Infatuation Considers Christianity

[rev]

Reminds me of CNN just over a year ago: "yes, I think we can definitely give non-Christian to Infatuation..."

[PatRussell]

Originally posted by Ted Striker


Young baby lives to age 3. Doesn't have an understanding of the concept of Christ and so is never able to comprehend how to choose or not. So never makes the choice.

Oh sorry little baby, you are going to burn in hell.

Remote Amazon South American tribe is isolated from the entire world. Nearly impossible to reach them. They have never heard of Christ.

Oh sorry evil Amazonian primitive man, you are going to burn in hell too!

Gentle Hindu spends his life feeding the homeless, giving all of himself for the sake of others. The most honest, good, and spiritual man you will ever meet. Loves God and his fellow man with all of his heart and all of his soul.

Ohhh sorry mister nice Hindu, you didn't choose Christ either so you're going to burn in hell too!

The issue is not how much good a person does or whether they live in the deepest jungles of the Amazon. Man is inherently sinful. God requires holiness and has provided a way for us to know and be with Him despite our filthiness. Any works done by mankind cannot save, no matter how good. I again suggest your read Romans. It is clearly spelled out that man has rejected God from the beginning. I would be less concerned about those you listed as examples and look after your own soul.

"Be still, and know that I am God." PS 45:10

That should be Psalm 46:10. If one wants to know God, the best place to start would be the Bible (all of it, not select verses plucked out of context for the purpose of twisting them to say what is not meant to be said).

It is obvious this is going nowhere so I will end with this. If anyone who has been following this thread wishes to have a further discussion please PM me or send an email.

[Ted Striker]

Yeah, just like you've been quoting the whole thing also.

You didn't even address any of the examples except the last one.

Basically you just said, "Screw 'em, there's nothing you can do about them, just take care of yourself."

So, even though your leaders are tellling you to go out there and spread the "Good News" (so the people in example 1 and 2 can be "saved,") you respond by telling me there's nothing that can be done.

The Christ you believe in is a complete a$$shole.

So I will NEVER put any energy into belieiving such rubbish.

Anyway, I guess I'll see filthy sinners Ghandi in hell then!

[Jack the Bodiless]

The issue is not how much good a person does or whether they live in the deepest jungles of the Amazon. Man is inherently sinful. God requires holiness and has provided a way for us to know and be with Him despite our filthiness. Any works done by mankind cannot save, no matter how good. I again suggest your read Romans. It is clearly spelled out that man has rejected God from the beginning. I would be less concerned about those you listed as examples and look after your own soul.

Selfishness is a sin, isn't it?

And Romans is a crock. Paul states that "all men know that God exists", and that unbelievers are "in rebellion" against God. Don't you know that Vishnu exists? Why did you rebel against him?

[tmarcl]

Originally posted by Ted Striker


Young baby lives to age 3. Doesn't have an understanding of the concept of Christ and so is never able to comprehend how to choose or not. So never makes the choice.

Oh sorry little baby, you are going to burn in hell.

Most, if not all Christian sects disagree with this belief. Most of the Conservative Christian churches believe that a person is not held accountable to God until they reach a level of maturity-basically until they are able to tell the difference between right and wrong, and choose between them. Other sects practice infant baptism, to insure the baby's place in heaven. If there are any sects that preach a baby is screwed, tou
gh ****, I've never heard of them.

Remote Amazon South American tribe is isolated from the en

tire world. Nearly impossible to reach them. They have never heard of Christ.

Oh sorry evil Amazonian primitive man, you are going to burn in hell too!

Believe it or not, only the most uneducated Christian believes this sort of thing. When I was studying theology, we were taught that those who never have the chance to choose Christ aren't condemned for that-they are judged by their heart. Even Paul in Romans says that the conscience is the guide of those who've never heard the gospel-it either condemns them or reassures them.

Gentle Hindu spends his life feeding the homeless, giving all of himself for the sake of others. The most honest, good, and spiritual man you will ever meet. Loves God and his fellow man with all of his heart and all of his soul.

Ohhh sorry mister nice Hindu, you didn't choose Christ either so you're going to burn in hell too!

Same as above, really. Believe it or not, Christianity is not the horrendous evil you seem to think it is. Now I'll grant you, there are those that call themselves Christian that are evil. Then again, there are evil Muslims as well (Bin Ladin, anyone?). But the core faith itself isn't evil-Love your neighbor, don't judge, forgive others, give to the poor, help those who can't help themselves, etc.

Also tmarc,

Yes I do realize that only applies to catholics, but since there are many Catholics in this world, that's a huge chunk. And I am just concentrating on Muslims as an example. The Catholic document specifically also cites Buddhists and Hindus as well. Wiccans are just as welcome in my book and anyone else who seeks out God.

Thank you for the clarification.

Marc

[Ted Striker]

In my encounters with most Christians, they are more to give me what Pat Russel said. Choose Christ or burn in hell.

You are the first person that's had a softened stance on that whole, "choose Christ or burn in hell" thing. So in my experience, I've seen more to condemn than those that do not.

That's the whole purpose of missionaries, to send them out and make sure everybody knows, "save" them so they don't burn in hell.

I never said Christianity is evil. The way it's been misinterrpreted over the centuries, yes, that IS evil, and bigoted.

Let's look again at the Hindu example. Say he does come into contact with some Christians and they teach him about Christ and he is given the "choice." He does not choose Christ. (Christ does exist in the Hindu religion, actually, he doesn't have the same role as he does in Christianity).

Is he still condemned to burn?

[tmarcl]

Originally posted by Ted Striker

Let's look again at the Hindu example. Say he does come into contact with some Christians and they teach him about Christ and he is given the "choice." He does not choose Christ. (Christ does exist in the Hindu religion, actually, he doesn't have the same role as he does in Christianity).

Is he still condemned to burn?

According to basic Christian belief, yes, unfortunately. Now, before someone jumps up (I'm not speaking to anyone in particular) and says, "So, if someone just asks him if he wants to be a Christian and he says 'no', he's screwed?", it's a little more involved than that. In order for a person to choose salvation, s/he would need to be convinced that there was in fact a need for it. Just going up to someone and saying 'you need Christ in your life or you'll go to hell' isn't going to condemn him/her if s/he tells you to bugger off. Frankly, the 'choose Christ or burn' method never appealed to me when I was a Christian-quite honestly, it didn't seem Christian.

Marc

[Chowlett]

Ok, here, at least in my belief, is how it works...

We have all sinned. I don't care how good someone has been, they have still sinned, just a tiny little bit, somewhere in their life. God, and by extension his domain of heaven, is perfect. He cannot abide imperfection to be with him, and therefore the tiniest bit of sin prevents us being with him. In sinning, we have effectively chosen not to be with God, it is our choice.

God, however, being a loving being, doesn't want us to be apart from him (which, incidentally, is the basic definition of hell - eternity without God. Heaven is eternity with God), but he cannot allow the sin to go unpunished. Our sin should cause us to die, that is the punishment. So God, unable to waive the punishment, says to humanity "I am willing to place the punishment onto something else that does not deserve it" In Old Testament times, this was the burnt offering, and explains why Old Testament Jews go to heaven.

However, even this isn't enough for mankind, and it continues to sin, drifting ever further from God. So God kills two birds with one stone, and decides to give humanity a role-model and a way out of sin in one convenient package - himself, made human. Enter Jesus. Jesus lives a perfect life, no sin anywhere. In doing so, he both shows man how to live and prepares himself to be the ultimate "burnt offering", as it were. He dies, although he was without sin, and in doing so can take the punishment due to all mankind.

Therefore, in order to gain eternal life, all you have to do is accept the sacrifice of Jesus for your sins. If you fail to do this, you have rejected God's offer of salvation and in effect chosen to spend eternity without him - so you will.

This provides answers to all of Ted Striker's examples earlier:

Infant: We go to hell because in our sin we choose to be without God. A child who does not know wrong from right cannot have made that choice. Therefore, probably saved (I don't know for sure, though)

Amazonian: As above, except here he is mature enough to know wrong from right (he has a conscience, and studies have, I believe [sorry, no source], shown that even primitive tribes with no outside contact have developed very similar moral codes to ours), so by sinning (which I assume he has) he has effectively chosen to be without God. Therefore, not saved.

Really good Hindu: Actually, the easiest to answer of the three. He has, I assume, heard the Christian message. Also, no matter how good he is, there is almost certainly at least one minor sin in his life. He'd be absolutely incredible if there wasn't. Therefore, he has rejected God's offer of removing that imperfection, and chosen to be without him for eternity. Really sorry about this, but he's not saved.

[PatRussell]

Originally posted by Chowlett
Ok, here, at least in my belief, is how it works...

We have all sinned. I don't care how good someone has been, they have still sinned, just a tiny little bit, somewhere in their life. God, and by extension his domain of heaven, is perfect. He cannot abide imperfection to be with him, and therefore the tiniest bit of sin prevents us being with him. In sinning, we have effectively chosen not to be with God, it is our choice.

God, however, being a loving being, doesn't want us to be apart from him (which, incidentally, is the basic definition of hell - eternity without God. Heaven is eternity with God), but he cannot allow the sin to go unpunished. Our sin should cause us to die, that is the punishment. So God, unable to waive the punishment, says to humanity "I am willing to place the punishment onto something else that does not deserve it" In Old Testament times, this was the burnt offering, and explains why Old Testament Jews go to heaven.

However, even this isn't enough for mankind, and it continues to sin, drifting ever further from God. So God kills two birds with one stone, and decides to give humanity a role-model and a way out of sin in one convenient package - himself, made human. Enter Jesus. Jesus lives a perfect life, no sin anywhere. In doing so, he both shows man how to live and prepares himself to be the ultimate "burnt offering", as it were. He dies, although he was without sin, and in doing so can take the punishment due to all mankind.

Therefore, in order to gain eternal life, all you have to do is accept the sacrifice of Jesus for your sins. If you fail to do this, you have rejected God's offer of salvation and in effect chosen to spend eternity without him - so you will.

This provides answers to all of Ted Striker's examples earlier:

Infant: We go to hell because in our sin we choose to be without God. A child who does not know wrong from right cannot have made that choice. Therefore, probably saved (I don't know for sure, though)

Amazonian: As above, except here he is mature enough to know wrong from right (he has a conscience, and studies have, I believe [sorry, no source], shown that even primitive tribes with no outside contact have developed very similar moral codes to ours), so by sinning (which I assume he has) he has effectively chosen to be without God. Therefore, not saved.

Really good Hindu: Actually, the easiest to answer of the three. He has, I assume, heard the Christian message. Also, no matter how good he is, there is almost certainly at least one minor sin in his life. He'd be absolutely incredible if there wasn't. Therefore, he has rejected God's offer of removing that imperfection, and chosen to be without him for eternity. Really sorry about this, but he's not saved.

I would agree 100% with this.

[PatRussell]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Yeah, just like you've been quoting the whole thing also.

I wasn't referring to quoting scripture specifically. To have an understanding of what anything is saying it is important to keep the proper context, this includes scripture.

You didn't even address any of the examples except the last one.

Basically you just said, "Screw 'em, there's nothing you can do about them, just take care of yourself."

Unfortunately I was in somewhat of a hurry and did not have time to repond specifically.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Is this still going on?

Does anyone actually believe him?

From what I can tell, AH is nearer the truth...

Horsie is a Roman Catholic, and Catholics are becoming moderates these days as so many fundamentalistic Protestants are around.

It's meaningless to convert just to chase after skirts, even that's what a lot of young men here do, seeing the ratio of men and women is 3:7. There are a lot more women than men in local churches and fellowships.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by PatRussell
You cannot call Christ a great teacher and deny his claims to deity. Either He is the greatest teacher of all time and the son of God (as he claims) or he is a raving lunatic, there is no middle ground.

If you are going to quote somebody at least give credits where they are due. That was from C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity IIRC, and is a typical false dilemma as Jack the Bodiless has pointed out.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Chowlett
That at least is easily dealt with. The Roman historian Josephus notes that a young rebel by the name of Jesus, from the town of Nazereth, was put to death for insurrection around the year 33AD.

I don't have the time to get into this argument seriously atm, maybe later.

That paragraph in Antiquities of the Jews, Book 18, Chapter 3 is widely thought of as a later insertion by a Christian, Bishop Eusebius.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by PatRussell
Biblical Christianity teaches that those who CHOOSE not to acknowledge Christ as savior will burn in Hell. Even a surface study of the Bible will show this.

What choice? Where's the choice?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by tmarcl
Believe it or not, only the most uneducated Christian believes this sort of thing. When I was studying theology, we were taught that those who never have the chance to choose Christ aren't condemned for that-they are judged by their heart

I heard of that stance. Unfortuanately what that means is missionaries are an instrument of evil.

If a person never hears about this Jesus of Nazareth, that person would be judged by his works. However if a person who has done good works is then introduced to Jesus of Nazareth and refuses to convert, he'd be doomed. So Apostle Paul was completely wrong telling fellowers to go and spread this "good news" for this "good news" is infinitely worse than the plague.

As a matter of fact all bibles should be burned, churches outlawed, and all missionaries be sent to a desolate area in the Sahara.