jessee wrote:

God further demonstrated His love for us by dying on the cross for those very sins. If you accept and believe that He died for your sins 'in your place' then we are forgiven. Our relationship is then restored with God.

1. We broke fellowship with God through unbelief, now we must restore fellowship through belief.

What must we believe?

2. Jesus Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead.
Do you believe this?

Abracadabra.

I can help somewhat with a story that explains Gods justice and His love.....its just a silly story.

A captain of a ship has rules the crew must live by. They are strictly enforced to keep harmony on board. One rule is no stealing. Everyone agrees with the rule. However, it is soon discovered someone has been stealing from the stores of food and there is a severe shortage as a result. No one trusts anyone, suspicion and hate brews. It is soon discovered that it is the cabin boy, the 10 yr old son of the captain. The penalty is 40 lashes at the main mast. The boy cannot survive the punishment....what will the captain do? He loves the boy. He also loves the crew and must maintain order. They will mutiny if justice is sacrificed. He must be fair and not show favoritism.....He passes judgement....40 lashes.

The boy is tied to the mast....the whip is readied......would you still think it unfair? Suppose the captain said wait.
Suppose the captain walked over to the boy, took off his own shirt and wrapped his arms around the guilty and gave the order "begin whipping".....would this satisfy his love for the condemned?
Would this satisfy his justice for the crew?
Would anyone refuse this kind of LOVE?

The boy is you.....
the captain is Christ.

Can’t you lead a good life without believing in Christianity?” This is the question on which I have been asked to write, and straight away, before I begin trying to answer it, I have a comment to make. The question sounds as if it were asked by a person who said to himself, “I don’t care whether Christianity is in fact true or not. I’m not interested in finding out whether the real universe is more what like the Christians say than what the Materialists say. All I’m interested in is leading a good life. I’m going to choose beliefs not because I think them true but because I find them helpful.” Now frankly, I find it hard to sympathise with this state of mind. One of the things that distinguishes man from the other animals is that he wants to know things, wants to find out what reality is like, simply for the sake of knowing. When that desire is completely quenched in anyone, I think he has become something less than human. As a matter of fact, I don’t believe any of you have really lost that desire. More probably, foolish preachers, by always telling you how much Christianity will help you and how good it is for society, have actually led you to forget that Christianity is not a patent medicine. Christianity claims to give an account of facts—to tell you what the real universe is like. Its account of the universe may be true, or it may not, and once the question is really before you, then your natural inquisitiveness must make you want to know the answer. If Christianity is untrue, then no honest man will want to believe it, however helpful it might be: if it is true, every honest man will want to believe it, even if it gives him no help at all.

As soon as we have realised this, we realise something else. If Christianity should happen to be true, then it is quite impossible that those who know this truth and those who don’t should be equally well equipped for leading a good life. Knowledge of the facts must make a difference to one’s actions. Suppose you found a man on the point of starvation and wanted to do the right thing. If you had no knowledge of medical science, you would probably give him a large solid meal; and as a result your man would die. That is what comes of working in the dark. In the same way a Christian and a non-Christian may both wish to do good to their fellow men. The one believes that men are going to live forever, that they were created by God and so built that they can find their true and lasting happiness only by being united to God, that they have gone badly off the rails, and that obedient faith in Christ is the only way back. The other believes that men are an accidental result of the blind workings of matter, that they started as mere animals and have more or less steadily improved, that they are going to live for about seventy years, that their happiness is fully attainable by good social services and political organisations, and that everything else (e.g., vivisection, birth-control, the judicial system, education) is to be judged to be “good” or “bad” simply in so far as it helps or hinders that kind of “happiness”.

Now there are quite a lot of things which these two men could agree in doing for their fellow citizens. Both would approve of efficient sewers and hospitals and a healthy diet. But sooner or later the difference of their beliefs would produce differences in their practical proposals. Both, for example, might be very keen about education: but the kinds of education they wanted people to have would obviously be very different. Again, where the Materialist would simply ask about a proposed action “Will it increase the happiness of the majority?”, the Christian might have to say, “Even if it does increase the happiness of the majority, we can’t do it. It is unjust.” And all the time, one great difference would run through their whole policy. To the Materialist things like nations, classes, civilizations must be more important than individuals, because the individuals live only seventy odd years each and the group may last for centuries. But to the Christian, individuals are more important, for they live eternally; and races, civilizations and the like, are in comparison the creatures of a day.

The Christian and the Materialist hold different beliefs about the universe. They can’t both be right. The one who is wrong will act in a way which simply doesn’t fit the real universe. Consequently, with the best will in the world, he will be helping his fellow creatures to their destruction.

With the best will in the world ... then it won’t be his fault. Surely God (if there is a God) will not punish a man for honest mistakes? But was that all you were thinking about? Are we ready to run the risk of working in the dark all our lives and doing infinite harm, provided only someone will assure us that our own skins will be safe, that no one will punish us or blame us? I will not believe that the reader is quite on that level. But even if he were, there is something to be said to him.

The question before each of us is not “Can someone lead a good life without Christianity?” The question is, “Can I?” We all know there have been good men who were not Christians; men like Socrates and Confucius who had never heard of it, or men like J. S. Mill who quite honestly couldn’t believe it. Supposing Christianity to be true, these men were in a state of honest ignorance or honest error. If there intentions were as good as I suppose them to have been (for of course I can’t read their secret hearts) I hope and believe that the skill and mercy of God will remedy the evils which their ignorance, left to itself, would naturally produce both for them and for those whom they influenced. But the man who asks me, “Can’t I lead a good life without believing in Christianity?” is clearly not in the same position. If he hadn’t heard of Christianity he would not be asking this question. If, having heard of it, and having seriously considered it, he had decided that it was untrue, then once more he would not be asking the question. The man who asks this question has heard of Christianity and is by no means certain that it may not be true. He is really asking, “Need I bother about it?” Mayn’t I just evade the issue, just let sleeping dogs lie, and get on with being "good”? Aren’t good intentions enough to keep me safe and blameless without knocking at that dreadful door and making sure whether there is, or isn’t someone inside?”

To such a man it might be enough to reply that he is really asking to be allowed to get on with being “good” before he has done his best to discover what good means. But that is not the whole story. We need not inquire whether God will punish him for his cowardice and laziness; they will punish themselves. The man is shirking. He is deliberately trying not to know whether Christianity is true or false, because he foresees endless trouble if it should turn out to be true. He is like the man who deliberately “forgets” to look at the notice board because, if he did, he might find his name down for some unpleasant duty. He is like the man who won’t look at his bank account because he’s afraid of what he might find there. He is like the man who won’t go to the doctor when he first feels a mysterious pain, because he is afraid of what the doctor might tell him.

The man who remains an unbeliever for such reasons is not in a state of honest error. He is in a state of dishonest error, and that dishonesty will spread through all his thoughts and actions: a certain shiftiness, a vague worry in the background, a blunting of his whole mental edge, will result. He has lost his intellectual virginity. Honest rejection of Christ, however mistaken, will be forgiven and healed—“Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him.” 1 But to evade the Son of Man, to look the other way, to pretend you haven’t noticed, to become suddenly absorbed in something on the other side of the street, to leave the receiver off the telephone because it might be He who was ringing up, to leave unopened certain letters in a strange handwriting because they might be from Him—this is a different matter. You may not be certain yet whether you ought to be a Christian; but you do know you ought to be a Man, not an ostrich, hiding its head in the sand.

But still—for intellectual honour has sunk very low in our age—I hear someone whimpering on with his question, “Will it help me? Will it make me happy? Do you really think I’d be better if I became a Christian?” Well, if you must have it, my answer is “Yes.” But I don’t like giving an answer at all at this stage. Here is door, behind which, according to some people, the secret of the universe is waiting for you. Either that’s true or it isn’t. And if it isn’t, then what the door really conceals is simply the greatest fraud, the most colossal “sell” on record. Isn’t it obviously the job of every man (that is a man and not a rabbit) to try to find out which, and then to devote his full energies either to serving this tremendous secret or to exposing and destroying this gigantic humbug? Faced with such an issue, can you really remain wholly absorbed in your own blessed “moral development”?

All right, Christianity will do you good—a great deal more good than you ever wanted or expected. And the first bit of good it will do you is to hammer into your head (you won’t enjoy that!) the fact that what you have hitherto called “good”—all that about “leading a decent life” and “being kind”—isn’t quite the magnificent and all-important affair you supposed. It will teach you that in fact you can’t be “good” (not for twenty-four hours) on your own moral efforts. And then it will teach you that even if you were, you still wouldn’t have achieved the purpose for which you were created. Mere morality is not the end of life. You were made for something quite different from that. J. S. Mill and Confucius (Socrates was much nearer the reality) simply didn’t know what life is about. The people who keep on asking if they can’t lead a decent life without Christ, don’t know what life is about; if they did they would know that “a decent life” is mere machinery compared with the thing we men are really made for. Morality is indispensable: but the Divine Life, which gives itself to us and which calls us to be gods, intends for us something in which morality will be swallowed up. We are to be re-made. All the rabbit in us is to disappear—the worried, conscientious, ethical rabbit as well as the cowardly and sensual rabbit. We shall bleed and squeal as the handfuls of fur come out; and then, surprisingly, we shall find underneath it all a thing we have never yet imagined: a real Man, an ageless god, a son of God, strong, radiant, wise, beautiful, and drenched in joy.

“When that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.” 2 The idea of reaching “a good life” without Christ is based on a double error. Firstly, we cannot do it; and secondly, in setting up “a good life” as our final goal, we have missed the very point of our existence. Morality is a mountain which we cannot climb by our own efforts; and if we could we should only perish in the ice and unbreathable air of the summit, lacking those wings with which the rest of the journey has to be accomplished. For it is from there that the real ascent begins. The ropes and axes are “done away” and the rest is a matter of flying.

No - but i think a valid point was made as to the more perfect the genes statement.

Sorry K, I still cant get past the first few chpts. of genesis yet alone to thinking of the gene pool - i do stand by what I've read as there being man and woman prior to A&E - this makes more sense to me that the fundies view of two stories of the same creation , and now that I've read about B.G., also believing that, though i still don't know if he holds to that or not - just confirms it to me even more. B.G. changes his mind a lot over the years so who knows - but still other "C's" hold onto this train of thought also. It was not until Darby and the rest that followed after him such as Moody, Scoffield etc.,

that "infallibility" of the >>>book"<<< became the later cry of fundies.

It's where they were all at, when they got their butts kicked in the scopes monkey trail, after that they calmed down for awhile but rose up again in full force when hagan and his students brought it back to the fore front of modern Evangelical thinking - the futurist view of Hagan, lindsey, hinn, tbn,700 club and robertson, and a large host of others.

This along with the unfounded "re-birth" of speaking in tongues, prophecy, laying on of hands, casting out demons, and the other gifts given to the early church >>for that time only<< - and also the wrongful teachings of the same >name it and claim it< or use of god/jesus as there "private genie's" to give them things, and there incessent cries of "you cant out give god" used by the scammers of the money seeking grubby little pastors that breed more of them on tv every year, has corrupted modern day christianity past anything that would be recognizable by the first or second century followers of christ.

When you start getting that "hardcore" in your beliefs, it becomes impossible to see anthing outside of them, a major fault with all sects of "religious" >> beliefs,<< christian or not.

When >>man<< is put in charge of the things of god - god is always pushed to the side and selfish interest begin to devour any truth that might have been with in to begin with.

So now if one wants to be honest in their search for god especially a "book god" - one has no choice but to look at it on their own and try to understand it as well as they can "on their own" if you have to resort to any outside influences of other mans writing of what god is saying then again your just following an interpretation by >>>others<<< >>> not god. <<<

now this does not negate the need for at least a translation of hebrew/greek to english, for basic understanding if your really going to "study it", thats true of anything you read in another language you dont speak. But the >>>theology, sectarian dogma, and all denominational sect beliefs<<< have to be disreguarded if one is to even find a little truth yet all of it.
So i say to any that read - trust your heart and mind and common sense and your 6th sense of >>>intuition<<<. Do not listen to anyone that is so locked up on their take on things that they allow no room for compromise or difference of opinion, or logical debate or any that would make you see it's there way or damnation. who of mankind want's to follow after such nonsense?

And the other thing i look out for is "agenda's" if one is trying to convince me/you of something by pulling a bunch of verses together, you can be sure thats a secterian agenda. If one can not speak from a general conversation what is being asked, then i become wary, you dont have to - but i do.

Hi. As I understand, you have many questions. I will try and deal with your first...

your question is as follows....
1. I was taught that God was all loving, all knowing supreme being. That's all fine and good, but it seems to me, from the Bible... Be good and do exactly what he says and don't sin...don't even think of sinning or this all loving God is going to throw me into the pit of hell. God is supposed to be like our father, if this is true, it is my OPINION that he is saying, "I love you unconditionally, now behave or I'm throwing you into the furnace... So much for love....

Now, I hope this helps your understanding....

God does love you. He loves me too. That is not the real issue. The real issue is DO WE LOVE HIM?
If you have a child, and you love him, then you will teach him not to do wrong. Why? Because you love him and want to protect the child from harm. This is what comes from caring. Likewise God who made us seeks to protect us from doing ourselves harm. When we chose to do our own will and walk away from His will for our lives we are walking away from Him and toward our own pain. God does not desire this, but does allow it.
This happened in the garden of Eden. We call it sin. And when it entered the human race we were seperated from Him.

God further demonstrated His love for us by dying on the cross for those very sins. If you accept and believe that He died for your sins 'in your place' then we are forgiven. Our relationship is then restored with God. Remember, sin seperates us from God. Asking for forgiveness is simply the only way back to Him. We are restored in a relationship with Him through Jesus if we beleive. This is the only way back.

He doesnt send you to hell because He hates you or contradicts His love. If anyone goes to hell, it is because they chose it for themselves. He gave you the choice here and now and honors that choice. You cant remain stubborn and obstinantly refusing to make that choice for Him, and then blame Him for that very choice 'you yourself made', can you? Think about it. If there is a hell, it is a place separated from the love of God. Heaven therefore is a place we are united with God and His love. If you do not want Him here and now in your life, do you think you would want Him for all of eternity. Would this even be fair; to drag a soul, kicking and screaming into a relationship with Him that its whole life was one of demonstrating no such desire. A soul that seeks darkness gets darkness, not light. He gives us what we desire. We cannot then blame Him for that.

So the question is....what do you desire?

Let me be even more specific...Do you love God? Do you love His Son Jesus? If you do then believe.....John 3 vs 16.

Oh it absolutely does. Not to imply that all religious people are sociopaths, but the ones who become fantatical about preaching a religion are the ones to keep an eye on.

What other "institution" can a person step right into without any credentials whatsoever and immediately gain a following using Jesus Christ as a patsy?

They instantly obtain "blind faith" followers.

They instantly obtain support from many other "Christians".

They have a book to quote from that they can easy twist for their own agenda because it is so ambigous, and can easily be used to propagate bigotry and hatred toward almost anything other than "Christianity" itself (In fact, it can even be used to turn against other Christians who have meeker ideas about what Jesus stood for!)

It's almost like having followers on strings with the strings just dangling where anyone can come along and pick them up and claims to be speaking for the "Bible, Jesus and God".

It gives people who had absolutely no recognition before, a stage with a spotlight to put them in an instant power of authority and "righteousness".

It's an extremely inviting scenario for people who need attention and want to be recognized as being in a position of authority.

What higher authority can a person claim to be speaking for then from the position of speaking for God himself!

Yes, it's extremely attractive for sociopaths who are desperate for attention and respect. They use God as a crutch to prop up their egos.

I'm not saying that anyone on this site does that. I'm just saying that this is what the religion offers to people because it allows for just anyone to jump in and proclaim to speak for God at any moment. No credentials required. Anyone can become a Paper Pope just by proclaiming it on their own.

This is a huge danger of Protestantism. It's open to being absused by random egotists who need attention.

Sad but true.

which god would somone love? The old testament god [father,son,spirit] or the new T. god -[father,son,spirit]?

If one or the other or both, then whats the point? how can you love someone you have not seen and been near or close to? what type of love should one feel towards this multi-god of the book? how can anyone truly love someone they cannot be with? and why would anyone be drawn to a god that kills you if you don't live up to his expectations of being a son/daughter? misbehave and your consumed by fire or water or whatever - and you want someone to love this thing? tell me of your concept of love?

Yes - there certainly are those who abuse Christianity for their own means, but hey, why stop there.

The Evolutionist have Hitler to represent them. He got an ENTIRE country to back himup, and then got Mussolini on board, and his country as well!

And the UFO'ers have Heavens Gate holding up thei end of the bargain - let's not leave out Jeannie in our discussion.

Who could forget the Islamists and the Talaban! There's a big step for the woman's movement. Strap on a bomb and get your 70 virgins - step right up. Pass out a few "smilies" for those who don't like their birkas's

Then the Atheists have Stalin to thank for not being left out of "the group". What's a few hundred thousand countryman?

Abra - you need to expand your thinking - keep up with the times.

"The Evolutionist have Hitler to represent them."

"And the UFO'ers have Heavens Gate holding up thei end of the bargain - let's not leave out Jeannie in our discussion."

"Who could forget the Islamists and the Talaban!"

Then the Atheists have Stalin to thank for not being left out of "the group".

Jeanniebean

We have two opposing beliefs. This leads me to the following conclusion. We can't both be right at the same time. One of us is simply dead wrong. Good luck with your position though. I hope it was a wise one.