July 18, 2008

Doubt itself, the Catalyst for Atheism

We are tempted YES. That doesn't mean we feed those temptations. Always remember the three monkeys, don't allow evil to influence you. Cover up, get away, or remove yourself from false teachings. We don't bring a sex addict to a porn shop, we don't bring a alcoholic to a bar, and we don't feed the doubt, we must continue in FAITH.

Doubt itself, I believe, is the catalyst for atheism.

In the News: Dan Barker and his cronies at Freedom from Religion [Christianity] were in the news yesterday when the Federal Judge threw out their lawsuit. Barker wanted to sue 'Dakota Boys and Girls Ranch' because the courts sometimes order disabled children to the ranch for education and assistance with their mental or troubled needs. It's a ranch that takes in kids that are emotionally/behaviorally disturbed or addicted to substances where all other options has failed. They are a true asset for helping children and have a great success rate. It was Barker's "contention that public money is used to indoctrinate children with religion and the state agencies' referrals to the ranch are unconstitutional." Would you consider Dan Barker's tree of chosen path, good or bad fruit? Does the devil have a firm grip on him?

Barker is the co founder of a secular humanist religious group called 'Freedom from Religion', should be called Freedom from Christ. Barker also wrote a book that I was given the task of reviewing some time ago. Before you ask the answer is yes, I did read it. In his book, "Losing faith in faith" he says the beginning of his atheism began when he started as a preacher, became more of a liberal Christian and kept on doubting (opposite of faith) until "blam" he was an atheist. It was a quite obvious story. Most of you gave me similar stories, most recently Stan.

To make the point clear lets look at the apostles and what they, not to mention the 250 million people in 2007, had or will have to endure, the torture, arrests, be-headings and such. They were put through prosecutions, tribulation, and great turmoils. Yet they kept their Hope and honor and never wavered in their faith.

The Bible talks a great deal of doubt, as you know.

Deuteronomy 28:66 "And thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear day and night, and shalt have none assurance of thy life:"

Matthew 14:31 "And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?"

Luke 12:29 "And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind."

Romans 14:23 "And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin."

We must not trust our own lying wickedness, or others, and make sure we are not pushing our own agendas over or replacing God's (a.k.a. denominations or false religions). The thrust of my point though, is about leaving God entirely and abandoning Him.

To doubt God Himself or that Jesus is not Lord is so damaging that this atheism is a move from light to darkness. This is the point that 2 John the 7th verse is clear about.

Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

I beg all of you not to depend on, or lose faith because of, anything that mankind has done. We must have faith that God's plan is true and sound and no one will get to Heaven without Jesus as it says in His Word, the authority we should all live by.

James 1:5-8 "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. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord. A double minded man is unstable in all his ways."

22 comments:

  1. Regarding Barker's move from believer to non-believer and others like him, including myself, I think what you don't understand is that there is an expectation that comes when we are asked to have faith: We have an expectation that what we are asked to believe is true. So many people do just fine with faith until they start to look under the covers. For people like Barker they do research to help their ministries and that leads them to finding out things that loosen the hold faith had on them. Others, after reading the bible more deeply discover inconsistencies.

    Personally, I think there are people who are just not capable of having blind faith, though I have no studies or facts to back that up, it is just a conclusion I came to after reading these blogs and talking to others. Others, like yourself, are perfectly fine with taking in the bible and what it says without any doubts that it is the ultimate truth.

    So, in a sense, I agree with the title of this post, that doubt is the catalyst for atheism,

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Foo,

    Most of the ones with a 'falling away' from belief starts with an expectation from God of some sort. When God doesn't fulfill whatever is expected of Him, people start to doubt His existence. I have listened to many stories by atheists and many of the one that professed Christ feels duped in some way. They didn't feel something when they turned ti Christ. There were no changes once they prayed for something and got discouraged. Many of the stories I have heard fits so perfectly into the parable of the sower. Most of the stories that I have heard begins with the parents. They professed Christ but then they drank heavily, did drugs, or abused the wife and kids all in the name of Jesus. This is the most damaging thing that can be done so all you hypocritical parents out there go ahead be a drunk or a drug addict. Go ahead and be a dead beat Dad just don't do it under the umbrella of Jesus Christ. Say the truth, say you did it for satan but don't claim it's for God. These kids are lost now thanks to your parenting skills.

    Dan didn't do any research. Dan claimed all these contradictions and every one of them are a misunderstanding on his part. He threw the baby out with the whole message because of a typo.

    The original Bible is infallible, inspired, and inerrant word of God without fail. As far as contradictions, I can help you with some of these misconceptions, if you truly want to understand God better. First there is this 101 cleared up contradictions in the Bible But I like this one also because you can click on your specific contradiction:
    Countering Bible Contradictions


    One of Dan's big claim in his book of a Bible contradiction was Ahaziah's age, 22 or 42? (2 kings 8:26,2 chronicles 22:2)

    "Earlier, in 2 Kings 8:17-18, the author mentions that Ahaziah's father (Jehoram) was 32 when he became king, and died eight years later at the age of 40 (2 Chronicles 21:5, 20). Obviously, Ahaziah could not have been 42 at the time of his father's death at age 40, since that would make the son (Ahaziah) two years older than his father (Jehoram). Thus, the correct reading of Ahaziah's age is "twenty-two," not "forty-two."

    The simple answer to these queries is that a copyist, not an inspired writer , made these mistakes. In the case of Ahaziah, a copyist simply wrote twenty instead of forty." apologeticspress.org

    But to put is very simply, yes man penned the Bible but it was written by God. God did preserve His word and message. Logic would say if there is a God that created the universe and can do ALL things and still allow free will, he can preserve His word/message throughout the generations. Taking a few things that are typo's or inconsistencies (man is fallible) and throwing out the entire teachings of Salvation is reckless. (baby/ bathwater).

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hey are you Dan Marvin?

    I wanted to share something with you that comes into my awareness form time to time.

    I wonder why it is the the people who find themselves disillusioned with their faith or their practice of faith, end up throwing it all out.

    For instance, just given the things avialable in the world, lets suppose i was raised in a tribe that worships rocks. Eventaully i come to believe that the rocks are not answering my prayers. The rocks have no evidence of ever having life enough to give protection to my people. In the end i find i have lost faith in my people's rocks.


    Wouldn't you concider it a wee bit premature of me to then give up on ALL objects and forms of worship?

    I mean beyond rocks there are mysteries of weather, and astrology, and verious other excersises like yoga, and if i really was seeking for a god worthy of my trust and worship i should eventaully stumble across every kind of way to understand the thigns of spirit.

    What i am saying is i wonder how much these people LOOKED. All i seem to hear is how they struggled to keep what they had. And when it failed them, they set out to work on Dismantleing the parts of their minds that are geared for faith. As if Faith, like the skin of the natural penis, must be cut out in order to attain truth.

    I hear them make comments about how *difficult* it is to destroy their faith. They dont seem to mean "to cut out hope that their faith might be true after all" they mean........."i need to cut out all act and emotion of faith because the rock i was worshiping failed me. therefore all thigns of spirit will fail me."

    I dont hear stories of people who become disillusioned with their faith and go on to find other faiths that satisfy them. i dont see them seek out deeper and other meanings that can be applied to god. Nor even accuse themselves and work on their *sins*. And i surely dont see them as Having any further mastry over their flesh than they ever had.

    Look i read the arguments and i have seen my faith in the christian religion falter. I can see the pathetic apostate thing it has become. But that does not mean that the mechinisum for faith that exisits in me has no thing to be directed toward.

    It just opens up and makes my search for truth and god even more rich. Giveing me altered prespectives on the daily grind that alluded me when my people where worshipping rocks.


    But on the other hand, i am sure there are many who do go on to find enriching spiritaul things to hold to. But they dont make for popular atheist web sites.

    SO mayhap i have predetermined my oppnion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks Insanezenmistress,

    Yea, it's me. How are you doing. Ziltch hasn't been around here much, that I know of. I wanted to let you know I appreciate your well thought out viewpoint. In my opinion though, this subject is a little different then a pet rock.

    I started a new blog to make my point. I called it Atheists Eat Babies! Enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
  5. For years as a Christian I had problems with doubt. I took solace in the fact the when Thomas was at his greatest point of doubt, Jesus did not condemn Thomas, but rather he sought Thomas out with the facts Thomas needed. Modern believers look at Thomas in different ways. Some look at him with contempt or disgust, but some (me included) have taken a lot of encouragement from his story. The Bible indicates that Thomas spent several years walking beside Jesus. If Thomas could do that and have doubts, I think Jesus/God can handle anyone's doubts. The coolest part of the story to me is that Thomas was given what he needed to believe and more. Yes, my doubts have caused me to give up much of my old Christian belief system. But I am attempting to replace it with what I find to be most true. For example, I believe solidly in 1 Cor. 13, but even here love is placed higher over faith. Yes, love is more important than your faith, "But the greatest of these is love."

    For me personally, I think where Christians error is in pushing their own understanding of the Bible over maybe what God intended of its purpose. Consider the following: when I, or anyone having doubts, object to Ananias and Saphirra being killed by God, the typical Christian response is to justify God's reported behavior. Rather, I think a better answer would be to say, "I'm not sure why God allowed for the story to be put in the Bible. I can't say for sure God did kill those people, or if maybe that they died of natural causes around the same time and the writer made the assumption that God 'caused' their deaths. But what I do know is that God included the story for a reason, and we can learn from the story even if the story offends our sensibilities or sense of justice."

    Problems with interpretations are immense and many Christians get seriously bent out of shape over a fellow believer's views. Non-theists harp on the inconsistencies of interpretation to highlight the problems with the Bible. I agree with this criticism. If God wanted us to come to a unified perfect form of thought on what to believe, he would have compiled his message differently. However, it seems that God wants none to perish, and so he makes the messages he needs to come across simple. Why does an individual need a doctorate in theology to "rightly divide the Word of God?"

    As a believer, I used to insist that my understanding of scripture was correct because I believed the Holy Spirit imparted his understanding to me. I prayed, fasted and sought the Lord earnestly. As a Christian, I lived a righteous, albeit legalistic, life. I believed salvation was provided from faith through God's grace, and thus I thought that his grace would extend to my interpretation (and others) understanding of scripture. But what I learned is Bible College and Seminary is the opposite of what I am advocating. Knowledge of God and understanding or the scriptures requires much more than prayer, reading and fasting. I learned that the average person with a doctorate in ministry had views far different from a person with equivalent time in Bible study, but in a non-academic form. For example, I was raised in an Assemblies of God Church where the pastor spent 1 to 2 hours daily in study scripture for the 25 years of ministry that I knew him. Yet, doctors at Assemblies of God Theological Seminary (where I graduated from) would have viewed many of his understandings of scripture to be foolishness. Having known many doctors of theology, it is my experience that they find this typical.

    Now we get to the, but the most important view is what one holds of Jesus. This is the belief that I held onto for many years. I was able to understand that God would not expect everyone to earn a doctorate in theology so that they could rightly divide the Word of God. Moreover, it is dangerous to put your trust in any one individual no matter how much education that individual may have received. So, I assumed that God would not condemn a person for bad theology, because no one individual likely has perfect theology. So, my opinion now is, that you have the right to believe that God will condemn me for my opposing theological views, but if God does exist; only he knows the answer to my eternal fate.

    As a Christian, it was easy for my to justify my beliefs because of what was popularly believed or even by what I learned in the academic world. However, in the end, an interpretation of scripture, which is all any human has, is still ONLY an interpretation. Your interpretation may be right, but it may be wrong. I believe in studying and argue for the truth as you see, which is why I like your website, but for me, a doubter, I don't appreciate it when believers condemn me, or worse, call me dishonest because of my God given right to disagree with their interpretation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dan,

    I just read your blog on "eating babies" and if anything, that metaphor pushes me away from faith rather than toward it. The comparison may sound right in your own mind, but its sick and offensive. Let me turn it around on you and see you how you fare. It is closer to the truth that Christians are unfeeling Baby killers. We grow up hearing the stories of God killing infants and children for no offense or even for slight offenses. We are taught early on that these are justified killings and not to think about them. However, as time goes on the doubting believer starts to become sensitive to the baby killing. He sees all the Christians saying, "It’s okay, don't worry about it. Those people deserved it and God knows what he's doing." But for some reason it’s not enough, they start thinking, "I don't believe in baby killing. I think it wrong for ANY reason." Pretty soon they feel liberated and outraged that they could have ever been taught to believe that Baby killing was okay. Suddenly, the spanking that is encouraged in the Old Testament starts to sound barbaric as well. The doubter realizes that indeed spanking does fit the criminal definition of Assault and that parents should be arrested for it. The thirty years of psychological research that has shown corporal punishment to be an ineffective form of discipline starts making sense. Now the doubter starts practicing the nonviolent forms of discipline advocated by child psychologists, and to their amazement, the children are more responsive, better behaved, and mentally healthier because of the civilized treatment. Then they realize that the belief of spanking children stemmed from the other evil beliefs they once held. They realized that the justification of evil, and calling it good, caused them to be blind to how children should really be treated. So they speak out against baby killing and spanking to. They fault the God of the Bible for allowing those stories of baby killing to be called good when they were really evil all along.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ty,

    "For me personally, I think where Christians error is in pushing their own understanding of the Bible over maybe what God intended of its purpose."

    I agree this is called an eisegesis method. Does this mean that eisegesis thinking is wrong, I would say yes because it is a capricious attitude. It may even be breaking the 2nd Commandment and making a god to suite yourself.

    "I'm not sure why God allowed for the story to be put in the Bible. I can't say for sure God did kill those people, or if maybe that they died of natural causes around the same time and the writer made the assumption that God 'caused' their deaths. But what I do know is that God included the story for a reason, and we can learn from the story even if the story offends our sensibilities or sense of justice." Beautifully put. Amen

    Why does an individual need a doctorate in theology to "rightly divide the Word of God?"

    They don't, that isn't Biblical. Proverbs 9:10,Proverbs 3:5-6,John 10:27,John 14:26,John 8:31-32,Colossians 2:16,1 John 4:6,1 John 2:27

    If you try to get to know God through man's fallible intellect

    "Your interpretation may be right, but it may be wrong." I completely agree, I am not proud and I am humble enough to admit when I am wrong. If it can be proven Biblically, then I will concede.

    "I believe in studying and argue for the truth as you see, which is why I like your website, but for me, a doubter, I don't appreciate it when believers condemn me, or worse, call me dishonest because of my God given right to disagree with their interpretation."

    I agree, I too seek truth, where ever that leads. Remember I am not condemning you, you and God are. We are not to judge motives but we are to judge righteous judgments though. (John 7:24) Rebuke and reprove is in our arsenal to motivate an unrepentant sinner.

    It takes far more love to confront then to ignore the situation, perfect love is a constant confronter.

    Please don't be afraid to speak your mind, from what I can tell you are quite good at it. Welcome Ty, please stay.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ok Ty,

    What happened between the two comments? You flipped from logical to illogical real quick.

    "I just read your blog on "eating babies" and if anything, that metaphor pushes me away from faith rather than toward it."

    Sorry about that that wasn't the intent.

    "but its sick and offensive." Valid, but so is turning away from God and burning in hell forever.

    "Pretty soon they feel liberated and outraged that they could have ever been taught to believe that Baby killing was okay."

    Was it though? Aren't you judging God now? God knows future, you don't.

    You should respond to some these stories like "I'm not sure why God allowed for the story to be put in the Bible. I can't say for sure God did kill those people, or if maybe that they died of natural causes around the same time and the writer made the assumption that God 'caused' their deaths. But what I do know is that God included the story for a reason, and we can learn from the story even if the story offends our sensibilities or sense of justice."

    "Suddenly, the spanking that is encouraged in the Old Testament starts to sound barbaric as well. The doubter realizes that indeed spanking does fit the criminal definition of Assault and that parents should be arrested for it."

    Really? Who is judging now! Who is placing their own agenda before their own understanding.

    You are begging the question. I have a question, how many children do you have?

    "The thirty years of psychological research that has shown corporal punishment to be an ineffective form of discipline starts making sense."

    Whoopty doo, mankind also believe we came from monkeys also and that this entire universe is by accident. Prove that statement, or is this still hypothetical questioning?

    "Now the doubter starts practicing the nonviolent forms of discipline advocated by child psychologists, and to their amazement, the children are more responsive, better behaved, and mentally healthier because of the civilized treatment."

    Ah, self esteem. Self esteem movement is more dangerous then you could possibly imagine. Need more proof? 1, 2,3, you get the picture.

    It’s always been assumed that bullies have low self-esteem and that, as such, they act out violently. In contrast to old beliefs, recent research indicates that bullies act the way that they do because they suffer from unearned high self-esteem.

    This coddle love you talk about is believed that is the type of moms that bring up the 'Scot Peterson' sociopathic personalities of the world.

    "So they speak out against baby killing and spanking to. They fault the God of the Bible for allowing those stories of baby killing to be called good when they were really evil all along."

    So they trust mankind over God and they fall away but become well aware of their error on Judgement Day that they were horribly wrong to trust mankind. They spend eternity in hell forever to think about it. As for me and my kids we chose to fear God not man.

    It doesn't matter if you approve or not what matters if God approves. Remember Matthew 10:28 "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Whoopty doo, mankind also believe we came from monkeys also and that this entire universe is by accident."

    Do you actually believe either of those, or are you merely misrepresenting the position of scientists simply to make a point?

    Because either way, apes are not "monkeys", and the theories of probability are not "accident".

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dan,

    My point was that is was sick and offensive. As I began, what if I turned it on you to "see how you fare." Obviously it just upset you. It is not condusive to discourse in my opinion to be so grotesque that you alienate those you are trying to engage.

    And as for the difference between the two posts, I had not read your nonsense about eating babies. I was offensive to you to make my point.

    I actually dreamed this next point last night. If you truly believe that a true Christian cannot leave the faith, then your fears are unjustified. If anything thing, this "leaving the fold" movement is cleaning out the fold leaving only the true believers.

    Romans 10:9-10 says, "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved."
    The other verse I am going to quote you also know well, Ephesians 2:8-9 "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast."

    Faith comes from God to those who ask. Did Got deny my request for salvation as a small child in Sunday School. I grew up in a God fearing home. I truly loved God with all my heart, soul, mind and strength. I repented of all my sin, asking Christ for his grace and forgiveness to pay my debt. My downfall was actually deciding to go to Bible College. Perhaps North Central Bible College was a den of inequity in disquise, who knows. But I surely believed that God inhabited that place, as the praised of his people abounded there. My favorite place was chapel. I loved the worship teams and meditating and basking in the wonder of God. I did graduate from there with my degree in Christian Studies and moved on to the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary. Chapel wasn't as good there, and people were more "serious minded" in the academic sense. Everything was taken back to its original language. I wasn't offended by this level of understanding, but it was a change from Bible College. My faith in God never waived an iota during this time. I worked faithfully in apologetics as well. I had such a heart for the lost, espeically Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons. I would figure that I spent many hundreds of hours in research over a period of 5 to 6 years learning the fallacies of Mormon doctrine. In fact, I loved setting them up with these questions:

    1. Are you aware of how came to receive the Book of Mormon.

    Reply- Yes! They would proceed with the story of Joeseph Smith and the 10 gold tablets.

    2. What did Joeseph Smith use to translate the tablets?

    Reply- most missionaries would know the answer, the Urim and Thummin.

    3. Tell me what the Doctrine and Covenents says about this process?

    Reply- Most didn't remember exactly, but many would not approximately. Smith was inside the veiled area using the Urim and Thummin to translate the gold tablets. Smith would dictate the translation provided to a transcriptionist outside of the veil. Smith reported that God did not change the words in the Urim and Thummin until the transcriptionest had the translation perfect.

    4. I used to own a 100 year-old copy of the Book of Mormon. At that point I would ask them, "So, it is reasonable assume that this 1890's copy of the Book of Mormon is perfect, without error, the exact Word of God?"

    Reply - Always Yes.

    5. Would there be any changes that would need to be made to original copies of the Book of Mormon?

    Reply - No, but clever ones would see where I was going.

    6. How many changes do you think there are between the very first copy of the Book of Mormon and the most recent publication of the Book of Mormon?

    Reply - Usually I would get - I would think there are any.

    7. There are just over 4,000. From adding verses, to deleting verses, to grammatical errors, and so on. My challenge to them was to verify the knowledge for themselves. I begged them that if it were true that it cast doubt on the inerrancy of the Book of Mormon.

    Unfortunately, I was wielding a double edged sword as the metaphor goes. I noticed that the vast majority of Mormons were unpersuaded by arguement and unwilling to even look into the factual claims I was making. Just one error would have cast doubt on Smith's claim that God did not move change the words in the Urim and Thummin until the transcriptionist had it perfect. This would cast doubt on both the inerrancy of the Doctrine of Covenants and the Book of Mormon.

    This was not my only argument, I had hundreds that proved beyond reasonable doubt that Smith was a fraud. But the typical response was, "I've had a genuine experience from God, where he confirmed in my inner being that the Book of Mormon is true." The buring in the bussom experience.

    Had I remained uneducated in Theology, I probably would not have developed the doubts about the inerrancy of the Bible. But according to your theology, it is unlikely that I would yet be saved. Yes, I would be going to church, believing firmly in the salvation that God promised throught the verses I quoted above. But if 20+ years of acting on that belief, going into the ministry because I so firmly believed in the great commission, and because I was convinced so soundly to think that God had saved me and given me faith; then, I guess if I was never truly redeemed and God is giving me over to the evil of my heart, so be it. I will continue to live a righteous life. About the only changes I've made since giving up on the inerrancy of scripture to my life is that I occassionally swear now (I work for the Military and surprisingly I was able to not pick it up in the past), and now I drink alcohol. My first drink of alcohol was just a couple of years ago. I know drinking is not unBiblical, drunkness is. I never get drunk, and I never have driven even after having one drink, which is usually all I can handle because of my low tolerance. Two 5 oz glasses of wine is my limit.

    Finally, I actually do have a PhD in Psychology. While I was being crude in my previous point to make a point to you, the references about corporal punishment and the research showing that it is fairly ineffective compared to modern nonviolent forms of parenting is true-even in Christian households. Just as Christians sing the evils of slavery and would never advocate slavery, nearly EVERY doctor of psychology who claims to be a Christian acknowledges this research. A actual doctors will state the need for an EXTREMELY limited use of spanking for a limited age usually around 16 months to 26 months. As the child gets older, spanking has absolutely no benefits when compared to the other forms of nonviolent discipline.

    Respectfully,

    T.C.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Please forgive the grammatical errrors in my previous post. I was trying to type too quickly because I had to get back to work. Some of the sentences are hard to interpret, but I think you can get to what I was trying to say from the context. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Quasar,

    Actually I was being flip and merely misrepresenting the position of scientists, simply to make a point.

    So if I understand you correctly, you believe we come from apes? Ohhhhh OK that's logical.

    Ty,

    I will try my best to be respectful, forgive me but at times I have people punching me as I am trying to help them out of the fires, sometimes I get rough.

    "I guess if I was never truly redeemed and God is giving me over to the evil of my heart, so be it."

    I would be crushed beyond recognition with this news. How you can be so flip about it is possibly the reason for your turning away? Don't you care? Can you understand why God possible rejected your perceived sincerity?

    I mentioned this before but it's worth repeating over and over.

    God's word declares that this is God's plan of salvation; 1. Hear the WORD of God. 2. Believe that Jesus is the Messiah. 3. Repent of your ways that are contrary to God's will. 4. Be Baptized INTO Christ for the forgiveness of your sins and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 5. Remain faithful to the Covenant you have made with God.

    Let me ask you, were you baptized? What did that mean to you? Did you understand that you were making a covenant with God at the time? Does your word mean much to you? Do you say what you mean and mean what you say?

    1 Peter 3:21 "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:"

    Do you understand the Covenant that you broke with God? Please make things right and repent of your sinful actions. It's never too late to ask for forgiveness, until it is too late.

    You say: "A actual doctors will state the need for an EXTREMELY limited use of spanking for a limited age usually around 16 months to 26 months." and this gem "Had I remained uneducated in Theology, I probably would not have developed the doubts about the inerrancy of the Bible."

    God says:

    Ps 89:32 Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes.
    Pr 10:13 In the lips of him that hath understanding wisdom is found: but a rod is for the back of him that is void of understanding.
    Pr 13:24 He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.
    Pr 22:15 Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.
    Pr 23:14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.
    Pr 26:3 A whip for the horse, a bridle for the ass, and a rod for the fool’s back.
    Pr 29:15 The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.
    La 3:1 I am the man that hath seen affliction by the rod of his wrath.

    Let me ask you who's wisdom should we follow, the fallible intellect of man or God's infinite wisdom?

    Your presupposition will not allow you to trust God. You have it in your mind that man is superior to God's wisdom, I guess based on your perceived education level. "Be not wise in your own conceits."

    Also remember alsways these verses:

    1Co 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

    2Co 10:12 For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise.

    1Co 3:20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.

    1Co 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.

    1Co 1:19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

    Ro 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

    "Please forgive the grammatical errrors in my previous post."

    It's quite obvious we are all fallible and needs forgiving, we should all strive to be Christ like, and help each other by confronting in love.

    Blessings

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yes, I was baptized, and at the time it meant a lot to me. Not that it is meaningless now, it just hold a different meaning for me. As for being flippant about the prospects of hell, you misunderstand my position. I stand by my conscience, and if my heart is hardened, then it is not by my own doing. Yes, you clearly reject the wisdom of man and support your position scripturally as well. However, I do watch tv, go to the doctor, and I am aided by man's "wisdom" all the time. So man's wisdom is incompatible with God's wisdom, yet medical technology is more reliable than prayer.

    Where we differ is you say that I am judging God, but I say I am judging man. I question some of the cannonical texts. The councils (Niocea and Trent?)never finished their debates, and it was men who are fallible that picked the cannonical texts.

    I do believe you are sincere in your desire to help others, and I have no desire to decovert you. I wanted to post on your site because I read some interesting posts by you.

    You are focued on the exclusivity of God and I am learning to focus on the inclusivity of God. Your fear is that I can use my position to mislead others. But I don't think you currently have the ability to consider if you are the one doing the misleading. Hypothetically, I can name a number of things that would change my position.

    1. If I could see ANY Christian that could use prayer as Jesus promised. Mustard seed faith mountain moving kind of thing. What most Christian believe about prayer versus what actually happens are two different things. So, are we misinterpreting Jesus' words?

    2. A supernatural intervention like the one Paul received.

    3. Any data that showed Christians lived better lives than other religions. Divorce rates appear to be the same among all denominations overall. At times, divorce rates are ever so slightly higher than in the secular world, but never have I seen them lower.

    So, I am able to present a hypothetical arrangement where any 1 of these things would convince me of Christianity being the one true religion, but unfortunately I have not been able to verify any of them. And I have tried and will continue to try. But until God stops me from looking, I am not going to go against my conscience and believe without reason. If faith comes from God, then God, grant me faith. I have prayed that my whole life. For me, I said from childhood through my earlier twenties, "Lord, please grant me favor and continue to give me faith, I have no doubt of you or your Word." Later in my twenties it became, "Lord, I believe, but help my unbelief." Now my prayer is, "God, I can no longer accept the Bible as infallible. I cannot accept that you would permit these things that are evil. I believe that those were man's ideas of you, not ideas you held to be infallible."

    Final point: I have never read through the early church council's reasoning in how they determined what is cannonical and not in any great detail. Maybe I need to go throught that process for myself. I have heard the the OT was not set until 90AD, but by whom I know not. To me, it seems that it is easy for you to accept that God killed Ananias and Saphirra for their sin. "You have not lied to men, but to God." Their grievance is plainly stated. Well, we're both still standing.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Ty,

    "So man's wisdom is incompatible with God's wisdom, yet medical technology is more reliable than prayer."

    That is your opinion. Do you believe medical technology is more reliable than God? Here is a hint: medical technology cannot save you from the sting of death.

    "I question some of the [canonical] texts...and it was men who are fallible that picked the [canonical] texts. " and also "I have never read through the early church council's reasoning in how they determined what is [canonical] and not in any great detail. Maybe I need to go [through] that process for myself."

    I hear this a great deal. You do have it all wrong though if you think mankind had anything to do with the preservation of the Bible. God alone lead men to do His will. It was God's authority that gave us today's Bible intact. There are slight variations from conservative to liberal translations, but God's Word is still intact. The men at the Council of Nicaea were guided by the Holy Spirit to give us the Bible we read today (good tree bears good fruit). I have read most of the Apocrypha and I agree with the Council, they didn't flow like the Bible does and there were obvious contradictions to the Gospel.

    "But I don't think you currently have the ability to consider if you are the one doing the misleading."

    Don't place blame for someone losing faith on me. That's a cop out. (if that is what you mean) The people I am talking to are already lost. I am ,harshly at times, pointing them in the right direction. I must stay though, I have heard people with a broken and contrite heart.(Psalm 34:18,Psalm 51:17) and I just want to cringe and walk away and leave them alone with God. I never want to interfere with someone's salvation, but I don't see any broken and contrite hearts here yet. When I do, I will run away and let God water and nurture that seed.

    "Hypothetically, I can name a number of things that would change my position."

    You now sound like the devil telling God to show Himself to you. Remember the devil was trying to get Jesus to do miraculous things to prove His divinity.

    Matthew 4:3-7 "And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." (emphasis added)

    You must go to Him on His terms, not yours.

    "I have prayed that my whole life..." Thanks for assisting me in proving my hypothesis that 'Doubt itself, the Catalyst for Atheism.'

    ReplyDelete
  15. Thanks for the discussion. And yes, your hypothesis is correct that doubt can lead to atheism, but isn't that obvious? Doubt doesn't always lead to atheism, as shown by the disciple Thomas.

    I am going to move away from this site for now. For me personally, I find you a bit too judgemental. Because I chose not to pour my heart out to you, doesn't mean that I haven't poured my heart out to God. I don't mind if you privately think whatever about me, but stating your unsubstaniated assumptions about my relationship with God is offensive to me.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Ty ,

    "Doubt doesn't always lead to atheism, as shown by the disciple Thomas."

    Valid point.

    I love you that's what I think about you.

    "For me personally, I find you a bit too [judgmental]. "

    Wait until you meet God. You haven't seen judgment yet.

    I judge righteous judgment. (John 7:24) Do you remember what it says in Matthew 22:39 "And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself"

    But what does this truly mean? Does that mean we are to love them no matter what they do because we are sinners also? Do we coddle them in their sins, tell them God loves them no matter what? Nope Jesus was clear when he said this. He was telling us what the standard was. The way to show your love to your neighbor is to warn them and their sins will take them to hell.

    The only way you can show your love to your neighbor was outlined in Leviticus 19:17-18 "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbor, and not suffer sin upon him. Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the LORD." (emphasis added)

    If you believe coddling is love then you are delusional. You must confront to show love to someone. Would you let a friend go and drink and drive? Of course not, well that is how parents treat their children. We will take the keys and get into your face if necessary to show that you are wrong. If standing you up to tell you that you are making a mistake is judging then guilty as charged. If righteous judgment is perfect love then I love your bra. Please don't take offense to what I tell you but take heed of what I say.

    "but stating your [unsubstantiated] assumptions about my relationship with God is offensive to me." I will listen, please tell me what I did to make you feel offensive. I will understand you more if you express yourself more, a Psychologist should understand that.

    Do me a favor before you go though just one last thing, take a look at these characteristics to see where you fit. I am not judging you, I will let you do that. You don't have to share with me at all, but please talk to God about it. He is still there if you make the effort to get to know Him again.

    I will take your lack of any answer that you do not have children and if you did you would have an entirely different viewpoint of what love truly is. I don't hate you, I want you to make it to Heaven. Rebuke and reprove is in our arsenal to motivate an unrepentant sinner. I will spend time with you because I care about you. Enjoy your life and don't die before figuring all this out. Comeback anytime.

    Blessings

    ReplyDelete
  17. Clarification:

    Quasar said something here that needs addressing.

    I said "Whoopty doo, mankind also believe we came from monkeys"

    Quasar said are you merely misrepresenting the position of scientists simply to make a point?

    Because either way, apes are not "monkeys"


    I retracted but since then I found out that my claim was true.

    George Simpson wrote "...On this subject, by the way, there has been way too much pussyfooting. Apologists emphasize that man cannot be the descendant of any living ape—a statement that is obvious to the verge of imbecility—and go on to state or imply that man is not really descended from an ape or monkey at all, but from an earlier common ancestor. In fact, that earlier ancestor would certainly be called an ape or monkey in popular speech by anyone who saw it. Since the terms ape and monkey are defined by popular usage, man’s ancestors were apes or monkeys (or successively both). It is pusillanimous (cowardly) if not dishonest for an informed investigator to say otherwise." Formerly Professor of Paleontology at Harvard university. "The world into which Darwin led us," Science, 131:405:966

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hmmm? I see there is more garbage in here, such as "atheists never receive anything from the lord." I know you live in a dream world and are just as addicted to your religion as a heroin addict...but know this. The richest people in the world, including Bill Gates, and Buffet are atheists.

    Ninety-three percent of all scientists, many of whom have become wealthy from patents and inventions...are atheists.

    Why do you people lie so much? You never do any research or even "Seek the truth...because the truth shall make you free." You create your own arguments, create your own dialogues, never enter into any real discussions...and your only proof of your statements is what's in your imagination, and quote the bible, which has had more than 20,000 edits over the centuries by over 200 authors. However, some of you actually think jesus wrote the bible in English, hahahahahaah.

    The bible is proof of nothing. And...its amazing to watch you quote "jesus" as if you were eye witnesses from 2000 years ago. Don't you find this bizarre? You sound exactly like paranoid schizophrenics who believe their own lies and imaginary world...and the only reason you get away with it, is that you call yourself a religion. You are insane.

    Its very simple. Your "religion" empowers who to be self-righteous, narcisscistic, delusional, megalomaniacs who think you "speak" for god. How did you get permission to speak for your god by the way? And, why if you think you have the right to speak for your god, how come you all say different, contradictory things? Duh...

    Atheists are the most moral, and ethical people on this planet...because they demand proof. You demand no proof of anything but that everyone believe in your imagination. And, if too many of you gain access to this government, the Inquisitions will begin again, all based on bible scripture. When I look at a "christian" I see someone just chomping at the bit to start killing infidels to please your god.

    Try and think "why" 95% of Europe is now atheist. The churches are empty. Why is this? Because between 1900 and 1999 more than 180 million people, most often Christians and Jews were hideously murdered in wars. They were tortured, and murdered, or died of starvation with a prayer on their lips...begging god to save them. God didn't save them...and one has to ask: Where was your god? In your imagination.

    So, finally the Europeans who suffered the most, finally woke up and came to the overwhelming conclusion, there is no god.

    In your unimaginable cruelty, there will be those of you who will actually state that "they died because they didn't believe hard enough, they didn't pray long enough or in the right way, they were being punished, and on and on and on...the excuses for why there is no god that reaches out in his "love" to save people...didn't even save the children. Thirty million of those who died in these wars...were babies and children. So, when your god says: "Suffer the little children..." he really means it. To be religious, means to set one's self to believe god and jesus are some kind of imaginary lucky charm in which if you "believe" you will be "saved." Well, folks the proof is in the other direction. Millions upon millions died because they believed...in your imaginary god.

    Now out of this horrendous holocaust of unfathomable suffering and death...the Europeans woke up and became realistic. Human beings create wars, ergo, its up to human beings to prevent or stop war...praying, or begging your imaginary god to stop war or slavery, or any other degrading human condition, has shown itself to do absolutely nothing. Why? Because there is no god.

    Atheism is not a religion, it is not a belief...to be a religion, one must "worship" something. Religion is nothing more than a belief in magic. Atheists have no proof that magic exists or ever has existed.

    Religion says that a divine thingy can "magically" interrupt the laws of physics and produce stuff, like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat. Science and atheists know there is no record, no proof, no evidence in all of known, written, or geological history going back 4.5 billion years, that anything close to the interruption of the laws of physics has ever occurred...not one time.

    If we were in a court of law...and you were required to "prove" your god existed, you could not. In fact, you are paramount hypocrites, in that if you were accused of a crime...you would "demand" proof that you were guilty.

    However, in your imaginary world...you demand no proof...because you "believe." To believe by the way...means you state something is true without any proof. Atheists demand proof in and out of the court room.

    Atheism is a conclusion...because there is no proof of a god of any kind, human beings who think have "concluded" rightfully that there is no god.

    Diana Wilson PhD

    ReplyDelete
  19. Far be it from me to disagree with the great George Gaylord Simpson (Darwin bless his soul!), but he was being a bit disingenuous here. Of course he was right in saying that the common ancestor of modern humans and modern apes would have looked like a modern monkey, but that does not mean that "apes are monkeys" in anything but popular imagination. Strictly speaking, modern humans, chimps, gorillas, and orangutans (the so-called "great apes") are all in the family Hominidae, whereas modern monkeys are in various other families. All of us are in the order Primates, and the closest common ancestor of monkeys and apes would also be considered a primate.

    So we primates are all pretty closely related, but not all the same. Thus, while it is not exactly wrong to call our common ancestor a "monkey" or an "ape", it is more correct to call it a "primate".

    ReplyDelete
  20. Diana Wilson,

    "Atheists are the most moral, and ethical people on this planet...because they demand proof."

    I call foul on that biased statement.

    Look at what I said towards the end starting According to University of Hawaii

    I will add more later

    ReplyDelete
  21. Take a look at what we Atheists write about, in contradiction of what you write about. We debunk your religion all day long, because its easy. Have fund:

    [c/p dribble]

    We debunk you all the time and do it well. You do nothing but quote yourselves, the bogus bible, and your imagination. The religious will not win...they may try and bully, trick, murder, BS, or oppress their way into controlling the US government, but they will not win. In fact, the more insane and hateful the religious become, the more they will turn off the average American.

    Religion is a dinosaur whose end has come, and who will be just as extinct as the dinosaurs in the next 100 years.

    Diana Wilson PhD

    ReplyDelete
  22. Diana Wilson PhD it appears I have hit a nerve, do you want to engage in a conversation or a shouting match? Do you seek truth or a punching bag?

    Do you love me?

    ReplyDelete

Bring your "A" game. To link: <a href="url">text</a>