Do you read the Bible?

[Loomis]

Denominations are the creation of man, not of God. They spring out if differences in interpretations of the Word, interpretations that are often designed for convenience. Christianity was originally a literal faith, but was hijacked by Rome and made into a denomination.

How, then, can the current Christianity - which you appear to pratice - still be teaching the word of god, then?

If Christianity - which includes all of these groups, as they are all following the same text, which you also say hasn't changed in meaning for 1000s of years - no longer bears any resemblance to the original "pure" form of Christianity, then can it trult be said to be right?

Christianity itself is a "sect" of Judaism, as it takes those existing teachings and put their own spin on them. Christianity was not started by a god, but rather by god's disciples - who were all men. Who is to say Christians are not deviating from the chosen plan by god, who intended Judaism to be the predominant faith? Or if you believe in a Messiah, that Mohammed was not the one true prohphet (as he hass pretty much all the same characteristics Moses had, and is probably closer to the Old Testament's assertation that the messiah would 'be like Moses'). Anyways, I digress...

I guess my point is, if modern Christianity cannot decide upon a single path to god, who is to say that they indeed are the only path? What makes your (and I use "your" broadly, not meaning Aaron specifically but any Christian who believes they are the only true kind) branch of Christianity any more "pure" than the other branches, which are following the same text (i.e. The Bible) that you are?

[GOGOinVegas]

I find it funny how the human ego can be so arrogant as to even attempt to claim any intuitive grasp over the entire universal creation of existence as though it were only relative to our direct essence.

We are a particle of an element of dust in an endless and boundless infinity, yet persist to take it upon our own superficial word to proclaim the decisive knowledge of something that is so far above us and out of context without considering that vastness of existence, that I can't even begin to describe.

I had to quote you as well Stash, I dont think I could explain my feelings any better than that.
I did have a question though,I guess its for Aaron or anyone else with that strong belief that theirs is the one true path....
You can say that many of us in this world now may have been given the chance to accept/learn/understand the Christian/Catholic god. But there are millions in many parts of the world in both the past and present, that dont and will never come accross anything remotely related to your beliefs/religion . Are they then doomed to purgatory/hell for not even being capable to find your god? Im speaking of the countless indians, aboriginees, tribes deep in the jungles of South America ( my ancestors are Incas I am told) and all over Africa. They will never see your book, although I understand there have always been people that show up and try to convert them. I would really like to know what you think happens to these people when they die.

It also makes me think about the fact that most religions that people adopt ( Im being general here) have mostly to do with where they were born and when they were born. Think about it. What if you were born 600 years ago in China, or 50 years ago in Iran , 200 years ago in aboriginal Australia, or 2 days ago in Mexico. Your 'choice' of religion would likely be different. At least it seems so to me. This is one of the main reasons I cant say I will ever follow one of these cults.
I hope what I am asking makes sense.

[AwallaceUNC]

How, then, can the current Christianity - which you appear to pratice - still be teaching the word of god, then?

If Christianity - which includes all of these groups, as they are all following the same text, which you also say hasn't changed in meaning for 1000s of years - no longer bears any resemblance to the original "pure" form of Christianity, then can it trult be said to be right?

"Current Christianity" is certainly a loaded term. The problem is that not all of those who currently claim to follow the text, or those who claim to be Christians- and this can include the "platform" (and that's what it is) of a denomination- don't/aren't. Much of Christianity (and it seems that this is usually- though certainly not always, I don't mean to make any generalizations- Christians outside of organized religion) still resembles the Christianity that we see in the New Testament.

Christianity was not started by a god, but rather by god's disciples - who were all men.

Actually, it was started by Jesus, who was both man and God. Organized religion was started by men.

Or if you believe in a Messiah, that Mohammed was not the one true prohphet (as he hass pretty much all the same characteristics Moses had, and is probably closer to the Old Testament's assertation that the messiah would 'be like Moses').

There are many, many, many very specific prophecies and qualifications outlined for the Messiah in the Old Testament. Jesus fulfilled each and every one. Mohammed did not.

I guess my point is, if modern Christianity cannot decide upon a single path to god, who is to say that they indeed are the only path? What makes your (and I use "your" broadly, not meaning Aaron specifically but any Christian who believes they are the only true kind) branch of Christianity any more "pure" than the other branches, which are following the same text (i.e. The Bible) that you are?

Well I don't view it as a branch of Christianity. If there is any Christian, regardless of what they label themselves, truly following the text, they will be on the same page (no pun intended). Misguided denominations are the result of liberal interpretations of the text, the insertion of man-decided symbolism into text, or man-made rules that are created in addition to the Bible.

GoGo- you raise a very important question. The Bible teaches that no one will be held accountable for what they have not been exposed to. The key to salvation is choosing to accept Jesus. If you never had the option to choose or not to choose Him, then you aren't held accountable.

Now, how does God handle these cases? What defines true exposure and a true opportunity to make a choice? I can't answer either of those. I believe they are on a case-by-case basis. God and only God knows each man's heart, and makes those judgments Himself. It is only when you choose, even by indifference, not to accept Jesus that you are in peril.

On a related sidebar, the second coming of Christ is prophesied not to happen until the Word has been preached in every country and corner of the globe.

-Aaron

[Loomis]

If Christianity - which includes all of these groups, as they are all following the same text, which you also say hasn't changed in meaning for 1000s of years - no longer bears any resemblance to the original "pure" form of Christianity, then can it trult be said to be right?
[...]
"Current Christianity" is certainly a loaded term. The problem is that not all of those who currently claim to follow the text, or those who claim to be Christians- and this can include the "platform" (and that's what it is) of a denomination- don't/aren't. Much of Christianity (and it seems that this is usually- though certainly not always, I don't mean to make any generalizations- Christians outside of organized religion) still resembles the Christianity that we see in the New Testament.

So if I understand correctly - there is more than one Christianity, and even though they have all accepted Jesus (which was your previous criteria), only the Correct Christians (CCs) will be allowed to enter heaven? So you can think you are leading a good Christian life and not really be? So what then makes you so sure you are a CC?

There are many, many, many very specific prophecies and qualifications outlined for the Messiah in the Old Testament. Jesus fulfilled each and every one. Mohammed did not.

Actually:
http://www.islamland.org/articles1/a009.htm

According to the Bible, God said to Moses, on whom be peace: " I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers, I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them 'everything I command him" (The Holy Bible, New International Version, Deuteronomy chapter 18, verse 18).

The prophet described in the above verse must have the following three characteristics:

1. He will be like Moses.
2. He will come from the brothers of the Israelites, i.e. the Ishmaelites.
3. God will put his words in the mouth of the prophet and he will declare what God commanded him.
Let us see which prophet God was speaking of.
1. The prophet like Moses
Some people feel that this prophecy refers to the prophet Jesus, on whom be peace. But, although Jesus (peace be upon him and all of God's prophets and messengers) was truly a prophet of God, he is not the prophet spoken of here. He was born miraculously, and finally God raised him up miraculously. On the other hand, Muhammad is more like Moses; both were born in a natural way and both died natural deaths.

2. From among the Ishmaelite
Abraham had two sons, Ishmael and Isaac (Genesis, chapter 21). Ishmael became the grandfather of the Arab nation. And Isaac became the grandfather of Jewish nation. The prophet spoken of was to come not from among the Jews themselves, but from among their brothers, the Ishmaelite. Muhammad a descendant of Ishmael, is indeed that prophet.

3. God will put his words in his mouth
" Neither the content of the revelation, nor its form, were of Muhammad's devising. Both were given by the angel, and Muhammad's task was only to repeat what he heard" (Word Religions from Ancient history to the Present, by Geoffrey Parrinder, p.472).
God sent the angel Gabriel to teach Muhammad the exact words that he should repeat to the people. The words are therefore not his own; they did not come from his own thoughts, but were put into his mouth by the angel. These are written down in the Qur'an word for word, exactly as they came from God.

Now that we know that prophet we must listen to him, for, according to the Bible, God says: 'I will punish anyone who refuses to obey him' (Good News Bible, Deut. 18:19)

On a related sidebar, the second coming of Christ is prophesied not to happen until the Word has been preached in every country and corner of the globe. -Aaron

I wouldn't hold your breath. To quote the late, great Bill Hicks:

"Such a weird belief. Lot of Christians wear crosses around their necks. You think when Jesus comes back he's gonna want to see a cross, man?

"Oaww"

May be why he hasn't shown up yet.

"Man, they're still wearing crosses. I'm not goin, dad. No, they totally missed the point. When they start wearing fishes I might show up again, but..."

There are BILLIONS of people around the globe who are following a different path. Perhaps the next messiah won't be a christian after all?

Why would he come back anyways - they nailed him last time. You saw "The Passion" didn't you?

[Mr. Toad]

I agree with some of your points very much Loomis. While I believe in Christ and am therefore a Christian I still hold out the possibility that he was not the Son of God. Afterall, there are so many religeons practiced and at most only one of them can be the true path. Therefore, most of us have to be following the wrong one. Will God punish everyone who followed the wrong ones even if they tried to be a good and Godly person. I would like to think not. After all the religeon you practice is more a factor of geography and nurturing than any other factor. Is everyone in Heaven from one religeon? I would doubt it, I would rather imagine it is filled with people who strove for peace and understanding and tried to make the planet a better place to live for all.

Aaron - I am still having problems with not interpreting the Bible. What exactly is Bible study then? I think the Word of God is purposely vague. I think God would like us to think as long as possible about what He wants us to do. Lets take a couple of examples from something as seemingly black and white as the Ten Commandments. You claim not to interpret them. Yet, you post here on sundays. That would seem to be a black and white no-no.(And I am not criticizing, I do it to. I haven't yet figured out how to get everything done in six days so I can keep the Sabbath Holy). Further, you profess to like the series Touch by An Angel. This would also be clearly not allowed as it is a Grayven image. Does this not mean you have interpreted the Bible and interpreted it differently than others.

[AwallaceUNC]

So if I understand correctly - there is more than one Christianity, and even though they have all accepted Jesus (which was your previous criteria), only the Correct Christians (CCs) will be allowed to enter heaven? So you can think you are leading a good Christian life and not really be? So what then makes you so sure you are a CC?

No, there is only one Christianity. There are many simulations of it, but they aren't following the Word of God. It's quite simple to tell. Read the Bible. If you believe, accept, and follow everything it says in literal form, then you are truly saved. Now does that mean that if you have theological disagreements that you are Hell-bound? Not at all. Again, that's a case by case thing. God knows each man's heart, and deals with us as individuals.

Actually:
http://www.islamland.org/articles1/a009.htm

According to the Bible, God said to Moses, on whom be peace: " I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers, I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them 'everything I command him" (The Holy Bible, New International Version, Deuteronomy chapter 18, verse 18).

The prophet described in the above verse must have the following three characteristics:

1. He will be like Moses.
2. He will come from the brothers of the Israelites, i.e. the Ishmaelites.
3. God will put his words in the mouth of the prophet and he will declare what God commanded him.
Let us see which prophet God was speaking of.
1. The prophet like Moses
Some people feel that this prophecy refers to the prophet Jesus, on whom be peace. But, although Jesus (peace be upon him and all of God's prophets and messengers) was truly a prophet of God, he is not the prophet spoken of here. He was born miraculously, and finally God raised him up miraculously. On the other hand, Muhammad is more like Moses; both were born in a natural way and both died natural deaths.

2. From among the Ishmaelite
Abraham had two sons, Ishmael and Isaac (Genesis, chapter 21). Ishmael became the grandfather of the Arab nation. And Isaac became the grandfather of Jewish nation. The prophet spoken of was to come not from among the Jews themselves, but from among their brothers, the Ishmaelite. Muhammad a descendant of Ishmael, is indeed that prophet.

3. God will put his words in his mouth
" Neither the content of the revelation, nor its form, were of Muhammad's devising. Both were given by the angel, and Muhammad's task was only to repeat what he heard" (Word Religions from Ancient history to the Present, by Geoffrey Parrinder, p.472).
God sent the angel Gabriel to teach Muhammad the exact words that he should repeat to the people. The words are therefore not his own; they did not come from his own thoughts, but were put into his mouth by the angel. These are written down in the Qur'an word for word, exactly as they came from God.

Now that we know that prophet we must listen to him, for, according to the Bible, God says: 'I will punish anyone who refuses to obey him' (Good News Bible, Deut. 18:19)

That is one verse. There are over 300 specific prophecies, as well as required geneologies, that had to be precisely fulfilled. But even within that verse, they use inconsistent reasoning:

1. The only similarity they give between Moses and Mohammed is that they were both born and both died? In that case, everyone of us is qualified to lead the Muslims to Heaven. The verse says that the prophet will be similar to Moses, the prophet. Jesus fulfilled that. Moses and Mohammed did not prophesy in the same way.

Besides, they are using the Bible to make this claim, right? The Bible prophesies that the Messiah would come from a supernatural birth and return from the dead.

And then Jesus Himself addressed this: "But do not think I will accuse you before the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?" (John 5: 45-47, NIV)

Other comparisons are present, as well. And when Jesus was transformed in Heavenly form, Moses was with Him.

2. The term is actually bretheren. It's a pretty big (and unfounded) leap to say that Moses was talking about the descendents of their ancestor's brother. Again, this comes from the Old Testament. It teaches that the Messiah must come through the bloodline of Isaac, and that the blessing of God was passed down through Abraham, through Isaac (not his brother, Ishmael) and on to Jesus.

3. God the Father did put the words into Jesus' mouth- as if it's not enough that Jesus Himself is God.

"...I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. The one who sent me is with me; He has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases Him.' Even as He spoke, many put their faith in Him." (John 8:28-30, NIV)

And then there's the 300+ other prophecies. But I don't see why Muslims would bother using the Old Testament to justify Mohammed as the Messiah. They reject the OT as illegitimate, tainted for Jewish favor. So why insist that an illegitimate document makes the case for your prophet? What does that say about the prophet?

Why would he come back anyways - they nailed him last time. You saw "The Passion" didn't you?

lol. Yes, they nailed Him because He allowed them too. When He returns in transformed, holy form, He won't be making a sacrifice, and it will be quite a different story.

-Aaron

[AwallaceUNC]

While I believe in Christ and am therefore a Christian I still hold out the possibility that he was not the Son of God.

Then exactly what do you mean by saying that you believe in Christ? If you don't believe He is the Messiah, then you must only believe that He lived. Many, even most, people believe that. If you don't accept Him as the Messiah, then you are not, by definition and qualification, a Christian.

Aaron - I am still having problems with not interpreting the Bible. What exactly is Bible study then? I think the Word of God is purposely vague. I think God would like us to think as long as possible about what He wants us to do. Lets take a couple of examples from something as seemingly black and white as the Ten Commandments. You claim not to interpret them. Yet, you post here on sundays. That would seem to be a black and white no-no.(And I am not criticizing, I do it to. I haven't yet figured out how to get everything done in six days so I can keep the Sabbath Holy). Further, you profess to like the series Touch by An Angel. This would also be clearly not allowed as it is a Grayven image. Does this not mean you have interpreted the Bible and interpreted it differently than others.

Christians are not intended to follow the 10 Commandments- technically. They are part of Old Testament law. When Jesus came and fulfilled that covenant, He struck a new one. Accepting that new covenant releases Christians from the Old Testament law. Does that mean we can murder? No. 9 of the 10 commandments are repeated (though not as elite commandments- love is the only elite commandment in the new covenant) in the new covenant. The Sabbath is the one that is not.

That being said, the principle established in Creation that man physically needs a day of rest still holds true. It doesn't have to be a set day of the week, though. As for worship, we are to do that all the time. Besides, posting on UD.com is hardly labor.

Touched By An Angel is a graven image? News to me. There's no scriptural foundation, though. I don't worship the show or anything about it, so I haven't made it a graven image for myself. Does the show worship angels? I don't think so. If you do, that's fine, but we've then left a Scriptural debate, and are now debating television. The fact that the worship of graven images is wrong is still undeniable. So no interpretation has occured- it's a straight-forward, contextual, literal reading.

-Aaron

[AwallaceUNC]

Oh, and I should add that even if the Sabbath was mandated by NT law and even if I was in violation of Scripture with those two things (I certainly don't claim to always do what I should), it wouldn't say anything about the Scriptures themselves at all- only about me.

But that's beside the point.

...Just a little addendum that I forgot to include above, and the edit line often sends people into a tizzy in debates.

-Aaron

[Mr. Toad]

While I believe in Christ and am therefore a Christian I still hold out the possibility that he was not the Son of God.

Then exactly what do you mean by saying that you believe in Christ? If you don't believe He is the Messiah, then you must only believe that He lived. Many, even most, people believe that. If you don't accept Him as the Messiah, then you are not, by definition and qualification, a Christian.
-Aaron

Aaron - I have accepted Jesus as my lord and savior. But what if we are wrong? There are many others who hold a different religeon as the one true religeon. What if they are wrong? My point was is this is how we will be judged at the end of this life? By which religieon we chose? Or is it more important to live the kind of life God is trying to lead us to? If we promoted peace, love and understanding and had a generally positive impact on the lives we touched? If someone worshipped God? If they did all this and did not worship Christ does this make them ineligible for heaven? Given there are some very large countries in the World where you many not even get exposed to Christ this is hard for me to get my head around.

If Alexander the Great(I think it was him) had not defeated the Romans and his mother had not convinced him to convert to Christianity(although he really didn't do a very good job of converting) and established the Holy Roman Church then the Word of Christ would not have been spread nearly as far and wide as it had. You could argue Christianity would have remained very much the small cult(I tried to come up with a less loaded word but couldn't this late at night) it was for its first couple of centuries.

And Aaron please don't take my comments as critisism. I lived the first 32 years of my life as a complete sinner. I have now transformed myself into someone who does a bad job at trying to avoid sin in the last 5 years, although admittedly when I look at some of the guides like the Ten Commandments and the Seven Virtues/Sins I am certainly no where near perfect yet.

[PrinceAli]

2099Net wrote:
In fact, you don't need any religion as such, just a good upbringing and a little common sense. And, while it may not say as such in the Bible, I'm sure any just God would accept anybody from any religion who has lived a decent, honest, generous life.


But why would that be just? On the surface, it does sound like it. But let's look at the Christian claim: God creates humans. Humans are tainted with sin. To save them from this, God sends His Son (also God) to be killed by His own creation. That created a process, a means by which man could ve saved from the sin that had tainted him. But if man chooses to skip the process altogether and follow his own, should God allow him anyways? Would it even be possible? It doesn't seem unjust to me at all.

Why wouldn't that be just? Is living a good, healthy life not acceptable? Of course, if you go to the Christian claim it won't, because they follow circular reasoning. Their god exists because the Bible says so, the Bible exists because God influenced it. I can think of many things about your religion that I could consider unjust.

[Loomis]

Why wouldn't that be just? Is living a good, healthy life not acceptable? Of course, if you go to the Christian claim it won't, because they follow circular reasoning. Their god exists because the Bible says so, the Bible exists because God influenced it. I can think of many things about your religion that I could consider unjust.

Yes, well if you follow all of that argument, apparently there are Real Christians and Fake Ones (who are misguided - Aaron said "There are many simulations of it, but they aren't following the Word of God. "). Even if you follow Christ all your life and worship him and live a good life, if you aren't doing it in the RIGHT way and live a "good, healthy life" you aren't going be getting through those pearly gates. If you don't follow christ at all...phew. Why even live really? You are just going to sin? And even if you don't sin, you aren't getting to the Big House because you aren't a christian. So you may as well just go ahead and sin.

Gee, and people wonder how this can be questioned as the "one true path".

[Mr. Toad]

Loomis - that is something even I as a Christian can not get my head around. One true path sounds more like a rule of man and his ego as opposed to the rule of God.

[Loomis]

Loomis - that is something even I as a Christian can not get my head around. One true path sounds more like a rule of man and his ego as opposed to the rule of God.

Definitely true of Catholicism (which was my background until I rejected the whole thing sometime during my school years). There - and with other faiths - you have additional rules (in Catholicism these include contraception, abortion, and as 2099 said, fish on Fridays for some), which are created by humans (who are supposed representative of god). If there is a god, do you think he or she really needs earthly representatives? Or even followers singing praise constantly? I don't think I like the idea of an insecure deity who needs attention all the time.

I honestly believe that if there is something as powerful an an omniscient (all knowing, all forgiving) god, then it isn't really going to matter what path you take to get there. ALL religions - the so called "pure" ones or otherwise - are social constructs designed to obscure and distort the fact that if there is a god, we ALL have access to him/her all the time.

[STASHONE]

But there are millions in many parts of the world in both the past and present, that dont and will never come accross anything remotely related to your beliefs/religion . Are they then doomed to purgatory/hell for not even being capable to find your god?

Another reason that America is the most beloved country the world over!

[Prince Adam]

Here's my 2 cents:

An elderly woman once told me that she would rather believe in God all her life and die to find out He doesn't exist, than to not believe in Him all her life, and die to find out that He does exist.

[poco]

for those people who believe the only way into heaven is to follow the word of the Bible, how do you explain all the different Christian religions?

Denominations are the creation of man, not of God. They spring out if differences in interpretations of the Word, interpretations that are often designed for convenience. Christianity was originally a literal faith, but was hijacked by Rome and made into a denomination. Man's will was made higher than God's, and going through the motions of an organized religion became the most important aspect for many members. Sadly, it continues in that form for much of the world today. The New Testament tells us that Christians are not to be divided in faith amongst each other, but it happened, as a result of Satan.

here we go again about interpretations. Sounds like you are interpreting again here.

Anyway, I thought that most of the New Testament was written by Paul...and last time I checked, Paul was not God. So when Paul said/wrote something he was writing from his interpretaion of what God was telling him.


Also, when did God become a he? You keep saying God is a he and you capitalize it. Why? i don't know where God's gender is stated in the biblical text.

Poco

[pinkrenata]

Also, when did God become a he? You keep saying God is a he and you capitalize it. Why? i don't know where God's gender is stated in the biblical text.

Poco

Amen to that, sister!

[Mr. Toad]

I honestly believe that if there is something as powerful an an omniscient (all knowing, all forgiving) god, then it isn't really going to matter what path you take to get there. ALL religions - the so called "pure" ones or otherwise - are social constructs designed to obscure and distort the fact that if there is a god, we ALL have access to him/her all the time.

I would take that point of view as well, all-though I would not go as far as all forgiving. I don't believe you can live your life in evil way and then recount on your death bed. You also go too far in saying all religions try to distort the fact that we all have access to him. Some Christian churches including the one I belong to, do not hold this view. As well, Bahaii(I hope I got that right) specifically believes we all have access to God no matter what route we take to him. I have considered joining this faith as well.

[AwallaceUNC]

Oh my, so much to reply to.

Aaron - I have accepted Jesus as my lord and savior. But what if we are wrong? There are many others who hold a different religeon as the one true religeon. What if they are wrong? My point was is this is how we will be judged at the end of this life? By which religieon we chose? Or is it more important to live the kind of life God is trying to lead us to? If we promoted peace, love and understanding and had a generally positive impact on the lives we touched? If someone worshipped God? If they did all this and did not worship Christ does this make them ineligible for heaven?

It's not about choosing this religion or that religion. Religions are the construct of man. It's about choosing Jesus. When you invite Him into your heart and make Him your focus, not only do you accept salvation, but all the things He wants for you (love, kindness, living a good life) falls into line.

If you believe in and have truly accepted Jesus, then should that not be an expression of conviction and faith? But sometimes, besides our most ardent efforts, faith can be a difficult thing to exercise. The Bible tells us that faith comes through hearing, and hearing through the Word of God.

Given there are some very large countries in the World where you many not even get exposed to Christ this is hard for me to get my head around.

I think that in the very frequent posting that occurs in this thread, lol, some points get buried. GoGo asked me that same question, and it's an important one. I don't wanna make this post any longer by quoting it, but scroll up to my post made at 12:23am and read towards the bottom.

If Alexander the Great(I think it was him) had not defeated the Romans and his mother had not convinced him to convert to Christianity(although he really didn't do a very good job of converting) and established the Holy Roman Church then the Word of Christ would not have been spread nearly as far and wide as it had. You could argue Christianity would have remained very much the small cult(I tried to come up with a less loaded word but couldn't this late at night) it was for its first couple of centuries.

I think it was Constantine, but dont' hold me to that. It doesn't matter, though, because it didn't happen that way. (This is the same reason that I so dislike hypothetical questions- they don't matter, lol). If it hadn't happened that way, there is no way any of us can know what would have happened instead. I believe God would have just taken another route. That doesn't matter, though, because it happened the way it did.

And Aaron please don't take my comments as critisism. I lived the first 32 years of my life as a complete sinner. I have now transformed myself into someone who does a bad job at trying to avoid sin in the last 5 years, although admittedly when I look at some of the guides like the Ten Commandments and the Seven Virtues/Sins I am certainly no where near perfect yet.

JJJ, don't worry, I don't take it as criticism at all. I am happy to hear of your spiritual transformation, and wish you a continual increase in faith along that journey. I will pray for you.

As for the Commandments/Seven Virtues/Sins, be sure to read the New Testamant for the law that you accept as part of the new covenant with Jesus. The Old Testament for laws were for a people without a Savior, and we, as Christians, are not bound to them.

But why would that be just? On the surface, it does sound like it. But let's look at the Christian claim: God creates humans. Humans are tainted with sin. To save them from this, God sends His Son (also God) to be killed by His own creation. That created a process, a means by which man could ve saved from the sin that had tainted him. But if man chooses to skip the process altogether and follow his own, should God allow him anyways? Would it even be possible? It doesn't seem unjust to me at all.

Why wouldn't that be just? Is living a good, healthy life not acceptable? Of course, if you go to the Christian claim it won't, because they follow circular reasoning. Their god exists because the Bible says so, the Bible exists because God influenced it. I can think of many things about your religion that I could consider unjust.

That skirts around my point, though, which is to assume, for the sake of such circular arguments, that God does exist. With that in mind, is the Christian claim unjust? If God does exist, and Jesus is His son, then does it seem unjust for God to make those requirements, givne the situation I detailed in the paragraph you posted?

As for my "religion" (I dislike that word- it's my faith), many things often objected to as unjust aren't from the faith, but from one of the man-made religions. Even if it is from faith, though, that would be judging God by your mind's standards. If God exists, then doesn't that render us unworthy of that?

Even if you follow Christ all your life and worship him and live a good life, if you aren't doing it in the RIGHT way and live a "good, healthy life" you aren't going be getting through those pearly gates. If you don't follow christ at all...phew. Why even live really? You are just going to sin? And even if you don't sin, you aren't getting to the Big House because you aren't a christian. So you may as well just go ahead and sin.

Again, as long as you think in terms of living life the right way, then it won't make much sense. It's not about being the right kind of Christian. It's about truly following Jesus and Jesus alone in one's heart. Through that, you live life the right way. I hate to do it (actually, that's a lie, I don't hate it at all ), but I have to quote a line or two from an old school Amy Grant song:

"I have decided that bein' good is just a fable
I just can't, 'cuz I'm not able
I'm gonna leave it to the Lord"

I think that really expresses where the focus should lie- not on righteousness (or self-righteousness), but on Jesus.

One true path sounds more like a rule of man and his ego as opposed to the rule of God.

And yet it comes from God, not from man. It's a staple of the entire Bible- OT and NT. And I said in my response to PrinceAli up there, if you accept God and Jesus, as I know you do, then it really isn't unjust or unreasonable at all.

I honestly believe that if there is something as powerful an an omniscient (all knowing, all forgiving) god, then it isn't really going to matter what path you take to get there.

This is sort of on the same note as what I said to JJJ & Prince Ali as well. Would it really be too much for this omniscient power to have rules, standards, a 'worthification' process?

Another reason that America is the most beloved country the world over!

That problem extends back long, long before America was ever conceived. I replied to GoGo's post that you quoted a few posts ago.

Anyway, I thought that most of the New Testament was written by Paul...and last time I checked, Paul was not God. So when Paul said/wrote something he was writing from his interpretaion of what God was telling him.

God did indeed write the New Testament. We know that He breathed the Word into life, and that when Jesus came, He was not only God, but that word in the form of flesh. Paul didn't just paraphrase the Almighty. God didn't flip a coin and take a gamble on Paul's writing skills. The Bible was written by God the Holy Spirit, using Paul as a vessel.

An elderly woman once told me that she would rather believe in God all her life and die to find out He doesn't exist, than to not believe in Him all her life, and die to find out that He does exist.

There is truth in that. However, I do believe we can accept Jesus with more confidence than a fail-safe.

Also, when did God become a he? You keep saying God is a he and you capitalize it. Why? i don't know where God's gender is stated in the biblical text.

God's gender is really quite inconsequential. We don't even know what form He exists in, only that humanity was created in His image. Throughout the entire Bible, though, he is constantly referred to as "He" and called "Father" by Jesus. When Jesus came to Earth, He was a man. I capitalize it out of respect. It also conveniently helps to differentiate which "he" is being dealt with.

-Aaron

Edited once for grammar.

[poco]

Aaron wrote:

God's gender is really quite inconsequential. We don't even know what form He exists in, only that humanity was created in His image. Throughout the entire Bible, though, he is constantly referred to as "He" and called "Father" by Jesus. When Jesus came to Earth, He was a man. I capitalize it out of respect. It also conveniently helps to differentiate which "he" is being dealt with.

God created human in God's image, male and female God created them.

hummm.