Hello everyone! It has been a great discussion, but, like I said, we should give others a chance. We can keep on talking about the Lord and Biblical things here, if you want to. I will come back with a few comments on your comments to get this going, in the mean time, feel free to throw in your two cents! Its getting late, so this will be it for now, but I will come back with more comments, I hope you do too. But, we'll see...
Alex Loya

Testing site. Anyone else, feel free to speak your mind!

Alex: When you asked what is faith and living by it, it is believing in something you cannot see, feel or hear yet you know for a fact it is true. That is what I believe. I am also human and at time (very few) I start to question--but there is no doubt I am a believer and will go to heaven when the time comes!
By the way, have you read the Left Behind series? What a great group of books! Just love them!

Hey Rocky! I believe you have the right definition of faith. What is faith? The Bible says, "Faith is being sure of what we hope for, and certain of what we do not see" or "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." Yet, Rocky, I'm sure you will agree, faith, true faith, involves believing the record which God has given us, the Bible, and the Bible teaches in Romans 1 and Psalm 19, for example, that nature testifies to God's glory and existence, it says that the invisible God is clearly seen by the things which He has made, in fact, David praised the Lord because he was fearfully and wonderfully made. In other words, the natural order, even ourselves, our hands' ability to grasp things, our eyes' ability to focus and to see color etc, are visible evidences of the existence, and love, of the invisible God. Let me ask you this, do you see physical, visible evidences of the existence of God? God says the natural order preaches a message in every language testifying of His reality, and that is what I was trying to share with our school mates. Those evidences in nature, are certified by God to be evidences of His existence, in fact, that is why all people are without excuse, because He has revealed Himself in nature and in the conscience of people.

I have listened to the Left Behind series, I got the dramatized tapes/ I think they're excellent! And when you realize that we are about to enter those last 7 years of history, evidently, its awesome! I disagree with the view that says we will be raptured before the Great Tribulation, as the Left Behind series supposes, I believe we will be here for the Great Tribulation, and that we will be raptured at some unknown point before the final pouring out of God's judgement on the wicked, but we will be here, and I truly believe its at the door! I am assuming you are born again? Are you born again? Do you know what that means? At any rate, I do hope those that were interested join us in this conversation, we can discuss so many things! Alright, Rocky, lets keep in touch.
Alex

Thank you for starting this new branch, Alex. I am a Christian, but not born again, and I would like to know what that really means. I have had experiences with born agains, and I feel that they are not as tolerant as your run-of-the-mill Christian. What are your thoughts on this?

Hi Elena!
Your question is THE most important question anybody could ever ask. Interestingly enough, your statement "I am a Christian, but not born again" is exactly, verbatim, the statement I made just a few weeks before I was born again! Elena, "born again" is not a tag, it is not a denomination or a sect, born again is an experience. In the Bible, in John 3, a man by the name of Nicodemus came to Jesus and asked Him questions about the Kingdom of God, Jesus told Nicodemus "I tell you the truth, unless a man (or woman) is born again, he will not see the Kingdom of God". Being born again, then, becomes the one thing God requires for a person to be able to enter the Kingdom of God, if a person is not born again, that person will not see the Kingdom of God, which means that person will not go to heaven but will be separated from God eternally in a place where Jesus said "there will be weeping and grinding of teeth". This is why I say this is THE most important question anyone could ever ask. But what does it mean to be born again? Nicodemus didn't understand, he asked how could a man go back into his mother's womb and come back out again? Jesus went on to explain that being born again is to be born again spiritualy. He explained that the first birth, when we come out as babies, is a birth of the physical body, flesh, but the second birth, being born again, is a new birth of the spirit. Being born again is to be born again of the Spirit of God. Jesus went on to explain that this new spiritual birth happens when we stop trusting in anything else, even our own good works, to get us to heaven, and we put our full trust in Him. Jesus put it this way, "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life". That is absolutely awesome! When you are born again, you are born again into everlasting life! To be able to truly trust in Christ for our salvation, there are some things we must understand: Please pay close attention, Elena, because., according to Jesus Christ, your eternal destiny depends on understanding what follows:

1.You must understand that "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" All have sinned, including you, including me, all of us have sinned, and because of this, we fall short of the glory of God. In other words, no matter how religious we might be, no matter how hard we try through religion to reach God, it is impossible because we have sinned. That is why it is not true that all religions lead to God, not one religion, including what would be a "Christian religion" is sufficient for us to please God. Why? Again, because we all have sinned, big or little sins, we all have sinned and so we fall short of God's glory.

2. What we need to understand next is "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" We must understand that because we have sinned, we are going to die, not just physically, but spiritually, in hell. Why? Because the wages of sin, the payment of sin, the consequence of sin is death, eternal death. But, praise the Lord, notice how that verse does not end there, it goes on to say "...but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" Etrenal life is a gift that God gives us, and because it is a gift, we need not work for it to earn it, that is what religion attempts to do and will fail in accomplishing, eternal life, salvation, is a gift. All we must do is accept that gift. How do we accept the gift? God shows us the only way "through Jesus Christ our Lord" Now, how do we accept the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ? I'm glad you asked!

3. We must understand that "If you confess with your mouth 'Jesus is Lord' and you believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you SHALL be saved" why? "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord SHAll be saved" Here is how you can recieve the gift of eternal life: By confessing, that means by agreeing with God that Jesus Christ is Lord. That Jesus is Lord, Biblically, means two things, 1st it means you accept Jesus for Who He really is, the Bible says "The Lord, He is God" We must accept that Jesus is God, not just a good teacher, not just a prophet, not just a great leader, "The Lord, He is God" Jesus Christ is the ONe and Only God of the Universe and we must accept this, otherwise Jesus said "Unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins", and 2nd, if He is the Lord, that means He is the boss, if we confess Him as Lord it means we submit our hearts and will, and lives to Him and let Him be the Lord, the ruler of our life. If you do this, Elena, and anyone else that might be wondering, if you agree with God that Jesus is God and make Him the Lord of your life, you SHALL, not you may, but you SHALL be saved. Then you will be born again. When you truly make Jesus the Lord of your life, that means that you repent from your sin, wether it be a life of terrible sin, or the sin of trusting in your own good deeds to get you to heaven. If our good deeds got us to heaven, then Jesus was crucified in vain. Making Jsus the Lord of your life involves repentance "Let him that names the name of Christ depart from iniquity" and Jesus said "Unless you repent, you SHALL all likewise perish" not you may, but you shall. Repentance is a change of mind, you are going one way, now you go the other, you are getting drunk, now you stop getting drunk, you are trusting your good deeds, now you don't, and you trust in Jesus, you don't believe in Jesus, now you do. Unless we repent, we will certainly perish, eternally separated from God.

So, in a nutshell, being born again is being born of the Spirit of God, being saved from the consequence of our sins by putting our faith in Jesus Christ, both in Who He is, God manifiested in the flesh, and on what He did for us, ddied in our place on the cross, but was rasied to eternal life. We must repent from our sisn, we must say no to sin and yes to God. He knows we don't have the strength, what He wants is our willingness to turn from our sin, He will give the strength and forgiveness.

Elena, if you believe these things, you may be born again today. T

Thank you for your message, Alex, and I want to give it more thought. Off the top of my head, however, I have a question: why would God not give people who are not familiar with Jesus an opportunity for salvation? Muslems and others completely unrelated to the Christian faith and society. If Jesus gave everyone the benefit of the doubt (the woman at the well, for example) how could God reconcile the fact that many will not enter into His Kingdom due to the mear fact that they live in remote jungles, or deserts, or that they were raised in a non-Christian society, without regard for their hearts and characters? I'm afraid that you may have addressed this before in one of your postings, and I may have missed it. If this is the case, please forgive me. I thank you for the opportunity to discuss this, for it seems I am finding more and more people around me who call themselves Born Again, yet, I feel that love and forgiveness for their fellowman is not as great a priority than to have this "conversion" which you, as opposed to them, call an experience.
Saludos,
Elena

Yes Alex, I am most definately born again and have been since I was 13 when I was babtized. I do however agree with the left behind series. I do not think that as a believer I will be here for the seven year ruling of the Antichrist. No way. I think I, along with all other Christians will rise and aptly put, some will be left behind. I am just thankful it wont be me! It does get you to thinking though...there are many "Christians" strong in their belief that have not actually "accepted Christ", but belive in him none the less---what about them...say for example the Pope or Sister Teresa when she was alive---would they go to heaven.....
As for me, while I believe strongly (ie it is a fact and I go to God when I have a problem and always give thanks for the multitude of blessings I have been bestowed) I do not read scripture frequently nor read the Bible often ---I do however pray. I must say though, I have learned quite a bit from the books (left behind)--anyway, that is about me.

Edited by author 08-08-2000 11:55 PM
Hello! I responded yesterday, but for some reason I couldn't post the response, which really aggravated me because I had typed a detailed response. Let me test this see if the response can be posted before I go on...
Success! Let me type my response again...

Edited by author 08-09-2000 12:47 AM
Elena, the answer to your question is: God does give people of all nations the opportunity for salvation, no matter who they are or where they live or wether they have ever heard of Jesus or not. The problem is not that God does not give an opportunity, the problem is that people do not take it. Muslims, for one, are not ignorant of who Jesus is, they simply refuse to accept Him for Who He claimed to be, God manifested in the flesh, and they refuse to accept the Bible as the authority in matters of faith. To people who have never heard anything at all about Jesus, God has revealed Himself to them in two ways: 1. He has revealed Himself to them through the natural order 2. He has revealed Himself to them through His law which He has written in the hearts of all people, better known as the conscience.
The Bible teaches that that which may be known of God is manifest in people's hearts because God has revealed His law in their hearts, and it also teaches that the invisible God is clearly seen by the things which He has made, so that all people are without excuse. All people know by instinct that God exists, that He is greater than His creation and that He is a moral God to whom we are accountable. All people know this on their hearts, but they choose to supress the truth in unrighteousness, they choose to exalt the creation above the Creator in their affections, and to betray their own conscience until their conscience is seared and they can no longer blush or feel any guilt for their immoral behavior. The Bible goes on to teach that the law of God, wether it be in tablets of stone or in the tablets of the heart, the conscience, was never meant to bring salvation by keeping it, namely because it is impossible to perfectly keep the law of God. Its purpose, then, is to show people their helplessness in keeping the law of God, wether it be on paper or in the conscience, so that they will see their need for a Savior and cry out to God for mercy. When people who have never heard about Jesus or the Bible recognize that they can't keep the law of their own conscience, that is meant to drive them to their knees to call out to the God who made all things around them, and thus God will send them a missionary to tell them about Jesus. There are literally millions of testimonies of people who had never heard about Jesus, but who, when they recognized their own sinfulness by their conscience, cried out to the unknown God and He sent someone to tell them about Jesus and they got saved. Therefore, when people die without ever having heard about Jesus, with the exception of babies and mentally retarded people, they die in their sin demonstrating that they would have rejected Jesus even if they had heard about Him. The fact that you have been meeting alot of born agains and that you have these questions shows me that the Lord is really dealing with your heart. Let me encourage you not to reject Christ because His people let you down, people will always let you down, but He won't. Let me ask you this, what exactly are you talking about when you say that born agains don't show alot of love, forgiveness and tolerance?

Rocky, praise the Lord! Great to hear you are born again! Because, according to Jesus, there is no other way to get to heaven! If the Pope or mother Teresa or whoever else claims the title Christian but yet does not "accept Christ", then they are showing that they are not truly Christians, since they do not accept the Founder, or the Founder's essential teachings. A true muslim will believe and adhere to the same beliefs and teachings Mohammed held to, so a Budhist to Budah's teachings, by the same token, a true Christian will believe the same thing that Jesus believed and taught. Jesus taught that salvation came by being born again through faith in Him alone, that He is the only way to the Father, and if any "Christian" disagrees and believes that his own good works will earn him a place in heaven, that "Christian" is disagreeing with Christ Himself and therefore is not a true follower, thus that "Christian" will not make it to heaven. If mother Teresa makes it to heaven because she did a lot of good things, then Jesus was playing the fool dying on the cross, He was crucified in vain. If mother Teresa was doing her good works in order to earn salvation, she will not make it to heaven, and all those good works could add to her condemnation because they would be a witness against her of how much she did not believe in Jesus' words and Jesus' sacrifice on the cross. But if mother Teresa did all those good works because she had been saved by trusting in Jesus alone, out of unselfish love, and not in order to earn her salvation, not only will she be saved, but she will have an awesome reward beyond salvation! Salvation is by faith alone, but the faith that saves is not alone. True faith will be manifested in good works, but salvation does not come by good works but by trusting in Jesus Christ.

Let me ask you this question: Why do you believe in pre-tribulation rapture? I was taught that doctrine like most Christians, but the more I study, the less I believe we will be taken out before the tribulation, and the more I believe we will be here. "Coincidentally" I started teaching on the rapture this week on my radio show, I am sure you will find it extremely interesting. I have begun teaching a series on the rapture by looking at some of the main Scriptures that are taken as a basis for the pre-tribulation rapture view of Scripture, I go through those Scriptures, and then I share why I believe they are in error to take them to teach pre-trib. I will be doing this for the next few weeks. Then I will teach on why I believe we will be here through the Great Tribulation. Although it is a non-essential issue, in other words, you can believe pre or post and still be saved, it is important and as the time is approaching, and we are so close! it will become more important to have a correct view of the timing of the rapture. Why? Let me ask you this: what if the anti-Christ comes on the scene in the next few months or years, I believe we really are that close!, and we are still here, will you be able to recognize him so as not to fall for his deception? Because he will come as a man of peace, but by peace he will destroy many... what if the Great Tribulation begins and we begin to be seriously persecuted, and we are still here, will your faith be shipwrecked? These are important questions, that is why I am teaching on the rapture at this particular point in time. Go on over to my web site and listen to the series about the rapture.
http://www.worshipradio.com/TheKnowingGodBroadcast.htm

But, why do you believe in pre-trib?

Alex

Dear Alex, I want to think about your response, I'm sorry I'm not faster on my feet, but as you will agree, this is something to ponder carefully. I appreciate the opportunity to explore this with you (and Rocky!)
Saludos -

I've come to the conclusion that I have perhaps mistaken intolerance and lack of love. If one sees the points that drew me to that conclusion in the first place (gays cannot go to heaven, among others)from the point of view of one who is "born again" then their reaction is understandable. I have a hard time with the concept of a God who gives only one interpretation of Himself.
Saludos -

Edited by author 08-14-2000 12:23 AM
Elena, that is a good first step in understanding where born again Christians are coming from in regards to the issue of gays, to see it from our perspective. Christians have been much maligned of spreading hate and intolerance, when what Jesus said was even to love those that hate us and to pray for those who persecute us. True born again Christians do not hate any body, not even our enemies, we are to love our enemies. The problem, evidently, is that nowadays some people confuse disapproval of a certain behavior with hatred of the person that does the behavior. The behavior and the person must be separated. Why do Christians disapprove of homosexual behavior? Is it because their own behavior is perfect? I don't think so. Is it because they hate the person that engages in homosexual behavior? Nothing could be further from the truth! The reason Christians disapprove of homosexual behavior is simply because the Bible declares that such behavior is against God's standards and will, and against nature, which God created. Homosexuality is called a sin, and like any sin, it will separate a person from God. And here is where you see who is it that really does love the homosexual. The Bible teaches, as I mentioned before, that the wages of sin is death, that is separation from God in hell. Not simply the wages of one type of sin, but any sin will bring forth eternal death, conscious suffering in hell. Some people struggle with homosexual sin, others struggle with gossip, others struggle with adultery, others struggle with anger... all people without exception, not just the homosexual, have sinned, and that includes every single born again Christian. The Christian, however, is aware of the consequences of sin, wether it be homosexual behavior or stealing cookies from a cookie jar or cheating on taxes, Christians are aware of the fact that sin will bring eternal suffering in hell to those who do not turn away from their sin, to those who do not repent. So the born again Christian will set about to warn people of the consequence of their behavior, so that those who engage in such behavior won't have to suffer for eternity, as the Bible says, "without rest day or night". To not warn the person of the unspeakably horrible eternal, and also temporal, consequences of their behavior is the true act of hatred, to warn them is an act of genuine love. For example, lets say two moms are in a kitchen talking and cooking. Each of the moms has a pot of scalding boiling oil on the stove, each of the pots has its handle protruding from the stove. Now, each of the moms has a toddler, and each toddler, because of curiosity, goes to pull the handle of the pots which are on the stove. All the toddlers can see is the handle, but each mom can see what the toddlers can not see, that the pots have boiling scalding oil inside. Now, which mom shows more love, the mom that rushes to her toddler and swats his little butt and says NO! as she pulls him away from the stove, or the mom that refuses to intervene so as not to make her toddler upset, and so that todddler pulls the handle and the scalding contents burn him? Which mom shows true love? Stop. Really do take a second to think about it, which mom loves her child more, the one who spanks him, says no! and pulls him away even if it upsets her toddler, or the one who refuses to do so so as not to upset her toddler and so the toddler dumps the boiling oil on himself? Which one shows real love? Stop. Think about it.

 The Bible clearly says that, among other sins, "homosexual offenders will not inherit the kingdom of God", it says that "men with men, burning in their lust, do that which is unseemly, bringing upon their own bodies the due reward" and'"...even as Sodom and Gomorrah, giving themselves over to immorality, and suffering the vengance of eternal fire." and many other such places. To not warn, and to even encourage people who are trapped in homosexual behavior or any other kind of sinful behavior in their behavior is the true act of hatred, because whoever encourages it or does not warn about it is letting those poor people pull the pot of boiling scalding oil on their own heads, except that in this case it will burn for eternity. True love will do what is best for the other person even if it meets with discomfort and disapproval. But today, people think that to tell people about the consequences of their behavior is an act of hatred, but to not warn and even encourage them in their destructive behavior is seen as love. The myth is spread that homosexuals can't change their behavior and inclinations, and when a few thousand ex-homosexuals who have been born again come out and say that it is indeed possible, with God's help, to change their behavior and even their inclinations, they are accused of spreading hatred. Here is the difference between a born again Christian who used to be a homosexual, or even a Christian who still struggles with homosexuality and a gay activist: the born again Christian ex-homosexual says to God "I have sinned, please forgive me" and thus begins his recovery, which may be in an instant or through a long hard process, whereas the gay activist says,"I have not sinned." and sometimes even go so far as to blaspheme and say "God is gay." Both of these people struggle with the same sin, but one chooses to believe in God and His Word and thus is healed and delivered, and delivered from eternal suffering, whereas the other one chooses to not believe God's Word and to refuse to accept, confess, that they have sinned, and thus suffers the consequence of his behavioral choice both in this life and that which is to come.
But, Elena, to come to agree with this perspective, as well as to come to accept the fact that God said there is only one way to Himself, and that is through Jesus Christ, boils down to wether the Bible is truly the Word of God or just a book like any other book. If the Bible is just like any other book, then it doesn't matter, but if it is the Word of God, we better take heed. I believe for many reasons that the Bible is not just any other book, it is the Word of God, therefore it is the standard of what is true. Maybe I will share some of those reasons here if you want me to.
Saludos

Edited by author 08-15-2000 03:09 PM
Alex, you paint a fairly rosy picture of what true Christians feel about homosexuals. While it may be true that many Christians are able to "love the sinner, hate the sin," it seems all too often that many who probably consider themselves "true Christians" do not, in fact, "love the sinner" but by their actions very obviously "hate the sinner." I'm thinking specifically of those jerks who parade around with signs that read "God hates Fags!" which I find truly repugnant. Of course their hatred does not stop at their speech, but is too often translated into abhorrent acts of violence toward gay people. I'm sure that you do not condone those actions, and probably do not consider these people to be true Christians, but how do you make peace with the fact that they probably consider themselves to be so? Their actions could in no way be construed as a loving warning. Beating someone up is very different from a swat on the behind of a toddler who is on the verge of hurting himself. Any thoughts?

Hey Sue! Good to hear from you here! Yeah, it is true that many are those who claim the Name of Christ, but in works they deny Him. You find it repugnant when those jerks carry those signs, doubly so do I, or triple so. Why? Not only because the do show hatred, but because they are misrepresenting Christians and, wurse, they are misrepresenting Christ. You ask how do I make peace with the fact that

Edited by author 08-15-2000 11:40 PM
Hey Sue! Good to hear from you here! Yeah, it is true that many are those who claim the Name of Christ, but in works they deny Him. You find it repugnant when those jerks carry those signs, doubly so do I, or triple so. Why? Not only because they do show hatred, but because they are misrepresenting Christians and, wurse, they are misrepresenting Christ. You ask how do I make peace with the fact that these people probably consider themselves to be true Christians. The peace I find is in the standard of what is true i.e. the Bible. I believe that the Bible is THE standard of truth, and it is in its pages that I find how to discern truth from falsehood, true Christians from false. What is a true Christian? A true Christian would be someone who believes and adheres to the same thing Jesus believed and adhered to and taught. A true Christian will reflect the character of Christ as revealed in Scripture. How did Jesus deal with those caught in immorality? Because the God who said "A man shal not lie with another man as he lies with a woman, this is an abomination" is the same God who said "You shall not commit adultery." In John chapter 8 we find the narrative of the woman caught in adultery, which the Old Testament law said she, and he by the way, should be put to death. The Bible says that when Jesus was asked what should be done, they were trying to trap Him in His words because the Jews no longer had the power to execute the death penalty because of the Romans, yet the OT law said she had to be put to death, the Bible says that Jesus answered "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone" One by one, the men who were ready to kill the woman, being convicted by their own conscience, left and didn't hurt the woman. When they left, Jesus told the woman,"Neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more." and she went away very greatful to Jesus. Here is where we find a couple of things: First, Jesus showed an attitude of true love and concern for the woman. It was true love in that His attitude was not of condemnation but of forgiveness, it was true love in that He was concerned for her immediate physical well being, not being killed, and for her eternal well being, "go and sin no more". A true Christian will show this same attitude, reflecting the character of his Master. A true Christian will condemn acts of violence against homosexuals, while showing true love and concern in an attitude of forgiveness rather than condemnation, and showing true love by showing concern for their physical well being, not just in not being beaten to death but in telling them that their lifestyle may bring some horrible, gruesome disease as a consequence in this life, and by, like Jesus, telling them "go and sin no more", the concern being for their eternal well being. Now, do those who carry those signs you mentioned and who tie up a young man and beat him to death because he is a homosexual reflect Jesus' character? The answer is clearly no. Thus, you discern that although these people claim to be Christians, they are not, since they deny the Lord with their works. You shall know them by their fruit, Jesus said. I would warn those people who claim His Name and yet do these things to examine themselves wether they are truly in the faith, I am sure that none of them is qualified to cast the first stone, yet they do, and in so doing they are simply adding to their own eternal condemnation, not only for acting self righteously, but for misrepresenting God and His people, and causing people to turn away from God because of what they do.
     On the other hand, homosexual activists themselves show tons and tons of hatred towards Christians. Perhaps one of the wurst, most disgusting ways in which they show this hatred is in slandering good Christian people, and even some good non-Christian conservative people, by charging them, us, with hate where there is no hate, and with blame where it does not belong. When that young man was tied to a fence and beaten to death by three thugs because he was a homosexual, homosexual activists charged Dr. James Dobson and his ministry, Focus on the Family, with the blame for the murder, saying that Dr. Dobson promotes hate simply because he believes that homosexuality is a sin. Now, I have been listening to Dr. Dobson for 15 years now, and one must go to great lengths to even imagine those three beer drinking thugs sitting around listening to "Focus on the Family", that is literally laughable, I am literaslly LOLing here at that thought! That's insane! That accusation is absolutely preposterous! Dr. Dobson is a good, good, good man! He has done very many great and good things and shows nothing but love to all. All who are reading this, if anybody else is, who have families, and even if you don't, would benefit tremendously from this man's knowledge and ministry. To charge him with hate and with the blame, now, that is what is an act of hate! The only group of people in America that can be slandered today and its ok, the only group of people against whom it is ok to be intolerant is born again Christians.
    Notice how in John 8 although Jesus said to the woman "Neither do I condemn you." He went on to say, "Go and sin no more" True Christians must take a stand and show true love by not compromising even if some people get offended, and declaring the truth that homosexuality is a sin, and it will bring terrible consequences both in this life and in the life to come, as will all sin. For this, we will be charged with hatred when in reality it is love that desires no one evil. Why are Christians like Dr. Dobson, or Dr. Laura, she is a great woman, Jewish conservative no hate at all, falsely charged with hatred? Because the truth is that homosexual activists want to silence anyone who disagrees with them by saying that they can change and come out of that lifestyle and clean up the closet. People blame Christians of trying to impose their morality on people, when in reality it is the homosexual activists who are very agressively pushing to impose their immoralty on everybody else. If you disagree, you are labeled a hate monger, so that pretty soon we won't even be alowed to freely speak our minds without being jailed, as is happening in Canada, I believe. At any rate, not all that is called hate is hate, and it is possible to discern who is a true Christian and who is not.
Let me invite you to browse through Focus on the Family, you can search in there web site concerning their stand on homosexuality, and see for yourself if they are hate mongers or not, as an example of Christians who have been slandered with the charge of "hate". It will also benefit yu for other matters.
http//:www.family.org
Hope to hear from more of you here!
Alex

Alex, I find many of your assertions to be irrational and inconsistent.

First you hold the Bible up as THE standard of truth. The only standard of truth is truth itself. A collection of words passed down for millennia are bound to be laced with translation errors and other inaccuracies. Being bilingual I'm sure you realize that many phrases and meaning defy translation from one language to another. Even within a given language, the same phrase can be understood to mean various things. There are many religions that refer to the text of the Bible as the source of their doctrine. Each religion is "interpreting" what the Bible says in a somewhat different way. There are those who claim that they DO NOT interpret the Bible, but the act of reading for any kind of understanding is by definition an act of interpretation. You conveniently define "True Christian" belief as the way you read and interpret the Bible. By your definition, you deny everyone who does not interpret the Bible the same way you do the right to consider themselves to be "True Christians". I find the "Born Again" or "Fundamentalist" Christians to be very intolerant of other's religious beliefs. I can't tell you how many times I have been told that Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, and even Catholics, aren't Christians. Each one of these groups firmly believes that Jesus Christ is divine, believes that His atonement as the ONLY way they can be saved, and refer to the Bible as their Primary scriptural text.

My wife who is a practicing Mormon (member of the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter Day Saints) has been told on many occasions by Baptists, Methodists, and others that she is not a Christian and that by being a Mormon she is denying the "true" Christ and will therefore go to hell. I personally listened to a sermon preached by Dr. Walter Martin where he said and I quote" The Mormon's believe that Jesus Christ is the bastard son of a Pagan God."

Once you have concluded that your understanding of the Bible is absolutely correct and that anyone who believes differently is destined for Hell, it is easy to pass off intolerance as heartfelt concern.

Based on your interpretation of the Bible as Absolute Truth, you are convinced that Homosexuality is a sin and that all who engage in it are in fact making a choice to live in sin and will go to hell if they don't repent. Since you "know" the answer, you don't need to pay any attention to those who claim to be Gay by nature. I have good friends who are convinced that they are homosexual by nature. That is to say they have been attracted to members of their own gender all of their life and never to the opposite sex.

I don't claim to have absolute truth and I think that different people are homosexual for different reasons. I can empathize with the plight of someone who truly is "wired" as gay that is told to fit the straight mold. In order to empathize, I imagine myself, wired as I am ("straight") as being raised and taught that to have desires for a women was wrong and that I should marry and have a sexual relationship with a Man. I would consider that kind of existence to be a personal hell. On the chance that this is in fact the situation for many homosexual people, I would hate to think I was making their situation worse by insisting that they were sinful and needed to be "cured" or "cleaned up".

This post is getting too long so I will save other observations for future posts.

Future topics might include,

Faith vs. Reason

Comparing the Creation with the Supposed Creator - Hash, Uncaring Nature created by a Loving Being

Evolution a Hoax? Hardly

God being obvious in everything around us - I happen to disagree.

Edited by author 08-18-2000 12:54 AM
Jared, about my assertions being irrational and inconsistent all I can say is... Praise the Lord you were not one of my professors! I might have never graduated Magna Cum Laude!... Why! I might not have graduated at all!

You mention that the standard of truth is truth itself, to which I ask: How do you know what truth is? How do you discern truth from falsehood apart from the Bible or from any other such "tangible" standard of truth? Without the Bible, or any other such source, how do you know that what is true for you is not true or is also true for me? Truth, without a tangible standard, then, becomes relative... what is true for you might not be true for me and so on, there is no absolute truth... but that "relative" truth is no truth at all, since what may be true for you might be false for me. Relative truth, then, can not be used as a standard because it is relative and it is a contradiction of what is really true, because what is really true must be true absolutely for all. Now, this assertion should not be confused with something that may be true for one individual but not for another. For example, it may be true of a person that he is allergic to bee stings, while it is not true of, say, his brother. This difference on what is true of one man but not of his brother does not show that truth is relative, because what is true is that one man is allergic and what is also true is that the other man is not allergic. A stetement concerning these two men's condition might be false, but the truth of their condition is absolutely true; one is allergic the other is not, and the absoluteness of the truth of each man's condition is seen in the ultimate outcome of, lets say, a bee sting. One man swells up, the other one does not, showing that it is absolutely true that one is allergic and that the other one is not. Truth must be absolute universally, for example, it is true, absolutely true, that you exist, right? It doesn't matter how much you or me, or anybody else may deny that Jared exists, you still exist, that is an absolute truth which shows truth is not relative but by its very nature is absolute. Is there any reason to believe that in the spirtual realm truth ceases to be absolute and becomes relative? What is true for you might not be true for me? I don't think so, not only because of the Bible, but because the nature of truth itself requires it to be absolutely true, otherwise if its not true, its false. Furthermore, where the connection is made between the spiritual reality and the physical reality, the verifiable consequences, the ultimate outcome, show that the Biblical spiritual principle is true. For example, the Biblical principle says that if a man engages in homosexual behavior there will be some bad consequences physically. Is this verifiable? Sure, in the form of hepatatis B, Aids and the need for adult diapers. I am not mocking,please do understand, I am simply pointing out some bad verifiable consequences which proove that the spiritual principle which says that such behavior will bring bad consequences is true. Does the Biblical spiritual principle that says adultery will bring some bad consequences in the physical realm show itself to be true? Many broken marriages, fatherless children, and, at the very least, broken trust between spouses would show that, indeed, the Biblical, spiritual principle that adultery is wrong is true, absolutely. The ultimate outcome of breaking God's spiritual law will always be death, which shows it absolute, because all die without exception. That all die is an absolute truth, that all are judged by God for sure after death is absolute as well, although some may have to wait till then to verify this.
On the other hand, does the Biblical, spiritual, principle of trusting God have verifiable good consequences in the physical realm? Certainly, for example, when I was in College, not depending on anybody for my support, not asking my parents for money, not asking anybody, just trusting God, on one occasion I looked at my closet, and briefly said to the Lord "Lord, I need some new jeans." The next day an acquaintance from church knocked on my door and said, "Hey Alex, I got these jeans, they are brand new but they don't fit me, you want them?" Three pair, waist and length exact. Or another time while in Bible College, I asked the Lord, "Lord, I need a dress jacket." No sooner had I finished praying when a young man by the name of Brent comes walking into my room holding two dress jackets in his hands, on hangers, "Alex, these don't fit me, you want them?" Or, now that God has blessed me financially, I took my family to Disneyworld this last February, we got to the park from the hotel at 11:00 A.M. just in time to find out that there was not one single stroller left that we could rent. This meant that we would have to carry our baby all day long in the sun with two other little children, and it was hot, which would mean that not only would we have to be carrying the baby, but lil' Alex would get very tired not able to really rest as we walked around the park all day without a stroller. I prayed in my heart, "Lord, please let us have a stroller!" Immediately, as soon as I said this in my heart, a lady who was walking in the opposite direction, at that instant, meets me and says, "You want our stroller? We are leaving." Not only did we get a stroller where lil' Al could lay down and sleep, but we got it for free! Whoever left Disneyworld with her family at 11:00 in the morning? Now, that's irrational!
You may think that all this is petty, I would tell you its the tip of the iceberg, and the point I am making is that the spiritual principle has shown itself to be true in the physical realm: sin brings bad consequences in the physical realm, trusting God brings good consequences in the physical realm. Truth must be absolute to be truth, it can not be relative. Truth is absolute in the physical realm, and so it is in the spiritual realm, and these petty things I shared are simply to show that this is true in both realms.

 Truth must be absolute by its very nature both in the physical realm and in the spiritual realm, but without a tangible standard like the Bible or some other such source to show you what is truth, truth becomes relative. But relative truth, which is what that truth without a "tangible" standard is that you propose, can not be used as a standard for anything because it is relative and ultimately is no truth at all, it contradicts what truth is. You must have a "tangible"(I fail to find the word) standard to be able to measure what is true and to discern truth from falsehood, it can not be done by relativity. You assume the Bible is not THE standard of truth and exchange it for a relative concept of truth which can not be used as a standard, who knows what it is? Tomorrow, or some time this week end, I will adress why the Bible can be trusted as THE standard of truth, beginning with your truly logical assertion that through millenia of translation, errors and inaccuracies have to creep in. Because this is logical, the fact that such minimal "errors" have crept into the text of the Bible through thousands of years of hand copying shows me that the Bible is indeed Divine, rather than human, in origin. I will also adress the rest of your letter.
Alex

Alex, I did not at any time assert that truth was relative. I also believe that whatever truth is it must be absolute. My issue comes with asserting that one of many possible interpretations of a written text is absolute truth. It is an act of faith or emotion that leads one to conclude that the Bible is absolute truth. Personal anecdotal instances of being provided with free clothing and stroller's hardly meets the standard of objective evidence. There are countless examples of prayers not being answered. People pray for peace all over the world every day to no avail. People pray for family members to be healed, when they are, it is evidence of God, when they are not healed, it is "God’s will". If God takes time out for a pair of pants, why wouldn’t he bother to keep Baby Jessica from falling down a well? In other words, if an answered prayer is evidence that God exists and is listening, why isn’t an unanswered prayer evidence that God does not exist?

As to leaving Disney World at 11:00 AM being irrational, quite the contrary. If you arrive at opening time you will be in the cool of the day, and visit many more attractions per hour before the crowds arrive. In fact, arriving at 11:00 AM after the park is thoroughly thronged with visitors is irrational. For your next visit I would suggest that you go from opening time to noon and then return to your hotel for a rest or a swim in the pool and then return to the park for the evening hours – smaller crowds and less heat.

People of many faiths, Mormon, Baptist, Catholic, Jehovah's Witness, Muslim, Hindu are all 100% certain that they have found absolute truth as regards the nature and existence of God. Since many of these beliefs disagree with one another, I have to conclude that they cannot all be correct (since I also accept the notion of absolute truth). Each of these people arrives at their conclusions through faith and spiritual/emotional experiences bolstered by anecdotal evidence. Since each of these beliefs is arrived at through faith processes, and they cannot all be correct, I must conclude that faith does not necessarily lead to the truth. In fact, if only one concept of God can be correct, faith apparently leads to a false notion of absolute truth in a majority of the cases.

Since we as mere mortals are helpless to ascertain absolute truth with any degree of confidence, we should be very cautious about describing anything as other than a belief or an opinion. My opinion, based on what I have observed of the world is that God does not exist. I do not know this to be a fact but it is what I believe absolute truth to be. Since I recognize I can't possibly be 100% sure of this belief, I don't think it is appropriate for me to tell everyone else that I have THE standard of absolute truth and that they are therefore wrong.

I don't contend that every Christian group has it's own truth. In fact, I think they are all incorrect. I don't think any one group has the right to use "faith" and a "true interpretation" of the Bible as a basis to reject the other groups interpretations of the bible as false and "non-Christian".

The notion that anyone knows what absolute truth is and therefore has no need to continue searching for knowledge and understanding is the kind of thinking that kept the dark ages dark for so long. At one point, people "KNEW" that the Earth did not move and was the center of the universe. In fairness, Scientific theories also come and go or are expanded upon. The big difference is that theories are just that, not declarations of absolute truth.

I don't know for certain if Evolution from species to species occurred in Earth's history. I think that it probably did, but I am not closed off to other possibilities. When you conclude that Evolution is a hoax, based on a belief that your interpretation of the bible is Absolute Truth, you shut down an avenue of exploration that could be adding to human understanding.

Let me close this post with some words from one of the greatest poets of our time – Billy Joel.

Shades of Grey

Some things were perfectly clear, seen with the vision of youth
No doubts and nothing to fear, I claimed the corner on truth
These days it's harder to say I know what I'm fighting for
My faith is falling away
I'm not that sure anymore

Shades of grey wherever I go
The more I find out the less that I know
Black and white is how it should be
But shades of grey are the colors I see

Once there were trenches and walls and one point of every view
Fight 'til the other man falls
Kill him before he kills you
These days the edges are blurred, I'm old and tired of war
I hear the other man's words
I'm not that sure anymore

Shades of grey are all that I find
When I come to the enemy line
Black and white was so easy for me
But shades of grey are the colors I see

Now with the wisdom of years I try to reason things out
And the only people I fear are those who never have doubts
Save us all from arrogant men, and all the causes they're for
I won't be righteous again
I'm not that sure anymore

Shades of grey wherever I go
The more I find out the less that I know
Ain't no rainbows shining on me
Shades of grey are the colors I see

Hey Jared! Apparently we were on line at the same time! I came back to add a thought to my previous dissertation, when I posted it again, there you were!

I believe Disney opened at nine, I don't think two hours is enough time to actually have some verifiable fun there. But I do agree, specially after being there, that it is best to avoid rush hour. I guess you must assume that all these little real life anecdotes must be coincidences, but it is very symptomatic how all these little coincidences begin to stack up when you trust God to the point where you begin to wonder if these are really coincidences at all. I would say that the law of compound probabilities would be against these being just coincidences. Answered prayer shows that God, and some times not God but another spirit being, depending on whom people pray to, exists, I do not believe that it is mathematically possible for millions of answered prayers to be all coincidence. Unanswered prayer does not show that God does not exist, it simply shows that God does indeed have a purpose and a will and that He is independent of man's whims or desires. Unanswered prayer shows us our place, that we are men, and His place, that He is God, He is the Boss.

I would agree with you that an interpretation of a written text may be in error, including my own. The Text itself, however, the Bible, is absolute truth. Contrary to your assumption, it is not simply an act of faith or an emotion that can lead a person to believe that the Bible is absolute truth. It is the verifiable evidence of the realiability of the Bible, as well as faith, that leads me to believe it is absolute truth. I am talking about its preservation through the ages, about historical grounds, about archeological evidence, about fulfillment of Biblical Prophecy (Jared, although you are not aware of this, you have seen more Biblical prophecy fulfilled before your very eyes in the last ten years than in the previous 2000 years since the first coming of Christ. Evidently, God is really fixing to wrap up the whole show!), textual evidence etc. I will share some of these with you soon. The Bible is truly a book unlike any other! Its incredible!

It's getting late, so let me come back tomorrow to adress the rest of your letter. Alright, talk to you later!
Alex
P.S.
Its a good thing that you do believe truth must be absolute, but you still didn't answer how you can know that truth. If truth is absolute, then it must be knowable. Either now, or later, but absolute truth must be knowable. How do you know what truth is? If you allow for the possibility that God may exist, then you can not afford to gamble with your eternal destiny, eternity is a long, long time! You must find the truth, but how can you do so? Jesus made it easy for you and me, He said,"I AM THE way,THE truth and THE life, no man comes to the Father but by me."

Alex,

Logic dictates that truth must be absolute. Logic does not dictate that all truth is knowable. I think we discover things about natural law through scientific investigation and experimentation but I don't think we can ever come to a complete understanding of everything that is. I define truth as what is.

I think we have a good understanding of many things. We know that matter is made up of molecules; we know that molecules are made up of atoms; we know that atoms are made up of electrons, protons, and neutrons. We speculate that protons are made up of quarks but we don't know what holds them together. The existence of a gluon or strong force is theorized to hold the proton together but we don't know for sure how it works. We may not be able to gain an absolute understanding of matter but we do know a lot about it and can use that knowledge to our benefit through engineering.

Because of the vastness of the universe we have little hope of knowing everything about it. I'm sure that human knowledge will continue to grow if we can avoid causing our own extinction but will never arrive at complete knowledge of everything that is.

The Bible may contain the truth as regards the existence of God and in fact everything it says may be true. Even if every word of the Bible is absolutely true it does not contain all knowledge. You might argue that it contains everything that is important to know, but it does not attempt to explain the physical world in any detail.

I understand that there are many prophesies in the Bible about the "last days" and the events leading up to them. Included in the list are wars and rumors of wars, earthquakes, and every manner of pestilence. Each of these things has existed for as long as man has existed. Predicting that they would exist in the future isn't going out very far on a limb.

The symbolism of Revelations is obscure enough that many events described therein can be construed to match up with modern events.

The fact that advice given by the Bible turns out to be valuable does not prove its divinity. Confucius had a great deal of good advice. Adultery being considered a bad thing does not require divine revelation. A society could easily observe the negative affects of adultery and then conclude that it is evil and write it down as a commandment. Most of the Ten Commandments have more to do with having a peaceful society than with anything else. Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not bear false witness, honor thy father and mother, thou shalt not covet etc, etc,. These same laws could be derived from common sense.

Whether homosexuality is a sin or not it is obvious that it does not help build a strong society in that strong families are not likely to be formed. Recognizing this fact and the negative consequences of the behavior could lead to considering it to be a sin.

There is no doubt that much of the Bible is in fact reporting on historical occurrences, we can have high confidence that a person named Jesus did in fact exist, that he was hated by the Jews and that he was crucified. We know that many of the cities and civilizations that are referred to also existed.

The bottom line is that the doctrinal content of the Bible cannot be proven to be true. Those who choose to believe in it must do so as an act of faith, not logic.

If I am wrong and God does exist, I am confident that he will not be so rigid as you seem to assume in requiring a specific set of beliefs to avoid Hell. I can't fathom a "loving" God expecting a poor soul raised in the middle of mainland China to conjure up a missionary to convert him to Christianity and that if he does not do this he will go to Hell. Simple percentages of what actually happens in China would imply that Westerners are much more righteous than the Chinese since Westerners accept Jesus at a much higher rate. If so much is required of the person born outside of earshot of the Christian message, I would think that only the most righteous would be born in China.

New Topic - Faith Vs. Reason

If God exists, he has chosen to make his existence a question of faith. God (being all powerful) would certainly be able to make his existence known to all with 100% certainty if he wanted to.

Since God does not make knowledge of his existence a certainty, we can conclude one of three things.
1. Living by faith is a fundamentally important thing and God does not want his existence to be proven, or
2. God does not care if we know he exists or not and makes no effort to conclusively demonstrate his existence, or
3. God does not exist.

Almost all religions teach that faith is in fact a fundamental virtue and that it is an essential part of the reason for this life - "we are being tested to see if we can live by faith". Either religion is teaching a great truth, that faith is in fact a fundamental virtue, or religion has erroneously concluded that faith is a fundamental virtue as the only way to explain the lack of concrete evidence that God exists.

The question of whether faith is a fundamental virtue or not has great implications.

The more I think about the relative value of faith as compared with knowledge and reason, the more I am convinced that faith is NOT fundamentally a good thing. Here are some of the concerns I have about the "virtue" of faith:

ˇ If truth is absolute, and hundreds of different religions use faith to arrive at and defend conflicting doctrines and beliefs, faith appears to lead to error far more frequently than it leads to truth.

ˇ Faith leads one to reject objective evidence that might be useful to human understanding - if you already "know" the truth according to your faith; you have no need of any new information.

ˇ Faith often leads to violent conflict. Many wars have been fought with both sides convinced they are fighting for God, and absolute truth. The most formidable adversaries are those who are "true believers" in the cause for which they are fighting.

ˇ Faith is a very personal thing; each person arrives at their conclusions based on unique experience as perceived through their own senses and prior experience. Subjective evaluation of a personal experience is extremely unreliable when it comes to evaluating objective reality. Scientific methods with requirements of repeatability and objective measurement provide much more reliable results.

ˇ When challenging of the status quo is presented as "lacking faith" or "evil", the pursuit of knowledge is stifled.

ˇ When a specific set of beliefs dominates a culture, there is not tolerance for any other belief and personal freedom is lost.

The real strength of the concept of faith is in getting people to accept a teaching or point of view without evidence. This strength is used as the foundation for most religions.

Since I don't consider faith to be a fundamental virtue, and in fact believe it to be harmful to the pursuit of knowledge, I am forced to conclude that God probably does not exist or is not concerned about the affairs of men.

I believe the answer is behind door #2. I don't think God cares if we believe or not, since He's already there. And the purpose of faith is to keep our little brains glued together whil we figure out how things really work. I don't see a dichotomy between believing in God and believing in science; God is the ultimate expression of science, or vice versa, but does it matter? I'm with you on almost all your points, Jared, but somehow those views reinforce rather than obliterate my faith. God is much bigger than all the arguments against It.

Hey, let me answer your first comments first!
Notice I said that absolute truth must be knowable... either now or later. Let me rephrase the same statement: If truth is absolute, then it is theoretically possible to know what is absolutely true, if we have the time and the means to find it out. Realistically speaking, however, we will never know all that is true not only because we are so limited, but because the Bible says "The secret things belong to God". In other words, there are certain things that are true which God will not reveal to us that we will never ever know. Concerning the subject at hand, however, God has revealed Himself to us is various ways. God has revealed Himself through the natural order that I mentioned before, if you observe nature you will see that there is intelligent design behind it, and God has revealed Himself through our conscience, He has written His law in all people's hearts. Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal etc. as you say, can be derived from common sense because that law is written in everyone's heart, people know instinctualy that those things are wrong. The Bible says that because of this, all people are without excuse. Although I agree that realistically speaking we will never know all that is true, concerning the subject at hand, God is knowable. Not only is God knowable, but He promises to meet us half way. When I went to San Antonio from New Orleans to attend Bible College, at the end of my first week in San Antonio that Fall I was really wondering and praying about where to attend church in San Antonio. That Friday at Bro. Van Gill's class we read a passage of Scripture, Hosea 6:3. When we read that, the Scripture jumped out of the pages of the Bible, and really spoke to me. So much so that I was telling everybody in class what the Lord had showed me in that passage. As Sunday came I was still asking God where to go to church. I went and visited Alamo City Baptist Church, and that Sunday they just happened to have a guest speaker, of all places, from New Orleans, and not just from New Orleans, but from the West Bank, which was my home. When he began to preach, his text was, it so happened, Hosea 6:3. He finished explaining the other part of the verse which I had not understood that Friday in class, so that I could understand the whole verse now, and when he was finished preaching, the choir, followed by the congregation began to sing a chorus based on, it just so happened, Hosea 6:3, so that over two thousand voices were singing Hosea 6:3. I became a member at Alamo City Baptist Church for my time in Bible College. Now, Hosea 6:3 says this,"Then shall we know, if we press on to know the Lord, His going forth is prepared as the morning, He will come to us like the rain, like the latter and former rain to the earth" In other words, God has promised that if we press on to know Him #1, He will come and meet us half way, He will come to us, and He will meet us like a gentle, refreshing rain, and #2, if we press on to know the Lord, we will know Him in an intimate way, in a relationship way, so much that we will be able to find God's ways are as predictable as the sure as the sun is coming up tomorrow morning. I have found as I have pressed on to know the Lord, that He has met me half way, and that the relationship is not one sided, as it is in religion, but reciprocal, as it is in relationship. God does speak, if we are willing to listen. In 1992 I was in Wisconsin visiting a friend, I was praying about the election, specifically praying for Bill Clinton as an individual and against Bill Clinton becoming president. I was praying sitting on the carpet, with my back leaning on the bed, my knees bent up and my face resting on my hands which were resting on my knees. As I was praying, God suddenly spoke to me! He spoke to me so clear it was almost audible! It was in my heart, but so clear it was almost audible! God told me,"Ross Perot is not going to be President, he is going to drop out." It was in an instant, a "knowing" that came into my mind from outside like a "click". When I heard this I lifted my head and went "hmm, I guess... sometime in the future..." and I kept on praying. The very next day I'm ironing my shirt listening to the radio, all of a sudden, Ross Perot is quiting! I went like, "What?!" I turned up the radio, and Ross Perot is quitting! NObody knew he would quit, his aides were all upset because, without telling anyone, he up and quit, just like that! Yet God clearly told me the night before Ross Perot would do that, while I was praying for Bill Clinton! Now, I'm no psychic at all, but God does reciprocate in relationship. God is knowable, and He promised to meet us half way. It is true, as you say, that people in other religions may have anecdotal experiences so that faith my lead us the wrong way. That is why it is extremely important that faith be not based on experience but on a Standard of Truth. Why sould it be so incredible that God would provide us with such a standard? A God of love does not necessarily spare us the eternal bad consequences of our behavior or lack of trust in Him, but He, because of love, does provide the standard by which we can masure and know the truth about Himself. The Bible claims to be THE Book that reveals the "what is" of God. You said that I conviniently define a true Christian as someone who interprets the Bible the same as I do, but if you read what I said again, you will see that that is not so, I defined a true Christian as someone who believes the same thing Jesus believed and taught, someone who is in agreement with the Founder, as a true Muslim would agree with Mohamed. It is true that Christians, true Christians, won't always agree on everything, specially since the Bible itself says to avoid arguments about the Bible because they gender strife, and it says that some passages are hard to be understood. Augustine put it thei way, "In things essential, unity, in things non-essential, liberty, and in all things, love." Christians may disagree on non essential issues, like are miracles operative today, but all Christians, it doesn't matter what denomination, will agree in the essential issues, the issues which can lead a person to hell. Essential issues would be the Deity of Christ and slavation by faith, for example. It is on these issues that the distinction is made and has been made between true Christians and pseudo Christians, and the distinction can be made because the teaching is clear. A Baptist, a Pentecostal and Presbyterian, though they may disagree on many issues, they will agree that God is One, has always been God and that Jesus Christ is God manifested in the flesh, for example. Why? The Bible says "I am God, and there is none like me..." "The Lord your God, the Lord is One" "Is there a God beside Me? I know not any." "Great is the mystery of Godliness, God was manifest in the flesh..."
"in HIm (Jesus) dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" and many more. Now, these statements are so clear, that all Christians from very different denominations who disagree on many and important issues, will all agree on issues like this one. Those who disagree, because Jesus said, "Unless you believe that I am He you will die in your sin." are outside the limits of Jesus' belief and teaching. The Mormons have a saying, "As man is God once was, and as God is man may become." In other words, the Mormons believe that God is an exalted man like you and me, and that Mormon men will become gods with their own planets to rule. They will never be just as equal with God because by the time they are like God is now, God will have evolved further. In Mormon theology, there are millions of gods, but the Bible says "There was no god formed before Me, neither shall there be after me" Mormonism is polytheistic, and it is MOrmon men who are the other gods. In Mormon mythology, Jesus was born of a sexual relationship between God the Father who is an exalted physical man, and Mary, while she was espoused to Joseph. Jesus earned His divinity like we may, married three women and had children and Joseph Smith is a descendant of one of those children. You see, Mormon theology departs radically from Biblical theology, that is why they are considered a pseudo-Christian cult. The Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus is not God, not divine, He is an angel, MIchael the archangel. But the Bible specifically distinguishes between angels and Jesus, Jesus is God the Creator, the angels are created servants. They, JW's, also teach, in contradiction to themselves, that Jesus is the mighty god, a god, but not the Almighty God, so that in Jehovahs Witness theology there is a multiplicity of gods. They too depart radically from Biblical Theology, clear and essential for salvation teaching. Only by knowing what the Bible says clearly can anyone avoid being led into dangerous error. Neither any Christian nor I label any of these groups as being false Christians, they label themselves by denying what Jesus taught of Himself and going off on their own un-Biblical mythology. Does this mean I hate them? No, it simply means that Biblically speaking, if the Bible is to be trusted, they are in error, in dangerous error, because these are essential issues to salvation, according to Jesus. You are right in concluding that not all beliefs can be correct, but if truth is absolute, there must be a way that is indeed the right one. And this issue is so important, that we can not afford to philosophize it away and miss that one way. Next time I will briefly share why I personally believe the Bible is THE Book that shows us that one way, and His Name is Jesus. Just hold on, you are bringing up many issues, give me some time to at least give you my answer.

Alex,

You argue that Mormon's depart radically from Biblical theology when in fact what they depart from is your interpretation of Biblical theology. You believe that Jesus Christ, God the Father, and the Holy Spirit are three manifestations of a single being. The Mormon's believe that they are three distinct beings with a single purpose. Either interpretation can be legitimately derived from what is written in the Bible.

The Mormon's believe that they are three beings who form the Godhead and are One in purpose much the way a married couple is commanded to be one in marriage. They are not commanded to be literally merged into one being.

The Mormon's have Biblical basis for this belief.

Matthew Chapter Three Verse 16 and 17 "And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."

This passage reads much more clearly as three separate beings. If this is one being, that being appears to be schizophrenic in three places at once, in the river, descending from heaven, and in heaven.

On numerous occasions Jesus prayed to his Father and spoke in a way that clearly identified them as two distinct beings. One example is his prayer in Gethsemane…

Matthew 26:39 "And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I wilL, but as thou wilt.

As you point out, the Mormon’s believe that as sons and daughters of God they have divine potential. In fact, they believe that the Bible teaches of that divine potential. Below are some Bible References that support that point of view.

Genesis 3:22 "And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Psalms 82:6 "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High"

Matthew 5:48 "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect"

John 10:32-34
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods

Revelations 3:29 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

Alex Loya may disagree with this interpretation of the Bible but the doctrine is derived from the Bible and is therefore not a "radical departure from the Bible".

As to assertions of other Mormon beliefs, Mormon Doctrine does NOT teach that Jesus married three women and that Joseph Smith is one of their descendants.

You say the Mormon’s label themselves as false Christians by denying what Jesus taught of Himself and going off on their own un-Biblical mythology. On at least two points, the Mormon’s have just as strong a case to say that you label yourself as a false Christian by denying that God and Jesus are individual beings and by denying the divine potential of the children of God.

What it boils down to is two legitimate interpretations of the same text.

I usually don't get into religious, particulary "born again", discussions but I thought I would share new info on gays.
About 6 months ago research showed definate differences in CAT scan (in simplified terms and X ray of the brain) between homosexuals and non-homosexuals---so there are PHYSICAL differences in the brain--which is not a choice. Just like if you where born with a congenital deformity, Cerebral Palsy, or are deaf or blind. I am sure as more research continues we will find more and more evidence of physiological explanations for homosexuality. Homosexuality is common in the animal kingdom as well---and this is not considered to be abnormal...Although animals are not human, future studies of their physiology may help us understand human homosexuality. It is amazing to me that small minded people, in the name of what they claim their "religion" believes would outcast people, just as lepars once where, for something that is no fault of their own...
There is a lot of biochemistry in emotions which medicine is just beginning to understand..ie. Depression is a lack of seratonin uptake by the brain--should these people be labled and condemned? Excess testosterone is seen in aggressive people--consitently higher levels of testosterone are found in the prison population--maybe part of the explanation of why these people are there!
In summary, don't condemn someone if you don't understand why they are a certain way--and just because YOU don't understand it doesn't mean that research or an explanation doesn't exist!

I have also worked in psychiatric units where several patients claimed to be "Jesus" and heard voices from God. Alex, you aren't the only person whom claims to "hear God" speak to you. Some mentally ill people kill because "the devil spoke to them"--these people are locked up in mental institutions. Joan of Arc heard voices from God. Psych units are full of people whom hear voices or claim to hear God.....Now should we lock up any one whom claims to hear voices from God because the consencus is that they are mentally ill or abnormal?? Should we label them? No, of course not! So why label homosexuals? Instead of labeling people and condemning them because your so called "religion" believes this, why don't we spend our time helping the ostrasized instead of "preaching to them" to try to get them to conform to your ideals?

Alright! I'm back! Following I will share with you, briefly, several reasons why I believe the Bible is Divine rather than human in origin. I have to be brief because volumes could be written concerning this subject, so I will give you just a brief response.

1. The composition of the Bible.
     The way the Bible came to be the Bible is really quite amazing! Here we are, you and I, us AHS alumni, discussing just one controversial subject, God. We have a lot of things in common, things which bind us together after all these years. All of us grew up in an international environment, we were exposed to different cultures first hand, we have the same educational background as far as our growing up years, we all speak two languages fluently, we grew up within a little cultural group all of its own, we all like the same types of music, we are all contemporaries, we all live at the same time, most of us live within two countries that we are all familiar with, many of us were born with natural rights to two or more citizenships, we are all within the same age group, the great majority of us, according to the survey, are within the same income level, we all have an upper middle class to upper class upbringing, we all have the same level of education, we have all been exposed to the same cultural trends like T.V. programs, movies etc. we, as AHS alumni, have a lot of things in common, yet we have vastly different views concerning just one controversial subject, God. Some do not believe in Him at all, others believe that everything in the Universe is god, others have a Budhist view of god, others think god is dog spelled backwards, some of us believe in the God of the Bible Who's Name is Jesus Christ. We have so many things in common, yet writing within a period of a few weeks, we have vastly different views of God.
     The Bible was written by at least 40 different authors, they ranged in socioeconomic background and occupation from fishermen to farmers to doctors to generals to kings to priests and prophets, they wrote in three different languages: Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, from three different continents at a time where distances were much bigger: the Middle East, Europe and Africa, they wrote in many different styles and genres of literature: Poetry, narrative, history, prophecy, epistle, apocalyptic etc., they were not contemporaries, they wrote through a period of about 1400 years, they wrote on many controversial subjects: God, law, marriage etc. yet the Bible reads like one unified whole as if it had been written by just one, very wise and long living author... because in fact it was.

2.The preservation of the Biblical languages.
     I did a pretty exhaustive study on lingusitics some years ago, and I found out that the two major languages of the Bible are quite unique. Literally all of the languages of antiquity are extinct, except for Greek and Hebrew. Greek and Hebrew are the only languages of antiquity that have remained essentially the same through thousands of years so that someone from Israel could read the Old Testament and someone form Greece could read the New Testament in the original language. The languages of ancient cultures, like the Phoenicians, the Etruscans, the Philistines and just about everyone else, including the language of the Romans, Latin, have disappeared as languages, they either became totally extinct, or developed into different modern languages, like Latin in the Romance languages. Greek and Hebrew, the main languages of the Bible, however,have remained essentially the same through out the eons, with very small changes. This, of course, points to Divine intervention, and should put to rest any doubts as to the translation of the Bible from the original language to modern languages. Although translation from one language to another has its problems, it is never the less possible to translate a book from one language to another, when I have read an English Bible side by side with a Spanish Bible and even an Italian Bible, I see that they say the same thing. The bias in preservation of the Biblical languages over other languages of antiquity points to Divine intervention.

3. The textual evidence of the Bible.
     A thing I mentioned before, the textual evidence of the Bible absolutely pulverizes the textual evidence for any other work of antiquity! How is the reliability of an ancient text determined? When detrmining the reliability of an ancient text, there are two criteria that are used:
A. The number of extant, existent, copies of the manuscript.
B. The time elapsed between the dating of the earliest manuscript and the actual events it records.
     We base all of our ancient history on these two tests. When we study about Plato and Socrates, or read about the Roman Wars and the Roman theatres, we base all of our ancient history on texts which are tested for reliability using these two standards. Let me show you an example of what we base all of our ancient history on, I will write the name of the philospher or ruler, the number of extant copies, and the years elapsed between the life of the person and the earliest manuscript copies in existence:
Thucycides 9 manuscript copies 1,300 years
Aristotle 5 manuscript copies 1,400 years
Caesar 9-10 manuscript copies 900 years

These are examples of what all of ancient history is based on. I haven't heard any of you doubt that Aristotle or Caesar existed or that the Gallic Wars never happened. The New Testament has over 5,500 manuscript copies in existence today, the earliest fragments dating to 90-100 A.D, only within about 60 years of the life of Jesus, and within the life of the Apostle John who died around the year 96 A.D., add to this quotations of the Bible of the Church Fathers who were the disciples of Jesus' disciples, whose quotations could rewrite the entire New Testament, add to this certain ancient manuscripts, like the Didache, a church manual dating to the first half of the 1st century, which predates some of the books of the New Testament, and you have over 28,000 textual witnesses to the New Testament, some dating to a time when the Apostles were still living and before they had finished writing all of the New Testament!... yet the reliability of the Bible you doubt! Now, that is what is unbelievable! All this overwhelming textual evidence should put to rest the doubts of wether we have the text of the Bible as it was written by the origianl authors of anyone who seriously wants to know the truth, and it decidedly points to Divine bias for the Bible and Divine intervention.

4.The preservation of the Bible.
     I already mentioned, in writing about the textual evidence, the preservation of the New Testament. Let me briefly share concerning the preservation of the Old Testament. The King James Version of the Bible is based on a few Greek manuscripts that date only to the 10th century A.D., those were the oldest manuscripts in existence for many years. In 1948 an Arab shepherd boy discovered in some caves some jars that were full of ancient manuscripts. These were found to be manuscript copies of the text of the Old Testament. All of the books of the Old Testament have been found among these Dead Sea Scrolls, including Esther which until very recently, within a couple of years, it was thought that it was missing. These books of the Bible had been hidden in these caves by a sect of religious Jewish Scribes when the Romans invaded Israel in 70 A.D., and they date to the year 200 B.C. The Scroll of Isaiah has the Book of Isaiah in its entirety, and when it was compared side by side to the earliest copy in existance prior to that time, the manuscript which was the basis for the King James Bible,dating to the 10th century A.D., it was found that it was virtually the same, with very minute changes like in spelling or grammar. A gap of 1200 years was closed, and it was shown that although the Scribes who copied and recopied the Biblical text dis so by hand, the text was preserved virtually the same through 1,200 years of hand copying! That is absolutely astounding! It points to Divine preservation of the Bible!

5. The survival of the Bible.
     Through the years of millenia, very many have been the enemies of the Bible who have tried to erase its existence
from tne face of the Earth, only to find their own demise. Let me just share two: Nicolai Cesescu turned ten thousand Bibles given as a gift to the Rumanian people into toilet paper, in a brazen act of defiance against God... his corpse ended up hanging by his feet in the streets. Voltaire predicted that within 50 years of his death Christianity would be extinct, and the Bible would be dead... 50 years from his death the Geneva Bible Society purchased Voltaire's house and print and used them to print and store thousands of Bibles and to send them around the world. The Bible has shown itself to be indistructible, this too points to Divine intervention.

Next I will briefly share the fact of fulfilled Biblical Prophecy, the effect of the Bible, and some of my personal experiences with the Bible. If after reading all of these things you still believe that the Bible is just another book and is not Divine rather than human in origin, I guess your faith is stronger than mine!

Apparently we are on line again at the same time!
Jared, what you have brought up is what is called the doctrine of the Trinity. By no means do I deny that Jesus, the Father and the Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, in fact, I am in the process of writing a treatise on the Trinity focusing on the distinctiveness of the Persons, separating the three Persons of the Trinity because my intended audience are some oneness Pentecostals who deny this "threeness" of God. I pointed out the "oneness" of God here in contrast to the Mormon and JW view of a multiplicity of gods. But I strongly believe in the Trinity. Trinity, however, is different from tri-theism, the teaching that there are three gods. Trinity teaches that God, the One God, has manifested Himself, and eternally exists in three distinct Persons, yet is One in essence and nature. It really is quite complex, and this is one of those things we must accept by faith. The Mormons, and please, I hope I am not coming through insulting, I am simply pointing out where they depart from Biblical teaching on an essential to salvation issue, not only believe that the Father and the Son are distinct gods, but that they themselves can become god, and that god is nothing but an exalted man. Now, I am not condeming anybody, they are free to believe that, I am simply pointing out that in believing that they are departing radically from the teaching of Jesus Christ and the Bible. They do not believe in the Trinity, they do not even believe in tri-theism, they believe in polytheism, if indeed they believe Mormon traditional teaching. If they don't believe that they can become god themselves, then they don't believe traditional Mormon doctrine, and they are gettting closer to Biblical teaching.

Cindy, what is next? Those who like to have sex with little children will find that they too were born that way? After all, the Men Boy Love Association of America marches on every homosexual parade. And then what? Those who like to have sex with dead bodies will find out they too have some chemical in the brain that causes them to do so? Hey! Why put Jeff Dahmer in jail? After all, maybe he was born with something in his brain that caused him to like to have sex with men and then kill them, dismember them and eat them, all for sexual pleasure and power. The fact is that, wether people are born with certain tendencies, it is a choice to engage in any behavior, you can say NO! It matters very little, as far as behavior is concerned, wether we are born with certain proclivities, we are all born sinners, that is why all of us need a Savior. Hey! What if I was born with a brain damage that makes me be a born again Christian! You shouldn't be so harsh and condemn me so! And what will it take to make you understand that pointing out a behavior that is wrong in the site of God, pointing out the bad consequences of bad behavior is not the same thing as hate? Apparently, my explanation of the motivation of Christians in telling people of their destructive behavior went in one ear and out the other... why? Because you yourselves have a prejudiced idea, that our motivation is hate, so that you will not accept the explanation that it is true love and concern. You have no way of knowing what my motivation and any born again's motivation is unless we tell you, and let me tell you again and make it clear, our motivation is love that does not want to see anybody hurt either in this life or the life to come, but you will not accept it because it doesn't jive with your preconcieved idea, now, that is intolerance and condemnation...
Cindy, it might be the consensus among the people you socialize with that to hear the voice of God is a sign of mental illness, but it certainly is not among at least 30 million American born again Christians and many millions more around the world. Shall He that made the ear not hear? Shall He that made the eye not see? Shall He that made the mouth not speak? You tell me that just because I can't understand a certain thing I shouldn't condemn, let me encourage you to apply your own words to you, just because you can't understand that God actually does communicate, just because you can not hear His voice at this time, it does not mean He is not talking to those who will take the time to listen... You would be amazed to find out how much counseling and psychology we have to study in the field of Theology! I believe that could be considered our minor. Those people who claimed to be Jesus, are they actually Jesus? As to those who heard the devil, I don't know if they actually did, but they did do his bidding in commiting murder because the devil was a murderer from the beginning. There is a very simple test to see if it was actually God who spoke to you or if it was all within your own head, did the prediction come to pass? Let me ask you this, did Ross Perot quit the presidential race?

Edited by author 08-25-2000 11:26 PM
Hmmmm... perhaps this little dialogue could help account for some of the differences between the dogmas of world religions...

Dialogue while Moses is at the top of Sinai.

God: And remember Moses, in the laws of keeping Kosher, never cook a calf in its mother's milk. It is cruel.

Moses: Ohhhhhh! So you are saying we should never eat milk and meat Together.

G: No, what I'm saying is, never cook a calf in its mother's milk, Its cruel
M: Oh, What you are really saying is we should wait six hours after eating meat to eat milk so the two are not in our stomachs at the same time.
G: No, Moses, what I'm saying is, don't cook a calf in it's mother's milk, Its cruel!!!
M: Oh, Lord! Please don't strike me down for my stupidity! What you mean is we should have a separate set of dishes for milk and separate set for meat and if we make a mistake we have to bury that dish outside....
G: Moses, do whatever the fuck you want......

Hey, Loya, the difference between homsexuals and pederasts is that homosexuals don't have to hurt anyone to express their sexuality! Is that so difficult?

Edited by author 08-26-2000 02:39 AM
Gaby, no its not difficult, except that they do hurt themselves and each other with all kinds of diseases... on the other hand, what is so difficult about "A man shall not lay with another man as he lays with a woman, this is an abomination"? Or "... neither homosexual offenders shall inherit the kingdom of God"? or "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."... why is it so difficult to accept that homosexuality is a sin when God clearly said so without need of interpretations? Why is it so hard to accept that you and I and everybody has sinned against God? Why? I'll tell you why, because if we accept that we have sinned against God, then that requires that we be accountable to God and guilty before God, and if we are guilty and accountable to God, then that requires that we repent from our sin, whatever the sin might be, and the truth is that we love our sin too much to let it go. "Light has come into the world, but men have loved darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil" The point of my statement before is that once you begin to justify behavior, notice I said behavior, the sky, or should I say the pit? is the limit. We are all responsible for our own behavior, and if God said a certain behavior is sin, we must repent from that behavior, we must accept, confess, agree with God that such behavior is wrong before we can ever be forgiven and have etrnal life, but if we justify our sinful behavior, whatever that might be, its not just forbidden sexual practices, we are cheating ourselves and judging ourselves unworthy of eternal life... and I think we have to much to loose to be gambling with eternity! It seems like a dream when we were hanging out by the cafeteria at our school, but that used to be the present, so one day this day will be in the past, and this life and then we will find ourselves standing before the Living God, and all the explanations and excuses will mean very little when He clearly told us many, many, many times of our need to repent... but, hey, you are free to gamble with your eternal destiny! After all, we are only one heart beat away from finding out...

Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
-- Benjamin Franklin

See how easy it is for everybody to hear a different message?

Alex your saying murders are driven by the devil and ignoring mental illness as a factor (an NO mentally ill people do not chose to be mentally ill, mind you) is the same type of logic that caused religious fanatics to throw witches in water and claim that they where witches because they float!!!! And if your God condemns homosexuals and the mentally ill and banishes them hell that's not the kind of God that I want as my God!! I have known a have become friends with several ministers and priests (Christian) whom do not agree with your point of view. You don't speak for all Christians you speak for yourself and your interpretation of the Bible.

 Opinions and interpretations are like Assholes--every one has one.

Oh, one more clarfication about human anatomy--homosexual men do not "lay with another man as a man would lay with a woman"--ya know what I mean, Vern?

Gaby: I like that saying. WC Fields also said that he didn't drink water because "Fish fucked in it". He had a point.

Edited by author 08-27-2000 05:23 PM
Cindy, and it was fanatics like me who actually stopped the witch hunts. Whoever said God condemns the mentally ill? That's insane! On the other hand, maybe you are judging murderers by tagging them as mentally ill, maybe they just like to murder, like the guy in Mexico who was in jail for murder and when they had visitation day one of the prisoners' little daughters wandered off and this guy bumped into the little girl and strangled her to death. When they asked him why he did it, he said, "porque me dieron ganas de matar." Maybe you are just passing judgement on them by tagging them as mentally ill, according to this guy, he just liked to murder, who are you to say he is mentally ill? At any rate, Cindy, what are you so angry about? If I didn't know better, I would think that you actually hate me and are intolerant of me, and it is that kind of bigotry and intolerance of Bible believing Christians that has caused anti-Bible fanatics to kill hundreds of thousands, millions, of Bible believing Christians. In fact, that is what cause them to put Jesus Himself to death, as He said, "The world hates me because I testify unto them that their deeds are evil." Wether those ministers who are scratching your ears agree or not, homosexuality and murder are still explicitly forbidden practices that will have eternal consequences according to the Bible, read Romans chapter 1 for starters, it says it verbatim, so that your minister friends are not in disagreement with me but with what the Bible says verbatim, without need of interpretation. But, why are you angry at me? You are the ones focusing on the homosexuals, the Bible says all sin separates from God, because God is Holy, He is pure that sin can not be in His Presence. No, my God does not condemn anybody to hell, in fact, He actually died on a cross and took our sin upon Himself so that we wouldn't have to go to hell, but if people reject that sacrifice, it is they themselves, and I am not focusing on one sin, who judge themselves unworthy of eternal life. You can take it or leave it, Cindy, Christ can not be forced down anybody's throat, all people can do is tell you about Him and what He did for people on the cross, but if you do not find it in your heart to come willingly, it is your responsability.
Gaby, drinking beer is not a forbidden, getting drunk is. I gotta go, my baby is crying up a storm and Im baby sitting for my wife t give her a break.

Edited by author 08-29-2000 11:55 PM
Alright, before I share two more reasons why I believe the Bible is inspired by God, let me lighten up this discussion by taking the focus off the bad consequences of sin and shifting it to the good consequences of a life surrendered to Jesus. The Bible says that physical exercise profits. I guess that is something we could all agree on, when you are in the habit of working out and eating right you feel better, you look better, you are all around healthier. Up till daylight savings time this year, I was in the habit of going to bed at 11 PM and getting up at around 4:45 AM, by 5 o'clock AM I was in the Gym. Believe or not, there was alot of people at the Gym at that time. I took the spin cycling class for about 50 minutes, it was a great work out! Then I did weights for another hour and ahalf or so. By 8 A.M. I was back home ready to go to work, and every morning when I came home I would be singing "I feel good!" to where Sandra would tell me to change the tune. But I really felt really, really good physically after a good work out! I found it is true what the Bible says that physical exercise profits! Yet, when compared to what the Bible calls "exercise unto godliness" as good as physical exercise is, it profits little. It profits alright, but little when compared to exercising one's life unto godliness. The reason is because exercise unto godliness profits both in this life and in the life to come. I have found that second part of the verse to be true as well. On one ocassion when I was in Bible College, on a Friday night, I was very restless: I wanted to go to the movies, go hang out with my friends and have some good laughs, go to a restaurant, go to a party just do something. My friends and I got together and we did go hang out and had some good laughs, but the restlessness would not go away. It was not till later on that night that I took the time to stop and spend time alone with God in prayer and Bible reading that I felt, literally, felt that restlessness disappear, and I had an absolutely incredible peace, the peace that surpasses understanding which the Bible speaks about! It was not until I turned to God in prayer that my heart became quiet and peaceful, an absolute rest and calm and complete satisfaction and fulfillment that I could not find in all those other things I sought. I literally felt good! When I have spent time with the Lord, in prayer and Bible reading, I have found that heaviness turns into praise, ashes turn into beauty, worry turns into trust, pain turns into strength, frustration turns to contentment, the heart is satisfied and the soul is fulfilled! I have found that prayer is answered, direction is given, wisdom for decision making is imparted, when I have actively persued godliness by seeking to get closer to my Lord Jesus. It really is incredible! Today, as a matter of fact, I had a meeting with my Pastor, bro. Dennis Watson, a man of God, concerning my missionary trip to Pakistan. I was overwhelmed with the responsability that is being placed on my shoulders: I was overwhelmed with the responsability at home and what is expected of me in Pakistan. Apparently God moves in ways in those countries that we do not see alot here, Salamat, the man who invited me to go to Pakistan, emailed me the other day, just a personal email, and said how the day before he emailed me he had preached and had prayed for a Muslim girl paralized with polio, he emailed me because that day, the day after he prayed, the girl was up and walking! Unbelievable! The Muslims and Hindus, specially the Hindus, are used to seeing a lot of spiritual manifestations in the physical world by spirits opposed to the Bible, so that when a Christian preacher goes there they expect to see really supernatural manifestations of Jesus Christ like the polio girl who was healed, and I have never seen something as dramatic. I have seen God move in some very powerful ways, but not in as dramatic a way as a bona fide supernatural healing. When I go to Pakistan, many will be expecting things like that to happen and I don't know if it will, so I was kind of overwhelmed an discouraged. After the meeting, I went to the prayer room to "exercise unto godliness", as I prayed, I felt this incredible peace come over me once again! This incredible peace and comfort that I can not describe in words, except as the Bible describes it, the peace that passes understanding. It was beautiful! I walked away from the prayer room and drove to an insurance meeting with beautiful, perfect peace in my heart that only God can give! Now, I don't know if God will do any miracles when I go to Pakistan, but I know and truly trust that He is in control, and therefore I can rest. And then when I die and go to heaven, "in HIs Presence there is fulness of joy, and at HIs right hand pleasures forevermore." Truly, I have verified that exercize unto godliness does indeed profit, not only in this life, but in the life that is to come, and peace, purpose and contentment do indeed await you, even if at times you may go through hard and even painful times, if you will turn to Him. That is the other side of the coin!...
Next time I will share those two other reasons I believe the Bible is inspired by God and not just another book, fulfillment of prophecy and archeological evidence.
May the Lord bless you. And Cindy, please do forgive me if I have offended you, that is not my intention.
Alex

Sorry I have been gone for awhile.....I just scanned the last 20 messages....that took a toll

Alex to answer you question. Why to I believe in pre-tri. (I think that is what you called it)--I believe that when the second coming occurs, I will go to heavan and the anit Christ will rule for a period of 7 years. I do not know the Bible well, but I thought it stated that. I have always believed that, like I believe it will happen in my life time.

As for the gay issue....I am "born again"--however, I also know many gays that are also "born again" and probably are even more faithful than myself. I believe with all my heart that even if they are gay, they will go to heaven. Does the Bible state than man should not lay with man? Yes--but it also says I should not get drunk which I have done nor should I gossip which I have done or been jealous or any of the other ways in which I sin on a daily basis. I know it is wrong, I ask for forgiveness and try not to repeat it.--but I am still going to heaven. You might ask where do you draw the line (Alex you mentioned murder)--obviously you cannnot just kill knowing you are going to ask for forgiveness and all will be well. I do not know the answer, but try to live as I should, believe in Christ and move on..........

Oh and Alex, I do not believe you get to heaven by doing good deeds.....not going to happen.

Alex,

I agree that there are several passages in the Bible (including Romans Chapter 1) that condemn Homosexual behavior. Are there any quotes of Jesus condemning homosexual behavior personally? I'm just curious if this is a teaching of Jesus himself or of his followers after his death.

In any case, I think you have assumed a position of great authority when you describe other Christian ministers teachings as "Scratching Cindy's Ears".

The Bible clearly states in Genesis Chapter 7 that the flood covered all of the face of the earth and that every living substance that was not on the Ark was destroyed. It stretches the imagination considerably to believe that the water level rose by over 29,000 feet and that Noah somehow managed to preserve every species on Earth in the Ark. Some Bible believing Christians accept the story of Noah as literal truth. Others think it might have been a local flood with key species only being preserved. Yet others think that the story of Noah is only symbolic. The point is, even seemingly obvious statements are subject to interpretation.

You have repeatedly taken the position that people are not disagreeing with you but with the Bible. I think it is great to have a conviction of what you believe but I think you are convinced that you have absolute truth and anyone who disagrees with you is in error.

I am an atheist but I also consider myself to be a Christian person. I am Christian in that I espouse the Christian ideal of loving one another, turning the other cheek, and being forgiving and tolerant of others. I have respect for you and your beliefs and at least think I am tolerant of all beliefs. I don't think Jesus himself ever preached intolerance or condemned anyone. He forgave the woman caught in adultery, he forgave the thief being executed next to him, and he asked for forgiveness for those who were bringing about his death.

As Rocky points out, there are many homosexuals who believe they are saved by Jesus Christ and believe that they have a personal relationship with him. Who are you to tell them that they are not entitled to salvation because of their behavior? If people are saved by grace alone, what does their behavior have to do with it.

Jared--personal question...I know you were a mormon in high school...what made you change? How did your family take it? If its too personal, do problem...

Again, the Bible itself says there are homosexuals that are going to heaven, "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 Stop. Let me note a couple of things before I go on: Notice these verses start with a question "Do you not know that the unrigtheous will not inherit the kingdom of God?" Why does Paul start with a question? Because it is a rhetorical question, he assumes by asking the question, and that by inspiration of God, that people naturally know the answer, the answer is that we all know the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God, but he goes on to say "Do not be deceived." Paul follows the rhetorical question that we all by nature know the answer to in our hearts, by a statement "Do not be deceived." Why? Because eventhough we know by nature that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God, it is possible to be deceived, either by ourselves or others, into thinking that those who are not repentant will still go to heaven. So Paul makes a statement, don't be deceived, and he underscores the statement by naming a few categories of unrighteous behavior that will prevent people from going to heaven, and he closes that statement by repeating the phrase "(the unirighteous will not)...inherit the kingdom of God" twice he says it. Why? It is what is called a double emphatic, a form of speech used to emphasize and reemphasize that what was stated is certainly true, will certainly happen without any question whatsoever, in this case it is emphasized with double emphatic that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God, that fact can not be changed. Notice that in between the categories of unrighteous people that the Word of God mentions here there is one category that is emphasized even more than the others, double emphatic,"nor homosexuals, nor sodomites" Why is homosexuality emphasized double here in stating that the unrighteous will not go to heaven? I can only guess at the answer, although it is true that one word denotes those who are in the submissive role of homosexuality while the other denotes the dominant role players. But, could it be that this sin is emphasized double because God knew that in the Last Days it would be like in the days of Sodom and Gommorah where homosexuals would not hear someone tell them their behavior is wrong? Could it be that He knew that people would be more easily deceived concerning the eternal destiny of unrepentant homosexuals in that it would become an acceptable lifestyle to the masses? I can only guess at the answer, but what I can know for sure is that that sin is emphasized double and is therefore a sin that will most definately prevent people from entering the kingdom of God, and it would be an act of utter hatred to know this and not warn those who are caught up in it. But the statement does not end there, it goes on to say, "And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God."
1 Corinthians 6:11 Although Paul, by inspiration of God, makes a clear double emphatic statement that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God, emphasizing homosexuals more than the others, he closes this sobering statement with words of wonderful hope "you have been washed, you have been sanctified..." Although some had been involved in the behaviors mentioned above, they had found grace and forgiveness in Jesus Christ. And here is the difference, Paul said "Such were" they had been involved in homosexuality and other sins, but then he said "you were washed", in other words, there is a fundamental change in the behavior of those people who were not going to inherit the kingdom of God, they used to be homosexuals, or adulterers or fornicators, now they are not any longer, they changed by the power and authority, the name, of Jesus Christ, and by the Spirit of God. God can and will change those who are repentant. Rocky, you named it just right, although you sin you accept that you have sinned, you ask forgiveness and go on and try not to do it again, although I sin, I ask forgiveness and go on, what did the woman caught in adultery and the thief on the cross have in common? Both of them were repentant, to the woman Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more" and to the thief on the cross He said, " I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." that thief had said that he had sinned, but the other thief, however, was not repentant, and he did not go to heaven. And here is the Grace of God, and here's the difference, many homosexuals will go to heaven, many adulterers and fornicators and drunkards will go to heaven, but it will be those who humble themselves before God and accept that they have indeed sinned against God and ask for forgiveness and say no to their sin and yes to God, like the thief on the cross, while those who resist and insist in saying that they have not sinned against God and refuse to accept they have sinned, "will not inherit the kingdom of God" You must remember Jesus said, "Unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish".

Jared, I take the position that people are not disagreeing with me but with the Bible only when the Bible is explicit. For example, we just examined a passage that says explicitly, clearly, without ambiguity that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God, homosexuals mentioned among others. That is an explicit statement, and the only way these people mentioned in the passage gain entrance into the kingdom of God, is by turning away from that sin that causes them not to be able to go to heaven, and turning to Jesus Christ "Such were... but you were sanctified in the name of the Lord Jesus" If a minister says and teaches that either homosexuals or adulterers or fornicators can inherit the kingdom of God without repentance, they are deceivng themselves and others, and scratching the ears of those who want to hear that God does not require repentance, and that is the real act of terrible hate. If the Bible says, "...nor homosexuals, nor sodomites...will inherit the kingdom of God" but a minister comes and says "homosexuals will inherit the kingdom of God" without need for repentance, they are disagreeing with what the Bible explicitly says, and are scratching the ears of those who do not want to hear that God requires repentance and calls sin sin. Only when the Bible is explicit like that can anybody say that anybody else is disagreeing with the Bible. I am certainly no above Scripture, I have changed my views in a couple of things when I saw that the Bible taught different than what I believed. When I was born again I changed a bunch of my views, my philosophy used to be "if it feels good, do it", I had to change my views when the Bible disagreed with what I believed. As a believer, I changed my views concerning certain doctrines, the doctrine of the rapture, for example, I believed very strongly that we will be raptured before the Great Tribulation, as I studied more, I changed my views because of some things the Bible says. I used to be a strong contender for the King James only camp, but when I saw that I was wrong, I changed my view. I have no problem with that, I always tell my students and my listeners "Test every thing I say, or any other teacher says, by what the Bible says, if what I say agrees with the Bible, then embrace it, if what I say does not agree with the Bible, then by all means reject it"

Salvation is by grace through faith alone, but true faith in Jesus is demonstrated by outward lifestyle, as it is written, "What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works?... I will show you my faith by my works... Faith without works is dead" James 2:14, 18,17.
All you need to be saved is faith alone, but the faith that saves is not alone, works must be there not as a condition to salvation, but as a fruit of salvation... and when we sin, for there is not a righteous man on earth that does what is right and never sins, we confess, ask for forgiveness, repent, and go on in peace.

Maybe next time I can get to the other reasons I believe the Bible is inspired! By the way, there is plenty of proof for a universal flood!

Edited by author 09-05-2000 03:57 PM
Alex:
1) Again, your interpretation of the bible is your own, you don't represent all Christians.
2) I find it interesting and amusing that you say that it was religious fanatics like yourself whom put an end to witch hunts when it was the religious fanatics whom caused it to begin with! Are you sure the laws of bouyancy and the fact that humans do float didn't have anything to do with it?
3) I fail to see the point of you bringing up the fact that Ross Perot dropped out of the Presidential race after you "heard" God. You are one among millions whom has claimed to have had a "vision" or have "heard the voice of God"...This doesn't make the Bible or Christianity any more credible or " better" than any other religion. Soothsayers and psychics to priests and profits from the Egyptians to Romans to the Incas to the American Indians to the present day psychic have all had their own auditory or visual appearances from a god or gods..
4) It is statements like "if people are born with certain tendencies it is their choice to engage in behavior " (one of your past quotes) that show your ignorance in understanding of human behavior and human emotions...I question the legitimacy of the counseling and psychology courses that you took if this is your understanding of human behavior.

Many of your statements, I find, include misinformation or opinions based on the lack of knowledge of factual information. You use this incorrect information to support your religious point of view...

If your goal is to draw more people into becoming Christians, I hope as you continue your religious quest that you will acquire a style of preaching that will draw more people in that you turn off... And I hope that those people whom where turned off or ofended at your point of view understand that you do not represent all Christians or Christian thoughts.

There are many wonderful teachers (religious or other wise) out there whom have been great mentors to a lot of us and have helped shape our minds and our souls. I, for one, am grateful for those people at AHS whom were our mentors. I think it would do all of us well to respect the diverse ethnic and religious culture that we grew up with and remember that, at least on this web site, that we are a diverse ethnic and religious group..It may not be your intention to insult other religions or people of other religious backgrounds, but in fact you have, by claiming your religion is superior to all of the others.

As far as I am concerned I will join the other dozen or so people in this and the other message board whom where "turned off". I bid you adieu, mon ami, and good luck in your spiritual pathway, may it be one of "enlightment".

Cindy:
I wish you would not leave...not because I want to convert you, but because I enjoy listening to others opinions---even if they differ from mine. In fact when they differ I find them most interesting.

Anyway--hope you are well.

Cindy - I'm with Rocky, please don't leave. The purpose of this forum is to discuss different views of God and religion. It will get pretty boring if we're reduced to the opinions of Jared and Alex....! Not to say that their opinions are boring, of course, anything but!!!

I've come to the conclusion long ago that Alex is strong in his faith and will likely not be converted, just as many of us will not be converted to his way of thinking. Excuse me, Alex, that would be the Bible's way of thinking, right?!

Think of it this way, how often do you get the chance to challenge someone on their faith (or lack thereof) in a forum such as this? I find it pretty interesting. I don't always agree with Alex, but I respect his right to say what he believes. Same goes for Jared or any other posters out there. I don't post often, but I read all the time. I'm working on a post, but you'll have to wait a while. It hasn't come together just yet...!

Sue--can't wait to hear your response/post...especially if you have been working on it for so long. I don't think that much, just speak off the cuff....guess that is what gets me in trouble. Hope you are doing well.

Edited by author 09-08-2000 12:48 AM
Hey! It's been a few days, I have been really busy and trying to change my sleeping habits. Again, why is it so hard to understand that some things the Bible says plainly? You either accept them or reject them, do no commit adultery does not need interpretation it simply means do not commit adultery, the commands on homosexuality are the same, just plain, straitforward statements, there is no need for interpretation but rather for acceptance or rejection. If I say its alright to commit adultery what I say is in opposition to the Word of God, its not that difficult to understand! Come on people! On the other hand , if I read a vision a prophet had of seeing a wheel within a wheel with many eyes around, or if read the number of the beast is 666, then we may legitimately differ in interpretation of those symbols, I may very well be wrong, I said I have changed in a couple of things when I saw I was wrong and I will change again when I see I am wrong. Some people may interpret 666 as this, others as that, there may be legitimate differences of interpretation, but a straitforward moral command has no need of interpretation, you either accept it or reject it, but the meaning is plain for anybody and everybody to see, and when you disagree with a straitforward, unambiguous Biblical statement, it is with the Bible that you disagree, or I disagree. Its not that hard, is it? Just say I disagree with the Biblical statement concerning homosexuality, and let it go at that, there is no need for interpretations.

As to the religious fanatics like me stopping the witch hunts, its not only interesting and amusing, its a historical fact. In fact, I would accurately say that compared to those who stopped the witch hunts, I am a left wing liberal! In the United States and Europe, the witch hunts were started as a result of a book entitled Malleus Malleficarum (The Witches' Hammer) by Jacob Spener in 1486. In 1692 some Salem judges, as a result of this book, accepted what was called "spectral evidence" which meant "testimony by individuals that they had not seen the accused, but a ghostly likeness or spectre of the accused" engaged in burning houses etc., witchcraft. Several hundred people were tried under this "spectral evidence" and twenty were hanged, none were burned in America. Two Puritan Ministers, that is, ultra conservative and thoroughly Calvinistic, Increase Mather and his son Cotton Mather, spoke against the witch trials openly, and Increase Mather wrote a pamphlet entitled "Cases of Conscience" based on the Biblical teaching from Deuteronomy 19:15 that evidence for a trial should only be accepted on the unimpeachable testimony of two witnesses who witnessed the actual event or crime commited by an actual person, and not on "spectral evidence", that is, not on just seeing a ghostly likeness of the accused rather than the accused him/herself. Spectral evidence is no evidence according to the Bible, the Mathers taught that and openly spoke against it, and only then did the murders, the witch hunts, stop. Therefore, the witch hunts were stopped specifically because they were in disagreement with what the Bible teaches about trials and witnesses, and it was done directly by two Puritan ministers. Beleive me, the Puritans wouldn't even recommend "The Patriot" or any other movie at all! So then, it was religious fanatics who started and executed the witch hunts, and it was religious fanatics who stopped them, the difference was in that those who executed the witch hunts and started them were religious fanatics who did not know or did not care about what the Bible had to say, those who stopped the witch hunts stopped them because they knew and believed what the Bible says concerning this matter.
As to religion being superior, well, I do not believe any religion including mine is sufficient to get anybody to heaven. There is such a thing as good religion, which would be to help widows and orphans etc. and to keep your heart pure, but even that good religion is insufficient. The only thing that will get anybody to heaven is a relationship with Jesus Christ, a relationship based on what He did for us on the cross, take our sins away, and our response of faith and trust in Him alone. That is another clear unambiguous statement "I am the way, the truth and the life, no man comes to the father except through me" "There is only one mediator between man and God, the man Christ Jesus" " For there is no other name given under heaven whereby we must be saved (Jesus Christ)" There is no need for interpretation, we either accept these statements or reject them. Interestingly enough, the Bible does teach that in the last days there will be a one world religion, in this religion every path will be the same,we are warned, however, that this religion is the religion of the antichrist, and those who pledge allegience to the antichrist, who take the mark of the beast will never ever be able to be saved but will "be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the Lord and His holy angels forever and ever without rest day or night" again, its unambiguous, we either accept it or reject it, its a gamble, we will find out for sure sooner or later. The one world religion is already offically in place, this last June 26 they signed what is called "The Global Ethic" which is an attempt to find common ground among the different religions for the sake of peace. The one thing they want to do away with is "religious exclusivism", they will, eventually, enforce this Global Ethic and will make it a hate crime to teach or preach that Jesus is the only way. Many "Christians" are accepting and signing this Global Ethic, disregarding Jesus' exclusive statements. They specifically want to give the people freedom from proselatizing, yet Jesus said you must tell everyone that Hew is the only way. Consequently, Cindy and most of you, the day is coming when you will see me and people like me put in jail for what we believe, and you may even see me and people like me shot in the head for real for this that you find so unacceptable, that Jesus is the only way. I guess when they put a bullet in my brain you will feel vindicated and maybe even happy, I don't know. But its coming, you will see religious exclusivism outlawed and enforced brutally, that is what the prophecy says.

As to the sooth sayers and psychics, when the new year gets here, get the National Enquirer, keep it for a year and see how many of their predictions come to pass... zilch. Not one other book can even begin to compare with the Bible when it comes to fulfilled prophecy at all. That Ross Perot actually quit is siginificant because there is no way I could've known that apart from a spiritual source, either God or the devil, you may discern who the source is by the message that is attached to the predicition. Biblically, if a prediction comes to pass followed by a "there's another way" other than Jesus to God, Biblically, the source is demonic. You may disagree, but I would be slow in saying that somebody's prediction which came to pass is of the devil if that person follows the prediction by saying that Jesus is the only way, I would be extremely slow in saying something like that, because blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, that is, attributing something that the Holy Sprit did to the devil, is the only unpardonable sin, those who thus blaspheme the Holy Spirit will never find forgiveness neither in this life nor in the life to come, we can accept this or reject this. Insult is never intended, but truth must not be compromised. I will keep praying for you, sincerely.

Hi Alex,

A few comments. Actually a question. Is there some sort of hierarchy with regard to how to behave or act in the Bible? What I mean to say is that if someone said something in the Old Testament that was later refuted by something that Jesus said, which one are you to believe and live by? How can the Bible be absolute truth when there are some contradictions? Of course, I do not know the Bible nearly as well as you do, so perhaps this is even addressed somewhere. So while the Bible may explicitly say that homosexuality is wrong, was this something that Jesus said or someone else? And if Jesus didn't say it, how much weight do we give it? Perhaps this all ties in with some of what you were saying about the Bible being divine in origin? I'd like to hear more.

Very interesting stuff about the Salem Witch Trials. No doubt that the Mathers faced great peril for challenging the powerful men who were conducting the trials. And thank goodness for that. Reminds of a quote - and I'm paraphrasing - "The best way for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing."

Which conveniently leads me to my final comment. You said, "I guess when they put a bullet in my brain you will feel vindicated and maybe even happy, I don't know." For you to be murdered for your beliefs or would be tragic. I truly hope that you do not sincerely feel that anyone on this board would feel vindicated or happy about that, Alex. I most certainly would not. But the right to believe should be extended to people of all religions, not just yours. That's one of the great things about this country, and perhaps that is what the Global Ethic is all about. I would fight for your right to worship as you please, Alex. But would you fight for mine?

Edited by author 09-09-2000 01:57 AM
Hey Sue!
I love your questions! The first thing I would like to say in response is that it is a commonly believed myth that there are contradictions in the Bible. There are no contradictions in the Bible, I would very much like one of you to bring up some contradictions in the Bible and lets examine them see if indeed they are contradictions. The Bible itself, however, does say there are passages that are difficult to understand which people without understanding twist to their own destruction. The Bible itself also says that we must learn to rightly divide the Word of Truth. There is a science called "Hermeneutics", which some say is an art as well, which specifically deals with how to correctly interpret and understand Scripture, although some passages do not need interpretation. Jesus never refuted any part of the Old Testament, what Jesus said, as a matter of fact, was "I did not come to destroy the Law or the Prophets, I did not come to destroy but to fulfill." Mt.5:17
By "the Law and the Prophets" Jesus was referring to all of the Old Testament. And here is a key into understanding Scripture, in Jesus Christ are the Old Testament Jewish Scriptures fulfilled. They are fulfilled in several ways, Messianic prophecy, for example, the Jewish Scriptures predicted the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem of a virgin, He would be called a Nazarene, He would suffer in our place, He would suffer death by crucifixion (and this is an incredible prophecy in Psalm 22 that describes Jesus' death by crucifixion 1000 years before it happened, you can see the fulfillment in Matthew 27, realizing that although it reads as one book, you have two separate ancient documents separated by 1000 years, and 500 years before execution by crucifixion was ever invented by not the Jews but the Romans, realizing that the Jewish method of execution was not crucifixion but stoning) etc. Altogether, Jesus fulfilled over 300 prophecies from the Jewish Scriptures from His birth to His resurrection and His identity!(The Jewish Prophet Isaiah said that the Messiah would be "the Mighty God, The Everlasting Father") That is an exorbitant number when you are familiar with the law of compound probability! It literally renders it absolutely impossible to be coincidential! Jesus also fulfilled the Old Testament by being the ultimate sacrifice of the Jewish sacrificial system of the Old Testament. All those animals were sacrificed for the sins of the people, the innocent dying for the guilty, pointing to the time when Jesus was bleeding on the cross, He was the innocent dying for the guilty. Jesus did not refute the Old Testament, He fulfilled it, the New Testament is in the Old concealed, the Old Testament is in the New revealed. You are probably refering to what Jesus said "You have heard that it has been said, 'you shall not commit adultery' but I say unto you whoever looks upon a woman to lust after her has already commited adultery in his heart." This, Sue, is not a refutation, a refutation would say "I say, commit adultery" What Jesus did was to expound and show the intent. Evidently His hearers were thinking as long as I don't do the act I'm alright, but Jesus expounded on the command by cutting to the root of what causes the act, which is the thought, and what causes the thought, which is the look. There is a saying that goes "Sow a look, reap a thought, sow a thought, reap an act, sow an act, reap a habit, sow a habit, reap a character, sow a character, reap a destiny" The root of immorality is found in what we think about, and what we think about is rooted on what we feed our brain. This can become so entrenched, that pretty soon people start thinking they were born unable to control their behavior. Why? Because a habit is developed, and it becomes part of their inner character. But that character was formed, maybe from very early infancy as a result of molestation or any number of reasons, but character is formed as a result of habits which come from repeated actions which come from thoughts which come from feeding the brain by outward influence. Jesus cut to the heart of adultery, He explained the fuller meaning and in fact showed us how difficult it is to keep the law of God, because now we are not just dealing with actions, but with thoughts and inner motivations... and who hasn't had an immoral thought? A couple of things brielfly, who had said "You shall not commit adultery"? God on Mount Sinai, yet Jesus said, "But I say unto you" Question: Where does Jesus get off saying"but I say unto you."? It is a claim to Deity. Secondly, who hasn't had an adulterous thought? You see, the purpose of the Law of God was never to bring salvation by keeping it, because we can't, its impossible! The purpose, then, of the Law of God, is to show us our own utter sinfulness and inability to keep the law and by so doing to bring us to our knees to say, "Lord, have mercy on me a sinner!" Then, and only then, salvation is given to us as a gift, eternal life! Jesus did not specifically mention the sin of homosexuality, but He did endorse all of the Old Testament, and expounded on the Law to the root of the problem of sinful behavior, which is in the mind, so that following His teaching, not only are those who actually engage in homosexuality guilty of the sin, but also those who fantasize about it, and the fantasy, the thought, is planted by what comes into people's brains, that is why pornography is so destructive and why normalizing such behavior and making it mainstream is so dangerous, even if the Bible is not true. But, again, the purpose of cutting to the heart of it, to equalizing the thought with the act, is to show us our innability to keep the Law of God and by doing so to bring us to our knees to say, "Lord, have mercy on me a sinner!"... and He will have mercy.

I would fight for your freedom as well, in fact, I almost did go into combat when I was in the U.S. Marines after we bombed Lybia, but Kadaffi chickened out so we didn't have to go. I do believe that people should be free to believe, Jesus never forced anyone to believe in Him, but I do believe that a Christian's duty is to teach others that not all beliefs are founded on truth, and that not all ways lead to God and salvation, in fact, only Jesus leads to salvation. We can present what Jesus claimed and the Bible says, but we can not and must not force people to believe. The Global Ethic will eventually force Christians to deny their basic beliefs, that Jesus is the only way and that we must evangelize, and those of us who refuse to deny these basic essential beliefs will suffer persecution. Prophetically, please do not buy into the Global Ethic, because although buying into it will make life easier for a little while, it will make it unspeakably harder for all eternity!

Jared--Love your logic in messages 21 and 22. I'm no scientist, but back in the mid 1980's there was a supernova out in deep space. As astronomers analysed the light, they determined that this supernova had created all natural elements known to man. We all know from chemistry classes that in the 1960's, scientists took a bunch of gases believed to be in the atmosphere of the early earth, and zapped them with electricity, which simulated lightning. This created Amino Acids, which are said to be "the building blocks of life." From there, it's not difficult to see the logical, evolutionary progression from simple one-celled life forms up through man, currently the most advanced life form.
Clearly, we don't have all the answers, but we do know a great deal. It seems that it should take very little "faith" to assume that science is on the right track.

Sue--How can anyone take the bible as a serious document? Is it worth all the discussion? The origins of the Old Testament are hazy. The New Testament was written decades following the events it describes. Paul wrote his letters 25 years A.D., and the first "gospels" weren't written until 70 to 80 A.D. by men who weren't even with Jesus.
In what other disipline would we allow 2000 year old doctrine to affect our lives? Perhaps Alex should take his family to a physician or surgeon whose reference is a 2000 year old medical guide!!!

Alex--My kids believed in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth fairy. As they got older, we finally had to tell them that these entities weren't real. Just like these kiddy fantasies, most people believe in a faith because their parents taught them about it. It is not instinctive, and very few explore other faiths during their lifetimes. Have you explored other faiths? Or will you tell me that you have looked around, but decided that your own faith was the best?

Okay, I'll bite. Frank, what class are you from? Your name isn't too familiar.

As for taking the Bible as a serious document, I have to say that whether you believe it or not, in whole or in part, you certainly can't deny its influence on our history or our politics. That makes for some fairly interesting discussion, don't you think?

More later!

Sue--If you are going to bite, I'll fight the line for a while. Yes, the bible (and its followers) has had a significant impact on our history. The operative word here is "our." There are many cultures in the world that know nothing about the bible and it's Judeo Christian message. The chinese civilization, for example, has been around for 5000 years. This is at least 2000 years longer that meaningful Western Civilization.
    We are having this discussion about the Bible only by accident of our birth. We were born into a Judeo-Christian culture. Had we been born elsewhere, we may be concerned with Buddha or Confucius.
    All major religions have a moral code. Some claim that this moral law is divinely inspired, but I say it's common sense. If man is going to live together, we need to have rules to prevent the breakdown of civilization. Don't go stealing from your neighbor. Don't seduce his wife. And don't kill him.
    The bible's influence, and the influence of other great religions, has been substantial in the history of mankind. And perhaps as recently as one hundred years ago, the scientific world offered minimal counter explanation to the matters supposedly answered by spiritual doctrines. But during the 20th century, and specifically in the last 50 years, scientific knowledge and tooling has grown exponentially. Just a few examples are needed. Computers, the Hubble telescope, the human Genome project. The unknowns in our universe will become fewer, and the need for Gods will diminish.

Sue--To continue my reply to your message, let me say that I am delighted by the number of apparent agnostics/atheists who attended AHS. Perhaps this is testament to the higher intellectual backgrounds of the AHS families.
   I believe that most atheists better understand their position that do most believers, who dutifully abide by the teachings of their parents, never questioning or exploring.
Still, sometimes it is best that the atheist not publicize his views too widely. Just 200 years ago, blasphemers were still being burned at the stake in Christian societies. My own "atheist experience" in the U.S. has taught me that there can be social, financial, and even political consequenses if one's views are clarified. Its best to leave some people with fuzzy assumptions.
    And that's why I appreciate this forum. Can we focus on the content?

Praise the Lord! I had thought this discussion had died, but apparently there are a few people still being convicted.
To say that the Bible can not be taken seriously because the New Testament was written some decades after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, is to betray a tremendous ignorance of the validity and reliabilty of ancient documents. I suppose, Frank, that you do not believe any ancient history then, since there are only about 8 or so copies of the teachings of Plato, of the Roman Wars etc. and these documents are separated from the events they relate by about at least 1000 years. That the Gospels were written by men who weren't woth Jesus is fantasy, only Luke gathered his Gospel from research, Matthew, John and Mark were all disciples of Jesus, that is precisely one of the main reasons these Gospels are accepted as Scripture. In fact, if the Gospels were indeed written around 70 to 80 A.D., well, that is a major problem for those who oppose the Bible, since manuscript fragments of the Gospels have been found dating as early as 90 A.D., closing the gap between the writing of the Gospels and their closest extant witness to virtually nothing, actually making the Bible the absolutely most reliable document in all of ancient history! That's a fact. The Book of Jude and the Book of James were written by Jesus' half blood brothers, and 1st and 2nd Peter were written by the Peter that was Jesus direct disciple, and so on.
It seems evident that atheists are actually the ones confused; on the one hand they say we need to have rules to prevent the breakdown of civilization,such us don't steal, don't kill etc. thereby giving witness to the validity of the Scriptures they say have no value, on the other hand they say there is no God and no absolutes, thereby removing any authority to the rules they say are common sense. If God is not real, and the Bible is not His Word, who is anybody to tell anyone else not to steal or kill? Who are you to say so? Maybe I think its ok for me to kill somebody, who are you to tell me otherwise? Who gives you authority to put a murderer in jail? We all come from a bunch of tadpoles anyway... Frank, let me ask you something, lets say you are driving through the Desire Projects down in the New Orleans 9th ward at 10:00 P.M. Your wife and children with you, if you have them... all of a sudden your car's engine breaks down. You get out of your car, tell your wife and kids to stay in the car, and you procede to raise the hood and to see if you can figure out what is wrong with the engine. All of a sudden you look up to see 8 young black men ages 17-21 who are from the Desire Projects,where 1 or two people get shot every day, walking your way. Let me ask you this question, be honest now,: Would you rather have these 8 young black men from the Projects, where you are stranded at 10 P.M., be 8 young men who believe, like you do, that the Bible is not to be taken seriously and that God does not exist, or would you rather have these 8 young men be coming back from a Bible study believing that the Bible is the Word of God?... be honest now!... see how quickly the Bible becomes a valuable document in the mind of an atheist?

Its like the true story of an American sailor who was on an island in the South Pacific during WWII: walking down the beach he crossed paths with a native of the island who was carrying a Bible, upon seeing this, the American sailor disdainfullly told the Bible believing native, pointing to the native's Bible, "Us civilized people don't believe that Book anymore." At this, the Bible believing native smiled and replied, as he patted circles on his own stomach, "Lucky for you that we do, otherwise you would be in here right now!"
Frank, you rightly mentioned that in the last 50 years scientific knowledge and tooling has grown exponentially. Instead of letting this fact fill your heart with pride against the God of the Bible, you should open your eyes and let this fact humble you before the Lord, because the Prophecy says, identifying the time of the end, of the return of Christ, the Prophecy says in Daniel 12:4, "But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run (travel) to and fro, and knowledge shall increase." Traveling to and fro, according to the prophecy, would be made possible because knowledge would increase exponentially at the time of the end, making it possible for man to have the tools to travel back and forth great distances quickly. You are running out of time fast.

Alex--Good to hear from you again. Let me just say that while the tone of my comments may seem belittling or hostile at times, I hold no malice toward you or any believers. Like yourself, I served proudly in the U.S Armed forces. And you seem to have a command of your beliefs. I have talked with many believers over the years who condemn me for being an atheist, but who really cannot support their own beliefs. The moment the discussion moves beyond the superficial, they try to refer me to other learned men of faith for answers. You appear to be on of those men.
   Regarding the validity of the Bible vs. the works of ancient thinkers: Can't we admit that the works of the ancients in fields of science, medicine, philosophy, civics were merely the forerunners for their modern disiplines? Yes, their works are incomplete, and the "chain of custody" of the documentation is severly broken. The ancients provided us with ideas, which today we look upon more as a curiousity than as "Gospel." The 3000 years since has seen immeasurable growth in all these disiplines. No-one today is basing his daily life on the ideas of the ancient thinkers.
    Modern believers of the Bible, however, do base at least some of their lives on the teachings of a document that hasn't been revised in 2000 years. As a minimun, they look to the scripture for answers about our origin, and about our destiny.
    Perhaps you have dealt with this earlier, but I have to ask anyway. With all his power and wisdom, why can't God give us some new evidence of his existence? This is the age of mass communication. His divine signal could go global on CNN by tonight's news telecast.
    I admit I got a bit twisted by your answer about law and common sense. I'll read it again. But, let me answer this way. I don't need any person, or any God, to tell me that I don't want my wife to be raped. If I assume that other men don't want this either, then we will come together, as men, and outlaw such crimes.
     Regarding the eight black men in New Orleans: Chances are, no matter where that particular group of men just came from, they would each tell you that they believed in God. I've heard statistics that say that 94% of Americans believe in a personal God. I suspect that most of the 6% that do not are well educated whites.
    Can I conclude that most criminals who roam our streets and fill our prisons believe in God? Is this the same God you believe in???

Frank: Although I will admit with you that those ancient thinkers were forerunners of modern disciplines, and that indeed in 3 thousand years we have come a long way, to say that because they are more a curiosity today so that nobody bases their daily life on their ideas, therefore Bible believing Christians are backward in that they, we, base our daily life on what the Bible teaches, is to compare apples with oranges. The reason we base our daily life on the Bible, the reason God will not give us some new evidence of His existence, is because the Bible deals with things that do not change; man's nature and God's nature are the same today as they were 3 thousand years ago, what separates a man from God, sin, is still the same today as then, and what reconciles us to God, Jesus Christ, is still the same today as then. It is quite evident to me, by your comments, that although you have certain ideas about the Bible and the people who believie it, it is really very evident that you have learned these attitudes from an outside source, because if you yourself had studied the Bible, you would know that the wisdom for daily living found in it is as relevant today for you as it was for King David, and if you had socialized with enough Bible believers, you would know that trusting in Jesus is not a matter of education or intelect, it is a matter of the heart. After all, weren't Princenton, Yale, Harvard all started with the specific purpose of studying the Bible? Is it not true that the codex was invented to make Bible reading easier? Was it not, and is it not, missionaries to peoples without written languages that actually codify alphabets and writing and educate those who did not previously had a written language? Frank, if you would do some research to see the influence of the Bible and those who believe it on the advancement of education and such, you would certainly be overwhelmed! To believe the Bible or not to Believe it is not a matter of education, it is a matter of the heart. Last Monday I went and preached in the murder ward of the St.Tammany prison. Some of the men in there have become Christians, others have not. Believe me, there is a huge diffeerence in their eyes of those who believe, truly believe, who are born again, and those who are not, the difference of life and death. I will answer the question I asked you for you, you would much rather have those 8 young men from the projects be true born again believers, bottom line. Why? Because I believe you know that if those men truly believe the Bible and in Jesus, they would have a moral ethic that would compel them to help you, whereas if they didn't, you probably wouldn't come out of the projects alive. Why? Because the Bible deals with eternal non changing issues, the nature of man and of God, and the Bible has the power as the Word of God, to change the nature of man... this last Monday I met some convicted murderers who have been radically changed from the inside, because they have trusted in Christ. Let me ask you this: How did the prophet Daniel know that in the last days knowledge would increase at an exponential rate, and that people would thus be able to travel back and forth fast? Because the prophecy identified the times you and I are living in as the time of the end, let me exhort you not to look for a new revelation of God being broadcasted on CNN, because I believe that is exactly what people will get some time soon, but it will not be the God who made us. The Bible warns us of the anti-Christ, one world religion, one world government, one world economic system and al these things are already beginning to happen. Maybe I will use this arena to teach a course on understanding the end times and the prophecies we are all seeing fulfilled, its absolutely astaunding!

Alex--Absolutely, the Bible provides us with a "code of conduct" that allows us to live together in harmony. But so do all the world's great religions.
    Neither you nor I would reject the moral teachings of any of these world religions. Yet, you reject the theological aspects of most of them. I reject the theological aspects of all that you do, plus one more.
    Alex, you are an intelligent, learned individual. This is evident from your prolific commentaries on this forum. But just as you have rejected the theological bases of most of the world religions, you must be able to accept that I can reject the theological basis of your own religion. Thus, your quoting of the "Bible" is meaningless to me. What I need to further the discussion is some real-time evidence of God. Get creative and original, and present me with something that I can observe, touch, or at least rationalize. There might still be debate, but at least it would not be about 2000 year old events.

Frank, I have no problem accepting your rejection of the theological basis of Biblical Christianity, although it is sad to me whenever someone decides to reject the Gospel, since the eternal consequence, if the Bible is true, is absolutely, unspeakably terrifying. I will provide you with evidence that you can observe and rationalize, but is your desire to really know the truth? The motivation is essential for any evidence to be of any profit, because if your heart is set in rejecting the God of the Bible, the One and Only God, then you could personally see someone raised from the dead and you would still not believe, because its a matter of the heart. I am exhausted right now, I will come back tomorrow and begin that discussion, but examine your heart and see if you are willing to accept the truth even if it hurts.

Alex--I have no agenda in these discussions. I did not come here to seek salvation. Yet, if your truth is self-evident, my nature would compel me to explore it further.
   I await your comments.

Frank, that is really good to hear! Please do forgive my delay. As you can see it is really late. I have been very, very busy this week, I am flying to Pakistan tomorrow, or today I should say, at noon. I am going there to preach crusades and hold seminars for the church leaders, I will be preaching the Gospel where it has never been preached before! In these particular towns where the Gospel has never been preached, they expect 4-5 thousand people to show up. Frank, its too late to give you a quality response, let me respond when I come back from Pakistan, ok? Thanks! I do apologize, but I really have been swamped! In the mean time, consider that the events that are happening in Jerusalem right now are exactly what God said 3 thousand years ago that would happen in the end time! I am literally awed at the specific fulfillment we are all watching! This may make it more dangerous for me in my trip, Pakistan is an Islamic State and they actually persecute Christians there to death. That is another thing to consider in the mean time, believe me, Frank, if God was not alive and the Bible was not His Word, there is no way I would be flying to Pakistan tomorrow and risk not seeing my beautiful children grow up! I will be back after Oct. 21, if the Lord wills.

Alex, have a safe and successful trip. If I were a praying man I would definately utter a prayer on your behalf.

Alex, good luck and take care. We look forward to your safe return for more engaging debate.

Jared--perhaps with Alex gone for a while, we might discuss some of the practical questions about faith. Examples:
   1) why do most people have at least some faith?
   2) why do some people lose their faith?
   3) why do other people gain or switch faiths?

    I noticed that you never answered Rocky's question in comment #39, at least not in this forum. Your "testimony" might be a starting point.
    I find it perplexing that two of my siblings are atheist, like myself, while two are believers. One has even done missionary work!
    Let's hear some more of your logic!

Frank,

I have actually been drafting a response to Rocky's question for about a month. Originally, I was just going to email it to Rocky but when I finish it I will post it here.

It has taken me some time because although I know how I arrived at where I am in terms of belief it isn't easy to articulate in a way that people will understand and not be offended by.

None the less, I will try to finish up my story and post it here.

I have decided not to work on my answer to Rocky's question any longer. I'm sure it is incomplete and borring but I will post it now anyway.

Warning, the next post will be long. You don't have to read it.

Rocky, Frank, anyone else interested, the following is the story of my "unconversion".

I don't want my reasons to become a subject of debate but I am happy to answer your question.

As you mentioned, I was raised in a devout Mormon (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) household. Everyone else in my immediate family continue to be active practicing Mormons. I am in fact a bit of a "black sheep" and an oddity in the Mormon community.

Because of enormous social pressures, my decision to leave the Mormon church and espouse an Atheist point of view was not in any way easy nor was it taken lightly. My change of beliefs was not a sudden thing with a single cause but rather a world view that developed over many years. There are many experiences and learning's that brought me to that point. At the risk of boring you to tears, I will try to put it into words.

A chronology of major life events:

Up through High School I was a practicing Mormon with no reason to doubt what I had been taught. Some of my beliefs began to be challenged when I moved from Utah to Mexico City in 9th Grade to attend the American High School. I had never been confronted with competing views of life until then. In the AHS I learned about the theory of evolution, met people belonging to a wide array of World religions, learned about the concept of exponential growth and the need for Global population control. There were more than these three events but these are the ones that stand out.

As I learned about the theory of evolution, I discussed the issue with my family at home and was reinforced by the notion that it was only a theory and had very little evidence behind it. It was easy for me to accept my parent's view that the theory could be discounted.

When confronted with the issue of population control, my parents told me about many studies that had been done that indicated that the Earth could support much higher populations and that to control the birth rate was contrary to God's plan. Once again, it was easy for me to take this as an us against the world issue and side with my parents point of view.

On the issue of why there would be multiple religions is there is only one God I was taught that the Church that Jesus started had drifted away from the complete truth and that when the last of the original 12 apostles was killed, there was no longer priesthood authority on the Earth. Men left to their own devices interpreted scripture in many ways and came to different conclusions leading to a variety of beliefs. Joseph Smith was called to restore the original gospel of Jesus Christ in the early 1800's. This explanation made as much sense as any other and again was easy to accept.

Shortly after High School, I served a Mission for the Mormon Church in Argentina. Living and teaching full time kept me completely immersed in the teachings and reinforced my beliefs to the point that I had little if any doubt that the Mormon Church was true.

Less than a year after my Mission, I was married in the traditional Mormon Temple ceremony and had every intention of following the Mormon teachings for the rest of my life.

In college at Brigham Young University (run by the Mormon Church) I had many classes that brought up the old High School issues that had been so easily dismissed when it was a secular school against my religious beliefs. The fact that certain theories were taught at BYU surprised me since they are in apparent disagreement with Biblical doctrine.

In Biology class, I was taught the theory of evolution and the issue of exponential growth and the need for population control. We also learned about the history of life on earth and how species appear in the fossil record from the simples life forms to the most complex in chronological order. The Human species appeared very late on the scene in the last few million years.

In Physics I was taught that the Solar System was about 4.5 billion years old (considerably older than the 6 thousand years taught by the Bible). I also learned about the theory of relativity where the speed of light is the absolute speed limit for energy or matter (If you believe God is bound by physics, this makes prayer somewhat implausible).

I learned in Geology that the earth could be dated to 4.5 billion years through numerous techniques.

In Psychology I learned that conscience is a product of biology and environment as opposed to spiritual in nature.

In Philosophy I learned of the many arguments that had been made over time trying to prove or disprove the existence of God. I also learned how to construct a logical argument.

In History I learned about many instances of scientific fact being held back or stifled by religious beliefs that Church doctrine was absolute and should not be questioned.

All of these teachings left me with a strong feeling that logic and scientific investigation lead to more reliable results than faith and religious belief.

Faith is the foundation of nearly every major world religion. I began to question whether Faith was in fact a great virtue or in fact a great weakness of man kind. Certainly in the area of scientific knowledge skepticism has lead to far more discoveries than faith ever has.

With my new found respect for skepticism I began to evaluate everything I had been taught from a logical point of view. None of my conclusions are 100% certainty but I find them more logically appealing than accepting teachings on faith. Some of the conclusions of my thinking are as follows:

In answering the age old question of how the universe could exist without an intelligent creator I concluded that it is at least as difficult to imagine that a creator capable of creating the universe could just exist. Kind of a chicken and egg thing. In other words both the Universe and the existence of God are equally fantastic. There are good scientific theories for how the universe operates and none of them require the intervention of a supernatural being.

I think it is fair to judge a creator by the creation. I think the World is a fantastic place full of awe and wonder. I think the natural balance with food web relationships of predator and prey are extremely efficient. As fantastic and efficient as the natural world is, I don't think it is consistent with the Judeo-Christian concept of a loving caring God. I hope you don't take this next statement as blasphemous or offensive, but I think that if I were all powerful and all knowing and all loving, I could have come up with a design for Earth that did not rely on natural disasters and pain and suffering to exist. In other words, I think the natural world we observe is more consistent with evolution and natural selection (that don't require value judgments about pain and suffering) than with creation by a kind and loving God.

In the absence of scientific understanding, I can completely understand how early humans would conclude that there must be a god when evaluating the wonder of the world around them. Since this God does not make himself known in any clear-cut way, people would look for evidence in nature and in "miracles". This lack of concrete evidence would certainly have given rise to a concept of Faith. Without the need for faith how can you explain a lack of conclusive evidence. These lead me to conclude that the concepts of God and Faith were invented by early man searching for a meaning for their existence.

From what I have observed, Faith is not very good at leading people to the truth in either a religious or a scientific sense. I reject the notion that Faith is a fundamental virtue. Virtually every major accomplishment of mankind has been a result of logic and reason. Beliefs based on faith often present obstacles to discovering scientific truth.

I see only anecdotal evidence that God exists. People have spiritual experiences and some prayers appear to be answered. The human mind is very capable of manufacturing experiences that appear to come from the outside. I don't think trusting our senses and feelings is a very reliable measure of what is true. More prayers are not answered than are answered making answered prayer useless as an evidence of God's existence.

I recognize that I cannot prove any of what I believe and I have had "spiritual experiences" myself. Because of having been on both sides of the fence, I try to be respectful of everyone's beliefs. I respect my family members who continue in the Mormon faith, I respect you for your beliefs, and I respect Alex and his beliefs and most certainly don't wish harm to come to anyone because of their beliefs. I think we must all respect one another's right to believe as we chose and to defend that right. The only time anyone's beliefs should be interfered with is when they encroach on someone else's right to believe and live as they chose.

Jared--Thanks for that history. I have to rush to get my kids from school, and then it's a high school football game, and a big soccer Saturday tomorrow. I'll try to add to the discussion next week.
Rocky--Where are you? Do you have anything to say about Jared's story?

Edited by author 10-08-2000 06:58 PM
Very interesting what Jared wrote.

In conclusion you can say that times have changed. Many things that were unexplainable by science and logic had to be accounted for in supernatural terms. Imagine living in the times when the bible was written 2000 years ago. Disease was unexplainable since bacteria and virus are invisible to the naked eye. People would get cancer and suffer for no apparent reason. Any person who got sick in his brain and go insane would appear to be possesed by the devil. The stars were visible but there was nothing to explain them. It is no wonder that in those times believing in God required much less faith and to see a miracle you only had to open your eyes a bit and wonder at life itself.

Nowadays, believing in God requires a lot more faith, but there are still things that can't be explained. The origin of the universe itself for example, or who is one's self in reality? Death is a concept that can still overwhelm even the most hardened soul. That is where religions get their grip on people, from fear of death itself.

I have come to the conclusion that some people are more susceptible to getting involved in a religious doctrine than others. In fact I am willing to bet that there is a "religion" gene. Why? Because in prehistory people who stuck together united with the religion glue, had more of chance to survive. That is why all religions have the same characteristics:
 
1. Very strong and recognized leaders.
2. Strict rules one must abide to, that cover all aspects of your life, and that generally make you stronger against adversity (for example strong family ties, work hard, no excessive partying, etc).
3. All or nothing proposition, you are either in it or you go to hell.
4. Self perpuating through indoctrination in early childhood.
5. A dresscode or way of life that clearly distinguishes you belonging in the group.
6. Prayings in large groups with lots of chanting (which is plain and simple brainwashing).

All these contribute to making a group united and strong.

I had realized all this when I was a full fledged Sikh, a religion my mother converted to in 1972 and then got out in 1989. That is why I was never really into it, sort of following it along because of family ties. I also unconverted around 1989.

My hope is that through globalization, the internet, more genetically mixed societies, and global prosperity, more and more people will abandon these religions and become "world" humans. Its going to take lots and lots of generations though, because religion has been what has allowed humanity to survive (and even evolve) for thousands of years.

Jared:
Thanks for the answer....I was beginning to think I had ofended you or you grew tired of the discussions. I appreciate your honesty and sharing this with me/us. As for my thoughts---
As most of you know, I am a born again Christian. I try to follow as much as I can, but know that I fall short---very short. Don't think I am going to hell because of it, nor do I fell "guilty" about it. But I do have strong convictions in the basic belief of God, Jesus, Jesus being the son of God and that he died for me. I say this as a preface so you know where I am coming from.

While I do not believe in evolution, I can't explain the "facts" of evolution so I am back to faith. I stuggled with evolution for along time, and finally said--its a contradiction to what I believe so I let it go. Stupid maybe, closed minded, I am sure---but when we are asked to believe by faith alone, what else can you do?

I sincerley hope that "religion" does not go away as Didar suggested. I think many people are looking for it, but try to find "other" religions that are more modern, open, make you feel good rather than organized religion. I think many are turned off by preachers who are caught lieing, cheating etc and as a result look else where. As for atheism, (NO OFFENSE) I think, or at least my perception, is that it is easier to be an Athiest or Agnostic than to try to follow the teachings of the Bible.

Jared, I do commend you on being "unconverted" in a Mormon family. That has got to be tough, not only with your parents, but with your wife as well. You must have strong convictions, and the guts to follow through to change. I could not imagine that. Especially given the strong ties of the Mormon Church. I am quite suprised they taught those classes at BYU......

Well I have to run now---time for the debates...time to root for "dubaya".....(W). :)

Rocky--Just a quick comment about your message. You said that you thought it was easier to be atheist or agnostic that to follow the teachings of the bible. I just don't know if that's true. Jared has asked us not to make his story the subject of discussion, but I hope he doesn't object to at least one characterization.
   It sure seems that his journey to "unconversion" was long and hard. It absolutely was a well thought out, agonizing decision. It was not a whim. Do most people of faith examine their beliefs in the same way Jared did? Or, do they take the easy route, and believe what there parents taught them?
   I'll have more later.

Whew, we made it through Friday the 13th with a full moon in the year 2000 alive. Well at least I did, I don't know about the rest of you yet.

As to which path is easier I agree with both Rocky and Frank. It is definately easier to live according to one's own assessment of what is right and wrong than according to someone elses rules whether they come from the Bible or elsewhere.

On the other hand, deciding to abandon the faith of one's upbringing is also very difficult.

Let's face it, life is hard but it beats the alternative.

As to BYU teaching generally accepted scientific theory, my hat is off to them. BYU has decided to be a first rate educational institution. They don't run their curiculum by the church authorities. Rather they teach the same subject matter you would find at any accredited institution.

I don't think accepting the theory of evolution or an earth that is 4.5 billion years old require a rejection of God. It is quite possible that evolution was the tool God used to create life on earth. I don't think the Genesis account precludes a 4.5 billion year old earth since the six days of creation spoken of are often viewed as creative periods, not six literal days.

At any rate, I think we all have to come to our own choice in life and at some point we have to chose between believing based on faith or accepting only "proven" facts.

Each person's choice is a very individual thing and I think we need to continue to be respectfull of indivudual beliefs.

I appreciate the kind words you have shared with me about my "unconversion" story and I only fealt comfortable posting it here because I truly feel like I am among family who accepts me as I am. Thanks for the freedom to feel that way.

Hello everyone--

As young intellectuals, my parents both left the Roman Catholic church as a result of questionable behavior by the church relative to the holocaust. Consequently, I was raised in a household that was void of religious teaching. My secular education taught me about scientific advances and methodology, as well as the use of reasoning and logic. None of the hundreds of religious pitches I've heard over the years has surpassed the burden of proof required by my education.

In many ways, I am not unlike Alex and Rocky. I am being loyal to the traditions and teachings of my parents. Alex and Rocky were taught about a faith; I was not. Children around the world remain loyal to the teachings of their parents.

I have mentioned that my children believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy. (It's unclear to me what my 11 year old still believes, but I sure my younger ones still do.) Children will believe what their parents tell them. Sometimes they will believe until the parent tell them it is not true. Children are innocent, loyal, and gullible. As parents, I think we all know that.

So that's why I remain upset by the traditional Christian message. We tell the kids to be good and they will go to heaven. They will be reunited with grandparents and parents in heaven. But then we smash them with a hammer. If you don't believe, or if you are bad, you will go to HELL. You will burn and suffer for eternity.

Now, if I had heard that message when I was 4 or 5 years old, and my parents were the ones telling me about it, I would be scared as HELL. What do you think I would believe?

Which begs the question. Do christians believe out of love, or out of fear?

****
On an admin note, I see that this discussion is quickly growing. Perhaps we will run out of ideas before we catch the '80 site, but we may yet catch '78. Those folks must have boring lives!!!

Of course I am going to differ on what Rocky said about being an atheist is easier than being a believer.

When you are an atheist you have to decide by yourself what your morals are going to be. You become good for goodness sake, for human values, not because someone has already told you what is good or bad.

As you get older and death is more eminent, the true test of atheism comes, because that is when you realize the most that there is no afterlife and the existence you know as yourself will cease to be.

Alex--Welcome back home. I hope you had a successful trip. As you can see, we have had some discussion in your absence. I however, am particularly interested in your promised responce to my questions in message #55. You are the first person I've encountered who has offered to produce some real-time evidence of God. Once you're over the jet-lag, I'll be looking for your comments.

Hi all--
I do believe "Unconversion" as you put it is harder than beig a Cristian--that is why I give Jared all the kudos in the world--especially given his family history. He has got to be stong in his conviction to buck the system like that--but for those that have not really chosen if you will....I still think its easiest.

On the subject of beliveing out or love or fear....I for one do not believe out of fear....whatsoever....if I did I would be doomed, for being human as I am, I sin all the time! so fear is not it

Rocky--I hate to belabor my theme, but when did you first accept the Christian belief system? Was it as an educated, reasoning, adolescent or young adult? Or, perhaps you don't remember. As far as you know, you always believed in God and Jesus. And you also knew about Satan and Hell. If your beliefs stem from early childhood, how can you really be sure whether you were motivated by fear or love? By the time you came to truly understand the concepts of fear and love, you beliefs were intrenched. And of course you're supposed to say that you believe out of love.
    In fact, this idea of reward and punishment is in many religions. The Hindus believe that if you live a proper life, you will be rewarded and be reincarnated into a higher caste. If you are bad, you will be reincarnated into a lower caste, or into some lowly animal.
    Again, I'm not trying to pick on anyone, but I really wonder if christians and other persons of faith really examine the origins of their individual beliefs. Even without rejecting the basic themes of Christianity, individuals could explore other denominations or sects within the "Christian" umbrella. But most do not. They go cradle-to-grave in the exact sect to which their parents belonged. Too many times I've heard christians say "Well, I looked around, but I decided that my faith was best." I'm not so sure they looked very hard.
    I've said before that atheists know why they are atheists. But other than being versed in doctorine, do most people of faith really understand why they, as individuals, came into their beliefs?

Frank: I do agree with you in that if my parents had been Jewish, I too would be at this time. My point however is that I do not feel fear in any way shape or form. If I go to church and the sermon is "hell, fire and brimstone" I don't get depressed or feel like I better be better or else. I look at it more from the point of view that I accept Christ as the Son of God, and believing in Him and accepting Him, I will go to heaven. But God knows (no pun intended) that not only am I far from perfect, I sin a lot, am tempted many times throughout the day and sometimes give in to it, yet I know in my heart of hearts that I am going to heaven. That is what I meant by not fear, but love.

As to whether I have explored other religions, I have not. I came to my "decision" when I was 13. I think that it is damn near impossible to explore other religions and not be thouroughly confused and feel like you have to search forever for the "right" choice. I am comfortable with my choice if you will--even if it was guided from childhood. Bottom line, I am at peace and feel like this is the only way...not that I am judging anyone else. We all will sit before judgement day and live with the choices and decisions we have made. Am I right? I think so, but I guess we won't know until each of us die and then its too late. So we are back to faith.....but again, I don't see it as reward or punishment rather a by product of ones belief.

How did I come to this belief--yes much has to do with how I was raised, but that cannot account for all, for there are many that were raised one way and changed (ie: Jared)--To me,however "out there" Jesus may seem, it makes sense to me, even with the many questions I have, gives me peace and a framework within which to live. The other point I would make is that my brother and sister, who were raised in the same house as I was do not believe as I do, so not all has to do with how you were raised.

Rocky--Fair response. I would note that at least three of us who are regular writers in this discussion apparently have siblings who believe something different from what we do. This would be you, me, and Jared. I have yet to analyse this, but wonder if it creats a certain turmoil which keeps us interested in this topic.
   Where are Alex and Sue?

Frank you may be right, about why we are more interested in the topic. I think that most people don't do much deep thinking on the topic and stay where they are most comfortable. When you have arrived at your conclusions based on serious thought rather than inertia it is more likely that you will continue to evaluate your decision or at least reinforce to yourself why you decided as you did.

Frank, are you a Brit? Just wondering based on your spelling of analyse (American version is analyze).

I'm curious where Sue is but starting to get worried about Alex. He did say he was going into a precarious situation. I will feel much better once he has posted to let us know he is ok. How about it Alex, where are you?

BOO! Sorry, I didn't mean to scare you! I appreciate your welcome back and your concern for my safety, truly, if God didn't answer prayer and actually intervene in our lives, I wouldn't have made it back alive! But God intervened mightily in my behalf while in Pakistan! I will be back and tell you about it, and I will begin to present what I see as evidence of God's existence. It will require that you divest yourselves of preconceived ideas of God's non existence and just sit back and observe and weigh the evidence impartially, you are a tremendous disadvantage when right off the bat you decide God must not exist because not all prayer is answered, rather than understanding that God is the Boss, not a big Santa Claus in the sky, and He does and answers as He wills, you cheat yourselves, in weighing the evidence, if you come in assuming that the Bible is a book of fairy tales, rather than observing impartially the fact of fulfilled prophecy, you hurt yourselves in looking at the natural order and thinking that it is all a big accident rather than noticing there is obviously intelligence behind it. So, I will present some evidence for you to weigh and observe, but it will be useless unless you truly become an impartial judge. The evidence that I will show will be in the areas of answered prayer, fulfilled prophecy and the natural order. In the end, however, it comes down to having a reciprocal relationship with the Living God, but such relationship is impossible without faith, for without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to God must do two things, he must believe that God exists, and that God rewards those that dilligently seek Him. Because, ultimately, like Einstein said, it is God that hides Himself, and He hides Himself from those that are not willing to acknowledge Him, so that you could see Jesus Christ coming down from heaven and still not believe. Your attitude and motivation is essential to weigh the evidence.
Thanks for your kind concern, it really was dangerous, but God!

Jared--I could not have provided a more concise anaylsis to the issue I raised in message #76. I am not a Brit--rather a former subject of the British Empire.

Alex--I have learned not to judge a book by its cover. However, it seems you want us to buy the house before we see it, or marry the girl before we meet her! Are you saying that we have to accept the existance of God before you can show us evidence of his being?

Greetings everyone. Besides spending too much time following the election returns this week, I also spent considerable time reviewing the Photo archive on Didar's site. There must be 1000 photographs posted, and I must have looked at most of them. What a resource that is for reviving old memories! I appreciate all Didar's hard work. Still, as I looked through all those photos, something came to me which connected that experience to this discussion "About God."

Those images from AHS provided intricate visual details of people, places and events. Most of these details had been long forgotten, and without the photographs, they would be lost forever. But even with the visual reminders, what is the story behind the people, places and events shown on those photographs? There may be some fuzzy memories in the minds of some former students, but after 20 years, who could provide an accurate narrative explaining just one of the images?

That is where I find fault with the New Testament. Paul was with Jesus, but wrote his letters 25 years after the time of Jesus. The gospels were written much later than that, by people who were never with Jesus. If we have fuzzy recollections about High School, even with photographs and other written documentation, just how accurate can the new testament be?

This brings me back to a previous idea from myself and other writers here. Why didn't Jesus come during the age of mass communication? Or at least he could have waited until 1850, when he could have been photographed.

I'll keep thinking!!!

Just a quickie, Frank... Or should I say a quick response...!

Interesting thought about Jesus's appearance 2000 years ago, one that was immortalized in song, no less. In one of my favorite musicals, "Jesus Christ Superstar" Judas sings:

Everytime I look at you I don't understand
Why you let the things you do get so out of hand
You'd have managed better if you'd had it planned.
Why'd you choose such a backward time in such a strange land?
If you'd come today you would have reached the whole nation.
Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication.
Don't get me wrong now. Don't get me wrong. Don't get me wrong.
I Only want to know now....

Where's Alex? I'm sure he would say that since Paul was inspired by God that he couldn't possibly have made any mistakes in his recollection.

Back to work...

Oh, if you are the Christ,
yes the great Jesus Christ,
Prove to me that you're divine,
Change my water into wine...

That's all you need do
and I'll know its all true...
Come on, you king of the Jews...

Sue--don't be bashful about a quickie. At our age you need to be thankful for anything you can get! Indeed, Jesus Christ Superstar was one of my favorite musicals, too. There was a summer in my youth when we listened to it almost everyday. I had the entire thing memorized.

Ironically, christian fundementalists say that this musical is blasphemous. Yet, as someone who has never had any religious instruction, Superstar taught me everything I know about the biblical story of Christ's last days. It was a message presented in a form I could understand back in the early 1970's.

I also want to know where Alex has been. Once, he was so inspired. Now, perhaps, he's sad and tired.

I loved that too....the music was sooo cool. I rented the movie a couple of years ago, and I must admit, I was really disappointed. It was not what I remembered it to be. It was larger than life at the time and it was disapointing watching as an adult. I do still enjoy the music.

I was living near London when Jesus Christ Superstar first came out and I saw it on stage 4 times! I also know every word to every song, practically. (I still listen to it every Easter.) I remember the nuns outside carrying placards protesting each performance. I find it somewhat amusing that with time, the musical has become less and less objectionable than it once was, to the point that it is often performed by Christian theater groups! It is in San Diego, at any rate.

Speaking of controversial performances, who has seen Martin Scorsese's "The Last Temptation of Christ"? Talk about a movie that makes you think. For those of you who have seen it, what did you think? And for those who did not, what were the reasons you decided not to see it?

Sue--No, I've never been to London, but I have been to SanDiego. Though, lately it seems I don't go anywhere, not even to the movies. The only big screen movies I remember seeing in recent years are 101 Dalmatians and Pinochio (sp.) My three boys are 11, 9, 7, so when I transitioned out of diapers, it was just a lateral move to coaching soccer and helping with homework.
     I did see some promo's for Last Temptation, and it looked interesting. Just this afternoon, I checked at one video store, but they did not carry the movie. I'll try to find it elsewhere.
     Seems it was about 20 years ago when the movie "The Passover Plot" came out. It caused a big controversy amoung religious circles. But whether its Superstar or these movies, modern artist/critics are just putting their spin on biblical events. What's wrong with that? Ultimately, that's what Paul did, and that's what the writers of the Gospels did. That's what the assemblers of various versions of the bible did, and what anyone who has translated the bible has done. Every Sunday, preachers all around the world put their own spin on stories from the bible.

I think as you say that the longer time passes the less objectionalble it becomes is in large part because what "one generation tolerates, the next generation accepts." That could not be more true. Think of music -the beatles, tv-lucy and ricardo not sleeping in one bed- a baby out of wedlock- now the norm, living together - no biggie. That is why I believe it is such a shame that each and every day things are more sex driven, self gratification etc. There is not telling what things are going to be like when my girls ages 5 and 8 are in their 20's and 30's and beyond.....now I am not preaching nor judgeing, but I do believe its gotten and continues to get out of hand....

Rocky--I am still waiting for Alex to present his ideas regarding contemporary evidence proving the existence of God. Perhaps Sue hurt his feelings when she threw him off the '80 site for discussing abortion.
     In his absence, we might use this forum to discuss other moral issues, (which could include abortion, etc).
     I am also concerned about the sex driven society in which we live, especially as it affects our growing children. It might be a question of instinct. In this comfortable, modern world, in a good economy, we all have adequate food and shelter. Our streets and neighborhoods are reasonably safe, and we are not at war. Thus, with our survival assured, perhaps our society -and our children- have too much carefree time to focus on reproductive instincts.
     It may also be a question of biology and nutrition. I read recently where children are reaching puberty at ever earlier ages. How does a society handle that? If 50 years ago children were physically "mature" in their mid-teens, today they reach the same levels of physical maturity by their early teens. Should their conduct be the same as it was 50 years ago? How does one control the hormones?

Frank, Sue and Rocky - very interesting posts.

Alex - I read your posts in the '80 and '81 class quicktopics urging us to support Bush instead of Gore because of the abortion issue. Surely as a Christian you can't also support Bush because of the death penalty issue. Under Bush, Texas has had more executions than ever.

Hello, I'm baaaack! Sorry for the delay, I've been really busy lately, spending a lot of time following the goings on in American politics, its a circus! I posted a little note on the billboards, man, and I'm not sure if I felt like a fox in a hen house or a cowboy being trampled by a bunch of cows, but I ruffled a lot of feathers! Bummer is, I am not the one who actually performs partial birth abortions, I simply quoted an eyewitness testimony of someone who performed that horrible procedure! But they kicked me like a man kicks a dog when it barks at a thief instead of stopping the thief! Sue, you kicked me off the class of 80 site?! It must have been bad there! I will go there and perhaps write one last response, ok Sue?

Dave, "To acquit the guilty and condemn the innocent, these both are an abomination to the Lord." God instituted the death penalty in the very beginning, He said, "Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God made He man." Gen.9:6 From the God of the Bible's perspective, the value of human life is not seen in sparing the life of the murderer, but in bringing justice on the life of the person who was murdered. For example, a couple of years ago (please go to the next message if you take offense at exposing facts) a group of 3 19 year olds grabbed another teenager, beat him with a bat, tied his hands behind his back and his feet, and while one of them held his legs as he bucked and kicked and jerked, the other two pulled on a wire wrapped around his neck as hard as they could until he died. When asked why they did this, they said "because it was fun". The judge gave them a couple of years in prison and probation, from the God of the Bible's perspective, that judge might as well spit on the murdered young man's grave, his life was worth nothing. God says these young men should have been put to death, to let them go is an abomination to the Lord, it is in the same category as killing innocent babies. Why? Because the value of human life is found in that we are made in the image of God "... for in the image of God made He man", as long as people are made in the image of God, the death penalty is the appropriate punishment for murder. If Governor Bush didn't execute those men who dragged that poor black man until his head came off, that man's life would be worth nothing, and you might as well spit on his grave, the same goes for the thugs who murdered that homosexual man and hung him on a fence. Dave, there is no comparison at all between ruthless murderers and innocent babies. "To acquit the guilty and condemn the innocent, these both are an abomination to the Lord"

Frank, I will now begin to present my case. Now, the evidence I present is not just contemporary, it is timeless, but there are many contemporary issues that, in my view at least, show the existance of God, and not just any god, but the God of the Bible. Frank, Rocky, Dave and whoever else, previously believing in God is not necessary to see the evidence, what is necessary is the correct attitude and motivation. In other words, to be able to see what is evident, i.e. the existance of God, you must first divest yourself of your preconcieved ideas that God can not possibly exist and that He can not supernaturally communicate with people, you must put those on the shelf. Then you must sit back and observe the evidence with absolute intellectual honesty, such must be your attitude, and be desirous of really knowing the truth of wether God is alive or not, such must be your motivation. If you have such attitude and motivation, then, I believe, you may well begin to see the reality of God and conclude, like I did coming from an intellectual aetheist background such as yourselves, that God must indeed be alive.(I pause for dinner and hope I don't loose this, I'll be back)Alright, I'm back, full belly, happy heart! Where was I? Lets see... right, it is imperative to have the right attitude, of absolute intellectual honesty, and the right motivation, which is to know the truth, to see if indeed there is any evidence for the existance of God. It is also imperative that you do not disregard the evidence just because it is from the Bible. Also, I can only share with you the evidence that convinced me and took me out of the camp of the aetheists and transplanted me into the camp of the Christians, it may or may not convince you, but I think the case is extremely strong, impossible according to the law of compound probabilities. So, sit back and honestly weigh the evidence.

I already mentioned a prophecy in Daniel 12:4, this prophecy identifies a time that is yet a long time away from the time of its utterance. When Daniel asked when these things would be fulfilled, he was told that it was for the time of the end, that he would die before it was dulfilled and it was yet for many days after his death. the prophecy says, "But you Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end, many shall run to and fro and knowledge shall increase" In other words, the time of the end would be identified, set aside from any other era by two circumnstances: 1.People would be able to travel back and forth great distances at a fast speed 2. knowledge would increase exponentially, like it would never increase during any other era. Added to this,the construction of the language indicates that the ability to travel back and forth great distances at a great rate of speed would be a consequence of the unequaled increase of knowledge. The question is, how did Daniel know that people would be able ttravel back and forth at a great rate of speed when he could not even begin to concieve of such thing, and how would he know that knowledge would increase at a super fast rate in a short period of time enabling people to thus travel? He could not have a concept of this development, and in fact, in vs.8 he said "Although I heard, I did not understand" Daniel heard this prophecy, but he did not understand, he had no concept of fast speed travelling and exponential increase of knowledge. Therefore, this prophecy had to be given to him by an outside source, and this source claims to be the God who created us. You and I are seeing and experiencing the fulfillment of this 2600 year old prophecy, and we understand what Daniel could not understand or even concieve.

Perhaps some of the most amazing prophecies have to do with the fate of certain nations. These prophecies are significant because we can observe the prophecy, and then observe its fulfillment in secular history. For example, in Daniel chapter 8 Daniel was given in symbols a vision of several kingdoms that would dominate the known world through different eras. The symbols were given in the form of animals. Daniel saw in a prophetic vision in chapter 8 two animals confronting each other. Daniel saw a ram being confronted by a male goat. Daniel said, in vs.5 "...suddenly a male goat came from the west...without touching the ground, and the goat had a notable horn between its eyes." The goat attacked and destroyed a ram, trampling it with great fury. In verse 8 Daniel went on to write, "...the male goat grew very great; but when he became strong, the large horn was broken, and in place of it four notable ones came up toward the four winds of heaven."
In verse 21 Daniel was given the interpretation of that vision, "And the male goat is the kingdom of Greece. The large horn that is between its eyes is the first king. As for the broken horn and the four that stood up in its place, four kingdoms shall arise out of that nation but not with its power" Lets listen to what we are being told and take a look at its fulfillment in secular history:
    We are told that this male goat represents the kingdom of Greece, and the notable horn represents its first king. Historically, Alexander the Great was the first king of a united Greece. Did Alexander fulfill this prophecy? The prophecy specified thhat this first king of Greece would come from the West, in the year 334 B.C. Alexander the Great invaded Asia Minor with an army of 40,000 men, coming from the west. The prophecy said that he would conquer "without touching the ground" speaking of the great speed at which he conquered a great kingdom and, indeed, he conquered a vast kingdom in an incredibly short period of time, dying before the age of 33. He trampled the Persian empire under foot, as the prophecy says, the Persian empire represented by the ram. The prophecy said "the male goat grew very great" this detail has dual fulfillment: 1.He carved out a great kingdom, an empire of 1.5 million square miles and 2. He would exalt himself to the status of a god, this verse can also be translated "the male goat magnified himself exceedingly". Both these details of the dual fulfillment were fulfilled. The prophecy further said, "but when he became strong, the large horn was broken" this detail also has dual fulfillment 1. At the height of his power Alexander the Great died a horrible death 2. At the height of his self exaltation God humbled him and brought him down. In fact, historically, he provoked rebellion within his ranks by claiming to be a god. Furthermore, the prophecy goes on to say that after his death his kingdom would be divided into four parts "four kingdoms shall arise out of that nation" Historically, when Alexander died, that is in fact what happened, Alexander the Great's empire was divided among four of his generals Seleucus, Ptolemy, Cassander, and Lysamachus. The prophecy details not only that his kingdom would be divided into four at his death, but these four would be divided into four geographical areas corresponding to "the four winds of heaven" Historically, Cassander became ruler of Macedonia to the West, Lysamachus became ruler of Tharace and Bythinia to the North, Seleucus of Babylon and North Syria to the East, and Ptolemy of Egypt to the South, literally, the four winds of heaven. Not only that, but not only did the prophecy say that at his death the kingdom would be divided into four areas, ruled by four individuals, each area corresponding to the "four winds of heaven", but further detail declares that these kingdoms would not equal Alexander's kingdom in power "but not with its power", historically, in fact, these four kingdoms did not attain to Alexander the Great's power. Now, lets impartially look at the details of this prophecy:
1.The kingdom spoken of would be the Greek Empire.
2.Led by its first ruler, the Greek empire would conquer the East from the West.
3.Alexander would conquer in a veritable "blitzkrieg", fast.
4.He would conquer a vast geographical area.
5. He would exalt himself.
6.At the height of his power he would die.
7. He would die suddenly.
8. As he exalted himself he would begin to crumble.
9.After his death his kingdom would be divided among four of his rulers.
10.These four rulers would rule or inherit each a geographical area corresponding to "the four winds of heaven".
11.These four kingdoms would not attain to the power that Alexander's Empire had.
12. He would specifically destroy the Medo-Persian Empire.
13. The Medo-Persian Empire would hardly be able to put up a fight.

Gentlemen and ladies, this is an absolutely incredible, astounding prophecy! This alone should convince you if you sit back and observe the facts and think about it. Specially when you apply the law of compound probabilities. According to the law of compound probabilities, with each detail in a prophecy the possibility of it being a coincidence is compounded. For example, if I say in the year 2001 one year from today it will rain, its a 50/50 cance, 1 in 2 that it will be fulfilled, if I add a detail like, it will rain and it will be a strong rain, then the compounded pobability is 1 in 4, add another detail, its one in 16, another detail its 1 in 32, add thirteen details I mentioned in this one prophecy, and the cance for accidental or coincidental fulfillment is beyond the realm of possibility! Because of this reason, other "prophecies" such as Nostradumus' are given with few particulars and in the most ambiguous and general terms. There is not a single instance of prophecy expressed in unequivocal language and to any minuteness which can claim the slightest fulfillment, except in the Bible.
This prophecy is so absolutely astounding, that scores of liberal scholars have tried to dismiss it by saying that it must have been written after the events happened, dating it to within the 2nd century B.C. around 167 B.C., only to be miserably stumped by the fact that when the Old testament was translated into Greek, into the Septuagint, the Book of Daniel and its prophecies had already been solidly established in the Hebrew Canon for hundreds of years, the Septuagint was translated in 200 B.C. This, plus both internal and external evidence that the book indeed dates to the 6th century B.C.
Sit back, truly digest this information divesting yourself of any preconceptions, equiping yourselves with uncompromising intellectual honesty and a strong desire to know the truth, and you will begin to see the hand of God in all of this.
A little food fo further thought:
Consider recent events in Israel and remember these prophecies:
"I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for the nations"
"I will bring all nations against Jerusalem"
"I will gather my people Israel from the North and from the East and from the West and from the South, and I will bring them back into their land"
Of the Arabic people:
"His hand will be agains t every man and every man's jhand will be against him"
These are my paraphrases, I will examine these more acuraely in the future. Next time, I will examine a mind blowing prophecy fulfilled through the ages to this day.
Well, I think thats enough for tonight!

Let me see if I understand your description of compound probibility or not.

If I were to predict that a ten year old girl with blond hair and blue eyes would walk along the detroit river while pellet snow blew from the west into her face while ice floated down the river at some point in the future. The odds against this event occuring would be over 2000 to one?

Let me count the details.
1. The person could be male of female
2. The person could be ten or some age other than ten.
3. The person could have blue eyes or not
4. The person could have blond hair or not
5. The person could be walking along the river or not
6. The person could be in Detroit or not
7. The weather could be snowy or not
8. The type of snow could be pellet or not
9. The direction of the wind could be from the West or not
10. The person could be walking to the West or not.
11. Ice could be floating down the river or not

2 to the 11th power is 2048

Despite this "fuzzy" math, the scenario I laid out will almost certainly happen with all 11 conditions being satisfied at some point in the future.

I could easily lay out another set of circumstances that would drive the theoretical odds up to 1 million to one or 1 trillion to one and yet have a scenario that is almost certain to be played out at some point.

If God wanted his existence to be proven it would have been done so far more clearly than this long ago.

If God does not want his existence to be proven, good luck proving it against his will.

If God does not exist at all, you can prove it all you want and it will be a false proof.

Refer to my logic in message: #22

It seems you need to do a lot of interpretation of Daniel's vision to make it so astounding.

"many shall run to and fro and knowledge shall increase"

Where does it say people will travel great distances at high rates of speed? Might this just as easily be a reference to a football game or a track meet? Doesn't knowledge increase over time in most civilizations. I think I could safely say that knowledge will increase over the next ten years.

Color me skeptical but these arguments don't do anything for me. And yes I did have several years of statistics training so I do understand compound probabilities. In fact, one of the more interesting statistics books ever written is titled "How To Lie With Statistics". It isn't very hard to "prove" anything with statistics.

If nothing else, I'm impressed by Alex's prolificacy (is that the right usage?) as a writer, and also Jared's ability to develop a statistical argument is such short order. Both of you please keep writing.

Alex--I'm not so sure we can rely on the histories we have about Alexander the Great. I believe the first history about him was written 300 years after he died. By then, much of Alexander's exploits were either myth or legend. Thus, you are using fuzzy history to substantiate even fuzzier prophecies.
Also, a recent documentary on public TV seemed to indicate that Alexander died quietly on his way back from India. His death was from the accumulation of his war injuries. But how can anyone know for sure after 2500 years?

Alex--Just to clarify. Sue didn't throw you off the '80 site. Rather, she just wanted you to move the abortion discussion elsewhere.

Everyone--I think the discussion on this site is interesting, but it would benefit from more voices. Could we promote it and link it from other AHS sites?

Alex, I can understand why it would be seem justifiable for some people to be executed. But I think life of an adult is worth more than that of a baby, no matter how criminal that adult is. An adult gains through his life an unmeasurable amount of knowledge and experience (just try writing down everything you know, every little detail of your life). Killing another person for the sake of "justice" amounts to nothing more than simple revenge. For example Timothy McVeigh is no doubt a horrible murderer, but I wouldn't execute him. He can tell us alot of the crime in question or anything related for that matter. We need to look at the situation intelligently and with gain from the experience, not be overtaken by emotions that demand revenge.

Add that to that the fact that a lot of cases are not so clear cut as to the guiltiness of the condemned to be executed.

Using religious arguments, didn't Jesus say not to judge others, and whoever is free of guilt to cast the first stone? How can you be so judgemental of others? Aren't we supposed to be forgiving instead?

Didar,

I don't know how you can say the life of an adult is worth more than the life of a baby. As a parent, if I were forced to choose between my life and that of one of my children, I wouldn't hesitate for an instant before putting myself in harms way.

To say a child is not valuable because it has not accumulated experiences ignores the fact that they have great potential. I might compare a one year old to a 90 year old and say it is like throwing out a new battery with 100% of life left with a battery that barely has any life left in it.

I agree that the Bible takes a dramatic turn from the Old Testament teachings of "an eye for an eye" to the New Testament teachings of Jesus of "turn the other cheek".

I'm not sure where I stand on the Death Penalty.

On the one hand, can we ever be so certain as to someone's guilt to take their life? In many cases there is not much doubt about guilt but there are always those unusual cases.

On the other hand, we can't very well take the risk of letting a likely killer roam the streets to kill again and lifetime incarceration is very expensive to society. Also in support of the Death Penalty is the potential for deterrence -- although I'm not convinced that people who kill are rational enough to think through the consequences.

From a practical standpoint, we could torture Tim McVeigh until he tells us all he knows and then kill him. Much more efficient than letting him sit in a cell until he feels like telling us about his crime.

Interesting points--- I would give my life for that of my children, but cannot say I would do that for all children. For me, my child's life is more valuable and precious than my own....but not necessarily the neighbor next door......

As for capital punishment, I am all for it....errors and all. Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. Maybe if we did it more, crime would go down. I am sure there are stats that can challenge either side...just my thoughts.

Edited by author 11-24-2000 06:10 PM
I hope you had a great Thanksgiving! Bummer, though, some of you don't have anybody to thank for your blessings... and certainly not the same One whom the Pilgrims thanked! That's ok, I'm doing my best to straighten you out!

Jared, your example and attempt to simplify the complexity of fulfillment of actual Biblical prophecy is flawed. You listed the details wrong. For your example to be used as a comparison or example of the fulfillment of details of Biblical prophecy you can not say, as you said: The person could be male or female, the person could be ten or some other age, the person could have blue eyes or not and so on, for your example to be correctly used, you would have to take the "could" the "or not" and the "some other" out of the details. Using your story as an example, the correct way to use compound probability as it relates to fulfillment of Biblical prophecy you MUST list the details as follows: The person must be a girl, she must be ten, she must have blue eyes, she must have blonde hair, she must walk along the river, she must be in Detroit, the weather must be snowy, the type of snow must be a pellet, the direction of the wind must be from the west, she must be walking to the west and ice must be floating down the river.
Now, if you make such prediction and it is fulfilled in such details, well then, you would not be an aetheist, you would be a prophet, provided you attach to the prediction the correct revelation of Who God is and a message to follow Him alone. And here is the thing, only the Bible has such detailed fulfillment of prophecy.

Da-a-ave! You have have perfectly exemplified the view of the value of human life that some have used to bring tremendous suffering on others. Human life is not valuable because of the knowledge they have accumulated, making adults more valuable than babies, human life is not even valuable because of the potential of learning, as Jared has postulated, that would mean mentally retarded individuals are not as valuable as others. This view of of the value of human life was succesfuly used by Hitler and his minions to exterminate about 12 million people. I worked for a short while as an assistant at the Paxton Home in Pennsylvania, and as I watched those mentally retarded people line up to eat, I was filled with indignation at those who actually took it upon themselves to eliminate them because they are not as valuable. The Founding Fathers of the United States knew what the source of the value of human life was when they wrote "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unelianable rights, that among these are life..." It is only after this conviction, that it is our Creator Who gives us life, only after this conviction was removed from the American conscience, that the American holocaust began and 40 million babies have been murdered and now they are going after the old people too. The value of human life is not founded on knowledge acquired, it is not founded on potential, the value of human life is founded on that it is human, just that, and on that it is God that made us and not we ourselves, and that this God put the stamp of His image on every one of us. The horrible monstruosity of partial birth abortion and of all abortion, lies in that babies are innocent and helpless, and a big ruthless bully violates the safety and comfort of the place where they are growing and mercilessly slaughters them.
     True, the Lord said to judge not lest ye be judged, but He didn't just say that, he went on to say, for you will be measured with the same standard. If I judge whats his name from Wisconsin who killed a bunch of young men, chopped them up in pieces, ate their flesh, kept their heads in the refrigerator and their chopped up bodies in some containers, if I pass judgement and say he ought to be put to death for that, and then I turn around and do the same thing, I kill a few people, chop them up, eat their flesh and bury their bodies in my back yard, I will be judged by the same standard, and God will make sure I pay up. That is what is meant by "judge not lest ye be judged".
God said, however, judge with righteous judgement, and, Dave, when somebody commits a horrible crime, it is not that I am judgemental of others, it is that that person who commits such crimes has passed judgement on himself. I do not agree that the Bible takes a dramatic turn from "an eye for an eye" to "turn the other cheek". the reason I do not agree with that is because when the Old Testament Law was given, "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" that law was given for the proper authorities to execute the judgement of "an eye for an eye". When Jesus adressed that Law and said to turn the other cheek, he was adressing the fact that people were taking that Law into their own hands, for personal revenge, rather than using the Law through the proper channel which is the Legal authorities. God did not change, and the Law didn't change, because in Romans we are told that the authorities are the ministers of God to execute judgement on the evil doers, that they do not carry the sword in vain, the sword, of course, is used to decapitate. So then, what Jesus is clarifying is that we can't use the "an eye for an eye" to avenge ourselves, for revenge belongs to the Lord and because revenge belongs to the Lord, we need to stand back and let the proper authorities carry out God's judgement, which is to use the sword for its intended purpose on the evil doers. If we did that swiftly, as soon as a criminal is found guilty, believe me, crime would definately go down. "Because sentence upon an evil deed is slow in coming, therefore the hearts of the sons of men are fully set in them to do evil" Its not that sentence does not come, it is that it is slow in coming, its that it takes 15 years to execute a rapist murderer. In fact, the slowness in execution has the opposite effect of deterrence, their hearts are fully set in them to do evil, and that, they recently found, is a psychological fact.
    I will share with you some more fulfilled prophecies when I come back, tat one about the city of Tyre is astounding (when you understand compound probability as it relates to fulfillment of Biblical prophecy correctly) Yes, I say we open this board to other classes as well!

Like you, I would not hesitate to give my life for my children, and it I suppose it would be hard to give it for other people's children. God's love towards us is shown in that while we were yet sinners, He gave His Only Son's life on the cross for the ungodly, so that you and I could have eternal life!... that is incomprehensible love!

Alex,

I think you misunderstand my point on a child having great potential. I did not say anything about potential for learning. I was speaking about potential for life. I don't measure the value of an individual in terms of their intelligence or capacity to learn. I don't even think older people are less valuable, I just think it is wrong to consider a baby to be less valuable. I also consider mentally retarded people to be valuable even if they are not "productive" in the traditional sense. Many live their entire lives in a state of perpetual childhood. Health permitting, that isn't a bad way to live life. I GREATLY resent your comparing my view of the value of human life with that of "Hitler and his minions".

As to compound probibility, you also misunderstand. My "prophecy" DOES require each condition to be met. The prase a person could be this or that is to show that each point compounds the probability by a factor of at least two". My point was that despite the calculation appearing to have very long odds, my "prophecy" would almost certainly be fulfilled.

Why would my prophecy be fulfilled, because the future is long enough, and because most weather conditions will occur in Detroit at some point in the future and many people including ten-year-old, blond, blue-eyed, girls walk along the river. Even if my prophesy were fulfilled I would continue to be an anthiest with a solid understanding of statistics.

"...we need to stand back and let the proper authorities carry out God's judgement, which is to use the sword for its intended purpose on the evil doers."

Are you suggesting that the sword was created by God's will to carry out His judgment on evil doers?

This sounds remarkably like the logic behind all kinds of Holy Wars!

Back in grade school, we learned about the power of chance. If you sit a monkey at a typewriter, and give it unlimited time, it will eventually type out the full text of ever book ever written.

Alex--Even though I have some appreciation for history, your accounts are difficult to follow. It seems one would have to be a PhD in ancient history to verify your facts, or to present viable arguments. Can we not get evidence of God which the simple "man on the street" can understand?

Jared, I stand corrected, I misunderstood your view concerning the value of human life, I would agree with you on that. Obviously, then, the conclusion that followed making a comparison between your view of the value of human life to Hitler and his minions would be in error, obviously there is no comparison. To that effect, Jared, the mention of Hitler even if you held the view as I misunderstood it would not mean I think or insinuate that you would feel the same way as he did, it simply would mean that that view was taken to its extreme consequence by Hitler. I humble myself before you and ask your forgiveness.

I guess we are understanding compound probability differently, the way you explain it, in my understanding, does not compound the probability, on the contrary, it generalizes it. In fact, as I read your explanation as to why your prophecy would be fulfilled I realize that that is precisely what sets aside Biblical prophecy from any other kind of prophecy. Extra Biblical prophecies are given in such general terms in order to have the highest chance of fulfillment. True, a blue eyed girl is bound to walk along side the river at some point. Biblical prophecy is not general, but specific, for example, the prophecy Imentioned before specifically said the 1st king of Greece would conquer rapidly and at the height of his power he would be out of the picture and his kingdom would be divided among specifically four of his generals. That is extremely specific, and a general prophecy of a blue eyed girl walking along the river can not even begin to compare.

Biblically, the authorities of a nation are ordained by God with an intended purpose: to do justly and to love mercy, and to execute judgement on the evil doers. He ordained the death penalty for that purpose. Government officials, wether they are aware of it or not, are the ministers of God for that purpose. Those in government have a responsability to carry out their duty ethically and morally and justly. People, however, often corrupt themselves when in power and abuse that power. The Founding Fathers, in fact, understood this and understood that when a ruler forsakes justice and morality, that ruler is no longer legitimately exercising authority, and therefore they found moral strength to declare independence. A "holy war" is altogether different from executing murderers for their crimes. If the Biblical teaching that God instituted the death penalty to punish evil doers, murderers specifically, is used to start a holy war, that is simply misusing for evil that which God intended for good.

Frank, your story about the monkey reminds me of another story. If I was to take a worm into a convention full of scientists and I said, "This worm is going to sprout legs and arms, grow a brain, turn into a human scientist put on a lab coat and join us in this convention." The people would laugh me out of that place and send me to the looney farm. Yet, if as the men in white begin to carry me away I shout,"Just give it a billion years!", they would then release me, give me the microphone and a thunderous applause. You see, for some strange reason a lot of people who realize something is totally impossible and absurd, if you give it enough time, then it may just happen, the absurd becomes even a fact in their minds at times. I do not believe any monkey would type out every book ever written given enough time, I don't even believe it would type just one book. Surely, if a monkey could type all the books ever written given unlimited time, surely, given 20 years it could type at least "Wuthering Heights" huh? That could be verified, but its not going to happen.

God has given us plenty of proof of His existence that all people can understand, in fact, that is why all people are without excuse according to the Bible. When you realize that behind every design there must be a designer, when you realize that even the most simple organism is highly complex, when you see tha there is intelligence behind the formation of the cycle of rain, or the working of the human eye, when you see that there is a purpose for a gnat to exist and for bacteria to live in your own body, you are supposed to recognize that all those things can not happen just by chance, that there is a Creator highly intelligent behind it all. But if you refuse to see the obvious, not even fulfillment of prophecy that you yourselves have witnessed, even within the last week, will convince you. You see, Frank, ultimately it is not a matter of the intellect although its a shamefully ludicrous myth that says that to be a man of faith you must be a man void of intellectual ability, ultimately it is a matter of the heart. I will continue to share at least a few more awesome fulfillments of prophecy, including some that you may verify now, but unless you open up your heart all the "proof" I can give you will not convince you. It boils down to this, I know that I know that God is alive because it is not that I espouse a religion, it is that I have a personal relationship. God lives and sees and hears and speaks, He communicates with those who love Him, He promises to be found by those who seek Him with all their hearts, He comforts in sorrow, He guides in confusion, He helps in trouble, He provides in need, He gives a purpose where there is no purpose, He provides deliverance where there is none, God is a Person as real as you and me, and He relates as a real person, He manifests Himself to those who love Him, and He is a friend to those who will humble themselves before Him. I have verified this in my life, after having thought for years those who spoke as I am speaking now were crazy, I have verified that God indeed lives and relates, I fellowship with Him every day. Ultimately, you must experience this for yourself, otherwise it will be, as it is, a bunch of nonsense to you. I do pray that He will help you guys open up your hearts. I will be back soon.

loya, relajate brother.

Alex--I say it the workings of nature are all too complicated not to have happened by chance.

And if God is responsible for all of this around us, why did he give us such a vague "Users Manual" which flagrantly omits the details of our physical world?

Perhaps your relationship with God is personal. It's unclear to me what it gains you. I have no such relationship. Yet, I am happy and successful. It seems, according to your teachings, that I might suffer after I die. Thus, it seems that faith is really about death.

A worm will convert to a scientist given enough time... Isn't that evolution?

Hey Dave! Apparently we are on line at the same time! What's up! Yeah, that is evolution, and the point is that what anybody knows is absurd, that a worm should turn into a scientist, all of a sudden becomes an intelligent possibility in the minds of many by simply adding the factor of time. But this is even more absurd when you realize that the second law of theromodinamics says that given time, things do not go from being simple to being complex,but, on the contrary, things go from being complex to being simple, everything decays and breaks down over time, so that a worm could not possibly evolve into a scientist given enough time, rather, a scientist will be eaten by worms eventually, unless he is mumified or cremated or something.

Frank, if I understand your statement correctly, that the workings of nature are all too complicated NOT to have happened by chance, in other words, because they are complex you believe, therefore, that it must be by chance that they happened and happen, all I can say is, your faith is greater than mine!

The Bible, I assume since you are adressing me, is vague concerning certain things and it omits many details of our physical world because it is focused on a specific purpose. The Bible is not a scientific book, it is not a book concerned with scientific questions, although it is accurate way beyond its time on the "scientific" statements it makes, a fact than in and of itself shows Divine Inspiration. For example, contrary to popular belief, the Bible teaches the earth is spherical rather than flat, it teaches it is suspended in space rather than being held on the backs of two gigantic turtoises, it teaches that human waste, for example, is a source of disease, that people must bathe and wash, that certain foods must be cooked to be healthy to eat and many other little "scientific" type of details. That sounds like nothing to you and I, but it was not till relatively recently that people found out that the Bible had been right all along. But the Bible's purpose is not to answer scientific questions, the Bible's purpose is to reveal God who created us, and to reveal Him, more than anything, as a personal God, a God who desires to have a relationship with us, that is why much of the Bible is the narratives of the lives of individuals who had a relationship with the living God. The Bible is supposed to show us, not that the elements of life are carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen etc. but that He Himself is the source of life and the giver of eternal life, the Bible is supposed to show us not that Jesus turned the water into wine by alteration of protons,but, rather, that Jesus turned the water into wine so that the bride and groom could rejoice on that happy day, the Bible's purpose is to reveal God as He is, the One God who is willing for us to have a relationship with Him, and to show us the obstacle to that relationship, sin, and the way, the only way to overcome that obstacle, Jesus Christ. I would not expect you to be clear on what my relationship with God gains me, you would have to be me, and the only way to find out what a personal relationship with Jesus Christ willgain you is by getting into that relationship. I can tell you that He is a Friend that sticks closer than a brother! Its a good thing that you are happy and succesful, it is not so good to fail to recognize that it is the Lord who gives us all good things to enjoy. One thing that a personal relationship with God gains people is that when tragedy comes, when pain and sorrow come, when happiness vanishes and success flies away, joy and peace remain. Sometimes happiness and success can become a major blinding cloud that makes it impossible for us to see God. If the Lord had given me what I desired more than life at the time of my conversion, I would have been so happy that I would have never seen my need for God. But God in His wisdom denied my hearts desire at that time, and by breaking my heart opened my eyes. It is good that He afflicted me that I may learn how to keep His precepts. And now, the Lord restored me, He has made me happy and succesful as well, but has given me a peace and joy that will remain regardless of my circumnstance. Because life is about knowing Jesus Christ, apart from Him in eternity there will be no joy but anguish. Faith is not about death, but death is an inevitable part of life and if we fail to recognize the Giver of life, then there remains no life apart from Him, which translates into anguish and darkness. It is in this life, however, that He gives us an abundance of life, and in the next life, life forever more and fulness of joy! I hope to see you all keep posting. I will come back wiwth a couple of, if notheing else, extremely interesting prophecies and their fulfillment.

Alex, frankly I have never read the bible with any depth but I would like to read the parts that say the Earth is spherical, and suspended in space, and about the human waste is a source of desease. Can you point out these parts to me?

I've been attending to a friend who is in the hospital with pneumonia. He's an old man, who fought in the Hungarian resistance during WWII, and then spent time in the Soviet Gulag. He came back to Hungary in 1948, only to suffer under the communists. He was wounded during the Hungarian revolution, but also took that opportunity to escape to Austria.
   My friend might survive this illness, but then he will return to his routine maladies of emphysema, heart desease, gout, and arthritis. It's not much fun it is to watch our friends and parents shrivel-up and eventually die. That same fate awaits all of us.
    What a glorious plan God has for our physical being during our stay on this planet!!!
    But actually, this fate might be forecast at the time of our birth. During birth, feces is often ejected from the mother's body along with the baby. All glory to man, made in the image of God!!!

Sue--Boy, are you cheerleaders pushy! Yet, in this case, I must concede that you are an excellent gamesman.

I will answer you on this site, so as not to scare away participation on the main class site. As you know, my appearance on the '80 site was simply an attempt to drum up additional voices for the "About God" forum, which I enjoy greatly. Would you somehow be comforted if you knew that a non-anonymous, less controversial self was already posting on a related forum?

In that case, would "we" be hiding from something?
   Hmmm....perhaps we would.

Actually, Frank, I'm much less pushy in person... Even less so, if I actually know who I'm addressing! As for your identity, you have given a few clues... I may figure you out yet! The game continues...!

Alex, I also am interested in the part in the bible where it says the earth is spherical. Weren't there people who were killed for their heretical thoughts and beliefs that the earth was not flat and/or not the center of the universe? As for the human waste issue, that one is a no brainer, not some religious revelation, fer cryin' out loud! Ancient communities the world over had figured that one out.

I don't think man had to do too much thinking about staying away from human waste. It is a biological/evolutionary issue. The smell is revolting, and we stay away.
(Unless this is like natural gas. It is odorless until man puts the smell into it, so that it can detected by humans. Could it be that God put the smell into the pooh-pooh to make it unpleasant?)

My guess is that Frank is Frank Meckel '79

Let me continue to try to put this into perspective. Following the Gulf War, there was great excitement on the part of both major political parties that Colin Powell, a "black" man, might be willing to be their Presidential or Vice Presidential candidate. In this latest election, several additional women were elected as U.S. Senators and State Governors. This has been considered significant by commentators, because these offices are springboards to the Whitehouse.

Thus, it seems that possible that a Black or a Woman could attain the Presidency in the near term future. But what about a person who is atheist? Could he/she make it to any high office in this country if his/her views were known?

I don't think so. We have had persons of many faiths in the Whitehouse. We recently dealt with Roman Catholics, Quakers, and Jews. But no atheist has even tried, nor would he be successful.

Frank, point taken. I won't push you any more to reveal your identity. You're just so well spoken that I'd like to know who you are!

So, let's get back to the topic at hand. Alex, you yourself said that the Bible "...is vague concerning certain things and it omits many details of our physical world because it is focused on a specific purpose." You then went on to say that "the Bible's purpose is to reveal God who created us." To me it seems perfectly reasonable that a belief in the Bible and a belief in evolution are not two mutually exclusive ideas as you propose. Is it not possible that science has revealed to us the truths that the Bible omits, while at the same time fulfilling its purpose that it reveals God? Why is it so difficult to admit that the men who wrote the Bible had a lesser understanding of the world than we do today? Does it shake your faith too much to even consider that anything in the Bible might not be true?

Sue--Please don't try to exploit the tender spot I have for AHS cheerleaders!

Today in my fourth grader's class, the parents of one of his classmates came in to discuss Jewish holiday traditions. My son was truly delighted by a game these parents showed to the class. It seems children want to learn about everything, including other beliefs, if only their parents will expose them.

Edited by author 12-16-2000 03:02 AM
Hello! "Have ye not known? Have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning?have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth? It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth..." Isaiah 40:21-22a
"circle- applicable to the globular form of the earth..." Jamieson, Fausset, Brown 'Commentary on the Whole Bible' p.559"

"He stretcheth out the North over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing" Job 26:7

Yes, people who would oppose the Roman Catholic view of a flat earth were burnt at the stake as heretics, as were those who read the Bible and believed it and those who translated it into the language of the common people. This shows that although they claimed to be Christians, they were not, but rather fulfilled the prophecy that Jesus spoke "... the time cometh that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service." John 16:2 But then Jesus goes on to describe why religious people act that way "And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father nor me." Jn.16:3 This statement should help you discern between true and false Christians, and why people have commited atrocities in the Name of Christ, because they have not known, have not had a relationship with the One True Living God.

I not only believe it is possible, but that it is a fact that science has revealed many truths that the Bible omits, in fact, I understand science has done so in fulfillment of the prophecy "...knowledge shall increase...". Since God said that knowledge would increase dramatically in the last days, it is no surprise that the people of the Bible had a lesser understanding of many things in the world than we do. There is no disagreement here. I also believe that knowledge of the natural order indeed reveals God, as even the Bible says it does "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" Romans 1:20 Where people fail miserably today is in seeing the invisible God through the things which He has made, that clearly reveal Him. The more we know of the intricacies and complexities of the natural world, the more we should be able to see and believe in God, but people supress this knowledge in unrighteousness, the Bible says.

Some people do not see a contradiction between belief in evolution and belief in the Bible and creation, they simply believe the means God used to create life is evolution. I would have to disagree, however, because the two views are mutually exclusive. One claims we come from a lower organism, the declares we are made in the image of God, one claims organisms went through many different stages, the other declares organisms were created after their kind from the beginning, one claims we exist by accident without a real purpose, the other declares we exist by design, for and with a purpose, one claims we have no more value than a stone, the other declares we are worth the blood of the Son of God, one claims there is no right and wrong, the other declares there is a standard, one claims there is not such thing as sin, the other declares that we need to have our sins frgiven. The evidence shows overwhelmingly that Creation is indeed what happened, where as macro-evolution happened only in the minds of some who did not want their sexual mores disturbed. The bible declares of itself that it is not just a book, it is THE Word of God, as such there is nothing in the Bible that is not true, rather, there are things that people fail to understand.

When I moved to San Antonio right out of the U.S. Marines I left my few possesions at the airport and went out looking for an apartment. I found one by a street called "Bandera Road", which is a great distance from the airport. As I was walking up the street I prayed "Lord, I need a ride to the airport and then I need a ride to the apartment" As soon as I finished praying a car which had been coming down the street in the opposite direction turned around, went across the parking lot I was walking through and stopped infornt of me. The guy rolled down his window and said, "Do you need a ride?" I told him,"Well, I need to go to the airport and then I need a ride back" the guy said, "Hop in, I'll take you" So this stranger took me all the way to the airport, waited for me to get my stuff, and then took me all the way back to the apartment! And all the while he was asking questions about the Lord because the Jehova's Witnesses had confused him concerning the identity of Jesus.

Recently after I had moved on campus at the Bible college while I was staying in a trailer on campus before moving into the dorms, a Christian aqcuaintance had no job and no money. I gave him half of my food and half of my money and said, "The Lord will provide." Soon, I ran out of food and I ran out of money. That night I got on my knees and prayed, "Lord, give me twenty dollars, Lord, just to make it till next pay check." The day after the next day I walked into my little trailer and I sawe an envelope on the kitchen counter. The envelope had written on it "Alex. (I hope I got the right one)" that is, the right Alex. I opened the envelope and inside of it I found a note that said
"The Lord woke me up last night and said I was to give you a blessing", and there was $100 in it! I fell on my knees and raised my hands to heaven and worshiped God, and I felt so unworthy! As it turned out, some lady I had met only one time very briefly, just for a few minutes, like about six months earlier, the Lord woke her up the night I prayed "Lord, give me twenty dollars to make it to next pay check." as I was praying and told her to give me a financial blessing. She looked all over the place for me because she didn't know where to find me, finally, somehow, she got to the Bible college and somebody told her "Well, there's an Alex staying in that trailer".

Everybody in my platoon knew I used to literally "walk by faith". Wherever I would go I would just begin to walk and trust the Lord for a ride, and somebody always stopped to give me a ride without me asking, and it always turned out to be a born-again Christian or somebody who was really wanting to know about the Lord. One day I don't know what happened after morning formation so that nobody had a ride from the barracks to the shop (the place where our equipment was)and we didn't have a way to get there. Lcpl. Otto, knowing about my walk, said, mockingly,"Hey Loya, why don't you ask the Lord for a ride for all of us?" I said, "OK". A few minutes went by and no ride, then I rmembered I had to mail something the Lord wanted me to mail that day, Otto said, with a smirk, "What happened?" infront of everybody. I told him "The Lord was waiting for me to get the box I gotta mail" I went into my room in the barracks, as I walked out with the box, a big truck pulled over being driven by a born again Christian I knew from a different platoon, he jum,ped out the truck and said, "Ya'll jump in! I was just laughin and told Otto and them "See, the Lord was waiting for me to get my box!" All of them could not look at me in the eye, they all were looking down on the ground full of conviction.

One day crossing the border into Mexico on foot there were thousands of people, and a long, long, long line to get through. The Mexican border guards asked me for a bribe to let me cut through without having to wait hours to go through all that big crowd to get across into Mexico. I refused to bribe them saying "I love Jesus, I don't believe its God's will for me to bribe you." They kind of took offense and said that I was just gonna have to go through all that huge crowd. I looked discouragingly at the hundreds and hjundreds of people infront of me, when,all of a sudden, this total stranger all the way up to thvery front of the line starts waving his hand at me holding a ticket in his hand, with a big smile. I went to see what he wanted, and he, smiling, not saying a word, pushed that ticket into my hand. It was a ticket to get through, so I walked right through without having to wait and without having to bribe anybody. The guards who had asked me for a bribe just looked at me as I walked passed them with a totally confused look on their faces!

Question: Somebody read these again and explain how they happened, please.

Hi Alex, glad you answered my specific question regarding about the Earth being round and suspended in space, I will check on it carefully but alas, I have a grave feeling its case rests largely on semantics...

As to your question: "Somebody read these again and explain how they happened, please" - I have to say that life itself is amazingly full of coincidences, just look at what happened to me with Joe Cadena from the class of '77. We don't know each other yet we have residence in McAllen Texas. I put up a website, which you all know by now, he finds it somehow, and puts a message there, saying he is from McAllen (its still there, check it out) I reply suggesting we meet. We meet in McAllen at an Applebee's, his brother from our class Michael Cadena, who is also very religious and is in fact in Mexico preaching too, was there. We had a good time, sharing yearbooks etc. Next time I see him was at the airplane travelling to REynosa six months later. By absolutely sheer coincidence (a miracle you say?) we were seated right next to each other. I say to him: "hey aren't you Joe Cadena from American School?" he said: "aha, yeah" (I suspect he already had actually noticed me, but like me, was not sure if it was really me, incredelous to the incredible the coincidence that was taking place before our own eyes, besides he had already experienced an incredible mini reunion with his classmates)

In conclusion? Life is full of amazing coincidences, the mind just needs to OPEN up, and to fill up with previous knowledge and experiences, to realize just how seemingly coincendental our life is. Believing in God, miracles, etc, can open your mind this way which is great. What is not so great is that you COMMIT to a belief because of this instead of just be taken away by the wonder of your open mind.

On Friday afternoon, I was sitting in my bank here in the deep south, waiting to talk with my loan officer. I picked up a news magazine from the table, and began to leaf through it. The magazine was not one that I subscribe to, and it was dated early November. But something caught my eye. It was a letter to the editor written by my fifth grade teacher from back in New England. I hadn't seen or heard of him since my family moved from there some thirty years ago.

Throughout my life, I have included this man on the list of the five adults who had the most impact on my development. He was the one who taught me how to think critically. He forced us to truly evaluate what we were seeing or hearing.

Now, I plan to contact him to tell him some of these things.

But what about this coincidence? He is such an important man in my life, and I have not seen him for thirty years, yet I am reconnected to him in such a strange way. And for the purposes of this "About God" discussion, the things he taught me about rational thought processes have solidified my defenses against blindly accepting religious doctrines.

To continue this as I drink my Saturday Morning coffee.

There have been times in my life when I have "gone out of my way" to help a stranger. There have been times in my life when I have received help from strangers. Certainly, if I and driving down the road and see someone I recognize, I'm likely to stop and talk, especially if they appear to need help. This all seems to be human nature. I'm still hopeful that man is basically "good."

It also seems that the incidence of coincidence is increased by knowledge and/or curiousity. For example, suppose you live in a city far removed from your high school. Suppose your high school classmate's cousin lives two houses from you. That is a coincidence. But if you never talk to that neighbor, you may never know about the coincidence. And even if you find out, this is no evidence of divine intervention. Both you and this classmate's cousin certainly followed very rational paths to get to your present location.

Reminds me about a web site/data base someone was designing a couple of years ago. It was formulated on the premise that everybody in the country is just three people removed from everybody else. i.e. "you know somebody who knows somebody".

In closing, I believe intellect and information could explain most "coincidences."

Da-a-a-a-a-ve! and Frankie...Just right off the bat, there is a fundamental difference between your coincidences and mine, mine happen in answer to specific prayer, and I would guess mine happen a lot more often since I ask. I'll be back.

Alex, a couple of things...

So a belief in evolution precludes a sense of right and wrong? Excuse me, but that is Bull! You yourself have said that your father was one of the most moral men you knew, Atheist that he was! On top of that, there are plenty of people who call themselves Christians, who believe in the theory of evolution. (Although I suppose by your definition, they would be false Christians.)

As for your your prayers being answered, I have no doubt that you prayed, nor that you believe that your prayers were answered. Sincerely, what a wonderful experience for you. However, there are a considerable number of devout Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, and others who pray with the same conviction as you, whose prayers are also answered. Are their answered prayers simply coincidences since they are not praying to the right God? Explain how those prayers are answered!

How come Alex doesn't have any help in this Forum? My sense of fair play is being challenged. It's four against one.

Alex--where are your allies? Certainly you are not the only christian person in our larger community that feels strongly about these matters.

Edited by author 12-28-2000 09:11 AM
Deep Breath------O.K. Frank, I have to agree with Alex on a few points, though we differ on others. I hope I can be respectful of each persons view point and expect the same in return. It is with reluctance that I lay a few deep felt beliefs on the line, and hope for gentle responses in return. I'll Say I admire Alex's deep faith in Christ, and his relationship. I also admire his courage to speak up and even risk his life for his beliefs. I also have a deep faith in the divinity of Jesus Christ, and have a lot of peace in my life because of it. I also appreciate Sue's comments on how the prayers of many people, of many religions are answered. I believe that we all have one Father no matter what we call his name, and that He loves us all. Why wouldn't He answer the sincere prayers of all of His children as long as they are living up to the light they have been given so far. None of us has been given the total picture in this mortal life, so why would a loving Father condem us for that? I'm a mother of 7 children, and I try to respect the comments, and needs of my 4 year old as well as the comments and needs of my more enlightened 19 year old. Would God being Good, do any less? I beleive that all the pain and confusion in this world will be sorted out in the end. Soooo....., why all the pain and confusion if the first place? I believe that the only way we can be truly happy, is to choose it for ourselves, and that requires free agency. The free agency of billions of people will surely clash with each others. I feel that this is part of Gods plan, because, then we really have to make some tough choices. We can learn to be happy, and at peace even though others around us are being very hateful. There are stories of those in concentration camps who have chosen to love and serve, in spite of the hate and abuse they were enduring. If a person can learn to have peace in those circumstances, none can take it away in this life or in the life to come. Of course we don't all have to submit to that particular trial, but, we all suffer in one way or another. I know the times I have foccused on anger and vengence, have brought me sorrow, and the times I have let go and turned the other cheek I have felt peace and happiness. I also believe that the physical trials of disaster, death, and illness, also test our ability to make choices, and hopefully choose peace, instead of bitterness. Of course, some suffer more than others, due to no fault of their own. I firmly believe that those who have been given much are expcted to help all they can, and that in the end "The first shall be last and the last shall be first." Now, don't get me wrong, I don't believe that God is a God of "Anything goes". I believe he expects order and unity in His Kingdom just as we strive for it in our homes. I just believe there is time in this world and in the next to sort it all out. I believe God is just and will give all a fair chance to really know what they are choosing.
     About Abortion: I feel, that too little is said about the mothers emotional suffering as a result of abortion. Even though I believe that a women should be able to prayerfully choose that option in cases of rape, or if her life was in danger, I'm not sure I could ever make that choice. An example close to my heart: Eight years ago, when I was 4 months pregnant, I was told that my baby would die soon after birth. I was encouraged to have an abortion so that I could avoid the emotional pain of the pregnancy, and birth. Some of my doctors acted, as though the baby wasn't really a baby, because he couldn't live outside the womb. Well, I couldn't think of anything more emotionally painful than to make the choice to end my childs life right away. The Drs. didn't understand this reasoning, saying the end result was the same, so it couldn't make any difference. To me there was a huge difference. It was my child, and I wanted to do everything I could for him. I admit it was a difficult pregnancy, and it was hard watching, him die, but I am at peace. I don't think I would be to this day, if I had made the other choice. I feel bad that abortion is touted as a good thing for women, and some may accept this opinion without really consulting their own heart.
     Well, thank you for your respectful consideration of my beliefs. I must say that I have enjoyed the discussion, but it is a scary step to get involved. Hey Jared, by the way, I don't consider you a black sheep at all. :). Joe and I have always respected your honesty in expressing the way you feel. Love to you all! Linda

Linda--I certainly appreciate your venture into this forum, though your arrival brings a tinge of red to my cheeks --I admit to feeling a bit voyeuristic while looking at so many photos of you on Didar's site--. Ah, the beauty and energy of youth (Class of '75 had a fun discussion about aging a while back. Mostly the guys, though).

I don't think anyone in this discussion is trying to be hateful. I really believe we would all like to understand "the other side," and we welcome all viewpoints.

Your description of an all-encompassing, benevolent god is what a god should be. Yet so many "christians" believe that one can only go to heaven if he follows a specific path. Calvinists believe that everything is predetermined--that no matter what one does on this earth, god has already chosen whether or not a particular soul is going to heaven. Mormons believe in God and Christ, but are scorned by "mainstream" christian sects.

Being on the outside and looking in at all these doctrinal melees, I have often said, "when you christians get your act together, I might start to listen to what you have to say."

It was not clear from your text whether "free agency" could lead someone AWAY from God and Christ. Could one have peace and happiness in their life without God and Christ?

I'll comment on abortion next time.

Linda--thanks--and stay with us.

We are overwhelmed by the generosity of you Notherners, but truly, enough is enough. You can keep the cold weather to yourselves from now on.

****
About abortion:
Linda--I know about the emotional impact of abortion on women. But in some cases, there is also an impact on men. Take the case of a former girlfriend of mine. For the longest time, I suspected that she might have aborted my child not long after she terminated our relationship. And that tore me apart, for I loved her, and would have loved the child.
   Still, apparently something wasn't right for her, and if she indeed had an abortion, then that was her choice.
   Linda, your seven children and my three children were brought into this world within the structure of a stable marriage. I am amazed at the dedication and energy it takes to be a good parent. And it really takes both parents--a mother and a father-- to get it right.

   As a young person growing up, I was familiar with the circumstances of perhaps a dozen abortions. I helped finance some, and for some I provided transportation. For most, I simply offered information and support. Whether the girls involved were in high school or college, as we discussed the situations back then, it just didn't seem that it would be smart to bring a child into the world. The timing was wrong. The girls were all single, with no promise of anything more. Lives would be interrupted. Families would be scandalized.

   All these obstacles probably could have been overcome, but that's where "choice" comes in. Linda, as I read your defense of your courageous decision to bring your problem pregnancy to term eight years ago, it seemed you were making a very powerful argument for a woman's fundamental right to control her own body.

***

Happy New Year to everyone!! May we continue our discussions in this new millennium.

Finally, a quiet moment! Frank, thanks for your gentle welcome to the chat, and have you considered buying a sled? Thats how I cope:)
  About your previous comments: Obviously free agency can lead a person away from Christ and God. And you yourself said you were happy with your life without that belief. I think we all can build a life of contentment without God. I just believe that God would like to give us more than what we can build for ourselves. I've experienced both kinds of happiness, and they don't really compare.

Also, as long as God has His act together, us Christians, don't really have to agree on every doctrine. That is part of the process of free agency. We are all in a learning curve, but occasionally I meet someone who has become very Christlike, and amazing. I believe that just as we parents treat our children as individuals and help them with their own unique needs and strengths, God works with us one soul at a time.

Frank, at the time I decided to carry my sick baby to term, I felt I was nurturing my baby, not controlling my body. My body actually went through more than it ever has before or since, and the whole thing felt very much out of control. Still, no regrets. God found me in my moment of despair, anger, fear, and doubt, and by turning control over to him, I was given something incredible.


Take Care all. Linda

Don't those Bangerters write so well on either side of these issues? And they respond so quickly. Heck, I've really got to think about this stuff before I comment.

****

My old Hungarian friend died yesterday. They finally pulled the respirator out, and he passed away quickly. Really, I'm pretty angry, because I don't think he wanted most of the invasive measures that were used to keep him alive for most of the last few weeks. He had a Living Will, but apparently he made some last minute indication to his physician that he wanted all possible measures. I'm not sure what to believe at this point, but one thing seems clear. A Living Will that is made by a person "of sound mind" who is NOT under duress, can so easily be revoked by that same person even if he is incompetent, and under duress.

Linda - Your post makes me realize just how incredible is the *power* of women have over life. In short, women can decide when and if to start life or to abort it if they think for whatever reason its not worthwhile.

No wonder us men are so afraid! (and religiously try to control it)

I understand your reason why you let life take its course when the doctors (Men, I can almost bet) told you it was futile. Its clear you suffered alot when your baby died, but maybe you (and your baby) would have probably suffered a lot less if you had aborted before it would born. I know, sometimes life has strange twists (is it God?) and tests you to see how far you are willing to go. But how I see it its just really a lack of knowledge or trust. The doctors know its futile. You mistrust the doctors and so on. Maybe if they were women it would have been different, who knows?

The more I think about it, the more I am convinced men should just stay out of any kind of participation in gynocological matters. Its a whole subject we will never understand, alas.

Frank - I agree with you about the Living Will. Recently my father of 74 years, in a very serious tone asked me that if he was ever in a situation like your Hungarian friend, that I would gulp down hard and simply pull the plug. He believes in living and loves living, but it has to be quality living, not quantity (more time). I swear I would do it even if that means jail, its the least I can do for him. I wish I had the courage to will the same now, but I am not too sure myself, maybe later, when I am older... Again, its a matter of courage. Does God admire courage?

Hello David. Thanks for your comments. Actually, it was a women Dr. that gave me my baby's prognosis, and suggested that the end result would be the same. She had the same opinion as yourself; that it would be easier for me to end it right away. I feel that she like yourself, was speaking not only out of logic, but compassion. As the tears began to roll down my cheeks, she too wept as she quickly left the room. (The baby by the way did not suffer). However, my experience was far from futile. As my other children went through the process with my husband and I. They learned in a very profound way how much we value and cherish our children. They know we love them, no matter what; even with all their imperfections. When they saw how much we value life and each other, they suddenly had more love and respect for each other. From my perspective, again, the experience was far from futile. It was life changing in a spiritual way that I have already alluded to. However, strictly from a psycological point of view, it was very helpful to carry my baby full term. Jared and his family were living near us at the time, and were very helpful with childcare, and emotional support. Even though Jared doesn't believe in God, I think he knew how important it was for me to be able to nurture my baby the only way I could. (correct me if I'm wrong about that Jared) He reached out to me with understanding and compassion that I will never forget. My point is that I healed emotionally, much more quickly because of that decision. (I latter learned, through some research, that studies show this to be the case.) Oh Yea. David, please don't stop trying to understand the womens perspective about these things. We need the support.

Frank, I'm sorry to hear of the suffering of your friend. You are in my thoughts. Linda

Linda--You've shared alot with us about a very difficult time in your life, and again, I believe your decisions were courageous. My only reservation would be if your own health had been in jeopardy. So many depend upon you.

****

My old Hungarian friend almost took one secret to his grave. For the ten years I've known him, he told me his first wife died of cervical cancer in the mid 1960s. His other friends heard the same story.

Well, he lied. While going through his papers, I found his wife's name and address. She's alive and well and living in New Orleans. I had a nice talk with her last week. (Sort of like talking with a ghost!) Turns out she dumped him back then for pretty legitimate reasons.

I guess it was either great pain or embarrassment that compelled him to lie to us for all these years. Perhaps it was an emotional defense mechanism. Probably, most of us have deep, dark secrets we would rather not reveal.

****

Alex--Where are you? This is your discussion.

Frank, no my life wasn't in danger. My Drs. assured me of that. Linda

Hi!

Looks as though Alex may be back soon. He had misplaced the link to this page, so I gave it to him.

I thought you might find this article interesting. A recent survey of religions has been released, which tallies the numbers of people who are Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Atheists, etc. in the world. Some interesting comparisons between the numbers in 1900 to those in 2000.

http://www.salon.com/books/wire/2001/01/18/religions/index.html

Linda, thanks for your postings. I've enjoyed hearing your perspective.

Sue--thanks for that great link. Recently, I was poking at christians in one of my messages. "When you christians get your act together, then maybe I'll listen to what you have to say!" Now, when I said that, I was aware of a multitude of Christian sects, but really had no informed clue as to how many there really were. I suppose I would have guessed maybe 1000 different sects. Linda responded quite well in explaining the diversity.

But my gosh! There are 33,820 christian denominations! How can a message be so flexible (or muddled) that it can have 33,820 interpretations?

The other interesting fact in the link was the growth in the numbers of non-believers world wide. I really would like some detail about the United States alone, because I think this number may be distorted by people from communist states like the China and the former Soviet Union. Here in the U.S., I sense that atheists are few and far between.

Which may eventually lead me to a new topic of being "unequally yoked."

For the sake of intellectual argument, let me try to turn these statistics into a question. And I would like someone to attempt a serious answer.

Suppose I awoke one morning and said "Today I am going to find some religion. I believe God exists, and I want to know how best to worship him."

As a responsible, educated individual, I believe I should evaluate all options available to me. How would I begin to wade through the 33,820 christian denominations? After all, each of these groups would have clergy and elders who would say that their perspective was the correct way to worship God.

How would you christians advise me in this matter?

Frank,
    Each denomination probably has a lot of truth in it. Don't you find it amazing that so many, are so touched by the life of Jesus Christ? I think the unifying message is that we are loved so much, that Christ suffered for us, and he would have us accept that gift and in turn love others. Of course there are true followers of this principle in every denomination. There are yet others in each denomination who don't quite get that yet. This is part of the process of individual growth.
   If the theoretical you, who believed in God, really wanted to know Gods will for you, well then, you could ask God for guidance. Maybe God builds upon the truth, and increases the blessings we already have, as we are willing, and ready to accept it.(again there is alot of free agency involved here.)

     "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him."
 
                       James 1:5
              (King James Version of The Holy Bible)

Yo Frankie! Yo Frankie! I finally found my way back! Thanks to Sue who came to the rescue! I was lost in Cyber Space! Just like that old T.V. show! Or, was that "Lost in Space"? Anyway! I'm very happy to be back! Bummer its so late, I could engage in some more prolific discussion, for now let me just perhaps shed some light on the number of Christian denominations. It is alright that Christians should have differences of opinion and differences of interpretation in certain areas, God does not make Christians with a cookie cutter! The Word of God itself anticipates that Christians will disagree at times and tells us to avoid arguments about itself, since arguments gender strife. The Apostle Peter mentions that Paul's writings are at times difficult to be understood, and Paul, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, says that at this point in life our understanding is limited by our mortality and inperfection. One day, God promises, those of us who believe in Him, Jesus, will exchange this mortal body for an immortal one, and this corruptible body for an incorruptible, on that day, we will understand and know fully, even as we are fully known. Until that day, Christians will continue to differ on different things and until then Christians should avoid arguing about their different views of Scripture in order to avoid strife. Having said that, Augustine, one of the greatest theologians, said something very wise many years ago, he said "In things essential, unity, in things non-essential, liberty, and in all things, love" All these different denominations of Christians disagree on what iare known as "non-essential doctrines", but it is truly remarkable how all these differing groups are in one accord when it comes to what are known as "essential doctrines". Pentecostals, Baptists, Presbyterians and so on and so forth may disagree on, for example, speaking in tounges, wether miracles are still operational today, they may disagree on the correct "formula" for baptism, wether a person can be lost again after having been saved, they may disagree on church government and many other things, but all of them will agree in that Jesus Christ is God manifested in human flesh, they will agree that slavation comes by faith alone, they will agree that Jesus died for our sins etc. All Christians agree on the essential doctrines although they may disagree on the non-essential. Essential meaning the things that are essential to believe for a person to be able to be saved from eternal separation from God's love and mercy. True, there will be those groups who will claim to be Christian that will disagree on essential doctrine, but those groups are known as "pseudo-Christian cults", in other words, they are not truly Christian although they may think and claim that they are. How do you discern what is essential doctrine, well, essential doctrine boils down to what we believe about Jesus Christ, who He is, HIs nature and His work. Jesus asked Peter "Who do you say that I am?" and He said to some non-believers "Unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sin." You see, Jesus, and the Bible as a whole, place Jesus Himself at the center of salvation, just like He is the center of time itself. The Bible teaches that the eternal God of the Old Testament, manifested Himself in Jesus Christ, it is impossible to be saved if we believe there are many gods, if we believe we are god ourselves, if we do not believe He is God, you will find that pseudo-Christian cults will differ in their opinion of who Jesus is, some say He is Michael the archangel, others say He is the spirit brother of Satan, and Jesus said "Who do you say that I am" and Peter answered "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God!" and Jesus said "Blesssed are you, Simon Bar Jona, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you but my Father who is in heaven." Jesus identity is at the crossroads of salvation and of who is indeed a true born again believer or a non-believer. All Christians will agree, regardless of their denomination, that Jesus is indeed the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Pseudo-Christians will disagree, and they will use language that is similar but that will have different meaning than what it actually means, they will agree in saying "red" with you, but while you are thinking true red, in their minds red is what in your mind is blue. All Christians agree on the essentials, which is remarkable. Alright, I will be back soon.
Let me invite all of you to listen to my radio show, I am teaching a series on what is known as the "Trinity" which has to do with God's nature as revealed in the Bible, I'd get a kick out of eliciting some questions from you in regards to the content of the radio shows. I also have some pictures there of the crusades I held in Pakistan, Here's the Link
http://www.sermonaudio.com/alexloya

Hugs to all!

Alex--Welcome Back to your discussion, and congratulations. Your newest post was the most plain-spoken one I've read from you.

To help me better respond to the last two posts, I need some better definitions. You listed a few examples of christian denominations as Pentecostals, Baptist, Presbyterians. What about Catholics? Are they Christians?

Can you give me some examples of "pseudo-christian" cults?

What about Muslims? They apparently believe in your same God. For that matter, so do Jews. Will the members of these two major faiths make it to heaven?

Edited by author 01-24-2001 04:46 PM
Hey Frank, you're not trying to stage a debate between Alex and I are you? :) Alex already mentioned those who he believes to be pseudo-christian in an ealier message. I imagine that both Alex and I could hold our own, in a debate about Biblical Doctrines, but my feeling is that, that is not very productive or helpful to anyone. As Alex himself just said: arguments engender strife. On the other hand, I do believe that sharing perspectives out of love is worth while, and I assume Alex feels the same. I do love Jesus Christ, and I believe he is my Savior. I believe John 13:35 which says: "By this shall men know, ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." This is not something I do perfectly, but I feel this, is worth my energy. With Love, Linda
 Questions? Comments? Write me at: joehaynie@writeme.com

Linda and Alex--I am not intentionally trying to cause any strife. Rather, I am trying to clarify the situation -- if only in my own head. Everyone keeps talking about a pure, glorious message that comes from God thru Christ. And yet, your christian sects denounce each other. Some even shoot each other. (which can somehow be explained or justified through biblical quotations).
Will you at least acknowledge that it might be a bit confusing to someone like myself? It seems you are suggesting that I should disregard all the turmoil that I CAN see amoung christians, and to accept a message and God whom I CANNOT see!

I will research Alex's earlier posts about pseudo-christians.

Frank, I'm all for you trying to clarify the situation. I think its valuable to seek peoples perspectives. I have just learned that it doesn't help to do it in a debate type situation. When I entered the chat, it was with the intention of supporting Alex in what we did agree on, and sharing some personal perspective, not in trying to prove or disprove anything. I think its great for you to keep asking Alex for his input, and if you are really interested in more of mine, I again invite you to write me. That way you can ponder and evaluate the viewpoints you are interested in, in a more productive forum. As you yourself pointed out, the turmoil between Christians is not admirable, and I know Christ is not pleased with it. Again, he allows us complete free agency. I am not offended by Alex speaking his mind plainly, because I believe it is out of sincere concern. Again, (about people shooting each other) not all Christians will have their act together at the same time, It is God who has His act together. That is why if you did believe in God, or even wanted to believe, I would hope you would ask HIM for guidance, as well as your less perfect brothers and sisters. Truly, take care of yourselves. Linda

Edited by author 01-27-2001 02:09 AM
Frank, as I mentioned before, the identity of Jesus Christ is at the center of your question, as the saying says, in this case, Jesus IS the answer! What sets aside true Christians from pseudo-Christians and from every other religion is what they believe about who Jesus Christ is. Again, Jesus asked the disciples "Who do you say that I am?"
A pseudo-Christian would disagree in regards to what the Bible teaches about Jesus' Nature and work. Again, Jesus said, "Unless you believe that I am he, you will die in your sin." so that if a person does not believe what the Bible teaches about Jesus, that person will not be saved. And what does the Bible teach about who Jesus is? Well, Micah 5:2 and John 8:58, as well as John 1:1,14 and many other passages teach that Jesus has lived from eternity past, is the One who inhabits eternity, Isaiah 6 with John 12:37-41 teach that Jesus is God who sits on the heavenly throne, Zecharia 12:10 and Psalm 22 along with John 1:10 and Matthew 27 teach that Jesus is the God who created all things and that was crucified for the sin of His people (These Old Testament Scriptures are specially remarkable prophecies because of two facts: Psalm 22 describe death by crucifixion 500 years before that particular method of execution was invented by the Romans, and 1000 years before Christ was crucified, and because Zecharia 12:10 described execution by crucifixion around the time that it was being invented by the Romans although crucifixion was never the Jewish method of execution. In Zech. 12 the God of the Old Testament says that His people, the Jews, will one day crucify Him, and will eventually recognize Him as the One they crucified) Hebrews 1 clearly teaches Jesus is not an angel etc. So, as an example, the Bible teaches that Jesus is God and has always been God, that He has always lived and existed, that He is the creator of all things, that He is the ruler of the Universe, that He is the One and only God. And Jesus said "Unless you believe that I am he, you will die in your sin." Now, the Mormons, although they are very nice people and may do a lot of good things, believe that God is an exalted man like you and me, they believe that Jesus was just a man who earned His divinity, they believe He is the Spirit brother of Satan etc. the Jehovah's witnesses deny that Jesus is God, they believe that Jesus is Michael the archangel etc. because these groups disagree concerning Jesus' identity and nature, disagree with passages such as the ones I just mentioned, they are outside the pale of orthodoxy, and outside Jesus' statement concerning the basis of eternal salvation "Unless you believe that I am he, you will die in your sin." Now, I believe there are true born again Christians within the Catholic church, although much of its doctrine is in opposition to the Word of God and because of it many within it may be decieved into perdition. For example, when a woman in the Gospels said to Jesus "Blessed is the mother who gave you birth" Jesus responded "Blessed rather are those who hear the Word of God and obey it." And when in another passage some people told Jesus "Your mother is outside waiting for you..." Jesus answered "who is my mother?... those who hear the Word of God and obey it, they are my brothers and sisters and mother." The bible says that Mary offered a sacrifice according to Jewish law for her sin, it says that she acknowledged God was her Savior from sin, it says that Jesus was her firstborn and that she had other children and normal sexual relations with her husband Joseph after the birth of Christ, yet the Catholic Church teaches that Mary is to be acknowledged in prayer, it teaches that she was sinless, it teaches that she was a perpetual virgin, it teaches that she partook in man's salvation all these things in direct and open contradiction to explicit statements of the Word of God like the examples I mentioned. The muslims believe that Jesus is one of many prophets, which belief Jesus specifically identified as insuficient for salvation, they do not believe He is the Son of God, and much less that He is God manifested in the flesh... and Jesus said "Unless you believe that I am he, you will die in your sin." As you can see by these brief examples, these religious groups disagree with a doctrine that Jesus said is essential to salvation, and therefore they are identified as pseudo-Christian or pagan. Yet I had the priviledge in October of leading about 1100 Pakistanis to Christ, many of whom were Muslim and Hindu, to the Lord be the glory, so that God's arm is not too short that He can not save, truly, He will save any man, regardless of religious background, that is truly desirous to know Him, by sending someone to tell them about Jesus Christ. Another very important thing you will find that these groups have in common is that they ascribe Divine authority to other than the Bible, the Mormons have "the Pearl of Great Price" "the Book of Mormon" and two other "holy" books, the Jehovah's witnesses have the "Watchtower" publications, the Catholics have tradition and Papal utterances, the Muslims have the Koran etc. As to the Jews, well, Jesus Himself in His human nature was a Jew, Paul was a Jew, all the apostles and prophets were Jews, all the first Christians were Jews and today many Jews are beginning to recognize Jesus as Yeshua ha Mashiach, as their Jewish Messiah. As the Word of God says, "Salvation is of the Jews", it is those of us who are Gentiles by nature who were grafted into the Vine, the Jews are the natural branches.
Frank, and all of you, the messages I have posted on my website deal specifically with your question, listen to the messages entitled "The Mark of a True Christian" and "How to Get to Know God", they are a two message series, and to the two messages entitled "God the Son". You can listen to me teach on these subjects we are discussing, hopefully you will find them helpfull. Here's the link:
http://www.sermonaudio.com/alexloya
Remember to follow along in your Bible to test wether what I teach is true! Feel free to ask me any questions you have after you listen to these messages.

Alex--Thanks for that detailed explanation about pseudo-christians. I need to think about most of it some more.
Also, I have surfed thru your website. You're pretty serious about this stuff! I'll spend more time on your site later.

I suspect you might have made Linda angry with your discussion of pseudo-christians. In defense of Mormons, I will say that I particularly like their T.V. ad campaign that deals with "family." Other faiths don't offer similar broad-based messages. The Mormons are also a hard working faith. We see their missionaries in all parts of the country, peddling their bicycles and spreading their message. And not that this counts for much, but most Mormons I have known are physically attractive individuals.

And I don't take much objection to the premise of the Mormon faith. Why should their spin on the "Big Story" be any less credible that that of other faiths? The bible itself was written and compiled by men, many years after the death of Christ.

More later.

Edited by author 02-03-2001 02:17 PM
Unfortunately a religion is not only about your relationship with God but your relationship within a congregation. The leader of a congregation will always invent a variation to the original teachings in order to make his congregation more unique so it will stick together. That is why there are so many denominations of Christianity.

Fascinating theory David. I think you would have to be omniscient to prove that though. You make it sound so calculating, and I feel that most ministers are more sincere about serving God than that, and I feel that their differences also come from sincere beliefs. I agree that the relationship with a congregation is part of religion. It is kind of like an extended family to be able to get support and love from. However, I think it would be sad if we limit our love and support to only those in our congregation. Our Family has dear friends from many nationalities, and belief systems. I know we are richer for that.

Frank, thanks for the kind words. No, I'm really not angry with Alex. Maybe a little frustrated at being misunderstood, but not angry. I feel Alex has all of our best interest in mind when he speaks so boldly. I admire that kind of courage. In fact, I feel that anyone who has expressed their feelings in this very public forum, has alot of courage. I feel that in the end, we will all find that we are more alike than different, and I feel that God really understands the thoughts and intents of our hearts.
For now, I am happy to agree to disagree.

Hello! Linda, I am happy to hear that you are not angered by my statements, it is not my intention to anger anybody. I would like to clarify that when I refer to a group as a "pseudo-Christian" cult, I do not mean to say that members of such group are out there drinking kool-aid with Jim Jones or looking for UFO's with those people who killed themselves a couple of years ago, or out in a compound with David Koresh. I know, specifically talking about the Mormons, that the Mormons would not be a group like these I just mentioned. Mormon people are quite exemplary in many areas of Christian values, in family devotion and structure, in giving, in missionary zeal, in kindness to their neighbor etc. The reason that I refer to them as a "pseudo-Christian" group is not because they are lacking in any of these areas and more, but because when you really do sit down and study their teaching concerning the nature and character of God, you will find that the god of the Book of Mormon, of the Mormon religion, is quite different from the God of the Bible. Now, if the Mormons would claim to be a different religion altogether than Biblical Christianity, well, then they would simply be a different religion serving a different god, like the Hindus or Bhuddists. The problem is that they claim to be Christian and claim the god of Mormonism is the same as the God of the Bible, but upon close inspection, it is quite evident they are two different deities. Let me give you as briefly as possible, an example of what I am talking about:
     Lets look at the account of of the origin of the American Indian race, both NOrth and South American Indians, and for that matter, the account of the origin of all non-white races according to the Book of Mormon; In 2 Nephi 5:21-23 we read the account of why the American Indians look the way they look physically. Now, according to Mormon mythology, the American Indians are actually Jewish descendants of Joseph, and the Jews are not the Semitic Jews we all know, they are the Northern European "Israelites" of British Israelism. The American Indians of today are the descendants of Laman, a descendant of Joseph of the Bible, and are thus "Lamanites". Now, the Indians used to not always look the way they look now, according to Mormon mythology, they used to be a white race, but here's what happened:
     "And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity...wherefore as they were white and exceedilngly fair and delightsome...the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. And thus saith the Lord God: I will cause them that they shall be loathsome...save they shall repent of their iniquity. And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed... And the Lord spake it and it was done." 2 Nephi 5:21-23
     Lets look at this teaching from the Book of Mormon, and then lets examine the character and concerns of the god presented here, and then we will compare it with the God of the Bible. According to this passage, along with quite a few others, the American Indians used to be "white and delightsome", because of their sin, god cursed them and they became "dark and loathsome". Notice, however, that, according to this passage and others, if an Indian repents, he will become a white man again. Also, this god curses those who intermarry with non-whites and their descendants. Now, if indeed God did that, well, so be it, but does this passage reflect the character and concern of the God of the Bible? This god of Mormonism is very concerned with the way a person looks outwardly, he says non-whites are "dark and loathsome" while white people are "white and delightsome". In fact, the physical appearance of the Indians, and of all other non-white races like the blacks, is a result of a divine curse, a divine judgement because of their sin. Does this god of Mormonism judge like the God of the Bible? In 1 Samuel 16:17 we are told in no uncertain terms that the God of tthe Bible is diametrically opposed to the god of Mormonism in the way they view things. The prophet Samuel had thought that David's older brother was the Lord's choice for king because of his physical appearance, but God corrected him: "But the Lord said to Samuel,'Do not loook at his appearance or at the height of his stature, because I have refused him. For the Lord does not see as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart" 1 Samuel 16:17 The God of the Bible does not look, or judge, on outward appearance and specifies that is one thing that makes Him different than man, yet the god of Mormonism thinks that non-whites are "dark and loathsome" because of the way they look physically, so these two deities view man's appearance very differently, to the god of Mormonism if you are outwardly white, you are delightsome in your physical looks, if you are not outwardly white, you are loathsome in your physical looks, but to the God of the Bible, physical appearance is irrelevant because He looks at the heart. These views are very different, they show the internal character of the view holder and wha they consider important, to the God of the Bible, the god of Mormonism sees things as a man. In this passage of the Book of Mormon we are told that if an Indian repents, he will turn into a white man, his physical appearance will change,v.22 "they shall be loathsome, save they repent" the Bible teaches that repentance brings an internal change "Old things are passed away, all things are become new", and in Acts 8 when an Ethiopian rpented, he remained Ethiopian. In this passage the god of Mormonism curses those who intermarry with those that are not white racially, but in Numbers 12 we find the God of the Bible has a very different view and attitude in regards to racial intermarriage, "Then Miriam and Aaronspoke against Mosesbecause of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married, for he married an Ethiopian woman" Numbers 12:1 here we are told Moses married a non-white, a black woman, blacks are also cursed with their physical appearance according to Mormon mythology, Moses did exactly what the god of Mormon so harshly condemns, and Miriam and Aaron complained about since they were Moses' siblings. Does the God of the Bible side with Miriam and Aaron as the god of Mormon? Does He curse Moses and his descendants? On the contrary, look at how God reacts to this bigotry:"So the anger of the Lord was aroused against them (Miriam and Aaron) and He departed, And when the cloud departed... suddenly Miriam became leprous, as white as snow..." Numbers 12:9-10. Yoou see the God of the Bible actually cursed Miriam for her racial bigotry, because she complained that Moses had married a non-white, and the judgement was very telling, she became not white and delightsome, but white as snow with leprosy. Its like God said "OK, you want white? You will be white as snow with leprosy" When Moses prayed for God to heal her, God responded "If her father had but spit in her face she would be shamed..." v.14 The God of the Bible was very harsh and had no sympathy for those who, like the god of Mormon, judged people simply because they marry someone of another race. The God of the Bible kept the Jews purity not because of physical reasons, but spiritual, he forbade intermarriage then and does now on spiritual basis, on devotion to God, not on ohysical race. A black believer in God could then and can now marry a white believer in God, but the god of Mormon judges intermarriage not on the basis of internal faith, but on outward ohysical appearance. Lastly, notice how the god of Mormon says non-whites are "dark and loathsome" because of their physical appearance, in another passage he adds the word "filthy" for the same reason., but the Apostle Peter said in Acts 10:28 "God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean" yet the god of Mormon calls non-whites loathsome and filthy simply because of their physical appearance. It is clear, then, that the god of Mormon and the God of the Bible are diametrically opposed to each other in the issue of race, in the things that matter to them, and in their internal character. Yet the god of Mormon claims to be the same as the God of the Bible, the Book of Mormon is full of references to the Bible and its characters, but neither the God of the Bible nor its characters ever even acknowledge the existance of the the god of Mormon and of the Nephites or Lamanites or anything that claims to exist in the Mormon story. Because the god of Mormon claims to be the God of the Bible yet is diametrically opposed in character to the God of the Bible, the god of Mormon must threrefore be a pseudo god, he thinks like a man because he is the creation of a man, evidently. Anyway, this is just a little example of why Mormonism and its god are not the same as Biblical Christianity and Judaism and their God, I can give you more examples and probably will pertaining to their different nature. Gotta run!

Alex--Science is now indicating that the very first Native Americans were not the mongoloid, darker peoples who came to these continents at the end of the last ice age, but rather some kind of "hill peoples" similar to those from the highlands of Japan. These have more facial and body hair that the mongoloid, and almost "european" type facial structure.

Wouldn't your argument about "pseudo christians" apply to the debate between Calvinists and non-Calvinists. Certainly, the benevolent God that will accept all who honor him cannot be the same God that is absolute, and has predetermined everything, including which souls will join him in heaven. Which group are "pseudo-christians?"

You made some comments about Race. Here in the deep south,
congregations of the same faith remain segregated. Thus, there are Black Baptist churches, and White Baptist churches. Sometimes, they have identical names, even when located in the same town. Some cemetaries are segregated. Sometimes I wonder if these congregations are praying to the same God. Is there a white God, and a black God?

Edited by author 02-08-2001 08:42 PM
Alex, Thank you too for your kind words. I do feel bad those scriptures from the Book of Mormon are quoted out of context. Not in the spirit of argument, but in fairness to other members of my faith, I offer the following. Obviously, there are very beautiful people of every race. More importantly, there are deeply spiritual people of every race. Personally, I would be happy to have any of my children marry into any race as long as they were the right person for them. Concerning the Book of Mormon--- There are also periods in the history of the Book of Mormon where the darker skinned people are considered much more righteous than the whites, and where the white skin could be considered a warning for those darker skinned righteous people, not to marry them. It really was more about marrying in the faith, than about skin color. Also, there are also instances when the righteous of both groups join together because of the common faith in God. To become White and delightsome to me, is more about the light that shines from someone who knows Christ, not the color of their skin. For instance the Bible says "Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand (Daniel 12:10). In this passage, the meaning of the word "white" is most obviously pure; to "make white" is to purify. Conversly, I feel that the terms filthy, and loathsome refer more to the murderous state the people happened to be in, whether they were dark or light skinned. Both peoples are called those terms depending on their state of wickedness. It's also interesting to note that in the end of the Book of Mormon, the light skinned people were destroyed, while the lamanites, were left with great promises.

   I don't imagine for a minute I can change anyone's mind about whether I'm Christian or not. If I am, well then God knows. I just offer my perspective. Alex, you don't need to give me more examples about how my definition of God is different than your definition of God. I'm pretty sure I've already heard it all. What I am very interested in, is to understand what you think it means to be a Christian in day to day life. I do understand your definition of God is an important part of your faith, but in a practical sense, how does it work? I know you feel you are saved by grace only. Bassed on that belief, I'm impressed by how much you are willing to put into your faith. Earlier you quoted the scripture that says: faith without works is dead. It seems like a paradox, although a beautiful one. I feel the good works I try to do, are an expresion of my faith and obedience more than a means to "saving myself". How do you see this works in your life. It's always been a bit puzzling to me. I mean, if someone accepted Christ as their personal savior, and were really sincere, and said I'm going to heaven no matter what, and then they went out and killed someone, would they still be considered to be born again? Would they still be saved, or would you say they had a false conversion?

Linda,
How can you be on here at 9:16 on a school night? Isn't there homework to help with, baths to get, clothes to pick out, and perhaps lunches to make?

****
Anyway, in keeping with some of your questions to Alex, perhaps there is another logical question.

Suppose someone does not believe in God. Yet he lives a noble life, and helps his fellow man during his stay on earth. Would he be eligible for entry to heaven upon his death?

Frank your comment to Linda reminds of a joke I recently read and since the joke involves God, I'll share it:

A man was sick and tired of going to work every day while his wife stayed home. He wanted her to see what he went through so he prayed, "Dear Lord, I go to work every day and put in 8 hours while my wife merely stays at home. I want her to know what I go through, so please create a trade in our bodies." God, in his infinite wisdom, granted the man's wish.

The next morning, sure enough, the man awoke as a woman. He arose, cooked breakfast for his mate, awakened the kids, set out their school clothes, fed them breakfast, packed their lunches, drove them to school, came home and picked up the dry cleaning, took it to the cleaners and stopped at the bank to draw out money to pay the power bill and telephone bill, drove to the power company and the phone company and paid the bills, went grocery shopping, came home and put away the groceries. He cleaned the cat's litter box and bathed the dog.

Then it was already 1 p.m. and he hurried to make the beds, do the laundry, vacuum, dust, and sweep and mop the kitchen floor. Ran to the school to pick up the kids and got into an argument with them on the way home. Set out cookies and milk and got the kids organized to do their homework, then set up the ironing board and watched TV while he did the ironing.

At 4:30 he began peeling potatoes and washing greens for salad, breaded the pork chops and snapped fresh beans for supper. After supper he cleaned the kitchen, ran the dishwasher, folded laundry, bathed the kids, and put them to bed.

At 9 p.m. he was exhausted and, though his daily chores weren't finished, he went to bed where he was expected to make love -- which he managed to get through without complaint. The next morning he awoke and immediately knelt by the bed and said, "Lord, I don't know what I was thinking. I was so wrong to envy my wife's being able to stay home all day. Please, oh please, let us trade back."

The Lord, in his infinite wisdom, replied, "My son, I feel you have learned your lesson and I will be happy to change things back to the way they were. You'll have to wait 9 months, though. You got pregnant last night.

Didar--that's pretty good. I must say, however, that I doubt that sex is part of most wives' daily routines, especially when there are children in the house.

I do like the idea of a woman working. I suspect that children may not become independent enough when mom is home every day to think of and take care of all their needs. Also, when a woman goes to a job, she has outside intellectual stimulation.

Da-a-a-ve! I gotta show your joke to my wife! She'll love it! Although I am getting a taste of being Mr. Mom cause my wife is on total bed rest, its true, a woman's work is never done! My hats off to all of you house wives!

Linda, thanks for not taking offence, that is not my intent. I would just like to mention, however, that correct hermeneutic, that is, the correct method of Biblical interpretation, would prevent me from taking the passages I mentioned from the Book of Mormon as allegories, as evidently you do, because they are intended to be
historical narratives. The Bible, and I would assume the Book of Mormon since it is supposed to be another testament of Jesus Christ, is to be interpreted not in a wooden literal sense, but in the sense in which it was intended, and Nephi is intended as an historical account. And all I am saying is that, regardless of the exinction of the Nephites, the character of God is depicted palpably different in the Bible from the Book of Mormon.

Frank, that is a loaded question about Calvinism that you asked! Although the Calvinist Armenian controversy is very important, it does not deal with essential doctrine and it is possible to find Biblical precedent for both views. The Calvinist-Armenian controversy does not deal with the essential nature of God, but with His Sovereignity, at least not at the popular level, if there is such a level. Historically, however, it is quite evident that it is the Armenian view that departed from a Biblical understanding of God rather than the Calvinist view, which is solidly Biblical albeit misunderstood. So, no, Calvinists are not pseudo Christians and neither are most Armenians, although Armenius himself held an unbiblical view of God, and his immediate followers, the "Remonstrants" departed from Biblical Christianity totally denying the deity of Christ because of Armenius' teaching that Jesus was not fully God. Calvin, on the other hand, taught that Jesus is fully God and so the branches of Christianity that derive from his root have remained within orthodoxy. Maybe we'll discuss this further, very deep question indeed! As to your other question the answer is: If we could be saved by being "good people", then Jesus was crucified in vain. The reason Jesus had to die for our sins is because it is impossible for us to be saved by our good works, because no matter how good we might be, we have still sinned at some point, and the wages of sin is death... but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. ETERNAL LIFE! Think about it!...

Frank, you had mentioned you like to read this chat sipping your morning coffee, let me add to your enjoyment by inviting you, and all of you, to listen to some of the most beautiful, and that is the word, not jammin', but beautiful, Christian music at
http://www.worshipradio.com
just go there and click on the "listen live" and you will hear some very beautiful, peaceful music that you can listen to in the background as you read this chat or write or surf the net. By the way, I'm going to put all these discussions, and the ones in the class of 80's site, I already printed over 100 pages, together as a book entitled "Apologetics; Questions and Answers for the Modern Secular Mind about God, Christianity and the Bible", I'll be sure to give you all a free copy when I do get that book printed and published. Anyway, I hope to continue these discussions with all of you, I still haven't shared some major prophecy fulfillments that show the Divine origin of the Bible, and I would like to share a class with all of you entitled "Understanding the End Times" so that you all would know how seriously we are living in incredibly Biblical times and we are seeing the fulfillment of so many Biblical prophecies and are approaching the end of this present order of things. Get ready, the antiChrist is just about ready to be revealed!

Okay, Alex, good works alone will not get someone into heaven. But you have skirted around my question about a professed atheist getting to heaven. Also, Linda asked something about a born again Christian who goes out and murders someone. Can he still get to heaven? Or, is it that those people chosen by God to end-up in heaven will all lead Saintly lives?

Frank, to answer your question plainly, the answer is no, an aetheist will not go t heaven, and for that matter, according to Jesus' teaching, neither will any religious person who does not trust in Christ alone and accept Him for who He claimed to be. Now, I am aware that this is not the politically correct answer to give in these days of tolerance where the only thing not to be tolerated is the beliefs of born again Christians, never the less, tolerance at the expense of truth is travesty. Jesus told a good religious man, "Unless a man is born again he will not see the kingdom of God" and He told some bad religious people, "Unless you believe that I am He you will die in your sins". Obviously, an aetheist does not believe in God or that Jesus is the One True God, therefore it is impossible that an aetheist go to heaven no matter how kind and good. Why? Because salvation is more simple and easier than a lot of people think, it is a matter of believing in Jesus, of trusting Him for our salvation, not of earning our salvation by good works. To adress Linda's question, let me say that king David murdered Uriah the Hittite, MOses murdered and Egyptian, Paul is said to be responsible for the deaths of at least 5000 Christians, yet all these men are in heaven today. Why? Because in them God showed us the richness of His mercy and grace, that if these men who had done such wicked deeds can be forgiven, so can you and I. Can a truly born again Christian who murders someone go to heaven? Yes, just like a truly born again Christian who tells a white lie can still go to heaven. Does this mean that born again Christians can go on living like the devil and still go to heaven? And here is where the other part of Linda's question is adressed, a person that is truly born again can not go on living in a lifestyle of unrepentant sin. A born again Christian has undergone a new birth, a born again Christian has become alive to God and has the Holy Spirit living inside of Him so that he or she can not continue to go on in unrepentant sin. He may fail and stumble, he may even kill someone perhaps in a jealous rage, but a truly born again believer will be brought down to his knees by the weight of his born again conscience and by the chastening of the Lord and beg forgiveness of the Lord, and the Lord will set him back on the right track, as He did Moses and king David, the Bible teaches that although a righteous man may fall seven times, yet he will stand again because the Lord will uphold him with His right hand. Now, if a person claims to be a born again believer and kills someone and shows no conviction and no repentance, and goes on living not experiencing the chastening of the Lord, I don't care how much he claims to be born again, that person is not truly born again and will therefore not see the Kingdom of God. You see, salvation does come by faith alone, but the faith that saves is not alone, living faith will manifest itself in outward works. But here is an important difference between religion and true Christianity. Religion is man's attempt to please or apeace God, to earn salvation by doing good deeds. This practice of religion brings religious bondage because a person can never be sure how many good works are enough to earn that slavation. In true Christianity God saves man from his own sin and give him a new nature that thirsts after God, like a dear pants for the water, so the soul of a born again believer longs after God. This new nature will cause a true believer to live a life of good works, but the difference is that these good works will not be the born again Christian's attempt to earn salvation but, rather, will be a consequence of the fact that he has been saved. Thus, true saving faith is expressed in outward good works but not as a condition to get saved, but as a consequence of having been saved. That is why if someone professes to be born again but there are no good works, that faith is dead and that person is not saved. I know that if I die tonight, I will go to heaven, but it is not because I went and preached in Pakistan or because I attempt to help you understand more about the God of the Bible, I went to Pakistan and try to share with you not to earn salvation but because it flows out of a new nature the Lord created in me, a consequence of having been born again and saved. I will go to heaven because on Sept. 5. 1985 I was born again of imperishable seed, because when I trusted Christ as Savior He granted me eternal life and forgave all my sins. I am standing clean in the sight of God, not because I am so saintly, because I am a sinful man, but because when I trusted Jesus He took my sin on the cross and, in an unequal and undeserved exchange, imputed to me His righteousness, He put His own righteousness to my account. He began the good work in me, and He will finish it unto the day of redemption. Hope to hear from all of you soon.

Atheist don't care about going or not to heaven, obviously because we know it doesn't exist. Hell however can exist in this life, if you set your mind to it. And one very easy way to do it is if you go to the addictive path of guilt and shame religious sin propels you into.

Its easy to define sin for murder, rape and obvious violent crimes. Next in line are other sins for acts that are clearly wrong like thievery, lies, lust, adultery, incest etc. It progresses down to lesser "evil" sins such as swearing, bad manners, disrespect, masturbation, etc. Then it starts getting really weird. You get admonished for not praying everyday, for not praying before you eat supper or before you go to bed, for not going to church (first on Sundays, then everyday). It begins to be mind control when religious leaders even set the rules on how to eat, what to dress, who you can marry, when you can work (for example not on Sundays), what you can read, etc. The question here is that religions never sets a clear line on when one has actually sinned or not, and some religions like Christianity even go on to say one always sins no matter what, so you are doomed to begin with.

To be truly free you have to believe in yourself and do the best what you can do for yourself only.

Last Friday I went to a club in New York called the Limelight. This club is located in an old gothic style church. As an atheist and antireligious person, it gave me great pleasure to see a church converted into a dance/rave/party place and to see all the people going there not minding it at all. I am very curious to find out about the history of that church and how it ended up being a techno dance club.

David,
I describe myself as a firm atheist, but I have never considered myself as "antireligious." How does that manifest itself in your dealings with people of religion?

I do not know the fine points of libertarianism, but I think I sympathize with most of its ideas. Wouldn't a label of "antireligious" be outside the spirit of libertarianism?

I am antireligious in the very *general* sense that I think the majority of religions don't do humanity any good. Religion by nature is unscientific, oppresses women, impedes progress and democracy and tries to limit free thinking.

Individually I respect a person's right to practice any religion as long as no harm is being done to other people. What I don't respect is any religion's propensity to try to convert me or others into it. Unfortunately by its very nature religion will always do that as the people practicing religion think that is theirs is the *only* way to live and reach happiness. Just look at Alex's message on accepting Christ as the *only* "true saviour".

This kind of thing just makes me crazy!

The Taliban in Afghanistan is setting out to destroy some ancient Buddhist statues.

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010301/t...han_statues_dc.html

It's almost enough to make a person "antireligious." Which I am not usually, but I am today.

Edited by author 03-03-2001 02:02 AM
Da-a-a-a-ve! I think I must've touched a raw nerve again! Ouch! But, Dave, my man, it is quite evident to me that you are very confused concerning true Christianity and have swallowed anti-Christian philosophy hook, line and sinker. Let me just briefly point out some things that make it evident that you are confused about the subject on hand:

1.To begin with, you told Franckie wrong (yo Franckie!), what you read was not "Alex's message on Jesus being the only way" to get saved from eternal torment in hell, that is Jesus Christ's message, He said He was the only way, I am merely relaying a message from Him to you.

2. It is an historical fact that it was Biblical Christianity and its Jewish roots that provided the necessary mindset for there to be scientific advancement, for women to be liberated and valued as human beings equal to man, for progress to flourish, for democracy to develope and for free thinking to flower. You can begin to check the historical evidence by studying two books "What if Jesus Had Never Been Born" and "What if the Bible Had Never Been Written" both by Dr. D. James Kennedy, a hefty scholar. That is, Dave, if you are really serious about searching for truth and learning the facts, and about being intellectualy honest. You can get these books at your local Christian bookstore.

3. Alright Dave, you got 3 seconds to tell me the exact number of hairs on your head! 1,2,3... well? Yet you claim to know for a fact that there is no heaven and that there is no hell. (Quite a gamble, my friend!)

4. Again, religion that sees salvation as a reward for good works is what brings religious bondage and a preview of the anguish of soul people will experience in the lake of fire. Christianity, biblical Christianity, that understands salvation is simply by trusting Jesus and His sacrifice on the cross for our salvation, is extremely liberating from guilt and shame, a preview of the comfort and peace people who trust in Jesus alone for their salvation will experience in heaven.

5. Dave, all those things you correctly defined as sin, murder, incest, stealing, etc. are really not sin or wrong if there is no God, no heaven, no hell. If what you believe is true, there is no such thing as sin and no need for anybody to feel guilty about anything or for anybody to repent. This man I know who shot his friend in the face and head six times, if what you say is true, did no wrong and you do not have the right to put him in jail. If there is no God and no sin, neither you nor I have any right to impose our morality that says to rape someone is wrong, to each his own. But let me assure you once again, Dave, if your car was stranded around midnight down in the 9th ward in New Orleans, I can assure you that if you saw a group of 5 young men approach you, you would much rather have them believe as I do than as you do! That much, I can assure you! (Which shows the practicality of religious instruction).

6. Dave, you are confusing man made religous bondage and regulations with true Christianity. Jesus Christ, trusting in Him and studying His Word and growing in a personal relationship with Him, always, and I do mean ALWAYS, liberates people from the kind of religious bondage that you think is Christianity. (what to eat, how to dress, who to marry etc.)

7. True, Christianity does teach that a person is born with a sinful nature and therefore will always sin until this corruptible and mortal body is changed into an incorruptible and immortal one. But where you appear to be confused is in thinking that being aware of our lost condition dooms us. Quite the contrary, that is what saves us! Becoming aware of our lost and helpless condition is meant to show us our helplessness and bring us to our knees to ask God for mercy and forgiveness. Once you get to that point, then He relieves us from that burden and sets us free and grants us eternal life. Like when I prayed with a young Marine many years ago when I was in the Marine Corps, I remember the moment he asked Jesus to forgive his sins he suddenly at that instant lifted up his head from prayer, his eyes as big as baseballs, as he exclaimed out loud "Whoa! I felt a burden lift off my shoulders!" What I felt when I asked Yeshua Ha Mashiach (Jesus the Messiah in Hebrew) to forgive my sins was, yes, a burden sofftly lifted off my shoulders and an incredible, absolutely indiscribable peace, and His beautiful, awesome Presence fill the room in the barracks where I was. But neither that young Marine, I think his name was private Rogers, nor myself would have experienced that freedom if we had failed to acknowledge that we had sinned against God.

8. Just imagine a world in which everybody did the best they could do for themselves only! I do pray for you, dear Dave, that when you find yourself stranded out there somewhere you do not bump into people that adhere to that philosophy!

9. To think that to be truly free you must believe in your self rather than God is right up there with believing that you are god yourself! Now, what kind of god is the god that has to be tought that he is god? And if you are a god that has to be taught that he is god, what kind of non-sensical person would you be to put your faith in a god that has to be taught that he is god? I,m just asking! (And how the Sam's are you gonna be truly free by believing in yourself when you yourself have told me that it can be very disheartening for an aetheist to realize he is nothing but dirt in the fingernails of nothingness out there in yonder space, with no hope, no purpose and no God?)

10. Dave, I'm sure that there are millions of people who have achieved a level of happiness who do not believe in Jesus. And even in that happiness you can see the kindness of God. Happiness is fleeting, however, but life is eternal, and you can spend it in either joy or torment. Another area in which you can see the kindness of God, is in every time a born again Christian approaches you to tell you about Jesus being the only way to eternal salvation. Believe me, Dave, that may not happen forever, the Bible says that God will not contend with the soul of man forever. When I was in my first year of graduate school some guys at work used to always ask me about the Lord, mocking. I knew they were mocking, but I would still tell them. One day the boss, a homosexual, told me to put a lid on it and not talk about God anymore and that he would tell the others not to egg me on. I was grieved because I truly love God, but as I was grieved the Lord spoke to me and said, "Don't worry about telling them about me anymore, your job in this place is finished" God told me that it was He who was putting an end to the conversation about Him, and He would show it by bringing that job to an end, I knew I would not work there much longer, although that was my only source of income. Just a few days later the boss fired me because I respectfully refused to print 2000 invitations to a big banquet honoring the coming out of the closet of many homosexuals. He could have asked other workers to do that job, but he insisted that I had to do it or else. So I respectfully said no. What is really sad is that the Lord forbade me to tell them any longer about Him, He will not contend with the soul of man forever. Dave, it is God's mercy that you are aggravated by born again Christians such as myself, it will be very sad, and if I was you I would tremble, if some day you notice that you are not bumping into born again Christians any more, because that will mean that the Lord has ceased to contend with your soul...
 But, hey, you are probably foaming at the mouth reading this message! That's good! Because that shows that Jesus loves you and that I truly do care about all of you!

Come on Alex!!! Biblical Christianity and it's Jewish roots provided the necessary mindset for scientific advancement? For women to be valued as human beings equal to man? For progress to flourish? For democracy??

Not long after the bible was compiled, Europe entered the dark ages. This was one thousand years of stagnation.

In our own Nation, "under God", woman did not get the right to vote until 1920(?). The ERA amendment to the constitution was never ratified by the states.

I would say that the ideas of democracy came to us from the Greeks and Romans, not from the Jewish traditions. Jews, I believe, had Kings.

Just this evening, I stopped by the Chinese take-out to pick up some steamed dumplings for my son. On the wall, they have this huge picture of the Great Wall. It is a monumental structure, even by today's standards. Where was the Bible and christianity when this great chinese civilization was fourishing 5000 years ago?

****

Dave--don't let Alex scare you. If you end up in Hell, you'll have some good company

That's right, Franck! What I said is based on historical facts, get the books I recommended and study them before you make a decision. I have studied these things exhaustively, there are more books I can recommend. By the way, if you are interested, go to the chat of the class of 80 starting at message 1596 you will find a discussion between myself and the class of 80 concerning these things that went on for almost a month. You will find some of the facts concerning these things we discussed then, but you should really get these books I recommend.

Starting tonight, I will, if I may, begin to teach a course about where you and I are living in respect to end time prophecy. When Jesus came the first time, He fulfilled over 300 prophecies from His birth to His death and resurrection, yet most of His contemporaries were unaware and in fact fulfilling prophecy themselves. It is possible to live in times of Bibilical fulfillment and not be aware of it. Ladies and gentlemen, I submit to you that in the last ten years we have seen more Biblical prophecy fulfilled than in the previous 2 thousand years, that you and I are on the brink of the coming into power of the man called the "anti-Christ" or the "Beast", the Battle of Armageddon, of the end of this era of human government, the return of Jesus Christ to the earth and the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth. Today we will begin this course on end time prophecy, lets call it "Are We Living in the End Times?". It is my hope that at least some of you will be able to see the wave after wave of Biblical fulfillment that all of us are experiencing at a staggering rate. We will begin by briefly examining four prophecies that set the stage for the prophesied end time events of the Battle of Armageddon and the ruling of the anti-Christ, and that clearly set aside the time we are living from any other era as the time of the end of all things and the return of Jesus Christ to the earth. Please pay close attention and do keep an open mind. It is imperative that you are willing and desire to know the truth no matter what it does to your emotions or pre-concieved ideas for this course to be of benefit to you. As always, questions and discussion are welcome, I will try my best to post a new study every week or at the most every two weeks so that in a couple of months you will have learned to see by the world events around you the hand of the invisible God. Lets begin in the next posting which follows immediately.

ARE WE LIVING IN THE END TIMES? LESSON #1.

Let's begin by defining "the end time" not as the end of the world, the Bible is clear that the world itself will last at least another thousand years after the return of Jesus Christ, but as the end of the era of human government as well as the end of the era of human opportunity. In other words, Jesus Christ will return to earth as the promised Messiah and God and abolish all human government and establish His own kingdom on earth, and the human race will no longer have the opportunity to surrender to Him as Lord and Savior, but as Judge and Ruler.

The prophet Daniel was given around the year 600 B.C. some awesome prophecies concerning what would transpire at the end of time. Daniel didn't understand what he wrote so he asked God for the meaning of what he wrote. God answered Daniel that it was not given to Daniel to understand, but that the prophecies of the end time were sealed up for a specific generation, the generation of the end time. God identified the generation of the end time:

"But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, even to the time of the end;many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased" Daniel 12:4

With this statement, God told Daniel that the meaning of the prophecies he was given would be "shut up", would be "sealed" until the time of the end. Two things we understand: 1. These prophecies would not be clearly understood till the time of the end, 2. These prophecies would not be fulfilled till the time of the end.

Then God identified the "time of the end" by two circumnstances that would set aside such time from any other era 1. Knowledge would increase at an exponential rate and 2. Men would "run", travel back and forth at high rates of speed and great distances. This "running to and fro" would be as a direct result of the increase of knowledge. Since the world began people hardly ever moved a few miles from where they were born. The migration of peoples was very slow and took long periods of time, and it certainly was not a traveling "back and forth". Suddenly, at the turn of last century men began to travel by car instead of by horse! After thousands of years, and from that point on, in the next one hundred years mankind went from traveling on horseback to traveling to the moon and back several times faster than the speed of sound! And this ability to "run to and fro" was directly linked to the staggering increase of knowledge. In the last fifty years knowledge has increased at a mind boggling rate! 2,600 years ago, God told Daniel that there would be such a time, and that the generation that saw that incredible increase in knowledge and that was able to travel at such incredible speeds would be the generation of the time identified as "the time of the end". Clearly, our generation is different from every generation that preceeded us, and it is different because of the incredible knowledge that has been accumulated and because of the fast rate of traveling through the world. We are that generation God identified as the generation of the end time. If such is the case, then we should see the fulfillment of end time prophecy like no other generation has seen because the words of the prophecy of the end time were "sealed" and "shut up" till the time of the end. Is there any evidence that we are seeing more end time prophecy fulfilled than any other previous generation? The answer is a resounding "Yes!". Let's begin to look at some of the evidence:

"And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared" Revelation 16:12

This prophecy found in the Book of Revelation concerns directly with the last battle that will be fought in this dispensation, the Battle of Armageddon. Keep this in mind as we briefly look at it and see how it is being fulfilled.
The prophecy says that the Euphrates river, a major river, would be "dried up" at the time of the end. This drying up, however, is not due to a natural drought, it is rather intentional, it is dried up with a specific purpose. We read that it is dried up "that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared". As you go on reading you find out that these kings of the east, cross the Euphrates to go into what is known as "The Battle of Armageddon". We see, then, that this prophecy concerns the building of a dam that will be capable of stopping the flow of the Euphrates river, and that because this dam will be built, it will be possible to dry up the river at will. In other words, someone will be able by a decision to dry up the river and make it possible for the kings of the east, which refers to the armies of the rulers of the east, to cross over the Euprates river on dry ground into battle. In all of history this has not been possible, there has never been a time in which the Euphrates river could be dried up at human will. Never, that is, until now. On January 13, 1990 the Indianapolis Star had an article with the headline "Turkey will cut off flow of Euprates for one month" The nation of Turkey built a huge dam called the "Ataturk" dam, and built a huge reservoir. Turkey stopped the flow of the Euphrates river for a whole month while filling the reservoir in 1990! The interesting thin is that Turkey is mentioned as a major player in the Battle of Armageddon! You and I lived through the building of the only dam in history that makes it possible for the prophecy in revelation 16 to be fulfilled! Here is the thing to consider: If through 2000 years since this prophecy was given to the Apostle John it could never be fulfilled till now, coinciding with Daniel's prophecy about the increase of knowledge and spped in traveling, and if this prophecy states that the Euphrates is dried up for the purpose of letting the armies of the east through to go into the Battle of Armageddon, then what does that tell us of how close we are to this battle? Consider these two prophecies and its implications for your personal life. Next week I will deal with two other prophecies which identifiy our time and generation as the generation that will see the return of Jesus Christ and the end of this era of human government. After that we will see the United States of America and other major end time role players in Bible prophecy.

Sorry Alex but I'm afraid your argumentation doesn't sell.

We certainly are moving fast today and science has developed at an amazing rate but don't you wonder how it will be 200 years from now? or 1000 years in the future? Maybe all that stuff we've seen in Startrek and the Asimov books will be true... Wouldn't those generations deserve the privilege of seeing this supposed return of JC more than us?
Why does everything have to be so literal? Dry up the Euphrates? Sure, if a damn was built on the Nile why couldn't it be made on the Euphrates? Do armies really need to cross rivers nowadays? Look at Kosovo... nobody even got off a landing barge.
I'm afraid you're really trying to arrange all the blocks so they fit what you wanna believe.

It is very dangerous to base your thinking and way of life on doomsday prophecies because it limits your productivity and creates fear which is the goal of religions and cults in order to control the masses.

It limits your productivity because you no longer feel compelled to do anything if you think that the world is going to end anyway.

In 1843 a religious leader called William Miller had determined that the world was going to end sometime that year. He based his analysis on the Book of Daniel that says: "And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed" (Dan. 8:14, King James Version). He assumed that days actually meant years and since this passage was written in 457 B.C. by his calculations the world was going to end in 1843.

Thousands of his followers sold their possesions awaiting futily the end.

Alex,

I would like to address some of the things you say in your post to Didar, most specifically, item #5.

It seems to me a great mistake to make the assumption that since atheists do not believe in God that they have no sense of what is a "sin" or what is right or wrong. This is simply bullsh*t. You were not a Christian until you were born again in 1985. You have said that your father was an atheist, a man whom you admired enormously. Would you really have us believe that neither you nor he had a sense of what was right and what was wrong because neither of you were Christians? Sorry, but I just don't buy it. Most of the atheists I know have an extremely keen sense of what is right and wrong. They don't do the right thing based on a fear of going to hell, they do it because it is the right thing to do. And as has been said many times before in this forum, most of the world's religions have a pretty common set of "do's and don'ts", which speaks to their source as one of common sense.

Your comment "I can assure you that if you saw a group of 5 young men approach you, you would much rather have them believe as I do than as you do!" is as insulting as it is short-sighted. Didar and many like him mean no harm to anyone. Christians do not have a lock on knowing how to behave well towards other people. All too often they have shown that they do just the opposite. There are many compassionate, peaceful people in the world, and they are not all Christian. By the same token, there are many evil people in the world, and they are not all atheists!

Edited by author 03-07-2001 01:32 AM
Great! We got some debate going! But Sue, whatever you may think, please understand in no way is my intention to be offensive or disrespectful to anybody, so please do forgive me if I came through that way, I want you and all of you to if you understand one thing, let it be that I truly do care about you, and that the motivation behind the things I say is really not to win an argument, but to see as many of you in heaven, eternaly comforted in the Presence of the Lord. I really do believe these things I talk about, I really do believe that there is a heaven and there is a hell and that Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation, so that, wether I'm right or wrong, my motivation really is to see all of you saved from eternal anguish and in eternal bliss, that truly is my motivation. What I meant in my argument #5 is not that aetheists don't have a sense of what is right and wrong, in fact, I believe that since the great majority of people do have that sense it shows the truth that God has written His law in the hearts of people, that being one reason why all people are responsible for their actions. What I meant is that if there is no God, then there really is no basis for anyone to say what is right or wrong. If there is no God, then who's to say that what is wrong for us might be right for someone else? If there is no God, then we really have no authority to tell this kid that just killed some of his classmates in California that he did wrong, maybe in his mind he did right, he was smiling while he shot the people, maybe for him and to him it is right, if there is no God, and if we put him in jail, then, if there is no God, then we really are imposing our morality on him, because we have no more right to impose our morality on him than he does on us, if there is no God. But there is a God, and He created us and not we ourselves, and therefore He has the right to say what is right and wrong and He can and does delegate that authority to us to say what is right and wrong. I hope I explained it clearer. As for the 5 young men, what I meant was that down in the ninth ward, it is the gangstas that hang out at night and they WILL cut you! Or, as they say, as a 14 year old kid threatened me, they will put a cap in yo head (a bullet)!
If you see five young men walk to you in the ninth ward at night, you better pray that the believe God is real, and that Jesus Christ is their Lord and savior and that they have to keep a clear conscience before Him, like I believe, because if you see 5 young men approach you at night in the ninth ward and they believe that there is no God and that they evolved from from a kind of ape, in the ninth ward, it really would be a miracle if you come out intact! That is what I mean, and really, this could be tested, but I think its safer to leave it in the realm of an argument.

Now, Sue, Dave here just said my productivity is limited and that I live in fear, and that my goal in life, as a man of the cloth, is to limit other people's productivity and to entangle them in fear so that I, and the system that I represent, can exercise control over them. He also said that I do not feel compelled to do anything because I believe the world is going to end anyway. Dave's message is 161, and your message is 162, which leads me to believe you read his message. How come you don't get angry at him for saying all these things about me? How come I take all the flack? How come everybody gets angry at me because I offended somebody, but nobody gets angry at those that say potentially offensive things at me, but, on the contrary, they side together against me? Why is it not ok to bash anyone except born again Christians?... The answer is also found in end time prophecy, you will see more and more that born again Christians will be villified for their beliefs until you will begin to hear that more and more are arrested and eventually put to death, this spirit, this attitude against Christians will culminate in what is called "The Great Tribulation". But, Dave, I am not offended, although I must say that you got it wrong again, believing and living with the hope of the return of Jesus Christ actally leads to more productivity because the time is running out, and, as the Bible says,"he that has this hope in himself purifies himself even as He is pure" For each one of those few thousands who are misguided and do not understand prophecy or the teaching of Scripture and head off to the mountains and put dates on something God said not to put dates on, and become unproductive, there are literally millions who do just what I said, and schools are built, and illiterate people groups are given written forms of their languages, and hospitals are built, and many hungry people are fed, and disaster victims get relief, and many homeless are given a place to stay, and orphans are taken care of, and abandoned babies are adopted, and drug dealers turn to helping kids get off drugs, and wife beaters stop beating their wives, and rapists stop raping, and thieves stop stealing, and on and on and on, all because they believe that Jesus Christ will return to earth and the prophecies of the Bible will be fulfilled. Now, Sue, are you angry that Dave has characterized all Christians as opposite of what they are and as doing opposite of what they do? I want to know if you care about me too here! Anyway, Dave, my man, a softer heart towards God would be refreshing to you! It is so simple! Just believe!

Homero! Good to see you here! Maybe a hundred years from now or a thousand years from now there will be alot more knowledge and people will travel at the speed of light, maybe a dam has been built on the Nile. The fact is, however, that the prophecy said that knowledge would increase, men would travel back and forth and great speed, and that is what is happening now, not before our era, but now, the prophecy said the Euphrates river would be dried up as a sign of His imminent return, and it is indeed the Euphrates that two thousand years after the prophecy was written, can be dried up at will just as the prophesy says, it can be dried up at will now, not ever before, but now, and these conditions have coincided at the same time, the same era, which is not ever before but NOW. Stay tuned to this lesson series, and the coincidences will begin to stack up pretty dangerously on you! I don't see anybody getting rid of us grunts, that is, infantry men, as Tennyson would attest if he was here!(Once a Marine always a Marine!) And, yeah, please do look at what happened in Kosovo, look at it through the eyes of end time prophecy and you will be astounded to find out just how really close we are to the end of all things! Kosovo will come up in the lesson about the New World Order. I'm telling you, stay tuned, it will get interesting!

Okay, Alex, I'll give you the last 2000 years as the "christian era." I'll be generous and tack on another 1000 years as the pre-christian jewish era. That puts us back 3000 years. Yet, before that, there were great civilizations in China and Egypt. They did not know your God, and certainly did not know your Jesus. Thus, according to your last post, they could not possibly had a sense of what is right or wrong?

Or, was God influencing the hearts of those men, so long ago, even though their religions did not worship him?

Alex: Frank's point on 3/3 is very good. How do you address this? I know I have been a stranger to this page, but I think I'll start checking in once in awhile. Very interesting stuff.

David: Masturbation is a sin? Or were you saying that religeous zealots say it's a sin? Pretty scary!

Alex, I know your have good intentions in your heart, and you want to help others. You truly believe in what you preach and I imagine that the idea of others going to hell instead of heaven must be terrifying and no wonder you are trying your best to help.

But I hope you realize that when you are preaching the doomsday prophecies and damnation because of sin, you are using fear to induce people into your beliefs. Fear paralyzes people, and that makes them unproductive, much like the deer who become stiff when they see the headlight beam of a car who will smash them.

Why can't we rely on common sense, reason and on our senses to see the obvious and the real? Why do we have to imagine this supreme being who is completely fictional? Why can't we accept our reality for what it is instead of making up all these weird explanations.

Have you ever wondered why you are you and not someone else? The reason is simple. You are you because that is why you are, if you were someone else you would be that person, have those memories, those sensations and those genes instead of the you of now.

Same thing about reality. Reality is what it is because if it were something else, you would have wondered accordingly to that reality. What is so difficult in accepting that fact. It will make the rest of your philosophical and metaphysical life easier.

When you die, you simply cease to exist. No suffering will be experimented because there will be no memory no sensation of it. That is why there is no need to worry about death. People who have experienced severe trauma of accidents don't remember anything 15 minutes before the accident. Much less will we be able to remember death.

I had a girlfriend once who was always worrying about separating. She would lament the day we will split. That is why love is hard because its like life itself. It will end sooner or later. I would tell her why not just enjoy this love and not to worry about the end, something that cannot be controlled. Same thing with death. One cannot control when death is going to occur (although for some the prospect of not being able to control is so terrifying or suffering is so great that they take their own life). By worrying about death so much you take away from life, demeaning it.

Reminds me also of my brother who once bought a brand new car. He would worry so much about scratching it, or when we would go over a road with a bit of gravel we would cry in anguish hoping a piece of gravel will not smash into the windshield causing a crack. I told him: why worry so much about what is going to happen to your new car, you are not ENJOYING it! He was living in total fear of something he cannot control in the absolute sense.

Tennyson--Semper Fi to you!!! Welcome to the site. We don't know your leanings, but all opinions are appreciated. I do wish, however, that Alex had some more active allies.

David--Your points are good. I've often said that I'm not interested in spending my entire life preparing for my death.

All--I wonder if this "About God" discussion might one day surpass the '79 site. In fact, lately it's had more action than several sites.

Is masturbation a sin? hmmm... Alex, what do you say?

Actually that is soooo unfair... Loving yourself, is that a sin? (notice a few hour time diff...)

It's getting a little thick around here...

A new priest at his first mass was so nervous he couldn't stand still. He asked Father Murphy for some advice. Father Murphy replied, "When I'm worried about gettin' nervous on the pulpit, I take a wee bit o' whiskey. Just to calm my nerves."
So the next Sunday he took the older priest's advice. Before the mass, he got nervous and took a drink. He then proceeded to talk up a storm. Upon return to his office after mass, he found the following note on his door:

1. A few sips of whiskey. Not the whole bottle.

2. There are 10 commandments, not 12.

3. There are 12 disciples, not 10.

4. Jesus was consecrated, not constipated.

5. Jacob wagered his donkey, he did not bet his ass.

6. We do not refer to Jesus Christ as the late J.C.

7. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are not referred to as Senior, Junior, and the Spook.

8. David slew Goliath, he did not kick the shit out of him.

9. When David was hit by a rock and knocked off his donkey, don't say "He was stoned off his ass."

10. We do not refer to the cross as the Big T!

11. Next Sunday there will be a taffy-pulling contest at St. Patrick's, not a patrick-pulling contest at St. Taffy's.

12. The Virgin Mary is not referred to as the, "Mary with the Cherry".

13. The recommended grace before a meal is not: "Rub-A-dub-dub, thanks for the grub, yea God"

14. When Jesus broke the bread at the Last Supper he said, "Take this and eat it, for it is my body"; he did not say, Eat me."

First, Alex, thanks for your comments... I appreciate the points you are making and I will respond, but I'm sort of mulling it over still.

Okay, here's one... Potentially offensive to everyone...

Religions' Views of Life

Taoism: Shit happens.
Confucianism: Confucius say: "Shit happens."
Buddhism: Shit happens, but it isn't really shit.
Jainism: If shit happens, don't step in it; you might kill some maggots.
Zen: What is the sound of shit happening?
Hinduism: This shit has happened before.
Islam: If shit happens, it is the will of Allah.
Fundamentalism: Shit is caused by Secular Humanism (this may explain why Fundamentalists always seem so constipated)
Protestantism: Let shit happen to somebody else.
Catholiscism: If shit happens, it was my fault.
Judaism: Why does shit always happen to us?
Unitarianism: Any shit is good shit.
Christian Science: There is no shit.
New Age: Shit happens so we can use it for fertilizer.
Agnosticism: What is this shit?
Atheism: I don't believe this shit.

Mr. Slavco: Are you of the Marine persuasion? If so, Semper Fi, Devil Dog. What are my "learnings"? I believe in God. I consider myself a Christian and believe in much of what I have learned. However, there are problems I have with the philosophy of the Catholic Church. I bring this denomination up because it is what I know the most about. And because of this, I ask Mr. Loya all kinds of question that I do not have the answers for.

Before I go on, however, it's probably important to understand what "religion" Alex believes in. Please try to understand me Alex, I am not giving you a hard time, just asking what religion, denomination, sect or prophecy you believe in....in reference to what is commonly believed in this part of the world. You mention the teaching of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ of latter day Saints? No? So are they wrong? You have been fairly detailed in your teachings. Should we call it Loyaism? If not, then, what? Once again, Sir, I ask that with the utmost respect.

So, on with my story. I was raised as a Catholic. My parents were divorced and I was told that my father would be going to hell. My mother, who was not Catholic, had to sign a letter with the Catholic Church stating she would raise her children Catholic. Otherwise they would not have allowed my parents to be married within the church and her children would go to hell. What a lovely prospect for a new bride.

I ended up marrying someone who was raised as I was and when it came time to "sign the papers", I chose to marry outside the church. Sad, but true. So, we were married, had two kids, baptised them both in the church and believe in God. So my question to Mr. Loya: are we "covered"? Alex, I am simply trying to make a point. There are many people like me who believe, but don't necessarily practice all the time. So what is acceptable? And the people who say you are damned because you are a Christian? What do you say to them?

Enough for now. I'm sure more later. Oh, before I leave:

A kindergarten teacher was observing her classroom of children while they drew. She would occasionally walk around to see each child's artwork. As she got to one little girl who was working diligently, she asked what the drawing was. The little girl replied, "I'm drawing God." The teacher paused and said, "But no one knows what God looks like." Without skipping a beat or looking up from her drawing, the girl replied, "they will in a minute!"

Regards to all.

Tennyson! Aughrrrah! Good to see you here, my brother! Good to see this discussion pick up a bit! I am licenced as a Southern Baptist minister and my doctrinal perspectives would be very much like historic Baptist doctrinal understanding. But, like I have said many times before, regardless of what denomination you are, Christians agree on the essential doctrines, essential for salvation, althought they may disagree on non-essential peripheral dctrines. Tennyson, it is very important to understand that good works and religious works, such as going through a ritual of baptism, are not what earns us salvation. Salvation comes by a simple act of trusting Jesus Christ, of trusting His sacrifice on the cross, for our salvation. Its that simple, good works will come but not as a requirement to salvation, but as a consequence of salvation. Again, the difference between religion, even Christian religion, and true Christianity, is that religion is the attempt of man to please or apeace God, to earn slavation by religious works, which is impossible because no matter how many good works we do, we still have done something wrong some time, and sin can not dwell in the Presence of the Holy God. In true Christianity, it Christ that manifests Himself to the repentant sinner, it is Christ who takes the intitiative and reaches down and saves us. True Christianity is a relationship, a two way relationship with the Living God, and it is God who intiates that relationship, we merely respond, many refuse to respond. And it is possible to have a relationship with Jesus Christ, because He is alive and well, contrary to Dave's assumption. Now, since you, Dave, suggested that we should look at what is real, lets continue with the second lesson and prophecy, and please open your eyes and see, as you suggest, what is real. As to the "other" topic you all brought up, all I can say is, Pee Wee Herman got busted!

Edited by author 03-15-2001 12:22 AM
ARE WE LIVING IN THE END TIMES?
LESSON # 2: THE COMING CHINA WAR.

On the first lesson in this course we examined two prophecies that pin point you and I as THE generation that will see the return of Jesus Christ and the rise of the anti-Christ as well as the Battle of Armageddon. We saw the prophecy of Daniel which identified the generation of the end by two characteristics which never existed before: 1.Knowledge would increase at an incredible rate and 2. Because of this, people would be able to travel great distances and back at never before experienced fast rates of speed. It should be noted that a future time, although theoretically we could increase yet more in knowledge and speed, would not be the time spoken of by Daniel because Daniel's prophecy is drawn as a contrast. There is no contrast, although a big difference, between traveling at the speed of light and the speed of sound, both are incredibly fast, but there is a contrast between traveling on horseback and traveling on the Space Shuttle. Now is the time, we are that generation! The second prophecy from Revelation said that at the time of the end, the Euphrates river would be able to be dried up at will, and it will be dried up to make way for the armies that will go into battle at the Battle of Armageddon, the last battle of the ages at the end of which Jesus Christ will intervene personally. In 1990 the Ataturk dam was built and two thousand years after the prophecy was written, the Euphrates river can be dried up at will by the nation of Turkey, which is specifically mentioned as a participant in the Battle of Armageddon. Today we will look at one of the most ominous prophecies in all of the Biblical Text, a war that will result in the deaths of two billion human beings...

"So the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour and day and month and year, were released to kill a third of mankind. Now the number of the army of the horsemen was two hundred million, and I heard the number of it" Revelation 9:15-16

Through the ages, this has been one of the most difficult prophecies to accept. When John was given this vision, around the year 96 A.D., there was not two hundred million people in all the earth, yet John, by inspiration and revelation of God, spoke of a time in which there would be a nation which would have the capability of mustering up an army of two hundred million men, and that this nation would be an agressive nation. The number given by John is so high, that many thought it absurd for many years, and others argued it had to be symbolic, there simply was not a nation that could muster up that number of fighting men. Lets observe a few things that we are being told in this prophecy:

1. In verse 15 we are told that this war, and this army, would not be possible but until a set time, down to the year, month day and hour. The time is set for this horrific war, it could not happen before, it will not happen after.

2. The context of the book puts this war at the time immediately preceding the return of Jesus Christ, within what is commonly known as the time of the end.

3. Although we are not given the name of the nation, this nation is identified and set aside from all other nations by its unique military capability, unique in all of history.

4. This unique capability is this nation's ability to muster up an army of two hundred million men.

5. Notice it is men, not men and women, just men, two hundred million of them, that make up this army.

6. The horrible outcome of this war is that one third of mankind will be wiped out.

Just like the Euphrates river could not be dried up at will but untill 1990, which tells us just how close the Battle of Armageddon is, there was never a time in history that any nation on earth had the population base to muster up an army of two hundred million men, never, that is, until now.
In his diary, Mao Tse Tung, the Communist Chinese leader, boasted that he could raise up an army of two hundred million men. It is amazing that this aetheist Communist actually used the exact number which the Apostle John heard when he was given that vision, two hundred million! Mao said that over thirty years ago, and those who understood this prophecy perked up their ears, but those who were not familiar with the prophecy thought that Mao was just boasting, because at the time Mao said that, China couldn't actually raise an army of two hundred million men. Lets fast forward to the present. Just last week I got the breaking news on my beeper that China had increased her military spending by 17.2%, and just today I recieved the breaking news that China wants to talk to the U.S. about not building our missile defense system. Since last year, China has been rattling her saber, threatening to invade Taiwan, perhaps you have followed the news. The sobering thought is that at the same time, China has been threatening us with nuclear war. According to the New York Times, a high Chinese official told Mr. Freeman of our State Department that "We (the Chinese) don't think you (us Americans) will intervene when we invade Taiwan because we don't think you are willing to trade Los Angeles for Taiwan"
More recently, one of the three top ranking Chinese officials told the U.S. Government the same thing, except that this time they said "... we don't think you are willing to sacrifice two hundred million Americans for twenty million Taiwanese" American officials noted that China is threatening a nuclear war against the United States. This is important to understand, because the prophecy says that when the smoke clears, two billion people will be dead. Now, you know we can't engage China in a conventional war, and when, not if, but when they make good on their threat and nuke Los Angeles, our government will retaliate with nuclear weapons, the end result will be as the prophecy says, one third of mankind, which, by the way, is concentrated in Asia, will be wiped out. And here is the kicker, when Mao boasted that he could raise up an army of two hundred million men he couldn't actually do that, but according to the American Central Intelligence Agency, as of this year, 2001, China has reached the goal of having two hundred million military able men. Folks, this is extremely serious! It is happening as you read this! The capabiltity to raise an army of two hundred million men is now in place as we speak, and that same nation is threatening us, and the world, with a nuclear holocaust over Taiwan! We could sustain in a nuclear confrontation with China up to 50 million fatalities, and we could wipe the 1.2 billion of them out in retaliation! Its time to stop playing cat and mouse with God! Now is the appointed time! Today is the day of salvation!

To see the CIA report on China's military capability click on:(notice it is men, not men and women, notice the number of military capable men)
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbo...os/ch.html#Military

To read the Chinese threat of Nuclear confrontation go to:
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38c2a3f95d98.htm

One last thing, the war spoken of here will happen before Armageddon, the capability is there, the spoken threat is there, the Ataturk Damn is there.

Edited by author 03-15-2001 06:36 AM
Alex: "Salvation comes by a simple act of trusting Jesus Christ." What that tells me is that only Christians who believe that way will be saved. Is that not what the crusades were all about? The problem I have with that is small children. The smallest do not have the ability to understand and the older ones are always asking questions trying to understand. So will they not be saved because they cannot "act" on that trust or understand the sacrifice? Going by your analogy, my wife, son and I will be saved but not my daughter because she is too young to understand. I have a hard time with that. And if there is an explanation, then it is not "as simple as that."

Pee Wee Herman was doing it in public! You skirted the issue Alex.

Oh, one more thing. I'll take 10 trained Marines over 200 Chinese "military able men" any day. Bring 'em on!

Alex, for centuries lots of persons have come and gone saying the end of the world is about to happen. Lots of folks have studied scriptures and arrived to many different interpretations for this. Also if you consider that the meaning of any given passage of scripture could vary depending on what version of the Bible you use, it really makes it hard for me to accept what you say.
Also remember, it is not to us to know the day or time of our death. When you tell us you know when the end of half of mankind will happen, aren't you being arrogant as to pretend to know God's designs? Some would say this could only be inspired by Satan. What do you think?

Alex,
Just read your message. I hope your wife and kid get well soon. We will certainly remember them in our prayers.

As Homero pointed out a few messages ago, big wars are no longer fought with vast armies of men, 200 million men or whatever is irrelevant at these levels. So Alex, the prophecy you are preaching is self defeating and collapses at its own logic.

Question is why instill so much fear of doom and xenophobia?

I don't see why some future war couldn't be fought with an army of 200 million men, but I serious doubt they would be riding horses. Alex, you were impressed by the exactness of the number 200 million. How do you explain the outdated reference to "horsemen?"

Personally, I believe China is just a few years (and a few deaths of leading men) away from joining the rest of the world. This internet will have a lot to do with speeding things up.

Tennyson--I can't be more specific. Certain cheerleaders will zero in on me. Oh, well, its about time to take a shower and hit the rack, cause I've got to be up in the morning with the rising sun. Goodnite!

Frank: You lost me but you have my attention. How about another hint? I doubt there are many cheerleaders on this site (you being the exception Ms. MacIntosh!). How about a hint at tennyson_florida@hotmail.com?

When I look at the scanned pictures of our fervent ASF football players playing with all their might and sweat and tiredness I was wondering what would motivate tender teenagers to so much effort and sacrifice, and I realized that they all belonged to a group that was clearly defined to fight a clearly defined enemy, the opposing football team from another school. This makes me think about current religious ideologies and why we as humans have this inborn nature to group together to fight an external enemy.

In prehistoric times, nature was brutal. The only way to survive was to group together, have a group mentality and to fight adversity as a team. Later on it was group vs group. Naturally the group that had the strongest group mentality would survive. As groups grew bigger religion came into play. I can imagine in the times of Moises how living a life of idolatry, superstition, paganatry would be self destructive to a group at the face of low resource natural adversity, thus the ten commandments were born.

I see Alex trying to bring together a group. He is naturally rising to his self perservering instincts to bring forth fear to us all to a common enemy, far and remote and most likely unknown and non understandable: The Chinese. HOwever times have changed. We live in a world that is year by year noticeably growing smaller and knowlegdable through communications and through the internet.

Alex, it is time to understand why we all act in such and such ways. To throw away reason to such undefinable things as "God", "Faith", "Sin" etc, is to relax the mind and intelligence we were born with and is the ultimate sin IMHO. We need to act now with the individual intelligence, instead of the group intelligence that religion, army patriotism, boy scouts group or school football spirit mentality.

In the 1981 chat you said proudly you liked to think. I know you think alot because your arguments have a lot of logic and good faith. It is unfortunate you are basing all your thinking on an unreal abstract imaginary and fantastic thought of Christ and God.

I hope to see you at your class reunion, you will be comforted to see I am an ordinary (and thinking) human being like you, not the devil you must be imagining I am :-)

 Richard Whately 1787-1863

English philosopher and theologian; Archbishop of Dublin from 1831 'Never forget, gentlemen,' he [Whateley] said, to his astonished hearers, as he held up a copy of the 'Authorized Version' of the Bible, 'never forget that this is not the Bible,' then, after a moment's pause, he continued, 'This, gentlemen, is only a translation of the Bible.'

David--'excelent' comments!

Gabriela--Interesting passage. But as an old English teacher of mine would have said; Can you EXPAND???

Man! Excellent questions! This bunch is obviously highly intelligent! (Too bad some of you appear to be in the wrong team, thats ok, I'll keep praying for you!)

Tennyson, the Bible teaches that small children are spiritually alive in a state of innocence. Although they and all of us were born with a sinful nature, little children are innocent before God, and therefore God grants them eternal life on the merits of the death of Jesus Christ should they die in childhood. The Apostle Paul put it this way " I was alive once without the law, but when the law came sin revived and I died." In other words, before Paul could understand the difference between right and wrong, before he could grasp the Law of God, he was alive, spiritually, but when he became aware of the Law, he also became aware of sin and, like all of us, proceeded to give life to sin, to obey sin, and thus his spirit died. Jesus also said "Let the little children come to me, for to such as these belongs the Kingdom of God" and David said of his dead baby, born of adultery with Bathsheba,after God refused to heal the baby because of David's sin and the baby died, "He can not come to me, but I will go to him", understanding that after his death David would go into the Presence of God, his baby, though born of adultery, would be there. So, according to the Word of God, little children who die in infancy are saved by the grace of God, although they are not capable of believing.

Homero, I do not pretend to know when all these people will die, or when the end of the world as we know it is coming, and certainly not of my natural wisdom. God, however, does know when all things will happen, and some things He has given to us for us to know. Although I would never put any dates on any fulfillment of any prophecy, once the prophecy begins to be fulfilled, then we can know that it is being fulfilled by simply observing what happens. For example, the Bible speaks of knowledge increasing, men traveling back and forth and high rates of speed, of the Euphrates river being able to be dried up by a damn at will, of an army of 200 million men, of the military capability of killing one third of the population of the earth, and you and I can observe that for the first time in history these conditions are being met, and at the same time, now, the Bible sayts these would be the conditions at the second coming of Christ, and He said it, He revealed it with the purpose of letting us know. You and I can observe these things, and understand that this is the time God spoke about regarding the end of this order of things on the earth. The prophet Daniel "understood by reason of books" as the narrative says, that it was time for the Babylonian exile of the Jewish people to come to and end, and so it was. That fulfillment he understood by studying the books of the Old Testament he had available. When he understood by reading and studying, he gave himself to prayer and fasting, and then God revealed the things concerning the end time to him. So you and can understand by studying the Bible and observing the times, in fact, understanding these things, according to the Bible, will be a line between being lost and being saved, the prophecy says that "Non of the wicked will understand, but they that understand shall instruct many" So, I do hope that, if not now, later, before your hearts beat the last time, that you will have understood at least partially, and mainly that God is the One doing all these things and that salvation comes through Jesus Christ.

As to your statement that the meaning of a Biblical passage depends on the version of the Bible I would have to disagree thoroughly. The meaning of a Biblical passage does not change with a translation or version of the Bible, it really doesn't at all, no matter which translation you read, the New World Translation excepted (it is an purposeful mistranslation) and also paraphrases, the meaning of and the core of Christian (and Hebrew) doctrine is intact. This would also adress your statement, Gabriela. The translation of the Bible from its original Hebrew and Greek texts does not in any way take away from its reliability, and, in fact, the preservation of the text through millenia of translation and copying is itself a witness to Divine preservation of it.

Da-a-a-ave! I don't think you are a devil, my man! I think the devi has got you deceived and blinded, but so was I and every other born again Christian, that's why we need to get saved! Dave, open your eyes and read my response to Homero concerning the things prophesied that are beginning to be fulfilled, even your statement that the world is getting smaller is a fulfillment of prophecy! The Bible teaches that we will have a one world government before the return of Jesus Christ, and it is already being formed! Stay tuned to the lesson on New World Order! But observe these things, and you will realize that it is not irrelevant at all, it invcolves you and I personally and directly! There is a huge difference between instilling fear and bringing soberness. It would be instilling fear if the Bible didn't actually mention there will be an army of 200 million men that will start a major war and that in this war ther will be used military capability to detroy a third of the population of the earth, it would be instilling fear if there was not any signs of this actually happening, but when you actually have a nation with that specific number of military able men, and you have the military capability, the fire power to actually kill one third of the world population and even many times more, and when that nation that has the men is not just once, but repeatedly threatening nuclear war agaisnt the United States, then its not instilling fear, its bringing soberness, telling us its time to wake up, give it up and surrender to the Lord!

Frank, every Bible scholar knows that when God inspired the Biblical writers, when His Spirit moved on them, although He moved them even to the choice of the words to write, He did not do away with their personalities or education or cultural background. That is another thing that speaks loudly for the Divine Inspiration of the Bible! It was written by over 40 men, from kings and generals to doctors and fishermen and farmers, through 1,500 years, on three different continents, in three different languages on many, many different subjects, on many different styles and genre, and yet it flows like a whole, like one author wrote it! John would use terminology he was familiar with, his own personality and education is in his writing, he was not a military man. The point is that there is a terrible war coming, an army of 200 million, one third of the earth's population being wiped out and all these conditions are being met right now as we speak! Keep your eyes peeled! Begin to read the news and look at world events remembering these prophecies that you are learning, and you will see the Hand of God! Just within the last couple of weeks another event took place that has end time implications! The treaty between Iran and Russia, these two, according to the Bible, will unite, with Turkey and the United Nations, to attack Israel, using the problems in Jerusalem as an excuse. All of you, just observe these world events and keep the prophecies in mind. Next week "The United States In Bible Prophecy"

Hehehe, I can feel that I am after something when I see that Alex responds to me with the most exclamation points and the most distortion of my name ("Da-a-a-ave!").

Alex, it is interesting to see how you come up with term "sobering" vs what I think is really "fear". I assume you mean by sobering that people are in generally in a state of lethargy and blindness and that by your preachings you enlighten them to the realization of your theoritical prophecy. I can imagine that you see everyone blind to what you see so obvious carrying on with their daily chores and sins while you see this cataclysmic event coming and so very soon. However your prophecy is far from being just a "sobering" statement. YOu are actually saying that 2/3rds or even more of the population are going to die and not only that but are going straight to hell as these people are the unfortunate condemned by the Lord. Unless of course you repent and give yourself to Jesus Christ. I can't imagine a way more frightening and persuasive way to convince people! This is far from sobering, its outright alarming. You are two steps away from going to the streets and shouting with all your might that the world is coming to an end. Be aware of the path of lunacy your line of logic is taking you!

YOu say you are licensed as a Southern Baptist minister. Don't you have anything to do with the Seven Day Advantist? Their main thing is also preparing for doomsday.

Edited by author 03-18-2001 03:57 AM
Normally I wouldn't be wasting my time trying to convince someone like Alex who is obviously so solidly set in his mind to the path of religion, Jesus Christ, God, etc. But I have an 18 year old daughter who despite my atheistic upbringing of her she seems determined to follow the path of Christianity. Its weird because my generation and my parents generation where notable in being contrarian and therefore antireligious. (Though my mother adopted an eastern religion in her midlife, in a totally cultish way, and I had to follow it during my teen and twenties, this was good in the sense that it allowed me to see the pitfalls of religious fanatism and cultism).

I have had a few philosophical and theological discussions with my daughter, and unfortunately it is very difficult. That is why again I take such an interest here, to try to understand what my daughter faces and receives when she goes to church. The good thing is that the churches here are not terribly forceful, but I can imagine if my daughter was of weaker spirit and moral she would have completely succumbed to the lazyness of nonthinking having all layed out to you by a book, the bible (in the same way my mother fell to the eastern religion she followed). I have suggested to her to read "Honoring the self" by Nathaniel Branden and "Why I am not a Christian" by Bertrand Russell, she in turned has counterattacked with "Coffeehouse Theology" by Jim Thomas, an excellent book too in its own flawed logic.

One might think that what is so wrong with believing in the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Bible? In rougher times, I can very well have accepted that the justice and humanity Jesus Christ gave us would be a lot better than the brutality of the sword and the strongest which was the other option left in those times. HOwever we live in different times now, specially in the civilized world, where the internet and electronic communications can surface the most insignificant injustice in microseconds to the whole world. It is time now to give more power to the individual, power taken away in the first place because individual brutality would have been to destructive in more primitive times.

I wouldn't be so against believing in God, after all it will seemingly make you a morally better person, but when you think in God, you relax your mind, and your thinking, having all the unexplainable already explained to you, this betrays the existence of your own brain and mind that you were born with.

David--My younger brother also found religion at about the age of 18, as he transitioned from high school into college. It bothered me for a long time, but ultimately, I could do nothing about it. Oh, I think I can explain the reasons behind his conversion in detail, but he won't listen to my analysis. Ironically, he is still single, while I, the atheist, have gotten married and had a family.
   From my observations of my brother and other situations, I have come to the following conclusion: Many young people are confused as they leave the safety of their homes and high schools and head out into the world on their own. They are supposed to be "adults," yet they still haven't figured out the "key to life." So they desperately look for answers. If they were raised in a church, they might rebel. If they had no religious exposure, they may seek answers there.
   David, your daughter is on her own. She is grown. You have done the best you can do. Continue to be true to yourself. That is the most important. But be there for her when she needs you.

Alex--you seem to be impressed by "travelling back and forth at high rates of speed." Isn't it all very relative?
When mankind first learned to ride horses, the relative speed of locomotion increased greatly. Then, 125 years ago, clipper ships were setting speed records on the oceans, while steam locomotives were crossing our continent in unimaginable brevity. Isn't this about when that Miller guy thought Christ was returning?
     I theorize that any war where and army of 200 million men was involved would quickly go from conventional to nuclear warfare. Thus, I suspect that more than 1/3 of mankind would perish.
    What's wrong with world government? Isn't it the logical progression of the political maturity on our one planet, which does keep getting smaller? The earth and its resources are finite. Only some benevolent world body can ultimately protect the interests of all earth's inhabitants, be they human or otherwise.

Edited by author 03-21-2001 01:37 AM
It is absolutely amazing! It goes right over your heads! Let me try again... HELLO!!! ITS HAPPENING, MY MEN, ITS HAPPENING BEFORE YOUR VERY EYES! DON'T DODGE THE WORDS, DON'T MAKE EXCUSES, FOCUS ON WHAT IS HAPPENING! A TWO THOUSAND YEAR OLD PROPHECY SAYS THERE WILL BE AN ARMY OF 200 MILLION MEN, CLICK OVER TO THE CIA REPORT, IT IS NOW! A TWO THOUSAND YEAR OLD PROPHECY SAYS THERE WILL BE FIREPOWER ENOUGH TO KILL 1/3 OF MANKIND, IT IS HAPPENING NOW, A TWO THOUSAND YEAR OLD PROPHECY SAYS THE EUPHRATES WILL BE ABLE TO BE DRIED UP AT WILL, IT IS HAPPENING NOW, A TWO THOUSAND YEAR OLD PROPHECY SAYS THERE WILL BE A WORLD GOVERNMENT IN PLACE, AND THAT GOVERNMENT WILL BE THE GOVERNMENT OF THE ANTI-CHRIST, IT IS BEING FORMED NOW! AND YOUR RESPONSE IS, WHEN YOU SEE THAT IT IS HAPPENING, "WORLD GOVERNMENT IS THE NEXT STEP IN THE NATURAL PROGRESSION, WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT?" WHATS WRONG IS THAT ALL THESE THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING ARE HAPPENING JUST AS THE BIBLE SAID TWO THOUSAND YEARS AGO THEY WOULD HAPPEN, YOU YOURSELF SEE THEM HAPPENING, NOW YOU KNOW THE BIBLE SAYS THEY WOULD HAPPEN, AND YOU STILL CAN NOT GRASP THE SIGINIFICANCE OF IT! THAT THE LORD, THE LIVING GOD IS ALIVE AND WELL AND IS CONTROLING HISTORY AND BRINGING IT TO A CONCLUSION VERY SOON, AND THAT YOU ARE IN THE WRONG TEAM! THERE WILL BE WEEPING AND GNASHING OF TEETH! But it is not all bad news, the bad times will last only 7 years. the real bad times will last 3 1/2 years and then the Lord will establish His Kingdom of perfect peace on earth for one thousand years. Watch Israel, watch Jesrusalem, watch the peace talks, watch any world leader that is succesful in securing a peace treaty for seven years whereby the Jews can build their Temple of God and resume Old Testament animal sacrifcies, watch that man, he will come as a man of peace, but will be a man possesed by satan. He will go stand in the rebuild Temple of God and stoip the renewed animal sacrifices, and he will claim to be God, the Messiah of the Jews, then there will be 3 1/2 years of great Tribulation, the antio-christ will persecute Jews and born again Christians, and God will begin to rain judgements like in th eOld Testament on the non-believers, 3 1/2 years later the United Nations will intervene in Israel over Jerusalem, and just when the Jews are about to be desttroyed, Jesus Christ will intervene, having taken the believers out of the world not long before, Jesus will intervene against the United Nations on the side of Israel and they will recognize Him as their Messiah, and then there will be peace for one thousand years. Watch!... AND SET YOUR MIND TO UNDERSTAND! (Now I know why, someone is praying for you.)

Thanks for asking, Frank, but I think the quote I posted speaks for itself, especially with this audience and in light of these discussions.

Since we are all at least bilingual if not multilingual, we are all well aware of how a translation always slightly skews, indeed, sometimes totally butchers the original intent of a document.

The more removed the different cultures are from each other, the more the translation is suceptible to changing the intent of the original. The esquimos have 50 different words that all translate into "white." Do you see how a translation may not do justice, could even get you quite lost, if you do not fully understand the full scope of the culture of origin?

A single language can change from place to place. What is it to open the boot, is it to lift the lid of the trunk of your car, or unzip your footwear? That would depend on what side of the pond you're on. Language changes with time. What did "gay" mean just 50 years ago and what does it mean today?

If these significant discrepancies can occur within such a limited time and space, imagine the vast chasms of misinterpretations that a highly subjective, poetic and powerful group of books such as the Bible could be subject to, over 2000 years and an array of cultures. Every emperor and pope who ordered a translation or transcription had the opportunity to edit it, according to their own beliefs and power interests. Any monk transcribing pages upon pages could have left out a key word, which could change a meaning for all the ensuing offspring of that edition. Modern versions of the Bible are not even direct translations from the original, but translations of translations of translations, great-great-grandchildren of the original books by who knows how many generations! Just take your basic King James Version and compare it to the Mormon version, or any other, and you'll find great discrepancies. Even if we had access to the original manuscripts, which we don't, we have no cultural context to interpret from, since these cultures are long dead.

It follows, at least in my mind, that when we look into the Bible today, we are not seeing the literal Word of God, as some would have you believe. What we have now is the result of an evolution of many different cultures' beliefs, all centered around a collection of stories. The power behind the book is not in it's content, it is in the interpretation that we ourselves charge it with. It is more of a mirror than it is a conveyor.

Gabriela--Your original passage did speak for itself. But now, you have also spoken quite eloquently on its behalf. If the bible is ultimately just a mirror of today's cultures, are there any core truths within the bible that have stood the test of time? Or has every sentence on every page of the bible been so reinterpreted that it cannot resemble that which was written almost 2000 years ago?

Alex--As I understand it, Christ's disiples thought he would return soon after his death. When he didn't, they assumed he would at least return during their own lifetimes. He didn't.

Back in 1989, I was visiting a friend in New York. He had become involved with the Pentacostal religion. We went on a long walk one evening, where he tried to convince me that Christ was going to return in 1994. Again, Christ did not return, and I understand that Pentacostals no longer specify and exact date when Christ will reappear.

How many times can you cry "wolf" without looking foolish?

Alex: What does soon mean? Months, Years, Decades, Centuries? If you can't be specific about that, then how can you be specific about your "facts". One of your criteria is 200 million-strong army men. 200 million men, 200 million able, 200 million trained? The Russians could have put out 200 million able men against anyone during the cold war.

Sorry, I have to do this in parts as I am having internet problems. And I think the other "facts" could have occured at least 10 years ago. If so, then I guess it's decades from now. At what stage could the Euphrates have been dried up at will? Surely we could have wiped out the entire world's population, if not 1/3 in the 70's. So when you say things are very specific, they are not. And if you're saying that I am a non-believer who will perish with the rest of the non-believers, you are not correct. For I meet your criteria for salvation, as you describe it.

Back to this 200 million man army. Was the prophecy waiting for a CIA report? We live in reletively peaceful times. So why now? Unless soon means 20 or 30 years from now and the Chinese have time to built up that imaginary army. They will certainly need quite a bit of money to cloth, arm and feed all those men. Not to mention logistics. Did you see how long it took the well-equiped United States to get over to the Middle East in 1990? And that was well under a million men and they had support from many countries and no one trying to stop them.

So let's say the Chinese try to move these 200 million, heck (because it's the "About God" chat page) let's say 20 million men. How are they going to do it with many free states trying to stop them? Unless soon means a hundred years from now and the Chinese come up with all the answers by then. So is soon 100 years? Actually soon can mean 1 million years if you compare it to the age of the earth. Even if you take Mr. Loya's version of the age of the earth, 100 years is reletively soon.

So logistically it makes no sense Alex. And let's say that all that you say is correct and everything is lined up just how God predicted, then what is soon? You have had an answer for everything, what about the definition of soon when it comes to this big battle?

I have rea