Khayyam what Khayyam.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die
- Thread starter xfrodobagginsx
- Start date
- Status
Khayyam what Khayyam.
xfrodobagginsx
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2016
- Posts
- 1,724
It depends on where you place your faith. If it's in Jesus Christ than it's a good thing, if it's not in Jesus Christ, then it's a bad thing.
Nothing else in the world is worthy of faith?!
Tryharder62
Keep Believing
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Posts
- 12,752
Oops double post
Last edited:
Tryharder62
Keep Believing
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Posts
- 12,752
When love broke through! HMMMM!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44l9PRI4c2M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44l9PRI4c2M
EternalFantasies
EqualOportunity"Offender"
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2017
- Posts
- 4,663
Thank you for that.
yukonnights
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2007
- Posts
- 3,894
Blind Faith. What does this mean? To have faith in something/someone implies a strong belief…perhaps even an unshakable believe. For example; I have unshakable ‘faith’ that the Sun will come up in the morning. Can faith be “blind” and still be faith?
The Christian idea of faith is best defined by ST Paul in Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
The roots of the word Faith, Substance, Evidence will be helpful to understanding this.
A. Faith - Greek pistes : 1) conviction of the truth of anything, belief; 2) fidelity, faithfulness (relating to reliable character)
B. Substance - Greek hupostasis : 1) a setting under (support), i.e. (figuratively) concretely; 2) confidence, confident, substance.
C Evidence - Greek elegchos ; proof, conviction -- evidence, reproof.
So, taking the liberty of writing ST Paul’s sentence with the expanded definitions gives; Now conviction and belief (faith) is the confident support (substance) of things hoped for, the proof (evidence) of things not seen.
Thus, it is clear that our “faith” is our “conviction and belief”… to have faith implies belief to the point of conviction ( the quality of showing that one is firmly convinced of what one believes or says)
My own study of the roots of this English word ‘faith’ tends to indicate that the definition expanded a bit around the 14th century. It grew to include not only an ‘assured belief’ based on conviction, but to also came to be used in a religious connotation of a ‘less than firm belief’ while still ‘accepting as true’. The use of the modifier “blind” appears to have begun around or after this period. (hopefully others with more knowledge can either correct or amplify on this)
Since the original Greek word ‘pistes’ implies conviction/belief, does this mean that ‘blind faith’ is an oxymoron? I do not think so, if one looks deeper at the use of the phrase. First, the phrase means different things to different people. Also, there are distinct steps or phases of faith, and possible confusion arises when trying to use the same phrase for each of the stages or steps in faith.
Obviously, the ‘religious faith’ of a person on the first day is not the same for that person 50 years later. I see faith as beginning to form even before we are consciously aware enough to call it faith. Even our social influences play a part in our religious faith…and most importantly our faith is nurtured through God’s interventions in our lives (even when we do not recognize those interventions).
The Beginning of Faith:
Who hasn’t experienced moments in life when the very air around us seems to shift and become more alive? Almost as if time slowed down. Perhaps it was a place of beauty where nature seemed to embrace us…or a moment of tending a child when everything around seemed alive and full of a peace so palpable it could be held. In some cultures these moments are called moments of ‘awakening’…a brief and fleeting peek into a completely different perspective of the world around us. These experiences often impact us and imprint a memory that endures a lifetime. This is the beginning of a truly ‘infantile faith’ , which may grow into something we do not yet understand, but cannot rightly deny.
Thus, when people speak of ‘blind faith’, it is not truly blind…it is based on a moment of ‘awakened insight’ within the deepest regions of the human being… or perhaps it is based on many moments of ‘awakening’ that had occurred over many years.
But after an ‘awakening’, there needs to come ‘enlightenments’. These too are moments of clarity, but more focused and of more solid content. These moments may be few for some, or ongoing and profound in others…but all of them are gifts from God from the very first small ‘awakening’ to the last profound ‘enlightenment’. It is a process from infantile faith to unshakable faith…one only need look at the lives of the Apostles to see this progress from skeptical curiosity to an unshakable firm faith that even torture and death could not destroy.
So, true faith in a Spiritual Reality is never technically blind… it is based on the information one has been given by God. When one says they took a “leap of faith” it can often mean something like this: “I may not know everything, I may not even know much…but I know enough to begin getting started in learning more.”
For Christians, this first step of belief implies a hope in the words of the Gospel of Jesus based on enough information to believe (even if just a little at first). The physical act of commitment to this belief is described by ST Paul at Romans 10:9 - Because if you acknowledge and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord [recognizing His power, authority, and majesty as God], and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. (Amplified Bible)
So let us say; Blind faith is not truly blind when discussed in Christianity. Perhaps “Initial Faith” would be more accurate…even a drop of faith can be the beginning. This is why the emphasis about the need for faith…one must have faith in order to truly believe and one must truly believe in order to honestly confess with the mouth that Jesus is Lord. This “First Faith” is the gift that leads us from our first step of spiritual discovery to our last step….from awakening to enlightenment…and beyond. So now we might say; “My faith is not blind…once I was blind, but now I can see…and each day my vision becomes stronger and clearer…”
So if someone derides your faith as 'blind'; Do not be offended, but recognize that they simply do not understand the deeper truths of what the term means. If it seems helpful to instruct them, do so...if it seems unhelpful, just offer a word of kindness and maybe a small prayer.
******
[But, to believe to the point of conviction does not in and of itself imply that a belief is factual or reliable…that is another question though
]
The Christian idea of faith is best defined by ST Paul in Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
The roots of the word Faith, Substance, Evidence will be helpful to understanding this.
A. Faith - Greek pistes : 1) conviction of the truth of anything, belief; 2) fidelity, faithfulness (relating to reliable character)
B. Substance - Greek hupostasis : 1) a setting under (support), i.e. (figuratively) concretely; 2) confidence, confident, substance.
C Evidence - Greek elegchos ; proof, conviction -- evidence, reproof.
So, taking the liberty of writing ST Paul’s sentence with the expanded definitions gives; Now conviction and belief (faith) is the confident support (substance) of things hoped for, the proof (evidence) of things not seen.
Thus, it is clear that our “faith” is our “conviction and belief”… to have faith implies belief to the point of conviction ( the quality of showing that one is firmly convinced of what one believes or says)
My own study of the roots of this English word ‘faith’ tends to indicate that the definition expanded a bit around the 14th century. It grew to include not only an ‘assured belief’ based on conviction, but to also came to be used in a religious connotation of a ‘less than firm belief’ while still ‘accepting as true’. The use of the modifier “blind” appears to have begun around or after this period. (hopefully others with more knowledge can either correct or amplify on this)
Since the original Greek word ‘pistes’ implies conviction/belief, does this mean that ‘blind faith’ is an oxymoron? I do not think so, if one looks deeper at the use of the phrase. First, the phrase means different things to different people. Also, there are distinct steps or phases of faith, and possible confusion arises when trying to use the same phrase for each of the stages or steps in faith.
Obviously, the ‘religious faith’ of a person on the first day is not the same for that person 50 years later. I see faith as beginning to form even before we are consciously aware enough to call it faith. Even our social influences play a part in our religious faith…and most importantly our faith is nurtured through God’s interventions in our lives (even when we do not recognize those interventions).
The Beginning of Faith:
Who hasn’t experienced moments in life when the very air around us seems to shift and become more alive? Almost as if time slowed down. Perhaps it was a place of beauty where nature seemed to embrace us…or a moment of tending a child when everything around seemed alive and full of a peace so palpable it could be held. In some cultures these moments are called moments of ‘awakening’…a brief and fleeting peek into a completely different perspective of the world around us. These experiences often impact us and imprint a memory that endures a lifetime. This is the beginning of a truly ‘infantile faith’ , which may grow into something we do not yet understand, but cannot rightly deny.
Thus, when people speak of ‘blind faith’, it is not truly blind…it is based on a moment of ‘awakened insight’ within the deepest regions of the human being… or perhaps it is based on many moments of ‘awakening’ that had occurred over many years.
But after an ‘awakening’, there needs to come ‘enlightenments’. These too are moments of clarity, but more focused and of more solid content. These moments may be few for some, or ongoing and profound in others…but all of them are gifts from God from the very first small ‘awakening’ to the last profound ‘enlightenment’. It is a process from infantile faith to unshakable faith…one only need look at the lives of the Apostles to see this progress from skeptical curiosity to an unshakable firm faith that even torture and death could not destroy.
So, true faith in a Spiritual Reality is never technically blind… it is based on the information one has been given by God. When one says they took a “leap of faith” it can often mean something like this: “I may not know everything, I may not even know much…but I know enough to begin getting started in learning more.”
For Christians, this first step of belief implies a hope in the words of the Gospel of Jesus based on enough information to believe (even if just a little at first). The physical act of commitment to this belief is described by ST Paul at Romans 10:9 - Because if you acknowledge and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord [recognizing His power, authority, and majesty as God], and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. (Amplified Bible)
So let us say; Blind faith is not truly blind when discussed in Christianity. Perhaps “Initial Faith” would be more accurate…even a drop of faith can be the beginning. This is why the emphasis about the need for faith…one must have faith in order to truly believe and one must truly believe in order to honestly confess with the mouth that Jesus is Lord. This “First Faith” is the gift that leads us from our first step of spiritual discovery to our last step….from awakening to enlightenment…and beyond. So now we might say; “My faith is not blind…once I was blind, but now I can see…and each day my vision becomes stronger and clearer…”
So if someone derides your faith as 'blind'; Do not be offended, but recognize that they simply do not understand the deeper truths of what the term means. If it seems helpful to instruct them, do so...if it seems unhelpful, just offer a word of kindness and maybe a small prayer.
******
[But, to believe to the point of conviction does not in and of itself imply that a belief is factual or reliable…that is another question though
]xfrodobagginsx
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2016
- Posts
- 1,724
Tryharder62
Keep Believing
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Posts
- 12,752
xfrodobagginsx
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2016
- Posts
- 1,724
Good song and a good group.
xfrodobagginsx
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2016
- Posts
- 1,724
Tryharder62
Keep Believing
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Posts
- 12,752
Sadly, Christ followers are often the reason for some people not to choose Christ.
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
Nothing at all, actually.
Sadly, Christ followers are often the reason for some people not to choose Christ.
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”
-- Mahatma Gandhi
yukonnights
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2007
- Posts
- 3,894
If Salvation is by Faith…and Faith is based on Belief…then what to Believe?
The Christian faith finds it’s central focus in the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. For if Christ did not die on the cross, the entire structure of Church belief falls. And likewise, if Christ did die, but never rose from the grave, again belief falls. Some say it’s all a fable and others say it is absolute fact. There have been many books written about why the Bible is a trustworthy representation of what the early Church believed about these questions. What we now call the Bible is comprised of the Jewish Law & Prophets (Old Testament/Old Covenant) and a collection of early letters written by the Apostles/disciples who testified about Christ’s life , death and resurrection (New Testament/New Covenant). The writings of the Apostles are of critical importance for the initial building of belief.
I won’t take the time, due to space, to discuss how the letters/writings were chosen by the Church to be the ones to be believed (for those interested in knowing more it is an easy search…for convenience this one seems pretty thorough -> http://www.churchhistory101.com/docs/New-Testament-Canon.pdf). However, it has been rightly said that these writings that make up the New Testament are one of the most studied and researched subject in human history. The general acceptance of their authenticity is accepted by a majority of scholars knowledgeable of the subject. (Note; authenticity applies to the archeological validity, not the message, etc)
The important thing for the average person is; What makes these accounts believable, even if they are authentic? It has been said above on another post that the best way to view the testimony of the Apostles is similar to examining evidence presented at a trial. If the testimony holds up to scrutiny then it is fair to say it is believable. One of the most important aspects of this entails an examination of the Apostles actions while Christ was with them and after His Ascension.
For the most part, the relationship between the Apostles and other disciples/followers of Christ began based on a hope of the coming of the Kingdom of God promised in the the Jewish Law & Prophets (Old Testament). Their relationship progressed from an initial belief to a committed belief that Jesus was indeed someone special based on the healings, miracles and the words he spoke, etc. But as most people know, things didn’t turn out as the disciples had imagined and Jesus was crucified by the rulers of the country. This is where the trajectory of events becomes very interesting…
While he was alive, Jesus provided the glue to hold the disciples together. But as soon as He was murdered, panic set in. These Apostles and disciples had left homes and families and jobs in order to follow the Messiah, and now he was dead and buried. They hid themselves and tried to figure out how to back out of this mess. But then something happened that had never happened in all of history…Jesus was Resurrected from the grave and walked among them. He walked with them, talked with them, let them touch his flesh to make sure it wasn’t a ghost…in short, he gave ample witness to them that he was indeed alive and well, And after spending some forty days with them, the disciples witnessed Christ’s Ascension into the heavens.
Now the really important part of the story is what happened after Christ’s Ascension. Many think, and I agree, that the behavior of the Apostles and other disciples after the Resurrection forms one of the best foundations of firm Belief needed for true Faith in the claims of Christianity. After personally witnessing the risen Christ, each of the Apostles (and many other disciples) decided that only a fool would deny that Christ is exactly what He claims to be. This belief, and their testimony of this belief, got everyone one of the Apostles killed (save for ST John who, it is said, lived into old age).
What this means to us: If a person is willing to die for a firmly held belief, it is as strong of a witness and testimony as can be provided. Now many people have willingly died for a belief, the important thing to remember is that it is an undeniable testimony of what they believed. And what the Apostles died for was a firm and unshakable Believe in the Resurrection of the murdered Christ. There is no better reason to Believe than this, in my view. I can have a firm Belief because of these multiple eye witnesses who accepted death rather than deny Jesus as the Christ.
So now, because of the testimonies sealed in martyrdom of the Apostles we have; A firm conviction/Belief (Faith) which provides a solid foundation of substance that supports the things hoped for/proof (Evidence) of things not seen (Christ’s death, resurrection and promises).
Thus, it is not that a person might die for a belief, even the one’s killing innocent people in the name of “whatever cause” firmly believe in their cause. The important thing is; What did they die for? In the case of Christianity and the Apostles…they died because they would not deny that Christ had risen from the grave and appeared to them in the flesh.
The Christian faith finds it’s central focus in the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. For if Christ did not die on the cross, the entire structure of Church belief falls. And likewise, if Christ did die, but never rose from the grave, again belief falls. Some say it’s all a fable and others say it is absolute fact. There have been many books written about why the Bible is a trustworthy representation of what the early Church believed about these questions. What we now call the Bible is comprised of the Jewish Law & Prophets (Old Testament/Old Covenant) and a collection of early letters written by the Apostles/disciples who testified about Christ’s life , death and resurrection (New Testament/New Covenant). The writings of the Apostles are of critical importance for the initial building of belief.
I won’t take the time, due to space, to discuss how the letters/writings were chosen by the Church to be the ones to be believed (for those interested in knowing more it is an easy search…for convenience this one seems pretty thorough -> http://www.churchhistory101.com/docs/New-Testament-Canon.pdf). However, it has been rightly said that these writings that make up the New Testament are one of the most studied and researched subject in human history. The general acceptance of their authenticity is accepted by a majority of scholars knowledgeable of the subject. (Note; authenticity applies to the archeological validity, not the message, etc)
The important thing for the average person is; What makes these accounts believable, even if they are authentic? It has been said above on another post that the best way to view the testimony of the Apostles is similar to examining evidence presented at a trial. If the testimony holds up to scrutiny then it is fair to say it is believable. One of the most important aspects of this entails an examination of the Apostles actions while Christ was with them and after His Ascension.
For the most part, the relationship between the Apostles and other disciples/followers of Christ began based on a hope of the coming of the Kingdom of God promised in the the Jewish Law & Prophets (Old Testament). Their relationship progressed from an initial belief to a committed belief that Jesus was indeed someone special based on the healings, miracles and the words he spoke, etc. But as most people know, things didn’t turn out as the disciples had imagined and Jesus was crucified by the rulers of the country. This is where the trajectory of events becomes very interesting…
While he was alive, Jesus provided the glue to hold the disciples together. But as soon as He was murdered, panic set in. These Apostles and disciples had left homes and families and jobs in order to follow the Messiah, and now he was dead and buried. They hid themselves and tried to figure out how to back out of this mess. But then something happened that had never happened in all of history…Jesus was Resurrected from the grave and walked among them. He walked with them, talked with them, let them touch his flesh to make sure it wasn’t a ghost…in short, he gave ample witness to them that he was indeed alive and well, And after spending some forty days with them, the disciples witnessed Christ’s Ascension into the heavens.
Now the really important part of the story is what happened after Christ’s Ascension. Many think, and I agree, that the behavior of the Apostles and other disciples after the Resurrection forms one of the best foundations of firm Belief needed for true Faith in the claims of Christianity. After personally witnessing the risen Christ, each of the Apostles (and many other disciples) decided that only a fool would deny that Christ is exactly what He claims to be. This belief, and their testimony of this belief, got everyone one of the Apostles killed (save for ST John who, it is said, lived into old age).
What this means to us: If a person is willing to die for a firmly held belief, it is as strong of a witness and testimony as can be provided. Now many people have willingly died for a belief, the important thing to remember is that it is an undeniable testimony of what they believed. And what the Apostles died for was a firm and unshakable Believe in the Resurrection of the murdered Christ. There is no better reason to Believe than this, in my view. I can have a firm Belief because of these multiple eye witnesses who accepted death rather than deny Jesus as the Christ.
So now, because of the testimonies sealed in martyrdom of the Apostles we have; A firm conviction/Belief (Faith) which provides a solid foundation of substance that supports the things hoped for/proof (Evidence) of things not seen (Christ’s death, resurrection and promises).
Thus, it is not that a person might die for a belief, even the one’s killing innocent people in the name of “whatever cause” firmly believe in their cause. The important thing is; What did they die for? In the case of Christianity and the Apostles…they died because they would not deny that Christ had risen from the grave and appeared to them in the flesh.
Last edited:
Tryharder62
Keep Believing
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Posts
- 12,752
Like any extremes, some Christians do ruin it for the majority. There are genuine Christians.
rocket_surgery
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2017
- Posts
- 709
Of course there are. Like anything else the ones yelling the loudest get the most attention and often they are the most ignorant and hateful.
No doubt there are many who view all Christians as members of Westboro Baptist. It's sad but it won't change.
Tryharder62
Keep Believing
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Posts
- 12,752
xfrodobagginsx
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2016
- Posts
- 1,724
Agreed
xfrodobagginsx
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2016
- Posts
- 1,724
They are kind of a mock Church, making fun of Christians. They aren't Baptists in any sense of the word. It's all satire and blasphemy.
yukonnights
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2007
- Posts
- 3,894
Fact vs Inspired
I wanted to try and gently shine a light on the glaring inadequacy of any so called “gospel” that is restrictive, divisive and exclusionary.
There is a verse in the Bible that says;*“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16).
It is important to note the definition of “inspired” ; 1- Of extraordinary quality, as if arising from some external creative impulse: 2- (of a person), Exhibiting a creative impulse in the activity specified. So to be inspired is to be moved by an external creative impulse. I have searched, but have not found any Scripture that says that the ancient texts are “scientific fact”. To use the Bible trying to defend a belief in a literal interpretation of every inspired word brings derision and doubt…the denial of science is restrictive to the one trapped in that interpretation. To turn away a sincere seeker of God through such a restrictive argument is to risk harming one of God’s children.
“The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. Their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.” (Psalm 19:1-4). This ancient inspired writing speaks directly to the fact that God’s voice has indeed already gone out to the ends of the world. I trust that God has also given some understanding of that “voice” to those who ever lived in “the ends of the world”…it is not necessary to be divisive and exclusionary toward other beliefs. It is better, I think, to show the Love of Christ to all and trust Him to sift the wheat from the chaff. All we need to do is look for the presence or absence of the Fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23) and, to be ready to explain the hope we have within us through Christ... "But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear."(1 Peter 3:15)
When these ancient words in Psalm19 were first written, humans believed the earth was flat…that the sun revolved around us… etc. But humans with a special gift of intuition and genius discovered new “facts”…the earth was round, we are not the center of the universe… and the world is a better place for those discoveries. I do not think God is afraid of the facts. We now have learned, through other gifted and inspired humans, many things beyond the wildest imaginings of those who penned the ancient ’Inspired Words’ given to them. To deny these “facts” is restrictive, divisive and exclusionary. To accept “facts” will not change the Inspired Truth of the Bible, since it never claimed to be a textbook in the first place. Why would it change anything if the Earth was created a trillion years ago as opposed to six or seven thousand? Why would it change the Gospel if the world was round instead of flat? Would it really change anything if God used the evolutionary process to create? Why would it change anything if the Universe started with a Big Bang? Why would it change anything if Dinosaurs didn’t have a ticket on the ark? How many humans have been turned away from the Gospel by holding on to these claims as fact?
The ancient scrolls were inspired… not published in a science journal. Each has it’s place, but trying to combined them together just brings a self-defeating chaos. In fact, a large portion of this current conversation here has been about this very issue…and to what avail? All I can say in conclusion to this is; Try to get over whatever it is that necessitates this refusal of science…or, if that is impossible try to not use it to convince others of the Joy of the Gospel…or, accept the burden of turning away another child of God in search of the Gospel…and don’t be surprised when the child you push away is your own. I just wanted to say; Don’t get lost in the small stuff…Christianity deals in Spirit and Truth, not science. The two are distinct and both are gifts of God. But the Christian Church rests on the truth of the Gospel of Christ.
I wanted to try and gently shine a light on the glaring inadequacy of any so called “gospel” that is restrictive, divisive and exclusionary.
There is a verse in the Bible that says;*“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16).
It is important to note the definition of “inspired” ; 1- Of extraordinary quality, as if arising from some external creative impulse: 2- (of a person), Exhibiting a creative impulse in the activity specified. So to be inspired is to be moved by an external creative impulse. I have searched, but have not found any Scripture that says that the ancient texts are “scientific fact”. To use the Bible trying to defend a belief in a literal interpretation of every inspired word brings derision and doubt…the denial of science is restrictive to the one trapped in that interpretation. To turn away a sincere seeker of God through such a restrictive argument is to risk harming one of God’s children.
“The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. Their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.” (Psalm 19:1-4). This ancient inspired writing speaks directly to the fact that God’s voice has indeed already gone out to the ends of the world. I trust that God has also given some understanding of that “voice” to those who ever lived in “the ends of the world”…it is not necessary to be divisive and exclusionary toward other beliefs. It is better, I think, to show the Love of Christ to all and trust Him to sift the wheat from the chaff. All we need to do is look for the presence or absence of the Fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23) and, to be ready to explain the hope we have within us through Christ... "But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear."(1 Peter 3:15)
When these ancient words in Psalm19 were first written, humans believed the earth was flat…that the sun revolved around us… etc. But humans with a special gift of intuition and genius discovered new “facts”…the earth was round, we are not the center of the universe… and the world is a better place for those discoveries. I do not think God is afraid of the facts. We now have learned, through other gifted and inspired humans, many things beyond the wildest imaginings of those who penned the ancient ’Inspired Words’ given to them. To deny these “facts” is restrictive, divisive and exclusionary. To accept “facts” will not change the Inspired Truth of the Bible, since it never claimed to be a textbook in the first place. Why would it change anything if the Earth was created a trillion years ago as opposed to six or seven thousand? Why would it change the Gospel if the world was round instead of flat? Would it really change anything if God used the evolutionary process to create? Why would it change anything if the Universe started with a Big Bang? Why would it change anything if Dinosaurs didn’t have a ticket on the ark? How many humans have been turned away from the Gospel by holding on to these claims as fact?
The ancient scrolls were inspired… not published in a science journal. Each has it’s place, but trying to combined them together just brings a self-defeating chaos. In fact, a large portion of this current conversation here has been about this very issue…and to what avail? All I can say in conclusion to this is; Try to get over whatever it is that necessitates this refusal of science…or, if that is impossible try to not use it to convince others of the Joy of the Gospel…or, accept the burden of turning away another child of God in search of the Gospel…and don’t be surprised when the child you push away is your own. I just wanted to say; Don’t get lost in the small stuff…Christianity deals in Spirit and Truth, not science. The two are distinct and both are gifts of God. But the Christian Church rests on the truth of the Gospel of Christ.
Last edited:
yukonnights
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2007
- Posts
- 3,894
Yea! I am finished posting
My hope in contributing here has always been to simply broaden the discussion (this sort of fracas isn’t my normal cup of tea ). That this thread has gone on so long surprised me, but it shows that there is indeed interest in these questions regardless of personal belief. So hats off to the OP xfrodobagginsx. While I may not share all of “his/her” views, I assume ‘his/her’ sincerity and commend the fortitude to stay the course so long. Likewise, the fortitude of “his/her” opponents with differing views which were sometimes witty and irreverent but often sincere and thought provoking. To all, I wish the best on this journey we call life. ~
A few last thoughts for those who have come this far and are interested in learning more about the Gospel of Christ.
The Next Steps after initial belief and faith.
1. The Church from the beginning was about fellowship and nurture of one another.
2. Another critical issue is Baptism. Christ himself stressed the importance of this!!! (John 3:3-5, Acts 2:37-38).
3. Historically, Baptism was accompanied by Chrismation (anointing of the Holy Spirit; John14:16, Acts 2:37-38),
Thus, one needs to find a Church and enter into fellowship, Baptism, Chismation and growth in understanding and knowledge, etc. I suggest that you first memorize this list of the Fruit of the Holy Spirit : “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.” (Galtians 5:22-23). Visit as many churches as you need to and see if the Fruit of the Spirit is evident there…keep looking until you find the fruit!
****
My hope in contributing here has always been to simply broaden the discussion (this sort of fracas isn’t my normal cup of tea ). That this thread has gone on so long surprised me, but it shows that there is indeed interest in these questions regardless of personal belief. So hats off to the OP xfrodobagginsx. While I may not share all of “his/her” views, I assume ‘his/her’ sincerity and commend the fortitude to stay the course so long. Likewise, the fortitude of “his/her” opponents with differing views which were sometimes witty and irreverent but often sincere and thought provoking. To all, I wish the best on this journey we call life. ~
A few last thoughts for those who have come this far and are interested in learning more about the Gospel of Christ.
The Next Steps after initial belief and faith.
1. The Church from the beginning was about fellowship and nurture of one another.
2. Another critical issue is Baptism. Christ himself stressed the importance of this!!! (John 3:3-5, Acts 2:37-38).
3. Historically, Baptism was accompanied by Chrismation (anointing of the Holy Spirit; John14:16, Acts 2:37-38),
Thus, one needs to find a Church and enter into fellowship, Baptism, Chismation and growth in understanding and knowledge, etc. I suggest that you first memorize this list of the Fruit of the Holy Spirit : “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.” (Galtians 5:22-23). Visit as many churches as you need to and see if the Fruit of the Spirit is evident there…keep looking until you find the fruit!
****
xfrodobagginsx
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2016
- Posts
- 1,724
Yea! I am finished posting
My hope in contributing here has always been to simply broaden the discussion (this sort of fracas isn’t my normal cup of tea ). That this thread has gone on so long surprised me, but it shows that there is indeed interest in these questions regardless of personal belief. So hats off to the OP xfrodobagginsx. While I may not share all of “his/her” views, I assume ‘his/her’ sincerity and commend the fortitude to stay the course so long. Likewise, the fortitude of “his/her” opponents with differing views which were sometimes witty and irreverent but often sincere and thought provoking. To all, I wish the best on this journey we call life. ~
A few last thoughts for those who have come this far and are interested in learning more about the Gospel of Christ.
The Next Steps after initial belief and faith.
1. The Church from the beginning was about fellowship and nurture of one another.
2. Another critical issue is Baptism. Christ himself stressed the importance of this!!! (John 3:3-5, Acts 2:37-38).
3. Historically, Baptism was accompanied by Chrismation (anointing of the Holy Spirit; John14:16, Acts 2:37-38),
Thus, one needs to find a Church and enter into fellowship, Baptism, Chismation and growth in understanding and knowledge, etc. I suggest that you first memorize this list of the Fruit of the Holy Spirit : “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.” (Galtians 5:22-23). Visit as many churches as you need to and see if the Fruit of the Spirit is evident there…keep looking until you find the fruit!
****
Well, I thank you for participating in this discussion. It would be nice if you would change your mind and continue with us. Although we will certainly disagree on many doctrinal areas as I can see from the end of this post of yours, it's good to know that you do accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Baptism is not part of salvation it is something that believers do after salvation. Good works, are also not the cause of salvation, they are the result of salvation. Salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone, believing that He died on the cross and rose from the dead for your sins. You must receive this gift willingly. Again, I hope you will reconsider and stay.
- Status
Similar threads
