An incredible depiction of Love

Oh, for heaven sakes, good grief...puh-leez!!

Well said. Very well said. Yet no matter what, there are some who will hold to their old beliefs.

Thank you for telling us about the 'Christian' video on youTube. If that doesn't show God's love for us, I don't know what does. Gotta go. I've got a video to re-watch.

I am getting lost between the bold (Neale) and not-bolded (Turk182) comments, because it appears some of the not-bolded comments are actually Neale and some of the bolded may be Turk182.

Don't know if this can be edited and re-posted for clarity.

Even putting "Neale:" and "Turk182:" at the beginning of the paragraphs would help, especially since it is not an ACTUAL dialogue but just comments and questions inserted within Turk182's original post, right? Or is it an actual dialogue?

Thanks.

Thank you Neale....
I am learning every minute here in this blog of yours...
as each post comes up, my level of understanding grows...
and the cloud in my eyes dissolves to expose my mysteries..

Thank you...and god bless you. and all.

Idolhunter

Good Morning Neale:

I come from a religious background where fire and brimstone services on Sunday were the norm. As a child and listening to this Sunday after Sunday, I always felt that I was damned no matter what, because how could a person live a totally and completely sin-free life...as was expected at our church. We were told that you must repent daily, because you sinned daily and God could return at any moment and if you weren't sin-free, you would go to hell.

Growing up I always felt that they were wrong. There were too many unanswered questions. To many conflicting views. But when questions were raised they were quickly squelched in the "because I said so" arrogance of the time.

I have since traveled a different path and have read numerous books, including yours, in search of the answers to the questions that I had from long ago. I've been finding answers to questions, have also come up with new questions and continue to search for more answers. But I feel that I am now more "enlightened". As Idolhunter put it "the cloud in my eyes dissolves" and the truths continue to reveal themselves.

Thank you and God Bless.

Deb, So you believe that God was in the heart of the alligator, which was trying to eat the boy? Then it would seem that you have pitted God against himself, because he was at the same time trying to kill and save the boy. I'm sorry, but that is way closer to Wiccan than it is to anything else.

God created this earth and every form of life on it. Only in one animal does it say that God breathed "the breath of life", and that was man. Only man has an eternal soul, and the Holy Spirit indwells man only. When we confess and are baptized, the Scriptures teach that God himself in the person of the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in our hearts. He does not dwell in the hearts of animals, nor does he inhabit plants, fishes, insects, or any other living or non-living thing.

Haven't you ever read the Footprints poem, Deb? That when the man could see only one set of footprints, God told him it was then that he carried him? The saddest thing that people tell me is that they don't believe that God reaches down and intervenes in our lives. I can't think of a more wimpy, pathetic God than one who is not able or willing to act on our behalf. Certainly the God that is revealed in the Bible and through real acts in human history gets involved in his creation.

Love, Robert

Wow, Great Dialog. I know where Turk is coming from; it took me almost 22 years to wake up from out of that Nightmare Called Conventional Christianity.

Hey Turk, Brother, I feel ya and I know that you are saying and doing what you believe to be true. Truth is Brother, the teachings of Christ can be followed without the Myth and fear we have created as part of Modern Day Christianity. Which is so dogmatic that it binds one into a Catch 22 of what you are seeing is not what life is nor can it or is it being explained with conventional Religious Thought.

Not believing in the Dogma that Traditional Christianity (in its various forms) has become, leads to a built in and addictive state of self Punishment called Guilt; thus the dependency on a Clergy that reinforces the Myth and pumps you up to do Battle with a world that in Christian Thought is ruled by Satan. Viewing everyone who disagrees with your point of view or understanding is in need of saving

Think about it, what is the point of a Hell that God created for a Satan and then places his new creation called Man right in the midst of the same enemy that God just kicked out. Why would God have such a need of a place of eternal punishment? This is more of a human need (and an anthropomorphic God needed for a literal interpretation of the Bible) than God needing some kind of cosmic penal system.

It’s a Myth to keep us under control within a Dogmatic system built on a misguided attempt to make life work; we have made an Institution out of the Teachings of Jesus, thereby making it ineffective

Check this out Brother:
http://awakenlife.net/2008/03/24/is-jesus-the-only-way-to-salvation/

Peace and Love
G W. McKay
Thanks Neale...

what's wrong with believing in and practicing Wicca?

In a religious school somewhere in Asia...
a monk/teacher plays this game..

"if let's say YOU were on the steering wheel of a runaway car and you came to a point where you have to make a choice...
a goat and a dog were in your path.. and there are no other path...
it's either you ram the goat or ram the dog...what would you do?

the analysis and results from the classroom
the majority will say ram the goat
a few will say ram the dog
and some just say let go of the steering wheel and let nature decide.

Why the majority said ram the goat?
It's because goat is food... sooner or later the goat have to slaughtered so ramming it, there is no sin.
and a dog is a man's friend, it loves us.

Why ram the dog?
the dog is smarter then the goat, when in shock a goat stands still while a dog, when in shock will run.

Why let the steering wheel go?
.. I let god decide...

So you see, there are all kinds of people with their own beliefs and reasonings, some are smarter then others so depending on what is your level of understanding of the situation, our answers will be like what you see in my goat and dog story.

End of the class...- there is no right or wrong choice but merely a choice depending on the level of understanding of your own journey.
The idea was to make people understands about situations and give more light that there are more answers then what you thought was right or wrong.

regarding being called Wiccan, Christian, Jewish etc if one does not subscribe to any of these beliefs - I didn't intend my question to be taken as it was - I merely asked what is wrong with believing/practicing Wicca NOT what is wrong with being called Wiccan when they are not

hope that helps

. . . interesting how one sentence can be interpreted or misinterpreted depending how one reads into it . . .

JenSuf, you asked Neale the question that has plagued mankind since the beginning. How could God, in perfection, have created Satan?

If you read Neale’s book, ‘Conversations with God’, on page 14 you will find a being Neale believes to be either his subconscious mind or God, stating the following:

“Yet God has full power to match intentions with results. You can not and will not believe in this, (even though you claim that God is all-powerful), and so you have to create in your imagination a power equal to God in order that you may find a way for God’s will to be thwarted. And so you have created in your mythology the being you call ‘devil’. You have even imagined a God at war with this being, (thinking that God solves problems the way that you do). Finally you have actually imagined God could lose this war.”

Satan is not a myth. Satan is as real as any being God has created. Satan has been given free will, just as we have. Satan is imperfect, as we are. Since through our imperfections, trials and triumphs, we learn, I assume Satan learns as well.

God knew in advance the choices Charles Manson, Adolph Hitler, Pontius Pilate, and Satan would make. God made them, gave them free will, and loves them.

Life is not about perfection. The renewal of the natural world causes earthquakes, tornadoes, and forest fires. People get hurt. Free will allows some people to choose to rob, threaten, and demean. People get hurt. The body ages, babies are aborted, loving, generous people die of cancer while in their prime.

Through every trial that we face, we have the choice to turn to God. Through every trial, we are learning.

Life is not an easy thing. But it is preparing us for what comes next.

Bliss.

Why would we need to be prepared for bliss? I have no clue. There is no way of understanding everything God does. But I have faith that everything God does, everything, is perfect.

Blessings to you JenSuf, and to you Neale.

As I said in other topic, not all christianism has a fundamentalistic approach, or a fear-based view...

For example, read this excerpt from this site:

www.Tentmaker.org

http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/biggest_lie_eckerty.html

"
Exposing the Greatest Lie Ever Told
by Ken Eckerty

You have all heard preachers and evangelists speak of the “Greatest Story Ever Told.” It is a story of love, of sacrifice, and of “everlasting mercy.” It is a story that has been told for over two thousand years with great passion and tears, and one that has changed the lives of countless millions all over the world. This story, of course, is none other than the story of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. On this website, you will hear of that story, but you are also going to hear (maybe for the first time) another story. This story, like the other, is told with equal passion—perhaps even more. This story, unlike the other, is a lie. It is the “Greatest Lie Ever Told” to man, and you might be very surprised to find out where this lie comes from. It does not come from those we would consider heathen, nor does it come from atheists, or even those who are violently opposed to God and religion. No, this lie does not come from those we would expect. The greatest lie the world has ever heard comes straight from the very people who love and follow Jesus Christ. It comes from our pulpits, it is taught in our Sunday school classes, it is broadcast all over the world through our television ministries, and it is preached by the missionaries who are in the remotest places of the world.

Have I gotten your attention yet? OK, so what is this lie? It is the lie that says that God will eternally torment most of His creatures; it is the lie that says that Jesus Christ cannot save most men; it is the lie that says that death will continue to exist forever, and it is the lie that says there will come a time when God will never be able to show mercy and love to the majority of those He created. Yes, this is the lie of religion and it is one that has all but consumed evangelical Christianity, so much so that the Church's message has become one of fear rather than one of love and victory. It has taken the beautiful judgments of God and turned them into a sadistic torture chamber, and worse than this, it has made a miserable failure of the work of Jesus Christ in that only a small minority of the billions of people who have ever lived will ever see heaven. This website's purpose is two fold: 1) to proclaim the victory and power of the Cross of our Lord Jesus, and 2) to expose the false doctrine of “eternal” punishment (as it is taught by orthodox Christianity). "

No comments...

Blessings

Neale,

I watched the YouTube thing about the Lion. That made this old man cry. Thanks.

"How can a God of love send anybody to Hell?"

I noted that the above question was referred to by Turk indicating you had posed the question. I think on some points I disagree with both of you, but hey! I have decided that if any two people totally agree on everything, one of them is being dominated by the other. That will not naturally happen. That is what is wrong with all organized religions and various denominations within religions; they expect people to all believe the same thing. They were all originated by humans, and of course that spells error.

Loyalty to preachers, institutions, etc. can be a curse that is difficult to free yourself from. Jer 17:5-8, Thus says the LORD: "Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his arm, whose heart turns away from the LORD. He is like a shrub in the desert, and shall not see any good come. He shall dwell in the parched places of the wilderness, in an uninhabited salt land. "Blessed is the man who trusts in the LORD, whose trust is the LORD. He is like a tree planted by water, that sends out its roots by the stream, and does not fear when heat comes, for its leaves remain green, and is not anxious in the year of drought, for it does not cease to bear fruit."

I am a 66 year old retired Mathematics Instructor who is passionate about studying the Bible with a philosophy that I don't care so much about how the English reads, but I want to see what the Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek says. I believe that the original manuscripts of the Bible were inerrant, but of course they have not been found to date and so all translations are subject to human error and bias. We are fortunate to have many manuscripts for comparison. I believe that the death and resurrection of Jesus is what has reconciled all created beings back to God.

My current passion is to counter the message of fear and eternal torment with the message of a Father's love, grace, mercy, justice and whatever I forgot as well as His Son's obedience and faithfulness.

For those of you who trust the Bible as His love letter to humankind as I do, given translator errors, I would like you to consider the following article that I processed the other day.

After Robert Young had spent about half of his lifetime studying Hebrew and Greek, he finished translating the Bible in his “Young’s Literal Translation” (YLT) in 1862. Some 36 years later he released his 3rd and final edition in 1898. Robert had grown up reading the KJV and realized, as many have over the years, that the world of Bible students desperately needed a version with greater clarity and understanding of many words, as the KJV had this bad habit of translating a single Hebrew or Greek word into many different English words. Translators know this is warranted in those cases where you have different shades of meaning, but the KJV seemed out of control in this area and left the student with wrong ideas about certain word meanings. For example, the English verb “destroy” in the KJV is used for 49 different Hebrew words (this can be seen in the Englishman’s Hebrew Concordance, p. 1510, 2nd edition). This is but one example of many.

Concerning the use of the word hell, and the doctrine of hell that was instituted as an article of faith in the 6th century, Robert Young realized as many have that the word “hell” was a terribly poor choice of an English word for “sheol”, “hades”, “gehenna”, or “tartarus” since the word “hell” had picked up some baggage from its basic meaning of “hidden” or “unseen”, as is the proper understanding of this Anglo-Saxon word. In the intertestamental period, some notions out of pagan mythology became associated with the unseen realm of the dead. At some point in the development of English versions, this word for the unseen realm, “hell”, took on a concept such as what Dante’s fantasizing had envisioned in his “inferno”.

Note in the following list of the number of times that the word “hell” appears is quite variable, ranging from 94 to 0. One of a number of those without the word “hell” is Young’s Literal Translation. Young is not alone among versions without the word “hell”. We have many people probably thinking that Jesus actually spoke the English word “hell” during those 8 addresses that Jesus used the words “gehenna “ or “hades”. Here is the list of versions with the number of times that “hell” occurs.
DRB: 94, KJV: 54, MSG: 54, GW: 35, RV: 28, BBE: 25, GNB: 21, LITV: 20, NET: 16, ESV: 14, RSV: 13, NASB: 13, AMP: 13, DARBY: 12 , CLT: 0, ROTH: 0, YLT: 0

When the words “sheol”, “gehenna”, “hades”, and “tartarus” are analyzed by usage, the only one that holds a possible association with the punishment of humans is “gehenna”. Gehenna is a geographical location, the Valley of Hinnom adjacent to Jerusalem. This was their city dump, where even bodies of criminals were dumped. When Jesus metaphorically spoke to the crowds using the word Gehenna, his audience, the Jews, knew exactly what he was referring to. These addresses involving the use of the word Gehenna were parables all if we are to believe Mat 13:34, “All this Jesus said to the crowds in parables; indeed he said nothing to them without a parable.” We need to remember that a parable is a fictional story with a spiritually discernable message. One is hard-pressed to find “eternal” associated with “Gehenna”. Now, when you do find the words “eternal”, “everlasting”, “for ever”, etc., they are translations of “aion” and “aionios”. A search of the usage of the noun “aion” and its adjective “aionios” reveals that these words are associated with limited duration, so to also translate them as unlimited duration, one must question the validity. These words are clearly associated with “ages” or “eons”, such as those verses that use the phrases, “the current age” and “the age to come” and at least one version has chosen to translate them “eon” and “eonian”. An in-depth study of “olam” (the Hebrew word deemed equivalent to the Greek words “aion” and “aionios” by the Septuagint translators), “aion”, and “aionios”, such as was done by J. W. Hanson is very enlightening. A more recent and thorough study of these words can be found on www.growthingod.org, entitled “The Hidden Aeonian Realm”. As these studies were done, and is always the best way to determine the meaning of words, is to look at every verse containing them. Usage always trumps Etymology and Lexicography as to the determination of word meanings. Lexicography is especially subject to human bias.

Jesus’ uses of the word “gehenna” was confined to Jewish audiences as indicated in one of His missional statements (“…only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel”). Jesus commissioned Saul (Paul) to carry the kingdom message to the Gentiles. One would think, in Jesus’ revealings to Paul, the message would be the same, unless as some believe, the gospel was different to the Jew than it was the Gentile. Also, Paul said, as recorded by Luke in Acts, that he did not fail to declare the whole counsel of God. What then is interesting to see is that the word “hell” or “gehenna” is not in any of Paul’s writings nor in the gospel of John, Hebrews, 1 Peter, or 1, 2, 3 John. Since Jesus commissioned and revealed to Paul, if the doctrine of hell is true, it is incomprehensible that Paul would not mention it many times and very explicitly. Some will argue that we should give more weight to what Jesus personally said. But if you believe that Paul was inspired to speak the message Jesus would have him to speak, then essentially when Paul speaks, Jesus speaks. The most disciplinary-sounding words that Paul wrote are found in 2Th 1:9, “They shall suffer the punishment of eternal destruction and exclusion from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might …”. The words “eternal destruction” are the translation of “olethron aionion”, which could be translated “eonian destruction”. This word “olethron” which is translated “destruction” is the same word use in 1Co 5:5, “you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” We see here that “destruction” is of the flesh, not of the spirit, which serves the purpose of preparing the person for life in the presence of God, “that his spirit may be saved…”

Relative to “aionion”, note what Vincent has to say in Vincent’s Word Studies: Additional Note on ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον eternal destruction, 2Th_1:9
Ἁιών transliterated eon, is a period of time of longer or shorter duration, having a beginning and an end, and complete in itself.
The word always carries the notion of time, and not of eternity. It always means a period of time. Otherwise it would be impossible to account for the plural, or for such qualifying expressions as this age, or the age to come. It does not mean something endless or everlasting. The adjective αἰώνιος in like manner carries the idea of time. Neither the noun nor the adjective, in themselves, carry the sense of endless or everlasting. Ἁιώνιος means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Both the noun and the adjective are applied to limited periods. Ζωὴ αἰώνιος eternal life, which occurs 42 times in N.T., but not in lxx, is not endless life, but life pertaining to a certain age or eon, or continuing during that eon. I repeat, life may be endless. The life in union with Christ is endless, but the fact is not expressed by αἰώνιος. Κόλασις αἰώνιος, rendered everlasting punishment (Mat_25:46), is the punishment peculiar to an eon other than that in which Christ is speaking.

This doctrine is built on tradition, mistranslations, the institution of the Catholic Church, backing by the state, and perpetuated by the likes of Augustine and other “popular” and influential people. It became entrenched just like the Roman Catholic Church did and people begin to believe that if the majority believe in something it must be true and history has surely taught us better than placing any trust in humans, preachers, institutions, etc. Jer. 17:5, “Thus says the LORD: "Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength, whose heart turns away from the LORD.
Jer. 17:6 He is like a shrub in the desert, and shall not see any good come. He shall dwell in the parched places of the wilderness, in an uninhabited salt land.
Jer. 17:7 “Blessed is the man who trusts in the LORD, whose trust is the LORD.
Jer. 17:8 He is like a tree planted by water, that sends out its roots by the stream, and does not fear when heat comes, for its leaves remain green, and is not anxious in the year of drought, for it does not cease to bear fruit."
Pulling out the key statements relative to trust, we have the following.
"Cursed is the man who trusts in man”
But
"Blessed is the man who trusts in the LORD”

Many need to re-think this inherited doctrine which makes God out the hypocrite in that He through Jesus instructed us to “love your enemies”, whereas He, by this doctrine if true, is not willing to show a love that “never fails” to His enemies. And by the way, these “enemies” of God were declared justified by the blood of Jesus.

Rom 5:6-10 “For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. But God demonstrates his own love for us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, because we have now been declared righteous by his blood, we will be saved through him from God's wrath. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, how much more, since we have been reconciled, will we be saved by his life?

Note that a summary of these verses could be the following:
While we were helpless ungodly sinners who were His enemies, Christ died for us, declared us righteous by his blood, will save us from God’s wrath, and reconciled us to God through His death.

Helpless ungodly sinners who were enemies of God and Christ may be words written to those of Rome who were currently believers, but here Paul is obviously referencing their status with God prior to their becoming believers. Therefore the being reconciled to God and declared righteous occurred prior to belief since these descriptions are hardly of believers.

At the foot of the cross were many helpless ungodly sinners who were the enemies of Jesus, yet He said, “Father forgive them for they don’t know what they are doing”. I believe the Father was in agreement with this prayer of Jesus and so their sins were or will be forgiven on the merits of Jesus alone. Mankind was justified on that day. Paul reinforces the fact of being declared justified was for all mankind a few verses later in Rom 5:18, “Consequently, just as one offense resulted in condemnation for everyone, so one act of righteousness results in justification and life for everyone.”

I just woke up, and I was talking with my little cousins mother over breakfast and we talked about the murder of 14-year-old girl here in Finland.
One thing I noticed was that it was made big drama in newspapers by telling how nice she was by friends and parents.
It felt wierd because same time there is lots and lots people dieing iraq and I think there's not one newspaper in world who tells the lifestory or atleast comments by friends and parents of normal ppl who have died in the USA war.
Comments of dead soldiers and foreign civils to make ppl see THEY ARE ALL HUMANS the war is LOSE LOSE SITUATION FOR HUMANITY.

Idolhunter,

I think you have to be very careful when relating the game telephone to the transcription of Scripture. If you look at the history of how the Bible was passed down, you will find that people took the utmost care in transcribing it word for word, phrase for phrase. The proof of that was the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which contained almost the whole book of Isaiah as well as parts of other books. The modern translations of the Bible varied almost not at all from the ancient text, which gave Biblical scholars solid proof that the Bible has not been misedited down over the years.

Neale,

Wow! I was surprised and pleased that you devoted a lot of your column to discussing one of my posts. The fact that you are willing to talk about these points and display them prominently says a lot about you. I perhaps will discuss more of the talking points later, but I just wanted to focus on a couple for now:

There is no such thing as sin: - The apostle John said this in his epistle, 1 John 1: 5-10, [This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. 7But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin. 8If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.]

Now you, in your 'conversations with God', insist that sin is a man-made concept. John, in both his gospel and his epistle, says the opposite. Who should people believe?

The apostle John is a real historical figure; he is not a myth, made-up, or just a name in a story. He led the church at Ephesus for a while, then was exiled by the Romans to the isle of Patmos towards the end of the first century. He wrote Revelation sometime around 90 A.D.

John was a contemporary of Jesus. He lived as a disciple for the last 3 years of Jesus' life. He witnessed most of Jesus' miracles, was a witness of the Transfiguration on the Mount of Olives, and witnessed the resurrected Christ in the Upper Room. He also personally saw the glorified Christ as Christ and the angel gave John the message of Revelation. He personally performed many miracles himself, as he was given Christ's authority by Christ himself to heal the sick, drive out demons, and perform other signs of power. He was in the inner circle of Jesus' disciples, along with James and Peter. John was the only disciple listed as present at Jesus' crucifixion, and Jesus himself gave John the charge of taking care of Jesus' mother Mary upon his death. John was a witness to almost all that Jesus said and did while he was here on earth, so his credentials are impeccable.

Neale, you on the other hand have claimed that you had a conversation with God that took place inside your head. No one, to my understanding, heard this conversation take place or witnessed its manifestation. There are no other 'disciples' around that can atest to the veracity of your claims, nor are there any physical events that other people witnessed that would lend credibility to your story. You had this experience alone, and people have to take your word for the fact that what you say is true.

Now, putting aside personal biases and subjective feelings, who do you think has a more credible story, you or the apostle John? John, whose ministry and observations are backed up not only by the other gospel writers and church members that saw and heard what he did, but who is also backed up by the historical documentations of historians who were not Christians. Or you, who we simply have to take your word for what happened? I believe any lawyer in the country with a lick of sense would side with John.

People are inherently good: this is your other point that I will discuss at this time. Who ever said that people were good? I think that your hypothesis here has an indefensible premise, in that there is no way to scientifically prove that. And if people are inherently good, would there be so much evil in the world today? Yet violent crime is rampant, drug use is still at epidemic levels, and study after study confirms that the majority of people would cheat on tests, spouses, taxes, etc if they knew they could get away with it. Would a race of inherently good creatures do that?

Myself, I don't think that people are INHERENTLY good OR bad - I believe that people are inherently SELFISH. That in itself is not necessarily bad or evil, because the basic drives of our human nature are by their very nature self-centered. But selfishness lends itself to wickedness and evil much more than it does to being good, in the sense that 'being good' means that we help others less fortunate than ourselves. The Bible's view of sin states that man is selfish and will choose to act sinfully as soon as he is able to express that kind of behavior. And that behavioral model is what we see in real life today, not that people are good. Ask any preschool teacher, day care provider, or teacher or youth coach and you will receive affirmation of this. Of course there are exceptions, and we all know people who act altruistically, but the average person exhibits selfish behavior. 'Being good' requires real effort to overcome our sinful and selfish attitudes and desires.

Neale, there are a lot of ideas that on the outside seem good and beneficial in theory, but they fall apart when exposed to reality and the real world. Communism is one; on paper, it seemed like a great idea - state ownership of the means of production (meaning those evil managers and CEOs couldn't take advantage of the little man), re-distribution of wealth, and every worker would earn the same wage, so that jealousy and envy of higher-paid coworkers would cease. Sounds good, doesn't it? But it did not factor in the human component. People found out that it did not matter how hard they worked; everyone got the same reward. And instead of everyone lifting their productivity to the level of the high producers, people lowered theirs to the level of the lowest producers. Laziness, alcoholism, absenteeism, and shoddy workmanship were the hallmarks of this grand experiment. Morale among the working population was very low, and hopelessness attributed to the rising substance abuse and criminal activity among the working class. Things like what you are preaching, Neale, sound good on paper, but they fail the test when put into actual practice.

That, Neale, is why I can't ascribe to your particular theology. Not only is it NOT affirmed by what we see happening in the real world, it is not backed up by any historical, empirical, or any other kind of evidence. You are not alone; your philosophy is simply one of many present day philosophies and worldviews that claim that people are basically good and that bad or immoral behavior is the exception. The Bible states quite the opposite - that people are selfish and sinful as soon as they are able to express that kind of behavior. Because of this fact, people need a Savior in order to be acceptable to God. In contrast, the implication of the "people are good" worldview is that good people don't need a Savior. The fact of the matter is, Neale, that the biblical worldview and not the "people are good" worldview matches reality.

I look forward to your response.

Turk182

Robert,

Satan is merely a creation of God. Why would He give him so much importance, even to the point of, after a lapse of centuries?, sacrificing His only Son just to overcome him? So what if he hates God and want to hurt Him? That's his problem, not God's nor ours. Unless, He's vulnerable.

What's Satan's fault? He merely made Adam eat an apple. Who made our ancestors so gullible? Who made Satan so cunning? What did God do? He condemned all of humanity just for what Adam did. You say, "The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work." You say, "Jesus destroyed the devil's work by sacrificing himself in our place..." You say, "God has enemies, but he overcomes them all by the blood of his Son and the strength of the testimony of the saints." Sounds very comforting and reassuring to me.

There's only one problem though. You don't seem so assured. You act as though you do not believe in what you are saying. It appears that you believe that your efforts are necessary for Him to complete His mission. Would Jesus' sacrifice be of little import unless you reinforce it somehow?

I ask these questions because I know that, somehow, you would only be too willing to enlighten me and others who may probably as peplexed as I am. Perhaps I am getting the wrong signals.

Thank you Robert, for your comments...

Tax pointed out irrebatible arguments already...

In short words, the only way that God could have enemies, is if he is in some way, vulnerable or powerless... Don't you get that?

What enemy could have the All in All, the almighty Power of Universe...?

I know that fundamenealism says that the Power of God is not in doubt, but Satan wants that humans do have this doubt...

But then the question remains the same: who created Satan? What made a creature so powerful at the point of 'compiting' with God? Why human beings, and moreover 'light creatures' as Lucifer or Satan, were so fallible, corruptible, selfish or evil...?

Don't you see that the only way that DUALITY theology had some sense, is if God power is divided, lesser, or fallible?

But of course, the answer of my questions is only one: GOD THEN IS FALLIBLE...

And that is corroborated by the Bible itself, in Gen 6: 5-7

God repented of having created Men, because they didn't work well... (so, he decided to destroy all humanity and animals and plants, but failed again... that didn't work out anything...)

Understand? If Humanity failed, if Light angels failed, is because God failed...

That is the fallible God, the dual god, the nonsense 'god' in which nonsense theologies are constructed, and nonsense sociologies and politics were derived...

But remember: God is ONE...

Blessings and thanks

Victor,

You have asked the questions: If evil didn't exist until Satan brought it about, how did it end up in Satan's nature? If Satan's nature is evil, how could God have created him? Can God create something contrary to his own good nature? Then the thought trickles down: Is God free?

Different people may explain these matters somewhat differently, but as I see it, the main outline of the story is something like this.

God is free in that nothing apart from God "makes" Him do what He does. Although everything He does is good, this isn't because something different than God, called good, somehow limits Him. Rather, good is what He is. Good isn't abstract, but personal. It's Him, in the triune love of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

It wasn't contrary to God's nature to give His created rational beings the gift of creaturely freedom, because the gift didn't make them rebel against Him; it merely enabled them to choose. True, to be able to choose is to be able to choose rebellion. But to be able to choose is also to be able to choose to follow Him — and some goods, like love, can come into their own only if they are unforced. So the gift itself was good and in keeping with God's own goodness.

To answer the question about how Satan became evil, I have to clear up an ambiguity in the way we use the word "nature." Sometimes when we speak of something's nature, we mean "how it is." For example, this is how we speak of God's nature. But when we speak of the nature of created things, we are usually referring not to how they are, but to how God designed them to be. Human nature is the design that God imparted to human beings; angelic nature is the design He imparted to angelic beings. In this second sense, there is no such thing as an evil nature, because all of God's creational designs are good. Even Satan was created with a good nature. He had existence (that was good), intelligence (that was good), various other powers for serving God (those were good), and freedom (also good).

However, because creaturely freedom includes the ability to choose whether or not to follow the Creator, Satan could rebel. And he did. It makes no sense to ask what pre-existing evil "made him do it." There wasn't any, for if something had made him do it, then his doing it wouldn't have been free. The explanation of why you commit a free act is that you choose to commit it.

By rebelling, Satan misused the good gifts God had given him; he put himself in conflict with his own design. It's exactly the same when we rebel. Our freedom isn't like the Creator's freedom, because God cannot act against His nature, but we can act against our natures. Though nothing "makes" us do it, we can use our freedom even to impair our freedom, to ruin ourselves.

So you see, there were no evil things in the beginning; the only way to get a bad thing is to take a good thing and ruin it. That's what Satan used the good gift of freedom to do, and that's what he taught us to do. We do it every time we use the good of intellect for cheating, the good of knowledge for rationalizing, the good of trust for deception, or the good of sex for lust.

Thanks be to God for untying the knot of this terrible sorrow through Jesus Christ, who, though sinless, took the burden of our sin and dislocation upon Himself.

Have I answered your questions?

Grace and peace,

Robert

Robert,

The Bible says so, therefore it must be so. Is that it Robert?

What does the Bible say? Which Bible? Which version? I am no Bible scholar. I just happened to come across three Bibles, each one describing differently how Gideon's 300 drank from a river. Why not go back to the original Greek and Hebrew texts where chapters and verses were not numbered? Perhaps it was God's intention that it be so. Maybe it was that silly printer in 1450 AD who put those numbers that started all the trouble. He ignored the Bible's warning, do not add a period or a comma... Without him, we would probably have no Christian preachers quibbling over verses No. so and so. Maybe God needed a basic lesson in the art of writing. Man had to revise His Words time and time again. And yet through all these, He still needed ministers, pastors and priests to tell us what he is trying to say.

Martin Luther thought that the Bible, being the Word of God should be brought directly to the people. He thought that the message was so simple that anyone reading it would easily understand. So he had the Bible translated into German and had it distributed widely. To his dismay and disillusionment, he found out that no two persons have a common understanding of a passage, it they understood any at all. I attended a fellowship wherein the pastor merely acts as moderator. Everyone gets a chance to read passages and interpret it his way. I saw that God was speaking through them. As God does whenever anyone of us speak.

He is in all of us. Mabuhay. Cheers.

Bry, I read your comments. I too have read those stories, but in fact they are the exception and not the rule. My father was an FBI agent back in the 60's in New Orleans, dealing with the Klan and bad check passers mainly. I can tell you that in his experience love is absolutely NOT automatic in people. If you have ever had a friend in law enforcement (my college roommate went to the Air Force and then the FBI, and our other roommate became a police officer) they would tell you that out on the streets in this world, people's first reaction is not love.

The Chicago Police Department did a study two weeks ago aimed at informing motorists that there is a law on the books regarding yielding to pedestrians. At certain intersections around the city and the suburbs, officers would dress in very bright clothes and act like a pedestrian about to cross the street. Motorists who did not yield would be pulled over by a black-and-white that was on the scene and given a warning. The police officers were staggered by the response of the motorists - the lieutenant in charge said "All that I can say is this; everyone is out just for themselves!". Most of the time the motorists either sped up to get by the cops before they could step out into the street, or swerved and violently laid on the horn. The officers were appalled at the lack of courtesy on the part of the drivers, and many drivers had no problems putting the cops at risk and narrowly missing hitting them.

That is what is in the hearts of the majority of people, Bry. Not love, but "get out of my way!". I truly wish that we lived in a world where love is absolutely automatic in people, but look at the newspaper, the TV, the internet. Look at the headline stories, then go back and review what's happening in the world, in the country, and locally. Do you see love abounding? Is love jumping off of the pages and the TV screen? Or do you see murder, kidnapping, rape, adultery, drug and alcohol abuse, pornography, suicide bombings, starvation, cheating, tax evasion, embezzlement, arson, robbery, beatings, hate violence, et al? Do I need to go on? Now I am well aware that sensational stories sell, so the print and viewing media play up the bad and tend to leave out the good. But the fact remains that the world is rife with lawlessness, sensuality, and self-centeredness. We do see love in action when we see and hear about people responding to disasters and tragedies, pitching in to help out. But they are the few, and the majority of people would rather pass by and rubberneck at an accident scene than stop and help.

Selfishness is not a function of fear. It is a function of entitlement, the feeling that your wants and needs are more important than anybody else's. Fear is more a function of not wanting to lose what you already have, or losing what you feel is rightfully yours.

I can see that you are sincere in what you say, Bry. I just have to disagree emphatically with your notion about human nature. Love happens when we turn away from our first instinct, which is to serve ourselves first, and help someone else out. There are some good souls in the world who have learned to do this. The majority of people, however, still look to themselves first and foremost. They have learned to love themselves, that is true. What they haven't learned is how to love someone else, especially someone who isn't their friend or relative.

By the way, Revelation is not a dream, it is a vision. John doesn't even call it that, he just says he was sitting there in the Spirit and heard a sound behind him. He turned and saw the things he then describes. Certainly there is a lot of symbology in there, but it is to be taken seriously as a revelation of things that will happen soon.

Robert

Victor,

Way to look past the points in my post and draw that out - how altogether witty of you.

Jesus is more like the doctor at a clinic and hostel. He stands at the door and beckons everyone who is weary, hurting, lonely, depressed, angry, bitter, despondent, and otherwise beaten down by this life to come in and take a load off.

"Come to me, all you who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

Someone said that the one question we have to come to grips with is Does God really care what we do? I disagree. The one question that every human being has to wrestle with is what to do with this Jesus? If he is who he said he is, the Bible is absolutely true and Jesus is the only way to eternal life. If he isn't, he's either a liar or a lunatic. You can't say that Jesus is NOT the Son of God, that he DID NOT die on the cross for our sins, but wow he was a great teacher and we should follow some of what he said. He never claimed to be a good teacher or a wise rabbi or a prophet. He never claimed to be the leader of a new movement like Buddha or Mohammed or Raja or Joseph Smith. He claimed to be the Messiah, the Christ, the one that the Jews had been waiting for AND a beacon unto the Gentiles. To this end the gospels were written:

Matthew - written to the Jews. He emphasized Jesus' fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies in order to convince the Jews that Jesus IS the Messiah.

Mark - written to the Roman world. The Romans respected power above all else, so Mark emphasized Jesus' miracles. In particular, he showed that Jesus had power over nature, disease, the spirit world, and death.

Luke - written by Luke, a contemporary of Peter and Paul. It is said that Luke's gospel is actually Peter's recounting of Jesus' life. In it, Luke stresses Jesus' humanity, to show that God Almighty actually came to earth in the form of a man.

John - The disciple that Jesus loved more than any other. John's gospel was written to emphasize Jesus' deity, so that people would understand that although Jesus was a flesh-and-blood person like they were, all of the fullness of the glory of God resided in his being. John ends his gospel this way - "But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name."

That's it, Victor. Either you believe Jesus is the Christ or not. He is the one individual in history upon all that you believe about God rests. If he is not the Savior, then you can make up any god you want and that will suffice. If he is, then the God of the Bible IS God.

Cheerio,

Robert

Victor,

Jesus is mentioned in some of the Hindu verdas. In the Koran, after the final judgment, it is Jesus, not Mohammed, who comes back to establish Islam on the earth. Jesus is also mentioned in some Buddhist, Taoist, and Zoroastrianist literature. The Japanese for years have used depictions of Jesus in their advertising. The Eastern Orthodox church is a huge sect of Christianity. Roman Catholicism is the primary religion of Latin America.

So where exactly does this 70% of the world that has never heard of Jesus live? He is the highest ideal in philosophy, so many of the "enlightened" cultures of which you speak include his teachings in their stable of works. Due to the expansion of worldwide media and the internet, there are very few places on earth that you can't reach. And of course, every year tens of thousands of missionaries are working diligently at spreading the gospel and helping people in remote locations deal with disease, hunger, and poverty.

And we are not going in circles, as you say. I merely gave you the words Jesus himself spoke, and what you do with them is your matter entirely. He is not duplicitous, and he does not contradict himself. He earnestly desires that all would come to him - "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. Whover hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me." He will knock and call, but he will not kick down the door. Each person has to make the choice for himself or herself - I hear Jesus knocking; do I get off the couch and go open the door, or am I going to turn the TV up louder to drown out the noise and hope he'll go away? It's your choice.

Paul says that the cross is a stumbling block for the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks [I Cor 1: 18-24 - "18For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
20Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.]

This is what I think of the gospel - "16I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 17For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith." [Romans 1: 16-17]

It may be foolishness to you, Victor, but God does use the foolish things of this world to confound the wise. You look at the Hebrew God as a failure, making a mistake in the Garden of Eden and frantically trying to throw something together to make up for it. I have tried to help you see through that. God's plan for salvation runs throughout the Bible, from first to last. And yes, he made us with free will so that we had the capacity to reason for ourselves and make decisions that were not forced. And in his compassion and mercy he instituted a plan from the beginning that undo the damage done in the Garden and reconcile humanity to himself. And he did it all the while while dealing with a pernicious enemy in the devil and dealing with a humanity that oftentimes is puffed up with pride and thinks it knows best and has a superior mentality and morality than its creator. Such are things like CwG, which attempts to subvert the natural order of things and place man on a level with God. Neale will have to answer for that, I'm afraid, and if he doesn't repent, it probably won't be pretty.

Proverbs 11:21 - Be sure of this: The wicked will not go unpunished,
but those who are righteous will go free.

Not my words, but God's. He wants you, Victor, to come to know him in a personal way, because he has unbelievable blessings he wants to pour out in your life. I pray that you will see through your pride, humble yourself, and ask Jesus to come into your life, for "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble."

Guten Abend,

Robert

Robert: Jesus is mentioned in some of the Hindu verdas. In the Koran, after the final judgment, it is Jesus, not Mohammed, who comes back to establish Islam on the earth. Jesus is also mentioned in some Buddhist, Taoist, and Zoroastrianist literature. The Japanese for years have used depictions of Jesus in their advertising. The Eastern Orthodox church is a huge sect of Christianity. Roman Catholicism is the primary religion of Latin America.
x-x-x-x-x-x-x
Just to get the numbers, you point at Jesus almost everywhere. The Jews did not take kindly your claim over the Torah. Do you think the Hindus, Moslems, Buddhists, etc. will be any kinder? The Protestants are one in condemning R-C for its graven images. On the other hand, the Pope insists that only those that are baptized in the Church will be saved. Many Christians believe as Obama does that Christ is not the only way. Not all Christians believe that once saved, always saved! Now, where will you get your 10%. When will you realize that Jesus died in vain not because He is impotent but because of the yardstick you use?

I am the way. No one goes to the Father except by Me. This can be interpreted in many ways. One is that He set an example for us to follow. He was a man who became God, or one with God. As we can do also. As others before and after Him did. Jesus said, "Greater things than I have done, you can do..." Why not? He said so Himself, didn't He. Even the devil quote the Scriptures. Why can't I? Mabuhay. Chhers.