IndoctriNATION movie

[logger]

Romans 10:9-10 says something different. The Bible says repeatedly the you come to belief in your own and seek God out. This is one of several examples of you misquoting the Bible. It does not surprise me you said "unbelievers" often tell you that you're illiterate of the Bible.

I've never heard Romans 10:9-10 used in the way you just did. The author is simply teaching how to get saved.

Here's the verse that says more of what I'm talking about.

John 6:44


No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

 

[marplots]

Maybe some people have love switches in their brains they can flip at will, whether it's justified or not. I don't have one of those.

Maybe some people could convince themselves to love anything to avoid torture. Could you force yourself to love Caligula to avoid the torture chamber?

I don't know, I've never had to make that choice.

Apparently, some people are able to switch from not being a Christian to being a Christian (and vice versa). We know it happens. Somehow. Some sects believe it's determined beforehand - that only a certain number of "elect" have already been selected, and if you aren't one of the chosen, well too bad. Other sects emphasize the choice, while some add the Holy Spirit as a motivating ingredient.

However, if at least some of us here have rejected the offer, that feels as much like free will as anything, doesn't it? I think if we asked the atheists here, "If you were able to choose to believe, would you?" the answer would be "No" (for the reasons cited). So, regardless of the ability, the outcome would be the same.

 

[marplots]

I could no more choose to believe in the Christian God than I could choose to believe that the sky is green.

Could you believe the sky is green?

 

[Mark6]

I think if we asked the atheists here, "If you were able to choose to believe, would you?" the answer would be "No" (for the reasons cited).

My answer is: I do not know, because "choosing to believe" is a contradiction of terms. I did not "choose" to believe that 2+2=4, and I cannot choose to believe that 2+2=5. If my mind were capable of choosing what is or is not true, it would not be my mind any more, therefore I have no idea what I would choose to believe.

 

[Slowvehicle]

You're free to believe what you like.

Well, sweetie, this is one more place that you are using words carelessly. I honestly cannot tell if you think you are being clever, and leaving yourself a bolt-hole, or if you simply do not know the demonstrable history of your own "scriptures".

You keep bringing "beleifs' to a fact-fight.

Do some reading.

...or do you actually beleive that "Luke", "John", "Mark", and "Matthew" wrote eyewitness accounts of the MJ?

Cool story, bra.

And that means he was for it? Use a little bit of that human reason.

Speaking of human reason...the fact (the demonstrable fact) that your MJ said nothing, said nbot one word, about homosexuality means that anti-homosexuality cannot be said to be a "christian" value. A "pauline" value, perhaps (although I question your ability to properly parse Koiné to the point that your interpretation of strictures agains forms of prostitution can be considered blanket license to persecute homosexuality); but not a value based upon the teachings of your MJ. (Who was, BTW, said to be said to be big on "loving your neighbor" and "removing the great beam from your own eye".)

Not to mention, it is what you call "human reason" that leads to the inescapable conclusion that the plagiarized cow-'god' that became the יהוה of your OT is a purely human invention.

I know I'm having fun with you.

What a relief. Your scholarship is so inconsistent and shallow that you could not have been serious. Or are you just adopting the dodge of the overmastered?

No, it is quite clear the left is immoral and perverse.

How...odd. I don't suppose you have the least skerrick of, say, support for this claim of yours. Are you simply using "the left" as metonymy, the way your "bible" uses שָׂטָן?

Is Bristol Palin a spokesperson for the immorality and perversity of the "left"?

 

[Slowvehicle]

Could you believe the sky is green?

No. I could not "choose" to beleive the sky is green, in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Given actual evidence, I could choose to understand that the sky was, in fact, green; particularly given evidence as to why the normally-blue sky appeared to be green in this particular case.

In the same way, I do not "believe" in evolution or "believe" in gravity.

 

[marplots]

No. I could not "choose" to beleive the sky is green, in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Given actual evidence, I could choose to understand that the sky was, in fact, green; particularly given evidence as to why the normally-blue sky appeared to be green in this particular case.

In the same way, I do not "believe" in evolution or "believe" in gravity.

Are you suggesting that Christians have an ability to believe that is different that yours? That they are able, somehow, to believe in things that are not true, unevidenced, and obviously incorrect?

How do you suppose they manage it?

 

[Pixel42]

Wouldn't you have to know how my life turned out to know that? If worshiping Jesus makes me a loving successful person, wouldn't that make my life quite fulfilling in the eyes of the world?

You have shared enough of your attitude towards, for example, people who happen to be gay (or divorced, or left leaning) for it to be clear that your faith has not made you a loving person.

A successful Christian would be one who had followed the instructions of Jesus to, for example, give everything they have to the poor. Have you done that?

 

[tsig]

I've never heard Romans 10:9-10 used in the way you just did. The author is simply teaching how to get saved.

Here's the verse that says more of what I'm talking about.

John 6:44


No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

Then it's not my decision about accepting Jesus since god has already made that determination.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

I'm also not in fear of eternal damnation, guess why.

Well, actually you are. As far as I can see, with the possible exception of Rogue Kitten, you are the only one here who is in fear of eternal damnation. No-one else who has posted here so far believes in eternal damnation, so no-one else is living in fear of it.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Are you suggesting that Christians have an ability to believe that is different that yours? That they are able, somehow, to believe in things that are not true, unevidenced, and obviously incorrect?

How do you suppose they manage it?

I am not a psychologist (although I have played with one behind the TV, in my time), but some people do, in fact, develop imaginary friends that are not there.

If someone were to claim that it had been "revealed" to them that the sky was, in fact, green, I would still maintain, given the evidence, that the sky was blue.

I reject the "If only you believed as I do, you would come to see why you should believe as I do" gambit.

 

[Pup]

I don't think that is the comfort we're discussing or comfort at all. Rogue is this the prosperity gospel your talking about?

Did you miss where I said pray to be healed? Those kinds of people are all over some of the cancer forums. They ask people to pray for them because they're hoping for a miracle or to ease the pain of a relative with cancer. That's not the prosperity gospel by any stretch, but it is a way to go into denial about reality and try to use magical thinking to control an essentially uncontrollable situation.

I thought religion was expressly supposed to provide comfort in that sort of situation.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

I know I'm having fun with you.

Is this what one might call a clue?

 

[marplots]

I am not a psychologist (although I have played with one behind the TV, in my time), but some people do, in fact, develop imaginary friends that are not there.

If someone were to claim that it had been "revealed" to them that the sky was, in fact, green, I would still maintain, given the evidence, that the sky was blue.

I reject the "If only you believed as I do, you would come to see why you should believe as I do" gambit.

It doesn't help to rely on evidence, because the evidence itself is subject to the same judgements and beliefs as anything else. I sincerely doubt that a Christian apologist couldn't come up with evidences they find convincing.

But returning to the matter of "choosing to believe" - I should like to offer a method and see if you agree.

Suppose we agree that under some set of circumstances it is very likely a person would come to believe in Jesus as the Son of God. Now, whatever those circumstances might be, we can pin them down, process-wise into a sort of recipe. (I have one in mind, but I'll forgo it for now.)

If you (or I) were aware that some process like that existed - even if we don't know the particulars - we might consider undergoing it. When we do so, we can make a choice: either submit to this process or avoid it. In that sense at least, by choosing to participate or not, we can choose to believe.

 

[devnull]

I reject the "If only you believed as I do, you would come to see why you should believe as I do" gambit.

All of it, the bible, the stories, the actions of modern religious people, the psychology.... all of it is best and neatly explained by it being pure fiction.

 

[logger]

You have shared enough of your attitude towards, for example, people who happen to be gay (or divorced, or left leaning) for it to be clear that your faith has not made you a loving person.

Yes, because to a leftist one has to agree with the lifestyle to be truly loving, you cannot understand loving the person, not certain decisions they make.

A successful Christian would be one who had followed the instructions of Jesus to, for example, give everything they have to the poor. Have you done that?

Another verse taken OUT of context. Educate yourself on why Jesus said this to who he was talking to.

 

[Toontown]

I'm also not in fear of eternal damnation, guess why.

Because your irrational fear of eternal torture has caused you to abandon rational thought.

 

[Magrat]

Another verse taken OUT of context. Educate yourself on why Jesus said this to who he was talking to.

Matthew 19:16-24

Jesus says to give up worldly goods to follow him. You yourself said you have a good life "according to the world's opinion" because of following Jesus. It appears to me you have misunderstood the Bible. This is what I have referred to as a prosperity gospel. You have claimed you have rewards here in earth from believing in Jesus. That's the literal opposition of what the Bible teaches.

 

[Pixel42]

Yes, because to a leftist one has to agree with the lifestyle to be truly loving, you cannot understand loving the person, not certain decisions they make.

If you love a person you do not expect them to make decisions that will condemn them to a life of misery and loneliness. No-one who embraces a faith which requires them to accept the vile bigotry of the OT is likely to become a more loving person.

Another verse taken OUT of context. Educate yourself on why Jesus said this to who he was talking to.

Very little Jesus said is IN context today, that's the point I was making. Jesus was advocating a lifestyle which he expected to be practised by a small minority of people for a limited time. He was the guy who stands on street corners telling passers by to repent now because the day of judgement is at hand. It's hardly surprising that his instructions for that lifestyle can't be sensibly applied to long lives in large complex societies.

 

[Toontown]

However, if at least some of us here have rejected the offer, that feels as much like free will as anything, doesn't it? I think if we asked the atheists here, "If you were able to choose to believe, would you?" the answer would be "No" (for the reasons cited). So, regardless of the ability, the outcome would be the same.

None of this is directly related to anything I said. I didn't argue against free will. I simply pointed out the doctrinal reason why the mythical God gave Man free will.

To reiterate: the mythical God gave Man free will so some could choose freely to love Him - or else.

He knew free will fosters sin. He knew his compulsive rules would not allow Him to forgive sin - unless Jesus was brutally tortured and murdered.

And the "or else" option for failure to fulfill the "love" requirement is far worse than anything Caligula or any other human monster ever did.

So the mythical God is the Father of sin, the Creator of sinners, and the first sentient being ever to premeditate murder and torture. He created sin, along with Man, and irrationally planned to fulfil His compulsive rules requirements through the completely unrelated brutal torture and murder of Jesus. And also by the eternal torture of all who do not repent.

If that ain't crazy, there ain't no crazy. All hail the Ruling Psychopath.

Not that merely hailing Him will do you any good, but it's a first step down that surprisingly short road to Bizarro World. You have to love Him, with all your heart - or else.

Which makes the mythical God the original Stalker, in addition to all His other shortcomings, which you will learn to overlook - or else.