How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[phrodeau]

They were ALL welcome on the ark. Only Noah and his family chose to go on the ark, but it was open for all. They wouldn't believe Noah. Christ is the Ark today, people are being warned, but most choose not to accept Christ and will perish.

That is bullshit, as any student of the scriptures will tell you. There’s nothing like that in the story of Noah.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

That is bullshit, as any student of the scriptures will tell you. There’s nothing like that in the story of Noah.

Noah was a "Preacher of Righteousness". As a preacher he would have warned the world of the coming flood.

2Pet. 2:5 and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Did Noah Warn The World Of The Upcoming Flood:

https://www.versebyverseministry.org/bible-answers/did-noah-warn-the-world-about-the-coming-flood

 

[phrodeau]

Noah was a "Preacher of Righteousness". As a preacher he would have warned the world of the coming flood.

2Pet. 2:5 and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Did Noah Warn The World Of The Upcoming Flood:

https://www.versebyverseministry.org/bible-answers/did-noah-warn-the-world-about-the-coming-flood

If the apostle Peter wrote that, which almost nobody believes, there’s no way for him to know that Noah was a preacher, because there is no holy scripture that says he was.

Noah was a “man of the soil” and grew a vineyard after the flood. Before the flood, Noah isn’t quoted saying a single word.

 

[Tryharder62]

Noah was building a huge arc for over a 100 years. Whether Noah preached what was going to happen or not, I think others would have wanted to know what he was up to. I think there were some good laughs because there had never been a flood such as this. No need for an arc!

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

"It wasn't a flood. It was only a little rain." - George Burns, Oh, God!

 

[runsilent]

"Those kids deserved to die," is definitely something a reasonable person believes.

I guess you know tens of thousands of children died. Regardless of faith or just being innocent and not knowing what was expected of them. If you believe the fairy tale at all.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

PSYCHIATRIST CALLS TODAY'S LEFT 'MENTALLY ILL'

https://www.wnd.com/2018/08/veteran-psychiatrist-calls-left-mentally-ill/

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

If the apostle Peter wrote that, which almost nobody believes, there’s no way for him to know that Noah was a preacher, because there is no holy scripture that says he was.

Noah was a “man of the soil” and grew a vineyard after the flood. Before the flood, Noah isn’t quoted saying a single word.

Peter most certainly wrote it and MOST scholars do believe so, you are dead wrong. Also, Peter was inspired by the Holy Ghost to write the scriptures. Peter's writings are just as much scripture as Moses' writings.

2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. {in old time: or, at any time}

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

I guess you know tens of thousands of children died. Regardless of faith or just being innocent and not knowing what was expected of them. If you believe the fairy tale at all.

They died due to the judgment of the actions of their parents. Their parents could have repented before God and He would have spared them, but they did not.

 

[phrodeau]

(edited)

Peter most certainly wrote it and MOST scholars do believe so, you are dead wrong.

You didn't even look it up.

Even those who think Peter authored it speculate that he must have used a secretary to write it.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

You didn't even look it up.

Even those who think Peter authored it speculate that he must have used a secretary to write it.

Using a secretary to pen down what Peter dictated is not the same as saying that Peter didn't write it.

 

[phrodeau]

Using a secretary to pen down what Peter dictated is not the same as saying that Peter didn't write it.

It adds another player to the Telephone Game.

Suppose Peter doesn't know how to read or write. He hires a scribe to do the writing for him. How would he verify that the scribe got his Divine Inspiration down on parchment accurately?

You might argue that God would never allow inaccuracies or falsehoods to become scripture, but in my view it has happened hundreds of times.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

It adds another player to the Telephone Game.

Suppose Peter doesn't know how to read or write. He hires a scribe to do the writing for him. How would he verify that the scribe got his Divine Inspiration down on parchment accurately?

You might argue that God would never allow inaccuracies or falsehoods to become scripture, but in my view it has happened hundreds of times.

It's not a telephone game. It was likely dictated by Peter, either way, the book was inspired by the Holy Spirit. It fits together perfectly and is not inaccurate.

 

[Super-Surprise]

How To Get To Heaven When You Die

https://vimeo.com/226640440

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

https://vimeo.com/226640440

Jesus Christ is the door to heaven and His Word is the stairway.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

 

[colddiesel]

So colddiesel What do you believe?

The short answer is 'very little'

The longer answer requires more explanation. Some 2 million plus years ago, human chromosome pairs merged to form a new chromosome 2. Now Apes have 2 X 24 Chromosomes = 48 and humans have 46. There are other more subtle differences but that is the most important.

From the very beginning this new species, mankind, sought to understand their world and their relation to it, and from about 28,000 BC there is archeological evidence of this. Remains such as the Venus of Willendorf and similar show well developed fertility cults dating from this period. Modern primitive societies, such as the Aborigines of Australia, sub Saharan Bushmen(San) for example invest inanimate things such as rocks, mountains, rivers with spirits and they perform ceremonies to appease(worship) those spirits.

Modern so called sophisticated religions still have these connections with physical places especially mountains( Mt Gherizim- Samaritans, Jabal an-Nour - Moslems, Arrarat - Jews, Mt Sinai (Horeb) - Jews and Christians. Sermon on the Mount - Christians. Surprising how tenacious these primitive physical connections are with with modern belief. And, as many Anthropologists have observed both ancient and modern belief systems retain ancient ritual: Islamic Sufis engage in ecstatic dances, some fundamentalist Christians 'speak in tongues, other Christians hold elaborate processions and ceremonies. Moslems in Iran and Central Asia have adopted almost completely the ritual and seasonal celebrations of their Zoroastrian predecessors.

The basic point about all these people is that they all seek after knowledge but for the greater part of history the knowledge they have acquired has been inadequate to explain the world and the things that happen. In order to make life reasonably tolerable primitive people substituted belief for knowledge and found that joining together with people of a similar mind they gained great comfort.

But in the last few centuries there has been an explosion of knowledge, the proportion of what we know compared to what we believe (whatever our particular faith) has increased massively.

All major monotheistic religions without exception place mankind at the centre. But Copernicus, Newton and Einstein have taught us that we are totally wrong as we inhabit one planet circling one of 100 billion stars in our galaxy. And beyond that there are countless billions of galaxies.

Modern biology, particularly genetics proves Evolution is a fact beyond dispute, and Creationism is primitive nonsense. 98% of monotheistic believers have come to accept this fact.

So to get back to your question: I know what I know and which can be proved - I don't know what I do not know but I seek to find out. I make a concerted attempt to avoid belief and faith as a distraction from the seeking of knowledge.

I do not see belief or faith as having any usefulness except to the weak minded. Consequently I might have significant respect for a person based on their knowledge and how they act on it, but none at all for the wooly minded nonsense of faith and belief.

 

[Tryharder62]

All major monotheistic religions without exception place mankind at the centre. But Copernicus, Newton and Einstein have taught us that we are totally wrong as we inhabit one planet circling one of 100 billion stars in our galaxy.

So to get back to your question: I know what I know and which can be proved - I don't know what I do not know but I seek to find out. I make a concerted attempt to avoid belief and faith as a distraction from the seeking of knowledge.

I do not see belief or faith as having any usefulness except to the weak minded. Consequently I might have significant respect for a person based on their knowledge and how they act on it, but none at all for the wooly minded nonsense of faith and belief.

Fair enough

Interesting that you bring up Copernicus, Newton, and Einstein.

Copernicus studied at St. John’s Church in Torun's parochial school before going to Krakow Academy in 1491 to pursue astronomy and astrology. He became known as a skilled mathematical and astronomer, but he also maintained his ties to the church. He became a canon of the cathedral chapter of Frombork through his uncle, and he served the church of Warmia as a medical advisor. Despite the resistance to Copernican views in the future, the astronomer’s life was one immersed in religion. And while it may be forgotten, it is under the auspices of the Catholic Church that Copernicus made his theories known.

For Newton the world of science was by no means the whole of life. He spent more time on theology than on science; indeed, he wrote about 1.3 million words on biblical subjects. Yet this vast legacy lay hidden from public view for two centuries until the auction of his nonscientific writings in 1936.

Newton’s understanding of God came primarily from the Bible, which he studied for days and weeks at a time. He took special interest in miracles and prophecy, calculating dates of Old Testament books and analyzing their texts to discover their authorship. In a manuscript on rules for interpreting prophecy, Newton noted the similar goals of the scientist and the prophecy expositor: simplicity and unity. He condemned the “folly of interpreters who foretell times and things by prophecy,” since the purpose of prophecy was to demonstrate God’s providence.

And Einstein. In 1930, Einstein composed a kind of creed entitled “What I Believe,” at the conclusion of which he wrote: “To sense that behind everything that can be experienced there is something that our minds cannot grasp, whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly: this is religiousness. In this sense...I am a devoutly religious man.” In response to a young girl who had asked him whether he believed in God, he wrote: “everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe—a Spirit vastly superior to that of man.” And during a talk at Union Theological Seminary on the relationship between religion and science, Einstein declared: “the situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

I am glad that these men looked beyond what was safe and the proven knowlege of their day to discover that there were things beyond that to contemplate.

 

[With_David_Bowie]

Let alone Clive Staples Lewis.

I seem to have run into a decent evidence based discussion.

Maybe I'm drunk, but it seems like two posts back to back.

 

[phrodeau]

Fair enough

Interesting that you bring up Copernicus, Newton, and Einstein.

Copernicus studied at St. John’s Church in Torun's parochial school before going to Krakow Academy in 1491 to pursue astronomy and astrology. He became known as a skilled mathematical and astronomer, but he also maintained his ties to the church. He became a canon of the cathedral chapter of Frombork through his uncle, and he served the church of Warmia as a medical advisor. Despite the resistance to Copernican views in the future, the astronomer’s life was one immersed in religion. And while it may be forgotten, it is under the auspices of the Catholic Church that Copernicus made his theories known.

For Newton the world of science was by no means the whole of life. He spent more time on theology than on science; indeed, he wrote about 1.3 million words on biblical subjects. Yet this vast legacy lay hidden from public view for two centuries until the auction of his nonscientific writings in 1936.

Newton’s understanding of God came primarily from the Bible, which he studied for days and weeks at a time. He took special interest in miracles and prophecy, calculating dates of Old Testament books and analyzing their texts to discover their authorship. In a manuscript on rules for interpreting prophecy, Newton noted the similar goals of the scientist and the prophecy expositor: simplicity and unity. He condemned the “folly of interpreters who foretell times and things by prophecy,” since the purpose of prophecy was to demonstrate God’s providence.

And Einstein. In 1930, Einstein composed a kind of creed entitled “What I Believe,” at the conclusion of which he wrote: “To sense that behind everything that can be experienced there is something that our minds cannot grasp, whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly: this is religiousness. In this sense...I am a devoutly religious man.” In response to a young girl who had asked him whether he believed in God, he wrote: “everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe—a Spirit vastly superior to that of man.” And during a talk at Union Theological Seminary on the relationship between religion and science, Einstein declared: “the situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

I am glad that these men looked beyond what was safe and the proven knowlege of their day to discover that there were things beyond that to contemplate.

Sure they did, by showing how wrong the Biblical scriptures are.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Iran sentences 4 Christians to 45 years in jail

Read more at https://www.wnd.com/2018/08/iran-sen...QkJg7AlAYt8.99

 

[phrodeau]

Iran sentences 4 Christians to 45 years in jail

Read more at https://www.wnd.com/2018/08/iran-sen...QkJg7AlAYt8.99

Is that an express lane, from Iranian jail to Heaven?

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Is that an express lane, from Iranian jail to Heaven?

The only lane, express or not is through placing your faith and trust in Jesus Christ for salvation, believing in your heart that He died on the cross and rose from the dead for your sins. God knows your heart.

 

[Tryharder62]

Sure they did, by showing how wrong the Biblical scriptures are.

“I believe that the more thoroughly science is studied, the further does it take us from anything comparable to atheism.”

“If you study science deep enough and long enough, it will force you to believe in God.”

—Lord William Kelvin, who was noted for his theoretical work on thermodynamics, the concept of absolute zero and the Kelvin temperature scale based upon it. Kelvin was a devout Christian.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^This-----Tryharder62

 

[phrodeau]

“I believe that the more thoroughly science is studied, the further does it take us from anything comparable to atheism.”

“If you study science deep enough and long enough, it will force you to believe in God.”

—Lord William Kelvin, who was noted for his theoretical work on thermodynamics, the concept of absolute zero and the Kelvin temperature scale based upon it. Kelvin was a devout Christian.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^This-----Tryharder62

There is nothing scientific about those statements, and Lord Kelvin would agree to that.