Welcome to Doomsday (The John Hagee Phenomena)

[2centsworth]

That's because no one takes the Iliad as truth - it's a reknowned work of mythology. If you want to say that the Bible is mythology, then I won't argue the translations, but I'm pretty sure that's not what you're out to prove. Maybe a better analogy on your part would help.

And as for being judgmental - that's just something that everyone does - only the non-Christians aren't throwing in your face. Everyone is judgmental to a degree, but for something as eternal as your fate, that's not to be taken as lightly as say, a bad haircut. There's a difference is judging someone's opinion, which is stupid anyways, and judging someone as a whole person - like assuming the outcome of their afterlife.

I'm not debating your system of beliefs to be wrong - I'm just saying that they are your beliefs and not mine. You're the one accusing me of being in the wrong, while I'm just pointing out some of the alternative possibilities of the derivation of Biblical text. You're telling me I'm going to rot in basically - who's being judgmental?

1. You're missing the point on the illiad. the translations remained the same, just like the bible. Debating the value of the content is a different matter, I'm just telling you whatever your bible says today is the same as it was told 1000's of years ago.

2. I only read one person on this thread somewhat judge people by throwing in someone's face. The other 30 or so reply's were all about judging, and generalizing christians. Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

3. Again, if you read more closely I never accused you of anything. Also, find where I told you you're going to rot in basically. All I did was acknowledge your point and offered a counter point.

[2centsworth]

I think one of the reasons no one questions the Illiad is that no one has gone to war, and persecuted millions of people over homers book (i.e. it's not important enough).

Again you miss my point. The Illiad is true to it's original manuscript because the 650 ancient manuscripts/translations are almost identical. The same holds true for the bible.

As to your point about persecuting millions of people, the crusades were a long time ago and religion does a lot more good than it does bad. Secularism is a mark of communism like the former soviet union and communist China. You're surely not saying human rights are better there than they are here with our Judeo-Christian values and system of government.

[MannyIsGod]

1. You're missing the point on the illiad. the translations remained the same, just like the bible. Debating the value of the content is a different matter, I'm just telling you whatever your bible says today is the same as it was told 1000's of years ago.

Of course, nevermind the different texts that aren't included in the bible. The Gospel Of Mary Magdalen, anybody?Nevermind that most of this stuff is at the discretion of people like the Vatican. Nevermind that even though the bible is the same (allegedly. I admit, I know hardly enough to enter an academic debate on the history of it), there are different interpretations of what it all means.

I mean com'on, not only is this God putting conditions on his love, you also need a decoder ring to figure out what those conditions are.

2. I only read one person on this thread somewhat judge people by throwing in someone's face. The other 30 or so reply's were all about judging, and generalizing christians. Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

Untill the wonderful rapture was brought into play, (sidenote: I hope it happens after Fiesta), the only Christians people were judging were those who had heaven and salvation for sale. I wonder how much angel's wings go for on Ebay?

[2centsworth]

(allegedly. I admit, I know hardly enough to enter an academic debate on the history of it), there are different interpretations of what it all means.

Is this true of anyting. We both read the same book we can surely have a different interpretation of the book. The problem is that lots of church's like to add rules and text that's not in the bible. Example, drinking is not allowed when we know drinking is almost encouraged it's drunkeness that's a sin. That's a pretty darn good code of conduct, drink but don't get drunk.

I mean com'on, not only is this God putting conditions on his love, you also need a decoder ring to figure out what those conditions are.

There are no conditions on his love! What do you think the whole dying on the cross was all about. Jesus died for our sins. Otherwise, I wouldn't have a chance in of salvation.

Untill the wonderful rapture was brought into play, (sidenote: I hope it happens after Fiesta), the only Christians people were judging were those who had heaven and salvation for sale. I wonder how much angel's wings go for on Ebay?

I was kinda looking forward to Fiesta myself. Guy who referred to the rapture I'm sure noticed how all the posters were ganging up and generalizing all christians. However, I understand that evangelicals in general in the past have done a bad job of promoting christianity. It's just not like that anymore for the most part. David Robinson and Avery Johnson are better examples of what Christianity is really like.

[Extra Stout]

Probably - I believe those books are pretty accurate. Tim LaHaye is known as a foremost expert on End Times Prophecy. Here's an idea for you - why don't you buy the complete set of Left Behind Books and you can see how accurate they are when you're going through the tribulation!

Yeah, they're super-accurate. Like the part where Israel abandons its advanced technological economy, and reverts to agriculture, "miraculously" growing crops (based on carbon) from sand (based on silicon). And that somehow makes them far more ridiculously wealthy. Because, you know, agricultural havens like the Ukraine are just raking it in.

Oh yeah, and the Arabs let them annex most of Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and part of Iraq with no complaints. That's realistic.

The Left Behind series appears plausible to those who either are uneducated, or have a narrow range of education for a particular vocation. I just cannot imagine how anyone with any breadth of knowledge about the world could take those books seriously as Bible teaching. They're Christian pulp fiction.

[2centsworth]

Yeah, they're super-accurate. Like the part where Israel abandons its advanced technological economy, and reverts to agriculture, "miraculously" growing crops (based on carbon) from sand (based on silicon). And that somehow makes them far more ridiculously wealthy. Because, you know, agricultural havens like the Ukraine are just raking it in.

Oh yeah, and the Arabs let them annex most of Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and part of Iraq with no complaints. That's realistic.

The Left Behind series appears plausible to those who either are uneducated, or have a narrow range of education for a particular vocation. I just cannot imagine how anyone with any breadth of knowledge about the world could take those books seriously as Bible teaching. They're Christian pulp fiction.

I hope people except them for what they are, purely entertainment. I acutally liked the movie, just like the Omen. I love stuff like that.

[Jekka]

1. You're missing the point on the illiad. the translations remained the same, just like the bible. Debating the value of the content is a different matter, I'm just telling you whatever your bible says today is the same as it was told 1000's of years ago.

2. I only read one person on this thread somewhat judge people by throwing in someone's face. The other 30 or so reply's were all about judging, and generalizing christians. Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

3. Again, if you read more closely I never accused you of anything. Also, find where I told you you're going to rot in basically. All I did was acknowledge your point and offered a counter point.

Okay, I'll concede on points 2 and 3, mainly because I don't want to argue about personal accusations on here - whatever, it's all cool.

But, as for point #1 - different languages=different connotations and implications. When a work goes through a translation it loses a lot - especially depending on the subject matter. The Iliad is a mythological tale based on acts of bravery, etc. The Bible, especially the New Testament, which is what we are mainly arguing here, is based on philosophy and emotions and love. Most of the NT was written in Greek. Greek has THREE different words for "love" depending on the situation in which it is used. How can you translate that into English? You can't. That's just one example of how the Bible can be manipulated to say what you want it to say. Many Christians (not all, by any means) like to take things out of context. Take the book of Corinthians for instance where Paul says that women are not to speak out in the church (I'm at work and don't have a Bible handy, so I can't give you the chapter and verses). The Catholics and the Baptists among others have construed this to mean that they cannot ordain women. What they fail to take into account is that the Corinthians locally worshipped Aphrodite and women were whoring themselves out in front of the church and Paul was saying (in his letter directed at the Corinthians) is that they shouldn't be selling themselves - not that women cannot also be disciples and leaders in the church.

The Bible is full of stuff like this, it's more important than the Iliad because people don't live by the Iliad.

[Jekka]

There are no conditions on his love! What do you think the whole dying on the cross was all about. Jesus died for our sins. Otherwise, I wouldn't have a chance in of salvation.

So it's unconditional as long as you believe that Jesus is your only way to Heaven, otherwise you're going to ? Sounds pretty conditional to me.

[2centsworth]

Okay, I'll concede on points 2 and 3, mainly because I don't want to argue about personal accusations on here - whatever, it's all cool.

Of course, you'll only concede only because you don't want to argue, it has nothing to do with you being wrong. Give me a break.

[Jekka]

Of course, you'll only concede only because you don't want to argue, it has nothing to do with you being wrong. Give me a break.

And instead of commenting on the Bible discussion you choose to belittle my backing off. That's pretty low.

[scott]

God is dead.

[desflood]

...said Nietzsche.

[Guru of Nothing]

God is dead.

God is not dead .... he's just a no-show (probably hiding from the self-righteous)

[2centsworth]

So it's unconditional as long as you believe that Jesus is your only way to Heaven, otherwise you're going to ? Sounds pretty conditional to me.

Not a condition, because if you don't believe in him it doesn't matter. The choice is left to the individual.

[2centsworth]

God is not dead .... he's just a no-show (probably hiding from the self-righteous)

Talk about self-righteous.

[Guru of Nothing]

Talk about self-righteous.

You have quite the knack for ignoring salient discussion.

[Jekka]

You have quite the knack for ignoring salient discussion.

Amen.

[Jekka]

Not a condition, because if you don't believe in him it doesn't matter. The choice is left to the individual.

But it does matter, because there are millions of believers walking around thinking God is going to judge non-believers a certain way. The fact is that believers in the Christian faith think that God puts some people in a good place and some people in a bad place and think that this God loves everyone the same - which I cannot understand. Apparently, God only loves you unconditionally if you accept God as your savior - and that, by definition, is a condition.

[desflood]

But it does matter, because there are millions of believers walking around thinking God is going to judge non-believers a certain way. The fact is that believers in the Christian faith think that God puts some people in a good place and some people in a bad place and think that this God loves everyone the same - which I cannot understand. Apparently, God only loves you unconditionally if you accept God as your savior - and that, by definition, is a condition.

Think of it this way, Jekka: If you have many children, and love them all the same, but a couple do something bad and need to be punished, does that mean that if you punish them you don't love them anymore? Of course not.

[Spurminator]

Unconditional Love does not guarantee Unconditional Reward.

[Jekka]

Think of it this way, Jekka: If you have many children, and love them all the same, but a couple do something bad and need to be punished, does that mean that if you punish them you don't love them anymore? Of course not.

There's a big difference between being grounded for two weeks and being damned for eternity.

[2centsworth]

But it does matter, because there are millions of believers walking around thinking God is going to judge non-believers a certain way

Anyone who does this should take this to heart "don't judge lest you be judged yourself."

Apparently, God only loves you unconditionally if you accept God as your savior - and that, by definition, is a condition.

1.In the christian religion, it's do you believe in Jesus as lord.? If you do then naturally you will accept him as your lord and savior, because if you don't then you're saying yes Jesus is lord but I don't want what god has to offer. Fair enough.

2. If you don't believe Jesus is lord and savior then it doesn't matter to you what Jesus promises.

I think if you can understand those two points you'll realize that Jesus does not place a condition on his love, by choice people reject what he has to offer. that's ok too, but remember it's your choice.

[Jekka]

1.In the christian religion, it's do you believe in Jesus as lord.? If you do then naturally you will accept him as your lord and savior, because if you don't then you're saying yes Jesus is lord but I don't want what god has to offer. Fair enough.

2. If you don't believe Jesus is lord and savior then it doesn't matter to you what Jesus promises.

I think if you can understand those two points you'll realize that Jesus does not place a condition on his love, by choice people reject what he has to offer. that's ok too, but remember it's your choice.

But in this supposed "unconditional love", where is the compassion? Where in this "unconditional love" does eternal damnation fit in? No, Spurminator, unconditional love does not have to mean unconditional reward, but why does it have to mean unconditional and eternal punishment? Christians don't believe that non-believers don't have to answer to the Christian god just because they don't believe he exists or is the savior - they believe that those nonbelievers end up in for all ages. You can't get away with saying that "it's your choice, you don't have to accept what Jesus offers", because if you don't want to burn in , Christians believe that you do have to accept what Jesus offers. There is a condition placed on your fate in this scenario, and if God is omnipotent and knows every move you're going to make and has predetermined it all, why would God create people that were going to go to . If there is a God that is omnipotent and "knew us before we were conceived" and knew everything that we would do, is there really the free will that you're speaking about? Isn't that predestination? Calvinism obviously must not be obsolete here. What unconditionally-loving God would predestine some people to ?

[2centsworth]

there's no predestination. You have choices.

If you believe in him and still reject him and refuse what he has to offer, he is going to grant you your wish.

If you don't believe in him, then why is their any debate and who cares what chrisitians think.

[Jekka]

there's no predestination. You have choices.

If you believe in him and still reject him and refuse what he has to offer, he is going to grant you your wish.

If you don't believe in him, then why is their any debate and who cares what chrisitians think.

Predestination and an omnipotent god cannot be separated. If God knows what you're going to do before you do it then God also knows if you're going to Heaven or before you die. That is predestination, and that's not unconditional love - and with predestination you don't have choices, you're just acting out something that's already been planned, whether you're aware of it or not.

And also, are you saying that if you believe in Christ and don't accept what's to offer then you "wish" to go to ? That's some smug logic.