · Jun 11, 2018

Uhhhh okay...

outlawState said:
Yes, atheists are hypocrites, for sure.

There are Christians who confound moral perfection with political correctness that are utterly insufferable - in fact one doubts that they are Christians - but moral perfection is certainly not insufferable, although its parody is. As you say, moral perfection doesn't exist.

No, there are definitely no Christian "whores" or "drunkards" unless they are repentent and it is in the past.

Everyone is a hypocrite. There is no person on Earth who doesn't have a double standard or blind spot. Atheists simply have a common one to atheists. It's the schoolteacher fallacy. And yes, I did coin that term, you might not find it online.

It's like this. At one time, schoolteachers were not allowed to be married, to smoke, to see men, to become pregnant, etc. It was viewed as part of who they were that they were seen as a morally perfect, at the expense of being normal and having a life. Priests especially get this in full force, but I'm honestly surprised . God, that's ignorant. I'm a preacher's kid. Trust me. It isn't so. My dad overeats, occasionally goes to Hooters. I've heard "you're supposed to be a priest's kid" enough that I hate it too.

I said zero about political correctness, thank you. I said moral perfection, or more precisely moral perfectionism. This is what I'm talked about, legalism, and it's as common among Christians as atheists.

Outside the Catholic faith, we don't do excommunications, not that I know of. So no, there is no built-in expectation to be somehow be clean of all flaws.

In fact...

Matthew 11:19. Jesus himself gets called a drunk

And Jesus also forgave several women who were either adulterers or prostitutes. And so do some of the better Christians.

Beauty from Brokenness: These Christians are trying to restore dignity among sex workers - Premier Christianity

Yet, despite the relationships of trust the teams have developed over nine years, integrating those relationships into the wider church community has been challenging. Julian explains regretfully, “No matter what we’ve tried to do, we’ve only had one girl come to church for an event we did.” He doesn’t put this down to a fault in his team’s evangelistic ability, but rather the way the women view themselves: “We put on events for them to try and get them down…we’ve even had our volunteers try and pay for their time…[But] they won’t even do that.” His team have had women refuse any invitation to church, saying, “How could I possibly do that living the life I’m living?”

You talk a good game about how it's about the church judging you, but sometimes it's just self-judging. Nobody cares about how you grew up, they just want to see you happy.

Jumi · Jun 12, 2018

Skwim said:
The tagline for the movie was, “What are you willing to believe?” but that is not really the correct question. Atheists inherently know the God of the Bible exists, so the question should be, “Why do you willfully suppress what you already know is true?” (Romans 1:18).

Everyone else is wrong, but they do know I'm right although they lie because they're haters. I got it down in writing to prove it... [/sarcasm]

I think what stuff like that does is it just plays to their base (yes, it's purely politics, no care for truth) and alienates everyone else.

outlawState · Jun 12, 2018

Samantha Rinne said:
Uhhhh okay...
Everyone is a hypocrite. There is no person on Earth who doesn't have a double standard or blind spot. Atheists simply have a common one to atheists. It's the schoolteacher fallacy. And yes, I did coin that term, you might not find it online.

Some are more hypocritical than others. For some hypocrisy is a profession, a way of life, even a religious entitlement. It's those who Jesus was getting at, and yes this category includes priests and lawyers par excellence, but also atheists. The atheist "religion" is the definition and experience of hypocrisy.

Samantha Rinne said:
It's like this. At one time, schoolteachers were not allowed to be married, to smoke, to see men, to become pregnant, etc.

Female school teachers before WWI?

Samantha Rinne said:
It was viewed as part of who they were that they were seen as a morally perfect, at the expense of being normal and having a life.

I am not sure that was the only reason. There probably wasn't sufficient demand to justify married school teachers prior to WWI. Women who were married were supported by their husbands, therefore they did not need jobs. Single women did. So single women were preferred. And reasonably high standards are expected of them now, as then.

Samantha Rinne said:
Priests especially get this in full force, but I'm honestly surprised . God, that's ignorant. I'm a preacher's kid. Trust me. It isn't so. My dad overeats, occasionally goes to Hooters. I've heard "you're supposed to be a priest's kid" enough that I hate it too.

Yes, priests or anyone who lives by their reputation have to be hyper-careful as if they are found out, it can be curtains on their career.

But priests have another reason. They cannot before God continue in their career if they are not blameless.

Tit 1:7
Since an overseer manages God's household, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain.

Samantha Rinne said:
I said zero about political correctness, thank you. I said moral perfection, or more precisely moral perfectionism. This is what I'm talked about, legalism, and it's as common among Christians as atheists.

Political correctness is legalism. It's just another more modern term for it. Legalism is case of mistaking Satan (the political god of this word) for God (the non-political ruler of the heavenly world). The Jewish legalists in Jesus' day were described by him as satan worshippers by choice.

Atheists tend to be captivated by Satan, enslaved &etc. Both religious legalists and atheists will be ensnared by political correctness, but often atheists also lack any standards or morality at all (not all of them though).

Samantha Rinne said:
Outside the Catholic faith, we don't do excommunications, not that I know of. So no, there is no built-in expectation to be somehow be clean of all flaws.

It is why Christianity and Catholicism are not the same thing.

Samantha Rinne said:
In fact...

Matthew 11:19. Jesus himself gets called a drunk

And Jesus also forgave several women who were either adulterers or prostitutes. And so do some of the better Christians.

Yet Jesus was being slandered, and the women were reformed (Mary Magdalene had 7 devils driven out of her).

Samantha Rinne said:
Beauty from Brokenness: These Christians are trying to restore dignity among sex workers - Premier Christianity

You talk a good game about how it's about the church judging you, but sometimes it's just self-judging. Nobody cares about how you grew up, they just want to see you happy.

I think "dignity amongst sex workers" is an illusion if they repent not. The only way forward for such is to repent completely. If that is what these Christians are trying to achieve, fine, but it takes a will to repent and not all are willing.

I am quite convinced that I am judged by Roman Catholicism and Catholics in general as a heretic (except those within Catholicism who regard the papacy as the man of Sin). Papal bigots hate me, because I denounce the papacy as corrupt and worthless and linked to Cybele worship and ancient paganism.

Samantha Rinne · Jun 12, 2018

Pets snow leopard... Gonna try to put comments in blue, to not have to chunk up these quotes.

outlawState said:
Some are more hypocritical than others. For some hypocrisy is a profession, a way of life, even a religious entitlement. It's those who Jesus was getting at, and yes this category includes priests and lawyers par excellence, but also atheists. The atheist "religion" is the definition and experience of hypocrisy.

I dunno if I'd really call atheism the definition of hypocrisy any more than others.

Female school teachers before WWI?

I am not sure that was the only reason. There probably wasn't sufficient demand to justify married school teachers prior to WWI. Women who were married were supported by their husbands, therefore they did not need jobs. Single women did. So single women were preferred. And reasonably high standards are expected of them now, as then.

I think the point I'm trying to make is there is an artificial standard. That somehow to be a teacher is not to be a regular human being. Oh no, it was definitely about morals. They didn't want women smoking or drinking (or having fun, really) so if you got pregnant, you were toast, or if you were dating, etc. You were expected to be chaste. This goes for priests too, but also for lay Christians. Outsiders are really really stupid concerning their outlook of what Christians can and can't do. There was some movie I watched awhile back where this girl inherited her sister's children, and the other one was like "wtf? Why am I not godmother?" She raises them pretty well and enters them into a Protestant church school. The priest helps her out but she's like super afraid that he'd get tossed out if he marries her, cuz she has the hots for him. Ummmmmm no, that's Catholic.

Yes, priests or anyone who lives by their reputation have to be hyper-careful as if they are found out, it can be curtains on their career.

It depends heavily on the culture and how desperate things are. If the culture is such that the average teacher or doctor or whatever cannot reasonably be paid, it is possible nobody will blame you. In Columbia, professionals wind up doing this to make ends meet because they can't manage to land a job there (basketcase economy). And there was at least one teacher (probably more common than you'd think) who resorted to prostitution to make ends meet. Schoolteacher salary is something to sneeze at.

But priests have another reason. They cannot before God continue in their career if they are not blameless.

Tit 1:7
Since an overseer manages God's household, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain.

We passed by a Baptist church in the south attended mostly by blacks. The sign said something "I used to be a drunk/cocaine addict/whatever else." In the black community I am told this sort of sentiment where the priest used to be a sinner is actually an inspiration. Granted, you would hope they weren't currently doing cocaine, but this is known as backsliding. It does happen, among both lay and priests. And no, they don't immediately throw you out of the church, they try to get you treated. It is important to remember that none of us are blameless before God (Romans 3:9-19) yet Jesus forgave our sins (1 Corinthians 6:10-11). Some priests do get defrocked, but this is up to their superiors, and usually reserved for something like priests "going native." It is in fact important that the priest not be so above it all that they can't relate to their congregation, but if they lose their message to the community, they are no longer priests (to be "in the world, but not of it"). And yet, priests, just like cops, teachers, and so on, do in fact have moments where they are off-duty. They are not likely to start killing people in their down-time, but this business of holding them to some standard of near sainthood is silly. If my dad would anything like a saint, I'd be weirded out.

Political correctness is legalism. It's just another more modern term for it. Legalism is case of mistaking Satan (the political god of this word) for God (the non-political ruler of the heavenly world). The Jewish legalists in Jesus' day were described by him as satan worshippers by choice.

It might be. But it wasn't what I was talking about. I am talking about the idea of unreasonable standards for the church, and even in the church.

Atheists tend to be captivated by Satan, enslaved &etc. Both religious legalists and atheists will be ensnared by political correctness, but often atheists also lack any standards or morality at all (not all of them though).

I have no opinion.

It is why Christianity and Catholicism are not the same thing.

No argument there. I've long believed this.

Yet Jesus was being slandered, and the women were reformed (Mary Magdalene had 7 devils driven out of her).

I think "dignity amongst sex workers" is an illusion if they repent not. The only way forward for such is to repent completely. If that is what these Christians are trying to achieve, fine, but it takes a will to repent and not all are willing.

It is a heated debate amongst Christians whether Jesus came to save all sinners, or just repentant ones. I personally believe that the idea of Hell is an illusion we humans come up with. It WAS a thing, sorta (the place was Sheol and everyone went there) but I believe in universal grace, and I believe that the reason Hell exists is because we have a knowledge of Good and Evil, and judge ourselves unworthy of anything else. Strictly speaking, this is Satan accusing us. But here's the thing. If we say "my sin is too great for God to forgive" then we make Jesus's sacrifice into a lie, that he died for nothing.

Does this mean that the dead like Adolf Hitler are not punished? He probably is. But I make a distinction between eternal punishment and irredeemable punishment. I believe the unrighteous dead are simply not saved. They are punished and then sent back to Earth for a do-over. Yeah, I believe in rebirth even though it is widely regarded as heresy among most Christians. Their next life has a chance for salvation (1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9; Ezekiel 18:23; Matthew 23:37). If we have one life to get it right, without God's grace, none of us will succeed. And I believe that the standards of what is forgiven is far different from what we see as good or evil.

I am quite convinced that I am judged by Roman Catholicism and Catholics in general as a heretic (except those within Catholicism who regard the papacy as the man of Sin). Papal bigots hate me, because I denounce the papacy as corrupt and worthless and linked to Cybele worship and ancient paganism.

Oh I am definitely a heretic. Who cares? If Jesus came again, he would probably not be Catholic. Wine and bread does not literally becomes the body and blood of Christ. It's a symbol. And salvation by works is no different from living under the Law. Plus, it seems like priests messing with little boys, and nuns being disciplinarians accounts for more than the share of loss of religion.

outlawState · Jun 12, 2018

Samantha Rinne said:
t is a heated debate amongst Christians whether Jesus came to save all sinners, or just repentant ones. I personally believe that the idea of Hell is an illusion we humans come up with.

It was Jesus who came up with it, but he was a human, I'll grant you. He spoke of gehenna (lake of fire) distinct from sheol.

Samantha Rinne said:
It WAS a thing, sorta (the place was Sheol and everyone went there) but I believe in universal grace, and I believe that the reason Hell exists is because we have a knowledge of Good and Evil, and judge ourselves unworthy of anything else. Strictly speaking, this is Satan accusing us. But here's the thing. If we say "my sin is too great for God to forgive" then we make Jesus's sacrifice into a lie, that he died for nothing.

I agree with the latter, No sin is too great to be forgiven except resistance to and blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. There is sin that leads to death. 1 John 5:16b

The problem is that the longer you leave it to repent, the less likely you are to repent because the sin that takes over is rejection of the Holy Spirit. Then you're in a bad way. You simply can't repent, like Pharoah.

Samantha Rinne said:
Does this mean that the dead like Adolf Hitler are not punished? He probably is. But I make a distinction between eternal punishment and irredeemable punishment. I believe the unrighteous dead are simply not saved. They are punished and then sent back to Earth for a do-over.

Yeah, I believe in rebirth even though it is widely regarded as heresy among most Christians. Their next life has a chance for salvation (1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9; Ezekiel 18:23; Matthew 23:37).

The verses talking about God's will mean that it is no longer his will just to save the Jews alone and those living under the law. It extends to all men (disproving Calvinism). However there is nothing in the bible about physical rebirth or reincarnation, although some people allege it, but more likely demonic possession of some kind in those alleging to have been re-incarnated.

Samantha Rinne said:
If we have one life to get it right, without God's grace, none of us will succeed. And I believe that the standards of what is forgiven is far different from what we see as good or evil.

Jesus made it clear that to be forgiven we have to repent. We can't just rely on our baptism. We have to become holy ourselves, otherwise "even what he had will be taken away from him" (parable of the talents). Matthew 13:12

Samantha Rinne said:
Oh I am definitely a heretic. Who cares? If Jesus came again, he would probably not be Catholic.

I suspect not.

Samantha Rinne said:
Wine and bread does not literally becomes the body and blood of Christ. It's a symbol. And salvation by works is no different from living under the Law. Plus, it seems like priests messing with little boys, and nuns being disciplinarians accounts for more than the share of loss of religion.

I think what you meant is "justification by works is no different from living under the Law." I agree. However to be saved we must do the works that God wants us to do, not only relying on the cross (cf. parable of the talents). We have to put our forgiveness to good use.

Samantha Rinne · Jun 12, 2018

I think the only thing I'd add to this, is that repenting isn't so much about some grand gestures (alot of ppl get that association) and more a generalized turning (or "turning back") to God. As I said earlier, more important than earthly laws (Matthew 15:9) is a relationship. This what it's about, remaining in love with God. Pharaoh die, because he hardened his heart, against not only God but his adoptive kin, Moses.

I am very much a universalist, but I am neither a Catholic nor a Calvinist (fatalism sucks), because I see the story of God much more of a love story. There's alot of duties to forgive and help the poor, but ultimately, this too along with the old law, is a standard one can fall short of, which is why grace is never about what we deserve.

The reason, I came to the conclusion of rebirth, is somewhat from syncretism, but ultimately, my notion of rebirth is very Christianized, since it's effectively based on this passage. "Nobody can come to the Father without being born again."
(Btw, Max Lucado writes a book on John 3:16, where he discusses the word for born again, anōthen, and describes it as similar to rather than someone making a reproduction of Mona Lisa, getting the original artist to do it again. This is God's redo of the person in a new and more perfect way, not a reproduction)
Now, typically, this means spiritual rebirth, but... throughout history there have been many people who were born completely away from the Gospel. They live, they die, they never hear it. Some of these were born before it, some are in remote regions. So how does the message of a Savior spread to weird times and places?

Well, in a quite interesting way.

Suppose you were born in 450 BC. You likely don't get exposed to Jesus. Now, next time, you're born in 1160 AD, and you definitely grow up hearing about Jesus. Suppose then, you want your siblings and your mother from back then to be saved (Luke 16:28), and they live in ancient Egypt. You get reborn slightly before that as a priest (reincarnation doesn't work only forwards), and come up with an Egyptian myth about Osiris resurrecting after his body is destroyed. Atheists like to show how other myths are "stolen" to supply the Christian myth. They've got it backwards. The Savior is a universal, because the Savior is a real being. He came into history at different points because there was no single Jesus limited by history, he was eternal like God (John 1:2).

What I'm suggesting is those who are saved become part of the Body of Christ, and are able to preach to others even before the time of Jesus. They simply use the terms of the day. This also means the Second Coming will probably happen in the past, not the future. Notice, I used the prophetic perfect tense. That's what I think is meant by the fullness of time. Supposedly, the last enemy to be defeated is death. How does one do that? By disposing of the ravages of time, looping existence so matter no longer decays.

outlawState · Jun 13, 2018

Samantha Rinne said:
I think the only thing I'd add to this, is that repenting isn't so much about some grand gestures (alot of ppl get that association) and more a generalized turning (or "turning back") to God. As I said earlier, more important than earthly laws (Matthew 15:9) is a relationship. This what it's about, remaining in love with God. Pharaoh die, because he hardened his heart, against not only God but his adoptive kin, Moses.

I am very much a universalist, but I am neither a Catholic nor a Calvinist (fatalism sucks), because I see the story of God much more of a love story. There's alot of duties to forgive and help the poor, but ultimately, this too along with the old law, is a standard one can fall short of, which is why grace is never about what we deserve.

I agree

Samantha Rinne said:
The reason, I came to the conclusion of rebirth, is somewhat from syncretism, but ultimately, my notion of rebirth is very Christianized, since it's effectively based on this passage. "Nobody can come to the Father without being born again."
(Btw, Max Lucado writes a book on John 3:16, where he discusses the word for born again, anōthen, and describes it as similar to rather than someone making a reproduction of Mona Lisa, getting the original artist to do it again. This is God's redo of the person in a new and more perfect way, not a reproduction)
Now, typically, this means spiritual rebirth, but... throughout history there have been many people who were born completely away from the Gospel. They live, they die, they never hear it. Some of these were born before it, some are in remote regions. So how does the message of a Savior spread to weird times and places?

The answer to your question may lie in the following:

1Pe 3:18
For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

1Pe 3:19
By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

1Pe 3:20
Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

It may be the case that the dead who never heard the gospel get "preached to."I recall that Jesus said "to God all are alive" which tends to preclude re-incarnation as a person remains alive to God when they die, and opens up the possibility of interaction with God even whilst dead.

Luk 20:38
He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.”

Samantha Rinne said:
Well, in a quite interesting way.

Suppose you were born in 450 BC. You likely don't get exposed to Jesus. Now, next time, you're born in 1160 AD, and you definitely grow up hearing about Jesus. Suppose then, you want your siblings and your mother from back then to be saved (Luke 16:28), and they live in ancient Egypt. You get reborn slightly before that as a priest (reincarnation doesn't work only forwards), and come up with an Egyptian myth about Osiris resurrecting after his body is destroyed. Atheists like to show how other myths are "stolen" to supply the Christian myth. They've got it backwards.

Recall haow Luke 16 continues:

Luk 16:30
“ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’

Luk 16:31
“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”

It tends to suggest that there is a degree of wickedness that means in some cases repentance is impossible, so no point to re-incarnation, no point in anything.

Samantha Rinne said:
The Savior is a universal, because the Savior is a real being. He came into history at different points because there was no single Jesus limited by history, he was eternal like God (John 1:2).

I do not believe that Jesus ever came into history apart from by Mary. God worked through the angels in the Old Testament. They represented themselves as YHWH.

Gal 3:19
Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator.

Samantha Rinne said:
What I'm suggesting is those who are saved become part of the Body of Christ, and are able to preach to others even before the time of Jesus. They simply use the terms of the day. This also means the Second Coming will probably happen in the past, not the future. Notice, I used the prophetic perfect tense. That's what I think is meant by the fullness of time. Supposedly, the last enemy to be defeated is death. How does one do that? By disposing of the ravages of time, looping existence so matter no longer decays.

It might be so, but if it is so (i.e. those who are saved become part of the Body of Christ, and are able to preach to others even before the time of Jesus) then why does one need re-incarnation?

Audie · Jul 1, 2018

Skwim said:
The following is from an article in Answers in Genesis by Dr. Georgia Purdom, *

"It was a rainy Monday evening when I arrived on the campus of my alma mater, Ohio State University, to watch the movie The Unbelievers. The movie was an insider look at the travels and ideas of famed atheists Dr. Richard Dawkins and Dr. Lawrence Krauss as they traverse the world in their crusade “against religion and for science.” Many of the moviegoers proudly wore shirts emblazoned with a red letter “A” for atheism, and some even brought their children. Dawkins and Krauss were present at the event and participated in a Q&A after the showing.

The tagline for the movie was, “What are you willing to believe?” but that is not really the correct question. Atheists inherently know the God of the Bible exists, so the question should be, “Why do you willfully suppress what you already know is true?” (Romans 1:18).

Then there was this little bit of contrived creationist misrepresentation, which comes as no surprise.

By far the biggest fallacy in the movie was the equivocation of observational science with historical science. One example of this was when Dawkins, in trying to correct what he considered people’s false views concerning evolution, said that there was never a first rabbit or first human—that everything born from its parents looks like it parents. He explained the reason for this is that change is so slow and gradual that it is imperceptible. Of course this excuses evolutionists from having to find fossil evidence of evolution (so-called transitional forms) because the changes are so minute that they presumably wouldn’t be detectable in the fossils.
source

* "Dr. Georgia Purdom holds a PhD in molecular genetics from The Ohio State University. Dr. Purdom is the Ministry Content Administrator." Whatever that is.

.

.

Yuck

Why Some Christians Leave Such a Bad Taste in One's Mouth After They Speak

Skwim

Veteran Member

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist

Thief

Rogue Theologian

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member

Skwim

Veteran Member

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist

outlawState

Deism is dead

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist

Jumi

Well-Known Member

outlawState

Deism is dead

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist

outlawState

Deism is dead

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist

outlawState

Deism is dead

Audie

Veteran Member