October 22 / 24, 2004

Killing for Christ

The Destructive Power of Faith

By WILLIAM A. COOK

A pall hangs over this election, a shroud of darkness that oppresses the heart because its outcome guarantees no change, only the certainty of continued chaos if Bush should win and the unknown direction a Kerry victory might take, a direction that could continue the chaos America's mired in, a darkness, then, to appall. I read each day the crippling accounts of soldiers caught in a maelstrom of unseen death lurking on roof tops, in narrow alleys, behind cement walls and black windows, beneath tires littering the streets. I see pictures of burned out buses, sidewalks and curbs bathed with blood, faces twisted in pain, bits and pieces of flesh scattered about like fallen leaves, blown helter-skelter by the wind. Faces, I see suffering on so many faces, mothers weeping over their dying children, old women and men huddled in the debris left of their bulldozed home, medics carrying the lifeless body of a man whose hand rests beside his face held there by the torn shred of his sleeve, his arm gone, his body black with grime.

This is a world gone mad, a madness on all sides, the madness of greed that sees in oil the riches of Sultans and Kings, the madness of arrogant pseudo-philosophers who conjure beliefs of personal superiority that gives them license to conquer and enslave, the madness of ancient minds that dreamt of power and glory in covenants with gods, the madness of fanatics that fabricate fantasy out of indecipherable images lodged in pages of metaphors, the madness of little minds that grab onto faith as the golden ring that will bring them salvation, the madness of those born again to the child's world of impossible dreams forgoing in their new world the reality of this.

Today I read of depleted uranium, 1000 metric tons made from the deadly U238 isotope dropped on America's killing fields, that wafts on the wind like aerosol spray, a toxic death that sticks in human lungs, bringing a slow and painful death. I saw pictures of new born children bloated and bruised by scars, eyes missing, a nose of scar tissue and nostrils, no lips, the detritus of our advanced civilization scattered on hospital beds in Baghdad. I read of soldiers twisted in mind and spirit by no visible symptom except the phantom of our cursed nuclear waste that encircles them in their tank and haunts them the remainder of their lives. Our young return from this nightmare of devastation devastated themselves courtesy of our Commander in Chief.
And I read today that 24,010 Americans have been evacuated with wounds and injuries from our "war" zones, that 37,000 innocent men, women, and children in Afghanistan and Iraq have died and more than 500,000 have suffered wounds. And I hear the silence, the deafening silence of indifference that our compassionate conservative leader offers to those who suffer the consequence of his acts, and feel with them the utter helplessness of their plight. And I wait for a word from Kerry that he, too, hears their pain, that he will stop the slaughter in Afghanistan and Iraq and Palestine ... and I wait in vain; there is no condemnation, no plan to end the conflicts, no recognition that states terrorize, no acceptance of the right of people to fight the oppressor, no confession of wrong waged against the innocent that had not the intention or the means to threaten America.

I have heard these men, both Bush and Kerry, attest to their deep rooted religious principles, the depth of their faith in the teachings of Jesus, comforting the citizenry that they are fit for the White House because they believe. But I see nothing of Jesus in their behavior, nothing of the compassion that attended his ministry, nothing of the inclusiveness of his teachings, nothing of the love he proffered as the binding source of peace throughout the world.

I look in vain for this Christ in the Christianity practiced by the right wing, fanatical sects that preach the Book of Revelation, reveling in the glory they perceive to be their reward if they destroy the enemies they identify as the enemies of God. I wonder where in this acclaimed Christian land of TV Evangelists and literalist ministers is there a man who acts as Christ would act? I see none. I see only a God forsaken Tele-Evangelist land of vitriol and bigotry where none could say I "love the Lord my God with my whole heart and mind and soul, and my neighbor as myself." They have buried the teachings of Jesus in the quagmire of a malevolent and malicious God of the Old Testament, a God that would order one Semitic tribe to exterminate another. We have not moved beyond the racist hatred that blotted the landscape 2500 years ago.

I would have thought the founding fathers' voices would have turned us against such barbarity, for they knew that such religions were anathema to the rights of the people and to the fledgling Democracy they desired to create. They expunged such organized zealots of religion from civil discourse precisely because they knew its inherent destructive nature. But, no, we have the airwaves turned into streams of venom that flow from the mouths of the heralded self-worshipers whose mantra is hatred for their fellow man, the likes of Pat Robertson, Pastor John Hagee, Franklin Graham, Hal Lindsey, and, now, even our blessed generals who defile the houses of worship not with coins but with cursed bigotry in the person of General Boykin.

They mount their campaigns on fear, fear lodged in a word that defies definition because it slips and slides, nay, it slithers through meaning like molten lava over rock burying it beneath layers of hot and passionate rhetoric, a word without substance or sense, a word seething with diffidence, anxiety, suspicion, even horror, the word is FAITH. No word evokes more fear and mistrust; no word has caused more chaos and wanton destruction, as the Crusades and the Conquistadors, rampaging through Central America, attest; no word can put people in such a state of doubt that they acquiesce to prophets of doom century after century; no word has been and continues to be more destructive in the mouths of fanatics. That is the destructive power of blind faith!

\\\\\\\\\\\\snip///////////////////

read it all at

http://www.counterpunch.org/cook10222004.html

I totally agree. Faith and logic are incompatable. One must abandon one to have the other.

Faith also takes people away from their connection to their humanity.

It is sad to see people blindly follow superstition. The threat of hell and damnation driving them to flock like crazed birds in search of something more.

Make the best of your time here on earth. Be good for the sake of being good. Be decent for the sake of humanity. Concentrate on making THIS life better, not on what will happen after you are gone.

i would actually say it is logical to assume there is a God.... because all of the things that have transpired on this earth are miracles in themselves....look at our bodies...how complex they are, our eyes, our senses....our bodies are incredible feats, and i doubt just evolution could produce such a perfection.

Originally posted by Decka
i would actually say it is logical to assume there is a God.... because all of the things that have transpired on this earth are miracles in themselves....look at our bodies...how complex they are, our eyes, our senses....our bodies are incredible feats, and i doubt just evolution could produce such a perfection.

Like if it was just evolution our bodies would be all fucked up with superfluous valves everywhere.

In a Universe where it was just evolution people would be saying things like "obviously there is no God, look at how deformed our bodies are because of evolution"

(Actually, dirt eventually learning to talk is a miracle in and of itself no matter which side of the evolutionist/creationist argument you reside on)

Ooooooooooh choke me........ this is not about logic and faith being incompatiable........READ his article.

It's about fanatacism... and that can be with faith or without faith...

In fact it's pretty blatant in a few posts around here from both the left and the right... from both believers and non-believers.

Originally posted by Echo2
I totally agree. Faith and logic are incompatable. One must abandon one to have the other.

Faith also takes people away from their connection to their humanity.

Echo I see you say this type of thing a lot, you have incredible faith to believe it. Good for you.

1. What is more important: justice around the world or peace at home? If justice, then it's our duty to go and fight, no matter what the cost, to bring that justice to all corners of the Earth. If peace at home, then let the rest leave and die. But what happenes when we can't separate them from us, when we can't keep them away? This is 9/11. What's more important, to keep us safe at the cost of their lives, or to let the live and the risk of our own lives.
My choice? I won't kill a human, no matter who. I'll die first, let him kill me.
But that's just a side note, now for
2. What is faith? In my definition it's simply believing in something which has almost no hard ("scientific") evidence. Like I believe in Christ for example. That's faith. Some believe that Satan is their god. That's faith. I can say: "Well, I know I am right!" And they can say: "Well, we know we are right!" So who's right?
They will kill you if you don't conform, I won't. People who say that you go to hell if you don't accept Christ aren't Christians. People who say that they are Christians and then go and slaughter thousands of innocent people are hypocrites.
Please, read the Bible, because it tells you all about them. Take Pharisees or Saducees, they believed in God, yet Jesus says: "Do what they tell you to do, but don't follow their actions." They tell the right things, but they don't do them. And right now, during this era, there are billions of them!
Look on TV, read on internet, talk to a person. Hypocrites! Am I? Ceirtainly to some extent, so please, if somebody says they believe one thing and do the other, then they DON'T believe that one thing, no matter what they might think or say contrary to that.
I hope I wasn't too off-topic.

I wonder where in this acclaimed Christian land of TV Evangelists and literalist ministers is there a man who acts as Christ would act?

this is exaclty what i have been thinking for a very, very long time. when i studied religion this year, i couldnt' stop thinking about how fundamentally peaceful and beautiful all those religions were, and yet they've become unrecognizable.

The Church was never a peaceful love-bringing institution it was supposed to be, yet, I must say, the religion remained the same. Just look at truly Christian people: humble, quite, enduring, friendly, and simply good. They were like that then and they are like that now. The problem is, you can't 'see' them. They are delluted in the general population and if you see one of them on the streets, you won't recognize him. You won't find them yelling protests or waving slogans for Bush/Carry, nor will you find them doing anything radical. Yet they still feed the hungry, give drink to the poor, cloth the naked, and give shelter to homeless. It's just we don't see it, because they do it to be seen by God, not by men.

Originally posted by STOpandthink
The Church was never a peaceful love-bringing institution it was supposed to be, yet, I must say, the religion remained the same. Just look at truly Christian people: humble, quite, enduring, friendly, and simply good. They were like that then and they are like that now. The problem is, you can't 'see' them. They are delluted in the general population and if you see one of them on the streets, you won't recognize him. You won't find them yelling protests or waving slogans for Bush/Carry, nor will you find them doing anything radical. Yet they still feed the hungry, give drink to the poor, cloth the naked, and give shelter to homeless. It's just we don't see it, because they do it to be seen by God, not by men.
I agree. Christians like a certain Simpsons lawyer from Ohio on this board are rarely seen...the loud-mouthed fundies like Pat Buchanon, Jerry Falwell, and that outrageous prick Fred Phelps get all the airtime. The truly tolerant non-Christians recognize the Christian religion for one of love and humility, ignoring the hate-filled rhetoric preached by Messrs. Falwell and Phelps. I think that many of my fellow skeptics, agnostics, and atheists frequently forget this. It's quite easy to, as well, seeing as how visible the fundies are.

Originally posted by BorgHunter
...the loud-mouthed fundies like Pat Buchanon, Jerry Falwell, and that outrageous prick Fred Phelps get all the airtime. The truly tolerant non-Christians recognize the Christian religion for one of love and humility, ........I think that many of my fellow skeptics, agnostics, and atheists frequently forget this.

What is being overlooked in that statement is the fact that it is the Pat Robertsons and the Jerry Falwell's brand of narrow-minded Christianity that dictates what America's societal norms will be, that informs us what is supposedly "right n wrong", that clamors incessantly for it's irrational taboos and prohibitions to be codified into law so that EVERYONE will be forced to confrom to the Christian's own version of "morality" and that weilds all the political control.

Originally posted by Freethinker
What is being overlooked in that statement is the fact that it is the Pat Robertsons and the Jerry Falwell's brand of narrow-minded Christianity that dictates what America's societal norms will be, that informs us what is supposedly "right n wrong", that clamors incessantly for it's irrational taboos and prohibitions to be codified into law so that EVERYONE will be forced to confrom to the Christian's own version of "morality" and that weilds all the political control.
That was the whole gist of my post, that the fundies quite often are seen as the mouthpieces of the Christian religion as a whole, while mostly any Christian will tell you that this is not the case. The fundies have the luxury of telling us all what morals we should have.

Originally posted by BorgHunter
That was the whole gist of my post, that the fundies quite often are seen as the mouthpieces of the Christian religion as a whole, while mostly any Christian will tell you that this is not the case.

You seem to have taken my point the opposite of the way I meant it....the people like Falwell and Robertson, with their fundamentalist views, are THE faction of Christianity that possesses the CONTROL over society....

...for all intents and purposes, fundy people like Falwell and Robertson ARE the voice ---the one voice at any rate that has the power to make people do what it says-- of religion in America.

Sure there are many humble, tolerant, love-thy-neighbor-as-thyself Christians....but THAT faction does not have the power to put into office the warmongering, extreme RightWing leadership that he have.

The fundies have all the socio/political power.........hence they are the ones who imperiously instruct us on how we shall conduct ourselves as a society.

Well, what can we do? A "love-thy-neigbour-as-thyself" Christain cannot and will not go into politics. After all, Christ will come and everybody will get what they deserve. Can one really change US to become a truly Christ based nation? Probably not.
Those who are heard are not fully Christians, but what can we do? All we can do is be the GOOD Christians, so that by our example others may see what it is like to be a good Christian. Perhaps we won't achieve the same "number of listeners", but it's something.

Originally posted by STOpandthink
Well, what can we do? A "love-thy-neigbour-as-thyself" Christain cannot and will not go into politics.

Are you actually serious? "Sorry im a devouted Christian, thus i cant fight for what i believe in.... o no wait, its the other way round... o no its all gone to pot..."

Politics are so very corrupt, a pure Christian simply has no place there. But I do suppose one could do it with the help of God.
I accomodate your comment, Lokideviluk.

Stopandthink, I was going over your post on page one and there’s a couple of things I’d like to ask you about, if you don’t mind. First you said:
“People who say that you go to hell if you don't accept Christ aren't Christians.”

You mentioned that you believe in Christ. My question is; what do you believe about Christ? My next question is, in relation to your quote that I bold faced, what do you make of these verses:

For this verse coming up I’m really interested in what you think about the last sentence. John 3:16-18 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.”
Jesus himself is speaking in this verse also:
John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
This next verse comes from the Apostle Peter about Jesus Christ:
Acts 4:12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."
The last verse is when Jesus is about to go to the cross and he’s praying:
Matt 26:39 “Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will."
My question for this one is why did Jesus have to die?
On another part of this thread you made this statement:
“Those who are heard are not fully Christians,…”

What do you mean by that statement? I think I may know, but I just wanted to check with you first.
On the first page of this thread there is a spoken rage, or at least anger against Fundamentalist Christians. It’s interesting to note that in the world today there is a growing tide against Fundamentalist Christianity. The interesting part is that it’s coming from Fundamentalist Atheist, Fundamentalist Agnostics, Fundamentalist Skeptics, and even Fundamentalist anti-fundamentalist Christian Christians. (That is those who claim Christ, but don’t believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, and don’t believe the fundamentals of the Christian faith) By fundamentalist I mean those who have a leading or primary principle, rule, law, or article, which serves as the groundwork or basis or essential part of their belief system. These Fundamentalists, I just named, are attacking another group of Fundamentalists for being Fundamentalists. I’m very used to this dichotomy of thought, I see it all the time. An Atheist or Agnostic will come in and write that there is no God, or there is not enough evidence to prove God exists, and then they will turn and ridicule the Christian for having faith, yet they demonstrate faith as they expound their beliefs. It’s amazing to note that many rail against the idea of Christians telling people about their faith and what Christ has done for them in their lives, but then come into a chat room and tell Christians how idiotic they are for believing the Bible, and then proceed to convince the Christian how and why they must be wrong. They are in effect proselytizing those they feel should not be proselytizing. I’m by no sight suggesting that they shouldn’t do this, I’m merely asking why do they do it. The Christian is convinced that the better, more joyful, hopeful, and fulfilled life can be had by following Christ, and that the end product is heaven, their hope is that the person they talk to will have a better life, and that spiritually a life will be saved. What does the Atheist, Agnostic, Skeptic, or Anti-theist have for their end goal when they seek to turn a person from say the Christian faith, to the faith of the Atheist, Agnostic, Skeptic, or Anti-theist?
I’ll just leave you with that, for now. By the way have you already guessed that I’m a Fundamentalist Christian?

What do I believe about Christ? I believe what the Bible tells me to believe. Although I came to understand that it should be taken very...what's the word...carefuly, because it is very easy to misinterpret something.
The first three verses:
I absolutely agree with all of them, but people who are condeming you and tell you that you will go to hell are judging you, and God is the judge, not man. They should know better. I also would like to point out Matthew 25:31-46. In those verses Christ said nothing about the faith, but good works. Therefore, I think there are two ways to salvation. Faith is safer, but I suppose good works are fine too. And of course the best way is to follow both.
Why did Jesus have to die? To save us from the law and its condemnation, "for the law condemns."

What do I mean when I say some people are not fully Christians? Usually they are hypocrites. If you preach the Bible, follow it, that's what I say. Too many people say and do different things.
Agonstics and atheist start with a blank slate, they assume nothing. But the problem is there isn't enough evidence to lead the to God, one has to make the leap of faith ,which they are too scared to do. A Christian, on the other hand, starts with God and Christ, and then everything else follows just fine.
How can they blame our faith, when they have a kind of faith too? Excellent question. I think they are just trying to say that it's better to assume nothing and not just to hasty conclusions, as, they think, Christians did.
Why do they try to turn us from our faith? Most of them are really nice people, I have to admit that. It just pains them to see us wasting our time, energy, and recources on something that doesn't exist, in their opinion. Or may be they are jealous? Hehehe. :D
And I figured out you were probably a Christian by the way you wrote.

Originally posted by STOpandthink

Agonstics and atheist start with a blank slate, they assume nothing. But the problem is there isn't enough evidence to lead the to God, one has to make the leap of faith ,which they are too scared to do.

Too scared??? Who are you! Someone please change this guys username because its false advertising. I dont believe there is a God, i dont believe there is a Heaven and i dont believe there is a Hell. Im not scared of some "leap of faith" since its like me leaping from one side of the room to the other, NOTHING would change except for my postion in the room.

Originally posted by STOpandthink

A Christian, on the other hand, starts with God and Christ, and then everything else follows just fine.


Stop speaking for the sanity of us all. Your actually saying that Christians start with god, so all those people who found christ in their mid 30's or however old, arnt actually Christians.

Originally posted by STOpandthink
Agonstics and atheist start with a blank slate, they assume nothing. But the problem is there isn't enough evidence to lead the to God, one has to make the leap of faith ,which they are too scared to do.
Don't presume to tell me what I think, believe, or what my feelings are regarding the presence of a higher being. I'm not "scared" of making anything. You know absolutely nothing about what I think, and I thank you to stop thinking that you do.
How can they blame our faith, when they have a kind of faith too?
Faith, eh? Try looking up the definition of "agnostic", then tell me if I have faith.
Originally posted by stark
What does the Atheist, Agnostic, Skeptic, or Anti-theist have for their end goal when they seek to turn a person from say the Christian faith, to the faith of the Atheist, Agnostic, Skeptic, or Anti-theist?
Stark, I don't give a flying fuck what you believe. I don't want to turn you from Christianity. I don't really care, to be quite honest.

Agonstics and atheist start with a blank slate, they assume nothing. But the problem is there isn't enough evidence to lead the to God, one has to make the leap of faith ,which they are too scared to do. A Christian, on the other hand, starts with God and Christ, and then everything else follows just fine.
Really? What magical mind powers make you think that you know what goes on within somebody else's head? Did God anally probe you a few years ago? Implant some mystical device? I was a Catholic and went to church every damn week when I was younger. I still go to church. Your complete arrogance regarding what goes on in another person's head is rather fucking pretentious. Good job for opening your mouth when you don't know anything about a single person on here. Good job for being a dumbass when you obviously don't even know what the fuck an agnostic or atheist is.

How can they blame our faith, when they have a kind of faith too? Excellent question. I think they are just trying to say that it's better to assume nothing and not just to hasty conclusions, as, they think, Christians did.
Right, our "faith". And what would that be exactly? Not a single part of mathematics is faith, and consequently science, which uses it, isn't faith either. The only faith here is yours, that without evidence you believe something. I wont believe anything without evidence beyond a doubt.

Stopandthink, look at these post, see what happens when you step on the toes of the religious Atheists and religious Agnostics?
By the way, Agnostic was a term suggested in 1869 by Huxley, basically it’s a person who believes that God is unknown and unknowable. Look at the amount of faith that line of thinking requires. This agnostic would look at the evidence that point to God, like the six hundred thousand pages of information on a single strand of DNA, and still say “nope, this is not evidence that God exists.” Some will even go so far as to say that DNA was coded by chance.

Originally posted by BorgHunter
Stark, I don't give a flying fuck what you believe. I don't want to turn you from Christianity. I don't really care, to be quite honest.

Borg, I understand that you don’t care, it’s one of the things that sets us apart, because you see I do care. You and many others on this site are often in my prayers, I don't pray that you’ll join “my team,” I pray that you will find the joy and peace of Jesus Christ.

and stark, if i believed in a god, i'd pray that you'd stop presuming things about people and putting words in thier mouths. these issues are much more complicated than you seem to think.

Sputnik, talk to me, what words are you referring to?

STOPANDTHINK wrote:
But the problem is there isn't enough evidence to lead the to God, one has to make the leap of faith ,which they are too scared to do.

Since you agree that there "isn't enought evidence" then that would have to mean you don't really believe in God, you are just hoping there is a God inspite of the lack of evidence. I'm not too scared to believe in something that has no proof...I'm too logical.

STARK wrote:
This agnostic would look at the evidence that point to God, like the six hundred thousand pages of information on a single strand of DNA, and still say “nope, this is not evidence that God exists.”

Well, since that is not proof of a God, you are the one making the leap of faith.

dnamertz read the part of my post about the DNA again, I suspect you missed what I said.

Loki, sorry if I’ve asked you this question already and didn’t catch your answer, but I’d just love to know why you don’t believe that there is a God?

dnamertz read the part of my post about the DNA again, I suspect you missed what I said.

Nope, it doesn't appear I missed what you said...unless you mis-spoke. So, let me tell you what I think you are saying and you can correct me if you meant something else. I think you were saying that six hundred thousand pages of information on a single strand of DNA is proof that God exists. Were you saying something else?

Dnamertz that’s exactly what I meant, and why I assumed you miss read my post when you said:
“Well, since that is not proof of a God, you are the one making the leap of faith.”
See, I was saying that it is proof of God not that it is not proof of God. Now, I may be misunderstanding what you meant by your post.

Originally posted by dnamertz
Since you agree that there "isn't enought evidence" then that would have to mean you don't really believe in God, you are just hoping there is a God inspite of the lack of evidence. I'm not too scared to believe in something that has no proof...I'm too logical.
Yes, although I am lacking evidence, I still believe in God. You don't need evidence to believe in something (although I have the Bible), but faith let's you believe in the things that have no hard evidence.

Everybody, I am sorry I made some rough calls like: "has to make the leap of faith ,which they are too scared to do." I appologize mainly to Lokedeviluk and Borg Hunter. Conserning you, Blibblob, I advise you to use less profanity. I am sure you can find other words to express your disgust with me.

I still hold my position that agnostics start with a blank sheet and add facts only when they have evidence. Atheists are almost like that, although they accepts some evidence, which an agnostic wouldn't.
I still call that faith and I am sure you would know what I mean if you read the previous posts.

I still hold my position that agnostics start with a blank sheet and add facts only when they have evidence. Atheists are almost like that, although they accepts some evidence, which an agnostic wouldn't.

You are mis-characterizing what an agnostic is. Agnostics accept evidence, they just don't leap to conclusions when there is not enough evidence to make a conclusion...but we do believe in things in our life based on evidence. To me this is more logical than believing God absolutely does not exist, or that God does exist when there is little, if any, evidence...those two examples are "blind-faith".

If you were on trial and there was little or no absolute evidence against you, would you want a jury to make the leap and believe you are guilty? I would want a jury who "starts with a blank sheet and add facts only when they have evidence".

I never said that agnostics don't accept evidence. In fact, I am trying to say that this is the only way they can make any progress.
Perhaps, on a jury trial a leap of faith is not the best thing to do, but in life it sure is (as long as it leads you to Christ).

Perhaps, on a jury trial a leap of faith is not the best thing to do, but in life it sure is (as long as it leads you to Christ).

Why only when "it leads you to Christ"? If jumping to conclusions makes sense in that case then it should make sense in any cases. Jumping to conclusions can mislead you.

I never said that agnostics don't accept evidence. In fact, I am trying to say that this is the only way they can make any progress.

Yep, we do it the right way, we believe in facts...sorry.

I believe it is possible that UFOs exist, but I'd assume that you have faith that they absolutely do exist...or do you need evidence to make that leap?

The only leap of faith that I was talking about is the leap toward Christ.
What you are saying is:
Pooring water on fire is good.
Then it should work in all cases.
And then you will go and poor water on electrical fire and get shocked. Do you see what I am speaking of? Just because I make a leap in one thing, doesn't mean I make it in all things.
Concerning UFOs, I just don't know. Bible didn't say anything, but may be we just missed it. Who knows...

STOPANDTHINK wrote:
What you are saying is:
Pooring water on fire is good.
Then it should work in all cases.
And then you will go and poor water on electrical fire and get shocked. Do you see what I am speaking of? Just because I make a leap in one thing, doesn't mean I make it in all things.


Not the same thing. I won't pour water on electrical fire because I know the result is different than pouring it on fire. You are talking about believing something (God) exists without evidence, so why would you need evidence to believe anything else exists? If you "don't make the leap in all things", then aren't you just as guilty of doing what you claim agnostics are doing, which is requiring evidence before you leap?

Also, you said "I never said that agnostics don't accept evidence"...which is a lie, because in the post before that you said "I still hold my position that agnostics start with a blank sheet and add facts only when they have evidence. Atheists are almost like that, although they accepts some evidence, which an agnostic wouldn't."

See, I was saying that it is proof of God not that it is not proof of God. Now, I may be misunderstanding what you meant by your post.

I think you confuse yourself too easily. I never claimed that you said that it is NOT proof of God, in fact I even said "I think you were saying that six hundred thousand pages of information on a single strand of DNA is proof that God exists."

I'm simply disagreeing with you and saying it is not proof, which would mean you are the one making the leap, IMO.

Originally posted by dnamertz
Not the same thing. I won't pour water on electrical fire because I know the result is different than pouring it on fire. You are talking about believing something (God) exists without evidence, so why would you need evidence to believe anything else exists? If you "don't make the leap in all things", then aren't you just as guilty of doing what you claim agnostics are doing, which is requiring evidence before you leap?

Well, and I won't make a leap of faith concerning other things. Also, I was sort of forced to make that leap in the first place, but once I did, I saw that it was right. If I knew that it was right before, I would have made it earlier. Do you see that nobody leaps because they choose to, but sometimes they just do it and see that they are right.

Also, you said "I never said that agnostics don't accept evidence"...which is a lie, because in the post before that you said "I still hold my position that agnostics start with a blank sheet and add facts only when they have evidence. Atheists are almost like that, although they accepts some evidence, which an agnostic wouldn't."
[/QUOTE]
Do you even read what you write??? I fail to see where I lied.
Agnostics and atheists accept evidence to accept facts. Some are more open minded than others.

Stopandthink, sorry that I’m just now getting around to answering your response to my questions to you on page two, I just hope you have time to answer back, I see that your very busy on this site. First I’d like to talk about where you said:
“I believe what the Bible tells me to believe. Although I came to understand that it should be taken very...what's the word...carefuly, because it is very easy to misinterpret something.”

Would you show me a verse in the New Testament that could very easily be misinterpreted?
Next you said:
“people who are condeming you and tell you that you will go to hell are judging you, and God is the judge, not man. They should know better.”

You are so right. As soon as a Christian tells someone that they are going to hell, they are assuming that the person will never receive Christ as their Lord and Savior. Now, if the Christian tells someone that unless they receive Christ as their Lord and Savior, they will go to hell, then they are being scriptural.
Next you said:
“I also would like to point out Matthew 25:31-46. In those verses Christ said nothing about the faith, but good works.”

These verses match what the rest of the New Testament says and maybe is best represented in James 2:14-18, here it is: “What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.” I just wanted to point out that nowhere in Matthew 25:31-46 does it suggest that doing good to Jesus’ brothers is an alternative to salvation. It’s interesting to note that these verses take place after the Tribulation and on Earth. We know that Christ, in his second coming, will come to Jerusalem, so we can assume that Matthew 25:31-46 takes place in Jerusalem.
Next you said:
“…I think there are two ways to salvation. Faith is safer, but I suppose good works are fine too. And of course the best way is to follow both.”

This statement of yours contradicts these four verses:
John 3:16-18 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.”

John 14:6 “Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Acts 4:11-12 “He is "'the stone you builders rejected, which has become the capstone.' Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

Ephesians 2:8-9 “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-- and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast.”

And your statement contradicts your earlier statement concerning the verses I had given and you had said:
“I absolutely agree with all of them,…”

Not only that, but if there is another way to heaven, then Jesus didn’t really have to die.
Next you said:
“Agonstics and atheist start with a blank slate, they assume nothing. But the problem is there isn't enough evidence to lead the to God, one has to make the leap of faith ,which they are too scared to do.”

I don’t believe that Agnostics and Atheists assume nothing. Indeed, Agnostics assume that God is unknowable, and that the evidence that points to God is not evidence at all, and they assume the Bible is not the Word of God.
The Atheists assume there is no God. That belief also assumes that the evidence that exists is not evidence, and of course they also assume the Bible is not the Word of God.

I’m convinced that there is plenty of evidence that points to God, and Romans 1:18-21 backs it up: “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-- his eternal power and divine nature-- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.”

Hey, stark. Thanks for all the comments.
Can I show you a verse that can be easily mis-interpreted? I think it harder to find one that can't. Let's take Matthew 24:40,41. When I read it to my brother he said that 50% of the people will be saved. Take almost any Protestant church, all of them have one saying that they took out and blew out of proportion.
Concerning the faith and good works, I think that both is the best way to go. Will one way suffice? I wouldn't risk it.
In Matthew verses Christ actually tells those who did good works that they can enter the kingdom, so I suppose it's one way to heaven.
I also believe that when a man dies, he will see Christ and has the last chance to accept Him. This acceptance is the only way, of course, but to get that chance to accept, good works will suffice. The only way is through Him, but there are several ways to Him.
Concerning Agnostics/Atheists, I think they are right in a sense, that no fact can be accepted without evidence. Where is the evidence that the Bible was written by the apostles? Any proof for existence of God can be refuted. They start with a black slate. Atheist says: "Nope, don't see any evidence." Agnostic says: "Hmmm, I don't see any 100% correct evidence, but there are some things that just make me think there is something greater." They don't assume, they follow logic.
Your quote from Romans doesn't back you up. All the wrath from God can be ascribed to natural phenomenas. Any evidence that you can bring up, I can destroy.
Now it sounds like I am against you, but on the contrary, I am a Christian and I believe that God does make Himself manifest to people and they just close their eyes. I just don't see how I can show it to them, because on some level, they are right.

nice chinese characters, stark.