Part 11 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity

Dont you think that most people would not want eternal bliss, because its pointless, devoid of meaning. And it is not unwise to be punished for one's sins at all?

 

You seem to misunderstand the fact that there is no clear salvation formula within Christianity. Some groups believe (salvation by faith alone- sola fide). The majority of Christianity does not believe this.

The words of Jesus in Matt, Mark and Luke support a works based formula. James (brother of Jesus) also supports the works based formula and pretty much calls the people fools who believe the Pauline doctrine (faith alone).

 

Then you're either making poor excuses or you haven't read your Bible, or both. God constantly intervened and took away the choices of people.

He intervened before to hassle, and by hassle I mean kill and rape, nonbelievers. Go read Joshua.

Then Jesus is absolutely useless.

 

You can't compare a religion with a reality. And as to womens rights. How many female Catholic priests are there. Human rights = Spanish inquisition.
Human rights = Celibate priests. Human rights = refusal to allow study of the Bible by printing in Latin.
Byzantine Empire - religion CChurch - Eastern sect.
French Empire - religion CChurch.
Crusades - CChurch.
The rest is meaningless. How can you compare culture with culture. What one considers right another doesn't. You are biased for the culture you are brought up in.

There's no reason to believe that man would have not progressed without the aid of the church. If you look at history, despite the Church, slowly things began to improve for men, at least in Europe. By the 15th century people were very slowly beginning to think for themselves. And making their feelings known.

 

"toning it down" and "waiting" meaning...."Stop claiming the Earth revolves around the Sun, until we say so"?

BTW, was the charge against Galileo "not wiatiing"....or heresy?

 

Mitt,

I wonder if you'd get back to my question that you left out to dry when you left yesterday-

You said in the other thread-

1. Accepting Jesus as your Savior while you are alive was the ONLY way to get into Heaven.

2. You then said, no, that one could ALSO get into Heaven if God judged you worthy of getting into Heaven, i.e. a SECOND way to get into Heaven.

3. When confronted with this contradiction, you said nothing I said was wrong.

Could you explain how you could contradict yourself...and not be wrong?!?!?

 

If I may intrude. The Christian idea is that if you have heard of the story of Jesus and his sacrifice, you then have a chance to accept or reject him. If you have never heard and had that chance, God will judge you on your life.

Therefore there is only 1 chance for each individual. 1 for those who have heard and 1 for those who have not.

 

Your 1st Question: And the only way to be saved is to "accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior" while you are alive, right? That's the ONLY way?

My response: Yes while you are alive, repent your sins, ask for forgiveness of your sins, and accept Jesus Christ as your Lord Savior. Now let me remind you that this doesn't mean you now have a license to go on a sinning spree. (pg. 75 #746 Part 10)

Your 2nd Question: So what happens to the person who lived and died before ever hearing of Jesus?
They go to Hell?

My response: Not necessarily, it depends on God's judgment on them and so some will be saved others not. But as far as people who lived prior to Jesus, God pardoned all those people and none of them will be condemned to hell according to Scripture. (pg. 75 #750 Part 10)

Your 3rd Question: So accepting Jesus as your Saviour before you die is NOT the ONLY way to avoid Hell, yes?

My response: Yes, and so for example if a person is living in the jungles of South America right now who has never heard of Jesus, when this person dies, and when Judgment Day comes, God will fairly & justly determine the eternal fate of this person, depending on the judgment this person could be saved or not be saved...... (pg. 1 #3 Part 11)

So tell me how am I contradicting myself? Basically what I have told you from the responses I gave is that if you have heard of Jesus, then the only way to go to heaven is you need to accept Him, but on the other hand if you haven't heard of Jesus then God will judge this person fairly and justly and this is another way of entering heaven dependent on God's judgment but again this is provided that you never heard of Jesus.

Conclusion: No contradiction on my part, but obviously an inability to comprehend properly on your part of what I had said or perhaps a failed attempt by you to try cause a contradiction ...case close and now I have to move on!

 

= no Catholic, no Spanish inquisition = Islamic oppression and barbarism = no modern civilization.

= No Catholic church = no freedom

= take away the Catholic church = Roman mythological religion worship Caesar or die.

= with out the Catholic church Gaul will still be a barbarian country

= No Catholic church no crusade = pilgrims will not be safe from Muslim bandits = No modern Euopre no modern civilization or modern science.

= Are you not comparing the Catholic church with something? What do you consider right and wrong and what would you do if you exist during that era?

They started to think for themselves and civilization begun to expand because of the influence and contribution of Christianity. Just look at present day history Christian Europe is very progressive and more stable than none Christian Middle East, Africa or Asia history can not lie.

 

I deliberately used the term "ONLY way"...as in one and no other. No secondary way, not situationally different ways. ONE way...regardless of circumstances.

Now, if you want to say "Yes, the 'ignorant of Christ' can still get into Heaven," That's fine. But it means there is MORE THAN ONE way for a person to get into Heaven...depending on their circumstances.

And it opens a whole new kettle of fish for you...that being-

If a person "ignorant of Christ" can be saved by God's judgement....why not those who have heard the Gospels....but are dubious? Why don't THEY get the same break? What's the metaphysical "difference" between a Native American who dies in 1491, a year before Columbus....who can get into Heaven on God's judgement....

and a Native American who dies in 1500 who hears of the Gospels from a Spanish missionary...but seeing how the Spanish mistreated his people, and seeing no reason to believe claims about God from evil invaders from another land....doesn't accept the story of Jesus as real or true?

Does God send the Seminole to Hell who is a doubter...but his grandfather gets in on circumstance???

 

Not until the church say so but wait until other scientist say so
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-galileo-controversy
It is a good thing that the Church did not rush to embrace Galileo’s views, because it turned out that his ideas were not entirely correct, either. Galileo believed that the sun was not just the fixed center of the solar system but the fixed center of the universe. We now know that the sun is not the center of the universe and that it does move—it simply orbits the center of the galaxy rather than the earth.

As more recent science has shown, both Galileo and his opponents were partly right and partly wrong. Galileo was right in asserting the mobility of the earth and wrong in asserting the immobility of the sun. His opponents were right in asserting the mobility of the sun and wrong in asserting the immobility of the earth.

Had the Catholic Church rushed to endorse Galileo’s views—and there were many in the Church who were quite favorable to them—the Church would have embraced what modern science has disproved.

So do you believe what Galileo claim is true then Galileo believed that the sun was not just the fixed center of the solar system but the fixed center of the universe?

Just like the church can not endorse atheist science that human evolved from apes because there is total lack of evidence to support that the position of the church is to treat atheist evolutionary theory as such a THEORY not fact.

 

Where does Chirstianity teach to "think for yourself"? The Church says "Believe what you want...we're cool"?

- - - Updated - - -

So to "protect poor Galileo"...the Church had to PUT HIM ON TIRAL FOR HERESY?

That about it?

 

LoL...boy you guys like to carry on even after losing an argument...hilarious! Like I said in my previous post...case close and now I have to move on.

I have no time to play silly childish word games...lol

 

Nice...real nice comeback Inc!...lol

You got that gab! "A few seconds engaged in an "orgasm" is a far cry short of an eternity of such delight."...oh yes indeedy!...lol

 

Complete speculation. No-one knows what would have happened without the Roman church.

 

Obviously you haven't read close enough. The other day you challenged me on the statement I made which was:

"Not necessarily, it depends on God's judgment on them and so some will be saved others not. But as far as people who lived prior to Jesus, God pardoned all those people and none of them will be condemned to hell according to Scripture"

So tell me where am I wrong? You really haven't read the part that God tells us that He pardoned the sins of people of past times prior to Jesus Christ now have you?

 

Europe is what it is, progressive as you put it, because its people are 'inventive' not because it is Christian. Probably the most progressive nations now are India, China, Japan - none of which are christian. In fact these nations are taking over some European Industries.

 

Your reference?

 

Why must i need someone to teach me Or I read a book to be a Christian

Someone as wise and powerful as god can Let everyone know what he wants And not need Someone to speak for him
And then why does he only have Someone to speak for him in certain areas

 

Yeah, I noticed it myself the hostility, it was because he was traumatized by his Catholic priests and so he has bitter resentment toward the church/God anything to do with religion...poor boy!

 

haha! a confession!...lol see you haven't read it. Next time before you speak better know what you are saying otherwise you will make a fool out of yourself.

Your assignment is to read the Book of Romans thoroughly then you will get the reference on your own which will verify what I said was true.

 

No confession. I do not see any reference to ALL those before Christ being pardoned. I do see references to them being judged by a different criteria.. And much of the Christian teaching today is Pauls interpretation of the person and gospel of Christ. Note Romans 2:16 'as my gospel declares'.

 

Keep reading...thoroughly from start to finish...in other words the whole book...eventually you will stumble over the verse...but keep your eyes and your mind focused now!

 

In other words you don't know.

I suspect, and I may be wrong, that you are talking Romans11:32. If you are notice that Paul is, and has been 'speaking' about Israel in the past - both Jewish and spiritual. V 32 is a reference to the past Israelites. Revelations bears this out for Israel as well as the saved will be present at the last. This confirms Gods covenant with Abraham.
After the doxology he goes on to talk about them, to whom he is writing.

If you are talking about 11:32 you are taking a verse out of context.

Now I'm off to bed.

 

No, in other words you don't know...lol I already made claim that my statement is verified in Scripture, thus it means I do know, I do know the exact paragraph, the exact verse, the exact words as presented by the NLT bible.

Yes, that's right go off to bed and sleep over it...for tomorrow will be a new day for you, in your quest to find that passage in Scripture.