Question for Christians
-
cmcnaul — 10 years ago(February 04, 2016 03:04 AM)
There is a difference between those who "thump their bible" vs those of us who just live it. I think standing on a street corner thumping a bible is old anointing, it was effective then, but not anymore.
It is those of us who live it, we who have or are coming out of, or have had unresolved issues that affected us in adverse ways. It is our faith in God, obscure scriptures, or a prophetic word from someone that helped change bad behaviors, self-loathing, or something of that sort. Becoming a Christian is not it, it's living life without being driven by "things" the world pumps out telling us we need to be the best of the best.
Living in peace while the world rages on, being nice and saying thank you, being patient and kind(unlike the lady in front of me who called the McDonald's window clerk a bitch). That, is what being a Christian is about, stop being inhuman to humanity..it just begins with how I 'choose' to react, respond, be.
(btw..I apologized to that window clerk for that other person's bad behavior) There's a big difference between religion and being a believer. Religion puts people in bondage, faith sets people free. -
sheetsadam1 — 11 years ago(April 05, 2015 09:08 PM)
I'm not a Christian but I don't see this show as trying to shove religion in our face. It's an attempt (and so far a decent one) to bring an interesting story to the screen. Whether that story happens to be true or false doesn't make it any more or less interesting for the purposes of television. Sure, believers will get something extra out of it but I see no reason why non-believers can't enjoy it as they would any other scripted show on TV.
-
netsirc — 11 years ago(April 05, 2015 10:25 PM)
I have no problem with the show. I just used it as an example of why Christians don't need to take it upon themselves to preach to anyone who's not interested. To clarify, I'm talking about one-on-one conversations.
-
Volley2020 — 11 years ago(April 05, 2015 10:27 PM)
The end won't come until everyone in the world has had a chance to hear the Truth, at least once in his or her lifetime.
"And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." Matthew 24:14.
We are indeed very close. With the Internet now in maturity stages and instant global communication 24/7/365 virtually everywhere, there really are not many left who haven't heard the word at least once, that said a single soul is every bit as precious to God as a hundred thousand. -
Jerry-137 — 10 years ago(April 06, 2015 01:51 AM)
The end won't come until everyone in the world has had a chance to hear the Truth, at least once in his or her lifetime.
UhhI'm not quite ready to go yet. Maybe if the proselytizers cool it for a while the "word" won't reach everyone and we can go on with our business and not be worrying about the afterlife coming after dinner. If this is really the case then the proselytizers are suicidal and should be locked up to save humanity.
My favorite:
Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb -
netsirc — 10 years ago(April 06, 2015 02:31 AM)
But does the average Christian have access to people who have never heard of Christianity? If we don't, why must we still take it upon ourselves to preach to those who choose not to believe? Only the grace of God can unharden a heart.
As for that prophecy, It may have already come to pass. The word has spread to all "nations". With recent events, some people believe the times spoken of in Revelations is already upon us. -
Laura-eubanks — 10 years ago(April 06, 2015 08:34 AM)
I'm a Christian, & I like to talk about my Savior because He lived me so much He took this for my sin! I want everyone to come to know His love & peace. I know not everyone will. That saddens me. I cannot force anyone to believe, & neither did He. He did not have to do this, but He did it for me & you. True, nearly everyone has access to this Bible & the facts, but a head-knowledge is not the same as a personal, soul-changing relationship. We tell because we can't help but share
-
wildpeace10 — 10 years ago(April 08, 2015 05:25 AM)
The end won't come until everyone in the world has a chance to hear the truth,at least once in his or her lifetime.
They may hear the truth but millions won't believe it's
the truth.
What's the use of preaching the truth if people don't
believe it?
Remember when almost nobody believed the earth was round?
The fact is that religions who say they have the truth often
change their minds about their own interpretation of the Bible.
What was the truth a hundred years ago might not be
their truth today.
So in a way,they were preaching a lie for a hundred years until
they discovered it wasn't the truth.
And if they were wrong about a thing for a hundred years
(apparently God was too busy to correct them on day one)
how can you trust anything they're saying today? -
Sansas_LemonCake — 10 years ago(April 09, 2015 12:20 AM)
"The end won't come until everyone in the world has a chance to hear the truth,at least once in his or her lifetime."
Well people have died without ever having heard of your religion, Aboriginals for example, and Eskimos.
So I take it the end won't come then?
"They may hear the truth but millions won't believe it's the truth. "
How would you expect people to believe in something like a leprechaun with good pot on a candy covered planet that you can only visit when you travel through a rainbow?
One would need evidence for such claims, right?
Same goes for any religion.
"
What's the use of preaching the truth if people don't believe it? "
Exactly. Pretty ineffective when people need scientifically demonstrable evidence to accept anything as a fact.
"Remember when almost nobody believed the earth was round?"
No one in our age remembers that because no one has witnessed scientists to change that mindset.
If I recall correctly it's the Bible that implies the earth to be flat, found in Daniel 4:10-11, where it speaks of a tree that can be seen from the farthest places on earth.
Again in Matthew 4:8 which is paralleled with Luke 4:5, speaking of 'the devil' bringing 'Jesus' atop of a mountain from which he could see all the kingdoms of the world.
The book of Isaiah mentions this interesting and flat out wrong metaphor:
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.
First of all the atmosphere isn't at all in a triangular shape, it's all around the planet at the same height and in the same shape, spherical.
Circle isn't spherical either. When you look at an egg for example one doesn't immediately think "circle". One tends to think of the shape as a sphere, or even a ball, but not as a two dimensional platform.
The book mentions the earth to have four corners as well. Which firstly contradicts the circular shape the bible mentioned earlier, and secondly implies yet another false shape, a square or a rectangle.
Yet when we stand on the beach, the sun does not get swallowed by the seas just to resurrect the next morning, this is bronze age logic, hence the references in the bronze age books.
"The fact is that religions who say they have the truth often
change their minds about their own interpretation of the Bible. "
That's because the Bible has a couple hundred contradictions found within and sometimes even within the same page.
That's why it's such a popular book, anyone with ambition can manipulate others around them by quote mining and cherry picking the verses needed for whatever purpose.
"What was the truth a hundred years ago might not be their truth today.
"
Truth isn't a philosophical debate, truth is what exists, truth is fact. And fact cannot be changed by words, it can merely be studied.
"So in a way,they were preaching a lie for a hundred years until they discovered it wasn't the truth.
"
You might be off with a couple centuries. We're past the 2000 year mark. Eratosthenes, a Greek Egyptian found out the true shape of the world in the third century BCE by using simple mathematical calculations.
"And if they were wrong about a thing for a hundred years
(apparently God was too busy to correct them on day one)
how can you trust anything they're saying today?"
We have come full circle to the start of the post, indeed one would need sufficient scientific evidence to prove their theory, through trial and error, before anyone will accept it as truth, let alone gain a universal consensus on their observations. -
DabacTSP — 10 years ago(February 12, 2016 09:27 AM)
You speak sincere and well put. However, I used to reason with similar arguments years before until I found out that all those controversies can be cleared slowly and by examining the bigger picture, the writing style, the customs etc.
As for earth "flatness", Bible was never meant to be scientific book, those parts that you mention are poetry.
As for scientific fact, go and examine the case for Jesus' resurrection, the pros and contras, the historicity of the accounts Dig deep, you might be surprised by the evidence.
Cool music
http://audiosparx.com/MartinaSver -
jhn-55751 — 10 years ago(April 06, 2015 02:00 PM)
After the recent abominations of Exodus and Noah do we really need another biblical movie? At least this one hasn't been done before. But bear in mind that the Jesus story is just that, a story. The history is wrong, the geography is wrong, the genealogy is wrong and the books are contradictory. Miss translations abound. So whatever Hollywood does its no worse than what the First Council of Nicaea did in 325CE.
-
KatharineFanatic — 10 years ago(April 11, 2015 06:32 AM)
The books being contradictory is more likely evidence of actual events than if they'd sat down, cooked up a story, gotten all their details straight, and written up a fictional account from different perspectives. IE eye witnesses' stories in court are never identical unless tampered with.
-
DabacTSP — 10 years ago(February 13, 2016 07:46 AM)
I completely agree.
Furthermore, "The history is wrong, the geography is wrong, the genealogy is wrong"? Look up Luke's account (Luke and Acts) and compare all the details - up to the government function titles in several provinces - with the official history, it all matches and even reveal more.
Don't forget how the Apostles were portrayed in most situations: like cowards, like traitors (Peter), like confused incompetents (Jesus asks "how long do I have to bear you"), imagine conspirators writing about themselves that way. It's written objectively, with all the minuses (Jewish kings! Imagine nation's history almanac portraying its own kings as evil, losers or cowards) and all the pluses.
No even remotely similar book as this one, written by over 40 men of all classes on 3 continents in a time span of over 1500 years.
Cool music
http://audiosparx.com/MartinaSver -
rickathedj — 10 years ago(April 11, 2015 05:00 PM)
To answer your question in the most direct way, no, we don't NEED another Biblical movie. We don't NEED any more movies. But that being said, there does seem to be a market for the movies and as long as that remains the case, there will be more movies. Fortunately there is no law requiring people to watch movies of the current hot genre. I'm really glad of that or I would have truly hated the Twilight craze.
-
bonniebonniebanks — 10 years ago(April 10, 2015 11:37 PM)
I agree. And I also get a kick out of people feeling religion is 'shoved down their throat'.
Why are people so weak? If someone gets obnoxious about their religion, walk away. I had a discussion with someone who likes to rip up the JW's literature in front of their face. What good does that do? Why is it necessary?
I liken it to if someone offered me a beer. I hate beerthe smellthe taste and in spite of my age people are still insistent that I never gave it enough of a chance. Hate it. Sosay I'm at someone's house and they offer me a beer. I can say 'no thank you' or I can take the bottle out of their hand and smash it on the pavement and tell them to get the hell away from me and take their nasty smelling stuff out of my face.