jump to last post 1-16 of 16 discussions (138 posts)

So You Rejected the Gospel of Christ

  1. profile image0
    Virgil Newsomeposted 6 years ago

    Why do you stand in the way of those who are considering following Jesus?

    Can you give an honest answer?

    1. profile image61
      paarsurreyposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      There is no gospel with the name  "Gospel of Christ or Gospel of Jesus" with the Christians.

      1. profile image61
        paarsurreyposted 6 years agoin reply to this
      2. Eaglekiwi profile image80
        Eaglekiwiposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Answer the question, if you can.

    2. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I don't stand in the way of those who choose to follow Jesus. I challenge their knowledge of the scriptures which were manipulated before any Christians actually learned of their existence.
      I just did.

      1. profile image58
        passingthewordposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        the bible is true. Study the pharaoh Ahmose (means Brother of moses who lived in the 1500BCE) and the hyksos. Ahmose's record say that they kicked the hyksos out and while they were kick them out of Egypt there was a great storm like fire and hail that the bible talks about.

    3. A Troubled Man profile image59
      A Troubled Manposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      You would need to offer an honest question, first. smile

    4. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I stand in the way of Sarah Palin's followers as well.  I can't help it...

      1. kirstenblog profile image79
        kirstenblogposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Are they that hot Ron? hmm wink

    5. Titen-Sxull profile image91
      Titen-Sxullposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I used to be a Christian. The best answer I can give for why I'd like to talk people out of their Christians beliefs is that I've actually read the entire Bible and spent more than a decade as a believer. Losing my faith was one of the most liberating and enlightening journeys imaginable. It opened my eyes to the beauty of actual reality around me.

      I'm sure there are a few people out there who would be happier as Christians but for me personally the Christian beliefs I was instilled with as a child plagued me with fear, guilt, self-doubt and twisted morals. On top of all that add the fact that Christianity makes numerous false or unproven assertions regarding the natural world and the existence of supernatural beings, abilities, etc.

      So Christianity can be both emotionally and intellectually toxic on an individual and societal level. I escaped that toxic religion and it's the least I can do to try and help others do the same.

      1. earnestshub profile image88
        earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        My story is much the same, as is my current reasoning. smile

        1. JamaGenee profile image86
          JamaGeneeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          I also escaped the fear, guilt, self-doubt and twisted morals instilled in childhood.  But then I had to learn to ignore the guilt trips "Christian" relatives tried to heap on me for having the audacity to consciously reject their beliefs!

      2. Tlherald85 profile image59
        Tlherald85posted 6 years agoin reply to this

        I couldn't have said it better myself. However, I do NOT try to CHANGE peoples minds I just try to tell them to look up the facts, do some research then IF you choose still to be Christian have at it. But have the ACTUAL facts first.

    6. Kiss andTales profile image80
      Kiss andTalesposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Lets say you dont believe in christ ,lets say you dont belive in God because of what happen to you in the past what ever could have stumble you to feel the way you do! regaurdless , the sun will still shine ,themoon will still show light ,the earth will give a today and a tomorrow, and the true fact is How can anything evolve when mans body decays so fast,  he only lives to be 100 years of age! now most only live to be 60, about now, we have not evolved to anything lately we die to fast! there are trees older then us. and this is fact.

      1. earnestshub profile image88
        earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Well a lot of trees are probably smarter than some of us. smile

        1. Randy Godwin profile image95
          Randy Godwinposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          No doubt about that, Earnest!  lol  It's proven on these forums every day as we've just witnessed.  Hope you're doin' well!!  smile

          1. earnestshub profile image88
            earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            It's all good here Randy, weather and all in this early spring. The birds are at it, as are all the other animals and plants around me, so I'm a happy little Aussie bleeder. smile

            1. Randy Godwin profile image95
              Randy Godwinposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              Great weather here too, Earnest.  Finally got some needed rain and the temperatures are mild too.  Staying busy going on camping trips to the east and gulf coasts myself.  Plenty of ideas for articles, but not necessarily hubs.  Life is good!  smile

              1. earnestshub profile image88
                earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                Nice that you got the rain Randy, if we only believed in the sky fairy we would get exactly the right quantity of moisture all year round! lol

                1. Eaglekiwi profile image80
                  Eaglekiwiposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  Hey Gods gotta global garden to water ya know wink

                  Enjoy yer spring wink

    7. EphremHagos profile image60
      EphremHagosposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The Jesus Christ "by faith only" is a clever deception compared to the living (immortal) one unmistakably knowable by personal and direct revelation in his death on the cross, a.k.a., "the Good News". (1 Tim. 1: 10-11)

  2. DoubleScorpion profile image80
    DoubleScorpionposted 6 years ago

    I have to agree with Paar on this one. There is no gospel of Jesus or Christ. There is only gospels written about him and not even written by eyewitnesses for that matter.

    1. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Let's see....most of the disciples were indeed eyewitnesses!

      1. profile image0
        jomineposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        It is about gospel and its authors!!

      2. DoubleScorpion profile image80
        DoubleScorpionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        But the apostles didn't write any of the books of the bible. None of the books of the NT was written by Eyewitnesses. At best they were written by second hand knowledge many years after the fact. Only the Book of John directly references his information coming from an eyewitness. But it was written close to 60 years after the fact.

        1. profile image0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          Matthew
          Mark
          John
          Paul
          Peter
          all wrote books of the Bible and were apostles.

          1. Cagsil profile image60
            Cagsilposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Attributed to those individuals, not actually written by them. Big difference.

          2. profile image0
            jomineposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Mathew - copied from mark, with so many historical mistakes including Nazareth.
            Mark - Not a disciple, but a supposed follower of peter.
            John- He waited till the end of his life to write it down???
            Paul- didn't even see jesus or studied anything from his disciples, nor wrote anything about an earthly jesus.
            Peter-Didn't write any gospel.

          3. DoubleScorpion profile image80
            DoubleScorpionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Not true. Only Paul can be confirmed as writing Books of the NT. And he never met Jesus. John was written by an author who used the "beloved Disciple"s teaching as the base for his book. Mark was a follower/interpreter for Peter and never met Jesus, author for the 4 gospels is unknown, these books were attributed to well known names to lend to their authenticity. The Apostle peter never wrote any of the books of the bible. He was killed in 64CE and the books being his name weren't written until 85-95CE for 1 peter and 130-150 CE for 2 peter, which would mean neither book couldn't have been written by Peter.

            The only person that you named that was named as one of the twelve (apostles) is Matthew. That book was written based from Mark and the "Q" text, why would an eyewitness need to copy another when related the story of Jesus?

            Paul claimed Apostleship due to his revelation of the risen Christ. And he had to defend this claim on multiple occasions as he writes about in his letters to the different churches. 1 Corithians is a good example of this. Paul was the first "Christian" to actually write anything about Jesus and his letters were from 50-62 CE, prior to that timeframe nothing was ever in writing about Jesus. Paul converted in about 32ce and began his preaching at that time throughout Asia, it was 3 years before he ever went to Jeruselem to meet Peter or other leaders of the Jeruselem Church.

            1. profile image0
              jomineposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              To add, that would make Paul a contemporary of Jesus, yet he never saw him or went out persecuting him when he was alive.

              1. DoubleScorpion profile image80
                DoubleScorpionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                And it seems that he didn't have direct knowledge of the type of death of Jesus either. Which I find strange considering he converted within a year or so prior to or directly after the timeframe Jesus was supposed to have been killed. And he was persecuting Christians directly prior to his conversion. Paul was supposed at and in support of the Stoning of Stephen which happened in 34-35ce and this was after Paul's claim of being converted. Certian timelines don't add up. So either the author of Acts got his timeline of events mixed up or...well I'll leave that for others to decide...

                1. profile image0
                  brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  these books were attributed to well known names to lend to their authenticity

                  Matthew the TAX collector, by reputation, hated by the jewish community, not good PR to have that name on top of the document.

                  Only Paul can be confirmed as writing Books of the NT. And he never met Jesus
                  I corrected you on this one before. Pauls conversion was all about meeting Jesus. One of the criteria for being an apostle in the first place was meeting christ, which he did, albeit briefly one the damascus road and then during his next 3 days of blindness. To be an eyewitness to the resurrection does not mean a person has to like eat dinner, go to movies and hang out for a long period of time. An eyewitness, in our society only has to witness with the eye which is just what it says.

                  which would mean neither book couldn't have been written by Peter
                  We already know that Mark wrote for Peter and that Peter was a fisherman. It may be safe to assume that Peter did not write any letters - not books - at all, and that perhaps Peter was not that literate.

                  That book was written based from Mark and the "Q" text, why would an eyewitness need to copy another when related the story of Jesus?
                  Can't believe your still on about this one. John mark was a disciple, and accompanied peter and paul on their respective missionary journeys. Why would an eyewitness need to blah blah. The answer to this is obvious, he didn't NEED to but he did because as any normal person would be, he was so very curious to read what was written that it influenced him greatly, enough to elaborate, but nowhere does he correct it. Why do we when writing term papers quote from other authors? Same sorta thing.
                  Nothing wrong with the Q text, as it is documented sayings not narratives and this may well be where some of the quotes come from, ya think?

                  And he had to defend this claim on multiple occasions as he writes about in his letters to the different churches
                  Absolutely, as one who at one time persecuted the church extensively the other brothers did not easily accept him because of the persecution going on at that time and thought him to be a trap. Understandable. Luke writes that Ananias was told of God to go to Paul and even Ananias was hesitant. Eventually though, Paul gained the respect, love and admiration that was a part of Gods blessing to him.

                  Paul was the first "Christian" to actually write anything about Jesus
                  And so we see another reason God selected Paul to be an apostle - his zeal. As zealous as Paul was in his pre-christian life, he took that same zeal and applied it to his christian life. God made a wonderful choice.

                  it was 3 years before he ever went to Jeruselem to meet Peter or other leaders of the Jeruselem Church
                    Acts 9:19   And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days WITH the disciples which were at Damascus.
                    Acts 9:20   And STRAIGHT AWAY he preached Christ IN the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.
                     Acts 9:23   And after that MANY DAYS were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him:
                  As per Galatians 1:17,18 he spent 3 yrs in arabia. Then he came back and was wisked away to tarsus because of the jews wanting to kill him. Pauls mission was not to the jews but to the gentiles. God said it and we see jews always causing paul problems.

                  You have a low timeline for pauls conversion. Is it not accepted that Jesus died prior to 34ad? Stephen was stoned closer to 35ad and  shortly after, Pauls conversion, oh say in 35ad. Stephen had a short but powerful ministry.
                  Lets look at:
                  In "Ethics of The Fathers" 5:25 - the following age milestones are listed:
                  At 20 - it is the time to pursue matters
                  At 30 - the time for strength and power  <-- jesus' baptism
                  At 40 - we reach a level of deeper understanding
                  At 50 - we advise others.

                  1. DoubleScorpion profile image80
                    DoubleScorpionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    I said I wasn't going to respond to your post, due to the fact that you what to insult instead of discuss, But there is one part of your post that I would like to address. The rest of your responses I have already talked about and will leave it up to those who read these posts to decide for themselves.

                    You quoted Acts (a book supposed written by Luke, not Paul) Chapter Nine as to when Paul went to Jeruselem the first time.

                    For rebuttal I will quote Paul himself.
                    Galatians 1:15-20
                    15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,
                    16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
                    17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
                    18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.
                    19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.
                    20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.


                    So do we take the word of the man himself or one who only wrote about him from research. (Luke 1:1-4 and Acts 1:1)

                    Either Paul is right and didn't lie as he staes in verse 20 and "Luke" is slightly off in his research, Or is "Luke" right and Paul is off, or is there a contradiction in God's Word?

                    I'll leave it up to you and the reader to decide.

            2. profile image61
              paarsurreyposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              I agree with you; I further have to add that Paul was the first Christian having founded Christianity; Jesus was not a Christian; Paul, Church and the Christians never followed Jesus; they were never inspired by the Holy Ghost. Only to add a little credence to Bible, the Church publicised that it was inspired by the Holy Ghost.

          4. profile image0
            brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            The early church canon specifically agrees that the names on the gospel are the names of the persons who wrote them. Enough of this garbage. The Early Church was there and they had them hand delivered. There is no dispute about who wrote them at all.

            1. earnestshub profile image88
              earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              Rubbish, you christians can't even agree on it, and there is no proof, not a single item, unless you're gonna quote the book of myths at me again and call that proof!

              1. profile image0
                brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                you need to calm down

                1. earnestshub profile image88
                  earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  Why would you say that?

                  Is only bulldust calm now?

                  1. profile image0
                    brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    Why should Christians agree? Do scientists, mathematicians, historians, archaeologists, politicians school teachers, dentists, lol.. agree... Agreeing is not a big part in the right to denial, is just some lamo excuse to create the facade that just because we don't, there isn't. Christians agree well enough on the basics. I mean you read the bible for 30 years and you don't agree lol.

                    As for proof well thats complicated, isn't it. There are many christians here who do not have the need for the proof you require, myself included. We have our proof and are contented and calm.

                    As to quoting the good book, yah you will read more and more and more and the proper context will also be given as well as some skookum interpretations. Learn if you will.

                    yah, calm down maybe take a vacation

            2. profile image0
              Emile Rposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              It is common knowledge that there is dispute. Why would you lie about something so well known? More importantly, why does this matter to you? Unknown authorship has nothing to do with the debate of the veracity of the information written.

              1. profile image0
                brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                When this rumor gets passed around about the anonymity of the writers it only produces doubt in peoples minds, and its another atheist bit of untrue ammo,  therefore did i comment as i have before in length "when will people realize etc.. page 2" about the unstoppableness of the canon, OT and NT midway down the page.
                There are so very many good answers about this question in favor of the names they go by, that there is no doubt in my mind at all.

                1. profile image0
                  Emile Rposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  Considering that both religious and secular scholars would disagree with your assessment, I can only assume you (in the words of A Troubled Man) really, really want to believe that; in spite of clear evidence to the contrary.

                  1. profile image0
                    brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    Lets not forget the ones who would also agree with me. And there's bible evidence for a smaller time line of the gospels writing than what your precious scholars state.

                    You have no clear evidence to the contrary all you have is contrary evidence. Although you would like to believe that i am wrong, I wish you would try harder next time and assume less.

                    There's an excellent book called "the case for christ" if you would like to examine evidence from a fellow with a heap of amount of letters behind his name. But since i take my information from him and a few other scholarly sources, why believe me huh since all i do i repeat what i have learned from them.

                    Do you knit?

        2. liftandsoar profile image78
          liftandsoarposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          Well, that's the liberal mantra on the Scriptures.  However, a fair investigation will show that every book of the New Testatment was written either by an apostle or under his authority.  Can there be certainty?  Of course not.  But there is enough evidence to warrant a reasonable conclusion.

      3. Mikel G Roberts profile image81
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        The education system during the time in question isnt the one we have today. Literacy was very rare. It is highly unlikely that a carpenter or a common fisherman could either read or write. The "Gospels" were penned in Rome Italy by the Roman Senate 300 years after the death of Christ.

        1. profile image0
          brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          A tax collector could write.
          the author of mark was john mark a rich young kid.
          John was written in  greek. (The languages spoken in Israel at the time of Christ were Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and Latin. Most Jewish people spoke the first THREE, and some were conversant in Latin as well.)
          Luke was a doctor
          Paul very highly educated in the roman system.

          None of these are carpenters or fishermen.

  3. profile image0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    Virgil, I wish you luck on this one.  Well, I don't believe in "luck" but I guess you know what I mean.
    So far, they're bent on distraction.

  4. profile image0
    Emile Rposted 6 years ago

    I don't know that I have ever stood in the way of someone considering following Jesus. I do stand firmly against evangelical, fundamental or 'Bible believing' Christians. But, that's not in anyone's way of following Jesus, that I'm aware of.

    1. profile image0
      brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      lol maybe it can be said that you stand off to one side, firmly against only 3 types of jesus followers:
      the evangelical
      the fundamental
      the bible believing

      did you leave anybody out ?
      lol

  5. profile image0
    Virgil Newsomeposted 6 years ago

    I am going to say this first.  If you do not stand in  the way of others, that is good and this thread is not directed at you.

    For those who think they don't stand in the way but try to make things right according to what they think, anytime you sway a person's decision, you help them change their mind.  How can a person make an honest decision about anything at all when so many speak against what they are considering?

    So many believe they know what Jesus taught and meant when they do not have the same spirit that Jesus had.  They in fact cannot have the same spirit if they do not believe Jesus is why he said He was.  What this ends up being is teachers who do not really know what they are teaching.  They will teach their own ideas and thoughts, but not what needs to be taught.

    I wonder how many 3rd grade children teach college courses.  Can an English teacher teach nuclear physics?  Of course not, unless they have a degree in that area also and the credentials to teach it.

    The disciples of Jesus were ignorant and unlearned men, yet they wrote the New Testament.  God can use the small things to do great things.  The world these days wants men of renown and college professors to teach them.  I wonder how many of those college professors can go out on a boat and catch fish for a living?

    1. Cagsil profile image60
      Cagsilposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      See the post before yours and learn something new.
      Teach is the opportune word.

      1. profile image0
        Virgil Newsomeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        How many threads have you started speaking out against followers of Jesus?  How many against the Bible itself?

        How many posts have you posted speaking against Christians?  You stand in the way even if you don't realize it.

        1. Randy Godwin profile image95
          Randy Godwinposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          Is there something wrong with speaking out against delusion?

          1. profile image0
            brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            only if one is using delusion as ammo

        2. Cagsil profile image60
          Cagsilposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          Speaking out against followers of Jesus? That implies I have to meet someone who is actually following Jesus, before I can speak out against them. And, had I actually met one, then the likelihood I would be speaking out against them is slim to none and slim went on vacation.
          There's a reason for speaking out against the bible. It was manipulated long before it was ever put into book form.
          Are you Christian? If so, then what are you doing here? Wouldn't you have something better to do with your time instead? You talk the talk, but you don't walk the walk.
          That's what you think. If Christians actually understood Jesus' teachings, then NONE of them would be here in the forums talking up smack or preaching the bible. They would be doing something MORE productive.

          I don't stand in anybody's way. I only point the chosen ignorance of believers who make claims to walk the walk, when their own actions show that they only talk the talk. So please.

          1. profile image0
            brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            You point the way to self being the highest denominator in a persons life when clearly Jesus pointed to denial of self so very blatantly and so very often and so does the rest of the NT and the OT as well.

            Therefore you are wrong, having no christian insights, about how you know what the bible says.

          2. Eaglekiwi profile image80
            Eaglekiwiposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Who put YOU in charge of Christians ie What they should be doing?

            You wrongly assume they dont serve God or at least not in the way you seem to think they should lol

            Perhaps we should all be doing something else ?

    2. profile image0
      Emile Rposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      So, basically, what you're saying is those who agree with you are right and everyone else should back up and shut up. I certainly understand where you are coming from. Those who agree with you should certainly be allowed to actively pursue converts without opposing views being heard. That way, it would follow that the proposed converts not  be expected to think for themselves. Simply allow you, and those who agree with you, to tell them what to think.

      It seems to me that truth will out. Anyone advocating what they consider to be truth should not fear opposing views.

      1. profile image0
        Virgil Newsomeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        No I am not saying that at all.  I am saying those that piss on believers should not do so, nor should they try to make up the minds of those who are pondering turning to Christ. 





        Now you are being sarcastic or trying to turn the thread into something else. 



        Opposing views is fine, but pissing on believers is not good. 



        What is below is not directed at anyone in particular.

        Many think they know what is right and what is wrong.  They think for themselves and figure it all out, they say.  Of course none of them has had any type of education that might have influenced them in their thinking.

        1. DoubleScorpion profile image80
          DoubleScorpionposted 6 years agoin reply to this



          This is true of both sides.

          I myself hold a PHD in Biblical Studies, and yet I still have those of "faith" tell me I am wrong when it comes to the text of the bible (not belief or doctrine), because it does not agree with what they been taught (in church) or have found in thier search.
          Just because one person thinks a certain way does not make them right, even one who holds a degree. It is more about the majority of the scholars. there are certain things that are split about 50/50. but for the most part, when it comes to the bible, it is about 95% one way and the other 5% is varied directions.

          1. profile image0
            brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            lol
            scholars are the main reason christianity has not grown in the last 100yrs. Everybody is in awe of letters after the name. The spirit quickens the believer not the piece of paper. In theologian school, which christ never indicated we should all go to theologian school to be a good christian, lol

            gimme air!!!!

            1. profile image0
              Emile Rposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              It's the lack of respect for courteous people who have put a great deal of time and effort into studying scriptures under the tutelage of others who have done the same that makes it abundantly clear that fundamentalism is ego. Fundamentalism appears to lack spiritual wisdom on any level.

              1. DoubleScorpion profile image80
                DoubleScorpionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                I myself, don't refute a person's beliefs. I post information,based on my education, that I had hoped would be of use to both believer and non-believer alike. But, as can be seen with some it just doesn't matter.
                Which leads me to believe, that some will not accept facts that oppose thier opinions, even when they are in support of their religous text. The message is still the same, regardless of the facts of the text itself. And I try not to dispute the message itself. And if I do have an opinion of the interpretation of the message contained in the text, it is only that, my opinion. No more right or wrong than anyone elses.

                1. profile image0
                  Emile Rposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  I appreciate and respect your input. Where else could we discuss the topic and have the benefit of participation by someone who has spent years studying the topic matter?

                  I agree, in that some are less interested in facts than they are in belief. The two should be as close as possible, I would think. Everything is a leap of faith, but I'd like to leap from a mountain of fact,  not a mole hill of disinformation,  if possible.

                  1. DoubleScorpion profile image80
                    DoubleScorpionposted 6 years agoin reply to this



                    Agreed. And to add, If I don't have the mountian of facts, I want as much information as can be found before I jump to a decision of faith.

                  2. profile image0
                    brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    We see that even theologians do not agree on just about every topic.
                    Christ did not come to make all Christians theologians.

                    He said, paraphrased, the holy spirit would teach all his children and that's a fact. Sure we can google all sorts of topics but this is not the pattern of the christian way. Leaning on Him for understanding and guidance is the pattern.

                    But how can people who do not understand God living in his people ever come to that conclusion?
                    Theologians become proud, theologians graduate because they learned what they were taught. People with high IQs lean more to their own abilities than reliance on God for truth.

                    I will accept truth from people who praise God fervently and pray often,  than i would from those who spend far too much time in books. There's a lot of christian books out there that I would not even touch, so unless God is guiding the study program and choosing the books, any person can easily read a wrong book and gain a false understanding.

                    Christianity is not based on a mountain of facts, although its nice to have these from time to time, but the real teaching of Gods word comes from reliance on God, prayer and a sincerity for understanding what God wants to teach, not what tomorrows class schedule dictates.

                    Oft time i think we would better off without theologians, although i have read from some i enjoy.

                2. profile image0
                  Virgil Newsomeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  Everything I have seen posted by you is always well thought out and courteous.  I respect that. 

                  Education itself is not the end all of everything.  A person can be educated in every known field possible, know everything that is known and still know very little. 

                  Thank you DoubleScorpion for being courteous in your posts.  In fact, most of the posts on this thread have been courteous.  It is a nice change of pace from the norm.

                  1. DoubleScorpion profile image80
                    DoubleScorpionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    Thank you.

                    And I agree with your second statement completely. There is new information being found everyday. We never stop learning.

        2. profile image0
          Emile Rposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          Virgil, when you insist that an opposing view is tantamount to being 'p*ss*d on' then, I assume I could retort with the statement that believers 'p*ss' on non believers every day. But I won't. Because you are basically calling the opposing view nothing but urine. It's kind of rude.

          I can tell you, no one adopts a religion via the internet. Not that I've ever heard of anyway.  What would happen? A virtual baptism?

          And of course I was being sarcastic. Just as I would be toward anyone adamantly insisting every believer shut up.

          I have no idea what point you were attempting to make with your last paragraph. That statement is true of everyone.

          The point is, this is an open forum. People will post.

          1. profile image0
            Virgil Newsomeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            You are reading more into it than what I wrote above.  It is not opposing views, it is the pissing.  Believers have tried many times to get a thread started just for them, but to no avail because of the crap that is thrown.  You cannot deny it.



            Yes it is an open forum.  Atheists have the right to post crap if they want.  Why do they always post so much in a thread about Christianity? 



            Your first comment on this thread is above.  I commend you for not standing in the way of those who might want to follow Jesus.  But yet, your actions seem to contradict what you said first.

            1. Cagsil profile image60
              Cagsilposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              There's no such thing on Hubpages. The forums are an OPEN place for all members. No thread can be exclusive. If you want exclusive threads on religion, then start a forum of your own or go to a forum that is designed for religion.

              1. profile image0
                Virgil Newsomeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                Your post shows that you have absolutely no respect for anyone who believes the Bible.  Of course it is an open forum, this does not make it a shooting range. 

                I will not be posting anymore on this thread tonight.  Have fun!

                1. Cagsil profile image60
                  Cagsilposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  I have no respect for people who don't bother to understand their own beliefs, much less believing in the bible.

                  The bible is a joke in and of itself. Sure, I'm positive you could learn something from it, but when people blatantly dismiss reality, then it shows that they do not understand their own life, much less understand their beliefs.
                  An Open Forum means that ALL members regardless of belief can post at any time they so choose.

            2. profile image0
              Emile Rposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              My actions stand in the way? Other than disagreeing with you, how?

              1. profile image0
                Virgil Newsomeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                One of your earlier replies on this thread.

                No where in this thread did i say anything like what read into my posts.  You twisted my post around and added to it what you wanted to to make it look like I am the bad guy.  I see this a lot from atheists.

                1. profile image0
                  Emile Rposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  I'm not an atheist. But, I see this insistence that one be allowed to say whatever one wants, without rebuttal, from christians

                  1. profile image0
                    Virgil Newsomeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    I know you are not an atheist.  I also perceive you to be a nice person. 

                    As I stated before, rebuttal is OK but insults are not.

            3. Tlherald85 profile image59
              Tlherald85posted 6 years agoin reply to this

              Who actually has the right to say Atheists are wrong and Christians are right or vice versa???
              Or for that matter that ANY religion is wrong or Right and vice versa??
              It just makes no since to me how anyone can say they have the one and only proper religion.
              If there was one and only one proper religion wouldn't it be the FIRST religion that was EVER here?? Which by the way is NOT Christianity or Aetheism.

              1. Tlherald85 profile image59
                Tlherald85posted 6 years agoin reply to this

                Furthermore aren't Christians taught NOT to pass judgement for everyone will be judged in death???
                So then why is it that Christians judge MORE than any other religion out there??
                Ok, maybe not ANY other religion cause I'm seeing A LOT of JUDGING coming from Aethists.

              2. profile image0
                brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                In the beginning God....
                Although there are older 'religions' - God did bring his people out of Egypt who we know had beliefs - The oldest religion does not necessarily mean it is the correct one.
                In the bible we see that Cain offered sacrifice to God, as taught by his dad, who was taught by God. In Genesis 6 there is a reference to the lineage of cain and seth, one being more godly than the other, but the godly fell to the wrong side, being swayed by enticements of the flesh. We see later on the pharaoh of Joseph - the kid with the coat of many colors - recognizing the God of Joseph after Joseph interpreted his dream - the one about the 7 fat and thin cows, the great famine - Then along comes Moses albeit into a time of that present pharaoh not recognizing the God of Joseph. But Moses showed that pharaoh a thing or 10 and the whole ball of what we have today starts.
                So in a sense we have the oldest religion being that of Moses and by extension, Christ, today, the best way.

                1. Tlherald85 profile image59
                  Tlherald85posted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  You are right the oldest religion may not be right, but to say that ONE religion is the ONLY way is not true either. When Christianity came into this world it came with a vengeance!! That is NOT a religion I would follow for ANY reason. I do NOT believe in forcing free will and THAT is what Christianity did. Pope Gregory (590-604CE) was the first to decide the "New Religion" of Christianity would be the ONLY religion and started rededicating temples to it. And eventually it all lead to the Inquisition. I could go into grave detail but I won't here. I have a history book on world religion in the beginning full of the actual dates and things that happened.

                  1. Tlherald85 profile image59
                    Tlherald85posted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    By the way please when trying to explain or prove your point to ME specifically, don't use the bible. Or "quotes" from it either it is NOT God's word!! It is the word of some looneys!

  6. Randy Godwin profile image95
    Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago

    Illiterate men writing down words from a man they never met.  Yep, sounds about right!  lol

    1. profile image0
      brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      obviously the illiterate ones did not do the writing lol

      1. profile image0
        brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        lol

    2. Tlherald85 profile image59
      Tlherald85posted 6 years agoin reply to this

      You hit the nail on the head Randy!

  7. livelonger profile image95
    livelongerposted 6 years ago

    I did (reject the gospel of Christ) and will not (stand in the way of Christians believers).

    I'm perfectly happy with Christians being good Christians. The problem is that relatively few Christians are good Christians. In fact, those that scream the most loudly about being proud, bold Christians are usually terrible Christians, ignoring most of what Jesus commanded his followers to do.

    The question I have to you, Virgil, is this: is it more difficult to challenge fellow Christians to be good Christians, than it is to challenge non-believers?

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image81
      Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      nice.

    2. profile image0
      Virgil Newsomeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      You know, it is hard to have a discussion with fellow believers here because of so much crap that is posted by non believers, mostly atheists I believe.

      1. livelonger profile image95
        livelongerposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        You can always try to create a discussion forum for Christians. I know one had to be closed because it became a hotbed of abuse, but there's no reason another can't be created afterwards.

  8. profile image0
    RookerySpoonerposted 6 years ago

    Whilst I have long ago lost my faith, and feel it necessary to disagree with the religious beliefs of others, if they try to convince me of the truth of their beliefs, I nevertheless recognise that no one has the right to try and stand in the way of anyone else's religious beliefs.  Yes, some of the beliefs of Christians and those who belong to other religions now seem absurd to me, however I understand where people are coming from, because I too once shared their beliefs.  And I understand that people believe because they are looking for hope in what for many can be a very difficult life.

    1. profile image0
      brotheryochananposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      nice to have you here then. Enjoy reading and since you like the others are not completely ready to dismiss their prior beliefs I am sure you will find a frequent gem or many.

  9. earnestshub profile image88
    earnestshubposted 6 years ago

    http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRtY8NkXC7RhnYnlx6Z_TzuE0m3Ds-wxnQRVsAGc737mcsY1fsw_A

  10. hrsidekick1h profile image58
    hrsidekick1hposted 6 years ago

    Following our Lord Jesus is a very simple task. Simply understand that he was sent by the father as the last Adam, since the first Adam fell into sin; " Which was also pre-destined by the creator". There isn't any human being that has ever lived that will be able to explain God or Christ, if that were the case we would be Gods also. We are not Gods, but it is our nature to have the desire to be so due to the curse that we all have as humans that came from Adam when he ate from the tree of good and evil.
    Many many people spend there whole life frustated because they constantly try to figure out God the creator, but God was never supposed to be figured out. That is why he didn't explain, or try to prove his exsitance during the first book of the Bible. He has no definition, nor is he limited by time as we are, or any other form of life on the earth. If we give God a definition, we put him on our level and that my brothers is impossible. When a person opens there spirit and surrenders their pride and all the things of the flesh, only then will God start to do a work in you through the holy spirit, and then our eyes are opened to understand that God is God and we are not, and that our only purpose in this life is to Glorify him in everything that we do; and when we have the gift of the holt spirit that God gives we do not frustrate ourselves trying to do things from our own strength, but the opposite. We rely on God to use us, live in us, and do his work through us to complete his perfect plan. Praise be to the Lord God Forever and ever.

    1. JamaGenee profile image86
      JamaGeneeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      If you need this crutch to get you through each day, more power to you.  I personally don't need to identify the forces that rule the universe as a "god" (or goddess) while living by non-denominational "rules"..i.e 'do unto others as you would have them do to you'...'judge not lest you be judged'...and be tolerant of the beliefs of others. 

      Too many so-called "Christians" simply use their faith as an excuse to indulge in debating contests with those whose beliefs differ from theirs, ignoring that Basic Marketing 101 applies to religion:

      If your product is better than a competitor's, people will buy it.  Otherwise, no amount of advertising can force them to buy a product they don't want or don't need.

      1. hrsidekick1h profile image58
        hrsidekick1hposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        No debate here, no sells pitch either. and yes I do need the crutch, for his strength is made perfect in my weakness. I enjoy my walk with Christ, and I am happy to say that he took my pride and anger away, and I no longer want win a debate or a forum battle, I simply thought I would post something that the Lord laid on my heart. But it does please me that the post stirred something in you, a conviction that we all need. God led you to this forum, and is doing a work in you whether you agree or not.

        1. JamaGenee profile image86
          JamaGeneeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          No, hrsidekick1h, your god didn't lead me to this forum. Another hubber named earnestshub did, and by now you should've figured out your god didn't bring him here either. cool

          1. hrsidekick1h profile image58
            hrsidekick1hposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            I love you.

          2. earnestshub profile image88
            earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            He didn't???  lol lol lol

  11. Tlherald85 profile image59
    Tlherald85posted 6 years ago

    I am the same.

  12. Tlherald85 profile image59
    Tlherald85posted 6 years ago

    I am the same.

    1. Druid Dude profile image61
      Druid Dudeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      ANYONE who professes to be a christian yet still is plagued by guilt, obviously doesn't understand the story line. Once saved, you can't doubt, for in doubt, you reject the sacrifice. Those who say they were once christians but are no longer are usually called "backsliders". You are actually only considering what YOU desire, and the greater good can be hanged! Good day!

      1. hrsidekick1h profile image58
        hrsidekick1hposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        That is the truth Druid Dude, is has nothing to do with the person who is saved through the grace of our Lord Jesus, everything God created he created for his on glory. If it were any other way, we would be saved by our own " works" and not of God's work he did out of his own goodness and grace when Jesus was hanging on the cross; right at the center of that cross where horizontal and vertical meet, facing in all direction was the heart of the son of God, and when the spear pierced his side and blood and water ran out of his side is when the new birth took place. May the son be glorified and worshiped forever. Amen.

  13. paradigmsearch profile image95
    paradigmsearchposted 6 years ago

    ?

  14. Kiss andTales profile image80
    Kiss andTalesposted 6 years ago

    Never let it be said of me that I would come between God's appointed  king and his his followers ,That is not my purpose when I speak. My purpose is to speak word of truth encourage more bible reading and support of Gods word! many will not care ,some will ,some just want to argue because they are athiest! either they will get something out of hub or they will not ,this is still a personal matter between them and God in the end. what I get out of it
    is faith building ,and true picture .of what people think, rather they believe in God or not ! and personaly I should know that God knows better then me whats out there in peoples heart ! no wonder Armageddon is around the corner ! so many opinions disgusting! to hear. this is the true world!

    1. Randy Godwin profile image95
      Randy Godwinposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      And your opinion tops all others, right?  smile

      1. Kiss andTales profile image80
        Kiss andTalesposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        I feel good about mine like others feel good about theirs ! free will on both sides

        1. Randy Godwin profile image95
          Randy Godwinposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          Both sides of what?  smile

  15. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image99
    Wesman Todd Shawposted 6 years ago

    Despite my obvious Christian bent - I'd hang out with Randy and Ernest anytime I got the chance!

    1. earnestshub profile image88
      earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks mate! I would break out the ole D28 and we could rattle a few strings. smile

      1. Randy Godwin profile image95
        Randy Godwinposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Sounds good, Earnest!  I have enough guitars for everyone, in case Wesman doesn't!  Not to mention fiddles, banjos, and mandolins!  smile

      2. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image99
        Wesman Todd Shawposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Definitely!

        I don't really even know any Gospel tunes - just old fiddle tunes, and some Celtic stuff.

        I wish I could sing.

    2. Eaglekiwi profile image80
      Eaglekiwiposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Oh sounds like a good ole jam session ,count me in. smile

      1. earnestshub profile image88
        earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Oh goody! A female lead singer would be nice, or another instrument perhaps? smile

        1. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image99
          Wesman Todd Shawposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          I'd love to just be the guy that plays backup for some lovely female singer - If I could play a bit better, I'd happily travel the globe and sleep in cheap motels for such a avocation. :-D

          1. earnestshub profile image88
            earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            You could do a heap of songs I know.
            Remember some of the best songs only have 3 or 4 chords. smile
            We could start of with "Sarah" smile Or something by Neil Young. smile

            1. Randy Godwin profile image95
              Randy Godwinposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              Eagles music is easy too, but you must have two lead guitars for Hotel Californiasmile

              1. earnestshub profile image88
                earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                and some good harmony. smile
                I just remembered "Sugar Mountain" and broke out the old axe.
                I still got it!



                not!

                Oh well, practice practice. I haven't played much lately, gotta get back to playing daily. smile

                1. Randy Godwin profile image95
                  Randy Godwinposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  Ha!  I've neglected my music too much since I started this stupid writing thing, but I'm making up for it now.  I pulled out a 40 year old acoustic I love and restrung it with the most expensive strings I could find.  The sound from this old guitar is indescribable.  I'd forgotten just how wonderful it is to wring music from mere wood and steel.  I won't do so again.  smile

              2. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image99
                Wesman Todd Shawposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                I love that stuff!

                I really prefer the acoustic bases songs though - I used to knock out a good Seven Bridges Road - but anyone else singing it would surely sound better than me!

                1. Randy Godwin profile image95
                  Randy Godwinposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  I prefer acoustic now too, Wesman.  I've spent too much time standing in front of loud amps and monitors to ever miss them much.  I still have several electric guitars but favor using one of my acoustics most of the time.  smile

                  1. earnestshub profile image88
                    earnestshubposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                    I played electric guitar for a year, and loved having all that volume, but I was very young and starting a band. When we got started there were others who could actually play, so I sang instead. smile

            2. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image99
              Wesman Todd Shawposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              I doubt I could get along with many folks who DIDN'T like Neil Young!

          2. Randy Godwin profile image95
            Randy Godwinposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            It's not as fun as it sounds, Wesman!  smile

      2. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image99
        Wesman Todd Shawposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        Music is great like that - it can unite people despite other sorts of differences.

  16. profile image61
    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago

    There is no Gosple of Jesus or Gospel of Christ; he never believed in any Christianity.

    Paul was the first Christian having founded Christianity; Jesus was not a Christian; Paul, Church and the Christians never followed Jesus; they were never inspired by the Holy Ghost. Only to add a little credence to Bible, the Church publicised that it was inspired by the Holy Ghost.

    1. profile image0
      jomineposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      You are the official spokesperson of god or his ghost?

      1. JamaGenee profile image86
        JamaGeneeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        lol lol lol

 
working