# Want to know about religion? Ask an athiest.



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

A sad reflection on non-thinking followers.



> If you want to know about God, you might want to talk to an atheist.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oops, here's the link: http://mobile.latimes.com/wap/news/...23170009&cid=16686&scid=-1&ith=1&title=Nation


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

Makes sense.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

What the article fails to mention though is that it's not about religion, but about a personal relationship. Just because people didn't know the relevance of Martin Luther in church history, doesn't mean they don't know the scriptures. It's not religion that saves us. Martin Luther's views are not what leads a person to salvation. Nor does Calvin's views. Although I think it's important to know as much as you can about religion, and not just the Christian faith either, but all religions, I think it's more important for people to listen to the Holy Spirit as He leads them from death into life.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Sonshine said:


> What the article fails to mention though is that it's not about religion......


 The article was about religous knowledge, not about anything else.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Quote:
If you want to know about God, you might want to talk to an atheist. 

That may have been Oggie's title, but this was the first line in the article.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2010)

Every Christian should see this video.

[youtube]INttODEPzp0[/youtube]


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

Sonshine said:


> Quote:
> If you want to know about God, you might want to talk to an atheist.
> 
> That may have been Oggie's title, but this was the first line in the article.


It would be nice for a link to the article to verify that.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> It would be nice for a link to the article to verify that.


Here's the* actual survey*.
The reporter who did the article evidently made the comment on his own.
I think it's mostly :stirpot:

http://pewforum.org/Other-Beliefs-and-Practices/U-S-Religious-Knowledge-Survey.aspx



> A sad reflection on *non-thinking followers*.


That could be said about a lot of different things other than religion


----------



## hobbyfarmer (Oct 10, 2007)

Great video, ladycat. tyvm.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

wy_white_wolf said:


> It would be nice for a link to the article to verify that.


Oops, sorry.

There was a guy from some society to prevent blindness knock at the door just as I was trying to post that.

He was at the house to pick up a bunch of stuff from the barn that we're donating.

I'm at work, now, so I have more time on my hands.


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

Sonshine said:


> What the article fails to mention though is that it's not about religion, but about a personal relationship.


There are those on this forum, many of them "Christian" who would disagree with you...Knowing him ain't enough as far as their concerned...Ya gotta pays your dues, got to Church, be visible to your fellow "Christians" or you just ain't up to par.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

I think it's valid; I know plenty of atheists that KNOW why they (do not) believe.

On the other hand, I know just as many people - in fact, if not far more - that 'just don't believe.' I've heard reasons from 'This is what my daddy believed so it's good enough for me' to 'I just don't like the idea of God' to anything in between.

Furthermore, let's be honest - the vast majority of people aren't going to rush to take an online poll about religion. I'm not implying that the vast majority of atheists are idiots that simply remain undiscovered.  I'm saying that as with any poll or survey, there's a margin of error.

I WILL say however that I agree that the vast majority of Christians don't know their own faith, or even other faiths. I personally took polls quizzing on various religions and got a perfect score; there are many out there just like me that DO know their stuff.


----------



## cast iron (Oct 4, 2004)

I love religion and politics, it makes for an interesting, dynamic society.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

Reptyle said:


> There are those on this forum, many of them "Christian" who would disagree with you...Knowing him ain't enough as far as their concerned...Ya gotta pays your dues, got to Church, be visible to your fellow "Christians" or you just ain't up to par.


Thankfully, God doesn't require that we live 'up to par' with fellow humans.

HOWEVER...the Bible does in fact have something to say on the subject of remaining blameless in the eyes of others. It doesn't mean we're to please everyone. But it DOES mean that if we're Christian, we should desire to fellowship with others (in other words, go to church), live our lives in an upright manner, tithe (whether in money or time or expertise), and so on.

People can disagree with ME all they want; but the disagreement with God's Word is what concerns me. I don't judge people as right or wrong; I simply compare them to His standard.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

wy_white_wolf said:


> It would be nice for a link to the article to verify that.


I got it from the OP.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

ladycat said:


> Every Christian should see this video.
> 
> [youtube]INttODEPzp0[/youtube]




Love the video. Can you share the link to it? I would like to send it to some people.


----------



## Lyra (Sep 15, 2009)

I can understand it. I have shopped around at many Christian denominational and non-denominational churches. My impression of the majority of Christian worship experiences is equal to a rock/music concert with very few individuals attending Sunday School if it is even offered. Emotions have taken place over knowledge. It is all about entertaining the crowds.

This poll doesn't surprise me at all.


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

Kung said:


> Thankfully, God doesn't require that we live 'up to par' with fellow humans.
> 
> HOWEVER...the Bible does in fact have something to say on the subject of remaining blameless in the eyes of others. It doesn't mean we're to please everyone. But it DOES mean that if we're Christian, we should desire to fellowship with others (in other words, go to church), live our lives in an upright manner, tithe (whether in money or time or expertise), and so on.
> 
> People can disagree with ME all they want; but the disagreement with God's Word is what concerns me. I don't judge people as right or wrong; I simply compare them to His standard.


I didn't say God required it...I said other "Christians" like to play the judgment game.
And living a blameless life doesn't mean you have to live under a microscope. However, it appears that you're saying someone can't be a true Christian unless they go to Church...Kinda just proved my point now, didn't ya?


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2010)

Sonshine said:


> Love the video. Can you share the link to it? I would like to send it to some people.


Just an FYI when you see an embedded youtube video, the link is there.

In the lower right corner, mouse over the triangle. A little thing that looks like a flag will pop up. Click that and 2 links will appear. One says *Embed*, and one says *URL*. C/P the URL and you'll have the link. In this case, it is: [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INttODEPzp0&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

There's also another way. Right click the embedded video. You'll get a popup menu. One of the options is *Watch On YouTube*. If you select that, it will take you to the video at Youtube, where you can c/p the url from your address bar.

HTH.


----------



## chickenista (Mar 24, 2007)

ladycat said:


> Every Christian should see this video.
> 
> [youtube]INttODEPzp0[/youtube]


Ok. wow.
Just super wow.

During the video I was thinking about what I would post.
I was thinking about how annoying and irritating people that preach to me in the grocery store are etc..
but then.. whamo! at the end.
Must listen again with new ears.


----------



## mistletoad (Apr 17, 2003)

Kung said:


> Furthermore, let's be honest - the vast majority of people aren't going to rush to take an online poll about religion.


But this wasn't an online poll.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

ladycat said:


> Just an FYI when you see an embedded youtube video, the link is there.
> 
> In the lower right corner, mouse over the triangle. A little thing that looks like a flag will pop up. Click that and 2 links will appear. One says *Embed*, and one says *URL*. C/P the URL and you'll have the link. In this case, it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INttODEPzp0&feature=player_embedded
> 
> ...


That just shoots the theory you can't teach an old dog new tricks.  Thanks for the link.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

mistletoad said:


> But this wasn't an online poll.


No, it was a survey.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Kung said:


> Furthermore, let's be honest - the vast majority of people aren't going to rush to take an online poll about religion. .


 This was not an online poll it was a valid scientific survey


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

I've said it many times and I'll have to say it many more, just because someone calls themselves something (Christian, Catholic, vegetarian or whatever) doesn't mean they actually are that.

I know people who claim to be Catholic yet disagree with and do not follow many of the RC teachings. Ditto for just about every other "belief system" you can come up with.


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

...............Is it really necessary too beable too recite specific parts of the Bible too gain admittance too Heaven , are we going too be given a religious SAT test before walking thru the Pearly Gates ? Ignorance is just one more facet of the Human condition that is on the list of Forgiveable offenses . If , a 6 month old child is killed in a car wreck , and doesn't know...."Jesus" , does anyone think he will be denied entry ? Thank God no one now residing on this planet has any sayso about who gets...IN... and who doesn't ! , fordy:cowboy:


----------



## Lyra (Sep 15, 2009)

fordy said:


> ...............Is it really necessary too beable too recite specific parts of the Bible too gain admittance too Heaven , are we going too be given a religious SAT test before walking thru the Pearly Gates ? Ignorance is just one more facet of the Human condition that is on the list of Forgiveable offenses . If , a 6 month old child is killed in a car wreck , and doesn't know...."Jesus" , does anyone think he will be denied entry ? Thank God no one now residing on this planet has any sayso about who gets...IN... and who doesn't ! , fordy:cowboy:


Faith isn't enough. Anyone can say they believe in God.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

I think that for many people, religion is an emotional experience, not an intellectual pursuit. It's more about believing than it is about knowing.


----------



## Lyra (Sep 15, 2009)

Oggie said:


> I think that for many people, religion is an emotional experience, not an intellectual pursuit. It's more about believing than it is about knowing.


That is an irrational statement. They believe in something that they know nothing about.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

Lyra said:


> That is an irrational statement. They believe in something that they know nothing about.


Religion is sometimes not rational.


----------



## Lyra (Sep 15, 2009)

Oggie said:


> Religion is sometimes not rational.


It is an empty belief. They shouldn't even call themselves Christian or whatever. An example would be the two Mormons who came to my door. First, they knew very little about Joseph Smith and couldn't answer my questions. Second, when I asked why I didn't see a picture of Jesus in their church, they didn't know there wasn't one and couldn't tell me why it wasn't there. Honestly, I would rather have people say they are non-religious than be posers.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

Reptyle said:


> I didn't say God required it...I said other "Christians" like to play the judgment game.


I know what you said. Your focus was on the Christians who judge others for what they do or don't do 'correctly.' My essential response to your statement(s) is that, THANKFULLY, they're not the ones that stand in ultimate judgment of me. GOD is.



> And living a blameless life doesn't mean you have to live under a microscope. However, it appears that you're saying someone can't be a true Christian unless they go to Church...Kinda just proved my point now, didn't ya?


Uhm, no. Not in the least. You're evidently not reading my posts all that closely. What I said, and I quote, was



> But it DOES mean that if we're Christian, we should *desire* to fellowship with others (in other words, go to church)


In other words, desiring fellowship with others isn't a mechanism of achieving salvation; but it *SHOULD BE* (note the emphasis) a result of the changed state of our heart FOLLOWING salvation.

I'm not even sure the Bible itself says that people *must* go to church to be a Christian. What it says is that we should not forsake the assembling of peoples, as some do; but that we should continue to encourage one another. (That doesn't necessarily have to happen in a church, that I will grant you; but it's pretty obvious that fellowship SHOULD occur, and the obvious venue for that is usually a church. If one doesn't like any churches out there, then found a new one with like-minded believers. :shrug

To me, that seems pretty clear - that we *SHOULDN'T* (again, note the emphasis) forsake fellowship. But it also makes it fairly clear what fellowship is - and one thing it's NOT is a mechanism of salvation. Capisce?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Even Christ knew there would be "posers". In Mathew 7 He says.

21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those who do the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?' 23 Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'


----------



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

Lyra said:


> Faith isn't enough. Anyone can say they believe in God.





Oggie said:


> I think that for many people, religion is an emotional experience, not an intellectual pursuit. It's more about believing than it is about knowing.





Lyra said:


> That is an irrational statement. They believe in something that they know nothing about.





Oggie said:


> Religion is sometimes not rational.


*****************************************************
as it might answer a lot of your questions.

For your perusal I've posted the following excerpts from it:

_James 2:14 - What use is it, my brethren, if someone says 
he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?

James 2:15 - If a brother or sister is without clothing and 
in need of daily food,

James 2:16 - and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, 
be warmed and be filled," and yet you do not give them 
what is necessary for their body, what use is that?

James 2:17 - *Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself*.

James 2:18 - But someone may well say, "You have faith and I have works; show me your 
faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works."

James 2:19 - *You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.*_


As you will note, saying that you 'believe' in God is not enough.....even 'believing in God' isn't enough......


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Kung said:


> I know what you said. Your focus was on the Christians who judge others for what they do or don't do 'correctly.' My essential response to your statement(s) is that, THANKFULLY, they're not the ones that stand in ultimate judgment of me. GOD is.


But we are told an even warned that we should judge others. Mathew 7 says:

15 "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them. 


We can not judge who will or will not make it to Heaven but we are given the yardstick to measure who is following the teachings of Christ.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

watcher said:


> But we are told an even warned that we should judge others. Mathew 7 says:
> 
> 15 "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.


I'm not sure if you realize that you're taking me to task...for your agreeing with me. 

I said previously in another post that



> I don't judge people as right or wrong; I simply compare them to His standard.


What you outline above is exactly that - comparing people to God's standard. In other words, judging people is pronouncing final judgment upon them based on OUR opinion - i.e., 'I think you're a mean person!' But comparing them to a set standard is like saying 'Based upon what the Bible says, that's not correct.' And THAT'S why I tell people "Your problem isn't with me - it's with Him" when they ask my opinion on a subject, and I give them the Biblical answer and they dislike it. :shrug:

In fact, I have myself used the 'yardstick' statement before.  I think we're in total agreement on this issue; the rest is semantics.


----------



## hobbyfarmer (Oct 10, 2007)

The words "faith" and "religion" are not interchangeable. Learning scripture and learning doctrine are not the same thing. There are just as many athiests out there jumping to conclusions about what Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, etc....all believe, as there are Christians who are ignorant of the various church doctrines. I choose to ignore doctrine for the most part, because there is an unbelievably high percentage of that stuff that is entirely unsupported by scripture. As a Christian, I'm not responsible for learning what the church tells me to learn. I'm responsible for learning scripture.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Lyra said:


> It is an empty belief. They shouldn't even call themselves Christian or whatever. An example would be the two Mormons who came to my door. First, they knew very little about Joseph Smith and couldn't answer my questions. Second, when I asked why I didn't see a picture of Jesus in their church, they didn't know there wasn't one and couldn't tell me why it wasn't there. Honestly, I would rather have people say they are non-religious than be posers.


Number One, there are Pictures of Jesus all over *every* Mormon Church I have been in -- which is about 20 of them.
Number 2 Perhaps what YOU "KNOW" about Joseph Smith is not true -- ever think of that?


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Lyra said:


> It is an empty belief. They shouldn't even call themselves Christian or whatever. An example would be the two Mormons who came to my door. First, they knew very little about Joseph Smith and couldn't answer my questions. Second, when I asked why I didn't see a picture of Jesus in their church, they didn't know there wasn't one and couldn't tell me why it wasn't there. Honestly, I would rather have people say they are non-religious than be posers.




I hope you understand that this type of judgemental and condescending attitude tends to discourage non-christians from taking an interest in learning more about christianity. If you can express such open derision and hostility towards people of the Mormon faith, then why should I take any interest in what YOU believe in if it makes you so hostile and critical towards others?



.


----------



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

naturelover said:


> I hope you understand that this type of judgemental and condescending attitude tends to discourage non-christians from taking an interest in learning more about christianity. If you can express such open derision and hostility towards people of the Mormon faith, then why should I take any interest in what YOU believe in if it makes you so hostile and critical towards others?
> .


********************************************************
Pay particular attention to the part that Watcher wrote as well.......:thumb:

And it appears that you are actually 'reading' more into her attitude 
concerning hostility and being critical then her comment shows.


----------



## Lyra (Sep 15, 2009)

Asking basic questions about the writer of the Book of Mormon (they didn't even know where he was from) and why there was no picture of Jesus in the local Mormon Temple (which I visited) are considered hostile, condescending, and judgemental? Give me a break. 

Are we now not supposed to ask anyone about their religion? Oh, maybe because they don't know anything about it! Their religion makes them feel good and that is all that matters. You are promoting ignorance.

This Christmas, I will remember not to ask a Christian about Bethlehem and its significance since Christians will find that offensive.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I hope you understand that this type of *judgemental and condescending *attitude tends to discourage *non-christians *from taking an interest in learning more about christianity


The ones I see the most don't have any interest in learning anything.
They just like to agitate and pretend to be superior.

Why would they be interested in learning about something they constantly ridicule?


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

copperkid3 said:


> Pay particular attention to the part that Watcher wrote as well.......:thumb:
> 
> And it appears that you are actually 'reading' more into her attitude
> concerning hostility and being critical then her comment shows.


Perhaps you read less into her attitude than I did because you agree with her because she's a christian .... whereas you find reasons to disagree with me because you think I'm a bad person who's going to hell because I'm not a christian?? That's okay though, it doesn't matter, and I won't judge you because of your disapproval of me as a person, I will only judge you by your good deeds or bad deeds towards society as a whole. 

I did read Watcher's post, and Kung's post too. I do believe one can judge a tree by it's fruit but I don't make judgements because scriptures tell me that's what I have to do. I don't live my life according to the demands of scriptures in a book. I live my life according to what god tells me in my heart is right or wrong.

.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The ones I see the most don't have any interest in learning anything.
> They just like to agitate and pretend to be superior.
> 
> Why would they be interested in learning about something they constantly ridicule?


I don't know, I can't speak for what other non-christians are interested in learning about. I see just as many religious people as non-religious people who get all smug and superior about whatever it is they do or don't believe in. I think it's wrong to judge and condemn people because of what they believe in if their beliefs aren't harming other people. 

Speaking for myself, as a non-christian, I've always been interested in learning about christianity as well as the other religions all my life. I'm even a frequent reader on the Bible forum here on HT although I don't participate there. I know a lot about various religions and many other belief systems but I don't think I get smug or superior about my knowledge. It fascinates me - but I don't let any of it rule my life. I prefer to make my own decisions for myself based on how god guides me as an individual, not based on what other people want me to believe.

.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Lyra said:


> Asking basic questions about the writer of the Book of Mormon (they didn't even know where he was from) and why there was no picture of Jesus in the local Mormon Temple (which I visited) are considered hostile, condescending, and judgemental? Give me a break.


Balderdash to both of your statements
Non-LDS are not allowed inside LDS Temple's (as opposed to LDS Churches) except for Open Houses held before the Temples are dedicated. I have been inside 9 Temples and every one of them always have multiple pictures of Jesus, as He is the central figure of our religion.
and
Every Missionary learns the history of Joseph Smith (and I would believe that most already know it) as they must be able to teach it.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Lyra said:


> Asking basic questions about the writer of the Book of Mormon (they didn't even know where he was from) and why there was no picture of Jesus in the local Mormon Temple (which I visited) are considered hostile, condescending, and judgemental? Give me a break.
> 
> Are we now not supposed to ask anyone about their religion? Oh, maybe because they don't know anything about it! Their religion makes them feel good and that is all that matters. You are promoting ignorance.
> 
> This Christmas, I will remember not to ask a Christian about Bethlehem and its significance since Christians will find that offensive.


There was nothing wrong with asking them about their belief. It's good to ask other people about their beliefs, you can learn a lot about society by doing so. It's good if you're genuinely, sincerely interested in learning about what they believe and not just trying to show them up as ignorant losers. 

What is not good is for you to call them posers, to say that they have no right to call themselves christians, and to judge or condemn them because of what YOU consider their lack of knowledge about their own religion or their own temple.

I believe that anybody who believes and accepts Jesus as their lord and saviour IS a christian, doesn't matter what denomination they are or if they're mormons or JW's or the COG. Nobody has a right to judge that someone who believes in Christ is not a christian of one sort or another.

.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

Did you know that Martin Luther had a Diet of Worms?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

fordy said:


> ...............Is it really necessary too beable too recite specific parts of the Bible too gain admittance too Heaven , are we going too be given a religious SAT test before walking thru the Pearly Gates ? Ignorance is just one more facet of the Human condition that is on the list of Forgiveable offenses . If , a 6 month old child is killed in a car wreck , and doesn't know...."Jesus" , does anyone think he will be denied entry ? *Thank God no one now residing on this planet has any sayso about who gets...IN... and who doesn't ! * , fordy:cowboy:




Amen to that! I'm so thankful that God doesn't look at us like man does, but looks at our hearts. Having said that though, we are told in Timothy to study to show ourselves approved as workmen unto God, rightly dividing the word of truth. (Not word for word, but I'm sure you know the scripture I'm referring to) We're also told to be ready to give an account for what we believe. However, I don't think this was in reference to the teachings of man, no matter how much of a theologian they happen to be. Each of us should study for ourselves and allow the Holy Spirit to lead us in all truths.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Lyra said:


> Faith isn't enough. Anyone can say they believe in God.


Even the demons believe, and tremble.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Kung said:


> I know what you said. Your focus was on the Christians who judge others for what they do or don't do 'correctly.' My essential response to your statement(s) is that, THANKFULLY, they're not the ones that stand in ultimate judgment of me. GOD is.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Very good points. Just wanted to add that a lot of people confuse what the Church actually is. It's not the buildings, but the people. Once people can grasp that they may have a better understanding why some say they are Christians, but don't "go" to Church. Does that makes sense?


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Sonshine said:


> Each of us should study for ourselves and allow the Holy Spirit to lead us in all truths.


Thank you for saying that.

.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

hobbyfarmer said:


> The words "faith" and "religion" are not interchangeable. Learning scripture and learning doctrine are not the same thing. There are just as many athiests out there jumping to conclusions about what Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, etc....all believe, as there are Christians who are ignorant of the various church doctrines. I choose to ignore doctrine for the most part, because there is an unbelievably high percentage of that stuff that is entirely unsupported by scripture. As a Christian, I'm not responsible for learning what the church tells me to learn. I'm responsible for learning scripture.


AMEN!!! :thumb:


----------



## ChristyACB (Apr 10, 2008)

ladycat said:


> Every Christian should see this video.
> 
> [youtube]INttODEPzp0[/youtube]


::snort:: And the Christians who think their faith...keywords "their faith"...give them the right to constantly be up in my face are well deserving of the reaction they receive. I won't tolerate that mess. Missionaries are scared of me for a reason...I can and do (occasionally) convince them there is no god when they persist and corner me.

And yes, I did see the end where he said he is an atheist. I wonder how long he would hold that attitude if he had cretins like I did on the ship who wouldn't even let you eat a meal without trying to preach at you because "you need to be saved".


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The ones I see the most don't have any interest in learning anything.
> They just like to agitate and pretend to be superior.
> 
> Why would they be interested in learning about something they constantly ridicule?


Because God's word will not return void, but will accomplish that which he purpose. The way I look at it is there was a point and time in my life that I wasn't interested in anything any Christian had to tell me, but thankfully God sent many very patient people to minister to me and to show me His love in action.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

naturelover said:


> Perhaps you read less into her attitude than I did because you agree with her because she's a christian .... whereas you find reasons to disagree with me because you think I'm a bad person who's going to hell because I'm not a christian?? That's okay though, it doesn't matter, and I won't judge you because of your disapproval of me as a person, I will only judge you by your good deeds or bad deeds towards society as a whole.
> 
> I did read Watcher's post, and Kung's post too. I do believe one can judge a tree by it's fruit but I don't make judgements because scriptures tell me that's what I have to do. I don't live my life according to the demands of scriptures in a book. I live my life according to what god tells me in my heart is right or wrong.
> 
> .


I believe when the scripture tells Christian to judge by their fruit, it is referring to those who claim to be Christians, not those who don't claim to be Christians. Basically, as one person put it, it's to tell who is the poser as opposed to a true Christian.


----------



## chickenista (Mar 24, 2007)

mnn2501 said:


> Balderdash to both of your statements
> Non-LDS are not allowed inside LDS Temple's (as opposed to LDS Churches) except for Open Houses held before the Temples are dedicated. I have been inside 9 Temples and every one of them always have multiple pictures of Jesus, as He is the central figure of our religion.
> and
> Every Missionary learns the history of Joseph Smith (and I would believe that most already know it) as they must be able to teach it.


I have been to temple and I was inside.
I was in high school and went with a friend.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Sonshine said:


> I believe when the scripture tells Christian to judge by their fruit, it is referring to those who claim to be Christians, not those who don't claim to be Christians. Basically, as one person put it, it's to tell who is the poser as opposed to a true Christian.


Makes sense to me. I do think though that that particular scripture can also be interpreted as meaning that you can judge a person by their deeds rather than by their claims. I'm translating that literally you see - to judge a tree (religion) by it's fruit (deeds, actions) - if the fruit is good and wholesome then so is the tree. 

There are many good and wholesome trees of all species (many religions), each tree has many branches - some branches are strong and produce much good fruits, some are weak and produce little fruits, but the branches still all grow from the same tree. Should the whole tree be destroyed because some of it's branches are weak? No, the weak branches are either shored up and supported (faith) or else pruned off (separated) in order to strengthen the one good tree. But even the branches that are pruned off still have some other worth and shouldn't be discarded as useless. Everything has it's measure of value, and there is value in different measures of faith.

.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

naturelover said:


> Makes sense to me. I do think though that that particular scripture can also be interpreted as meaning that you can judge a person by their deeds rather than by their claims. I'm translating that literally you see - to judge a tree (religion) by it's fruit (deeds, actions) - if the fruit is good and wholesome then so is the tree.
> 
> There are many good and wholesome trees of all species (many religions), each tree has many branches - some branches are strong and produce much good fruits, some are weak and produce little fruits, but the branches still all grow from the same tree. Should the whole tree be destroyed because some of it's branches are weak? No, the weak branches are either shored up and supported (faith) or else pruned off (separated) in order to strengthen the one good tree. But even the branches that are pruned off still have some other worth and shouldn't be discarded as useless. Everything has it's measure of value.
> 
> .


I agree in part with what you are saying, especially about everything having a measure of value, except I would say that everyone has a measure of value. As a Christian I personally believe that Christianity is the truth. Having said that, I do believe that other religions have some good teachings, but my own personal belief and my own understanding of the Bible is that there is only one truth and that is that salvation only comes through accepting Jesus and through His sacrifice made on behalf of all who are willing to accept it. But faith and the Bible and my own personal experiences are why I believe this way. Others may choose to believe otherwise, and that is their decision to make. I will try to lead them in the directions of my own belief because that belief is that there is only one way, and if people choose a different path it leads to destruction. But I know enough from my own conversion that I can't make anyone agree with me. All I can do is try to live my life as an example, pray for others and be there for them in whatever way I feel the Lord leading me to be. Hope that makes sense. I'm not always eloquent in my writing.


----------



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

*
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFN9JZleNn0&feature=related[/ame]*


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2010)

Lyra said:


> That is an irrational statement. They believe in something that they know nothing about.


Ridiculous!! Do you believe that you're accessing the internet?? can you explain exactly how you're doing that?? and, "just does" isn't an explanation. details, details, do you know the details?


----------



## bluesky (Mar 22, 2008)

If memory serves me correctly, those who do not hold a current temple recommend, LDS or not, are only permitted to enter certain parts of Mormon temples but are not allowed access to the most sacred areas, especially after the temple is dedicated. (Attending Mormon Sunday services is NOT the same as going to the temple.) 

I have found that most Mormon missionaries are quite well versed in basic church doctrine and history but are often not willing to stray from their scripted responses and will call on a more seasoned member of the priesthood for in-depth discussions and questions about doctrine.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

Sonshine said:


> ..... But I know enough from my own conversion that I can't make anyone agree with me. All I can do is *try to live my life as an example, pray for others and be there for them* in whatever way I feel the Lord leading me to be. Hope that makes sense.


Sure that makes sense. That's how I feel about it too. That's what makes a person good fruit from the tree, whatever their particular tree is.

.


----------



## Lyra (Sep 15, 2009)

naturelover said:


> I believe that anybody who believes and accepts Jesus as their lord and saviour IS a christian, doesn't matter what denomination they are or if they're mormons or JW's or the COG. Nobody has a right to judge that someone who believes in Christ is not a christian of one sort or another.


And others believe that is the definition of being a Christian In Name Only.


----------



## Callieslamb (Feb 27, 2007)

If we don't have to live a certain way or do certain things to enter heaven, why did God give Commandments? A people that know what the doctrines or beliefs of their professed religion are AND have the relationship with God AND live by faith/revelation are a stronger people than those that only apply one or two. To have faith is good. To live by relevation is good. To have knowledge is good. To have them all is better. 

You must know something of what you are placing your faith on. If you have faith in Christ, you have to know something of him. Faith is a belief strong enough to make you act. FAith is action just as pure love is action. It isn't a feeling you keep in your heart. When you have faith - you act on that faith. You have to know what you believe in. Knowledge can bring you comfort. Knowledge will give you examples to strengthen you for challenges in your life. Knowledge is important especially when applied with faith.


----------



## FourDeuce (Jun 27, 2002)

copperkid3 said:


> *
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFN9JZleNn0&feature=related*


Typical religious video on Youtube. Mostly lies and half-truths. Among the many people "quoted", few of them were actually atheists.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Every LDS church I have ever been in (about 18 of them) have had pictures of Christ all over the building. I've never seen any LDS church without several.
There are not only pictures of Christ at the temples, but most temples have a statue, the Christus, as well. http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/art/christus_statue.jpg

Now, something everyone seems to be overlooking is that Mormons scored higher than anyone on questions involving Christianity and the bible. Atheists and Agnostics scored higher on questions regarding "other religions". All in all, very telling I think. 

"On questions about Christianity, Mormons scored the highest, with an average of about eight correct answers out of 12, followed by white evangelicals, with an average of just over seven correct answers. Jews, along with atheists and agnostics, knew the most about other faiths, such as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_rel_religious_literacy_poll


----------



## whiskeylivewire (May 27, 2009)

Naturelover-we just read Thomas Paine last week in American Lit and you sound a lot like him. Basically(just in case y'all didn't know) he said that he believed in God, just not religion. While I did not agree with him on most of what I read, it was fascinating to read.

The reading was taken from The Writings of Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason, Chapter 1. the Author's profession of faith if anyone cares to read what he wrote.

I wish I had taken that survey, I grew up Lutheran and went to the school from 1st-6th grade. I remember some of what I learned about Martin Luther(so of course someone is going to ask me something and I won't remember it!) I now attend a Baptist Church, I say I am a Lutheran-Baptist because there are things I agree with both denominations and things I disagree with. Religion is man made, God is not, is how I look at it.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

FourDeuce said:


> > Originally Posted by *copperkid3*
> >
> > _*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFN9J...eature=related*_
> 
> ...


I watched it too. I don't know if any of it was lies and half-truths or how many of the people quoted were atheists. That doesn't matter to me though - I think the biggest impression the video made on me was that it was using fear tactics and dramatic threats of everlasting despair and ----ation for people who are non-believers. It was very sad and morbid and made me go "Eeewwww". Because of that I wouldn't give its' message any credence or validity at all. I think it's wrong (and rather desperate) for anyone to try to coerce people into their kind of belief system by using fear tactics on them. Kind of like emotional blackmail.

.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

whiskeylivewire said:


> Naturelover-we just read Thomas Paine last week in American Lit and you sound a lot like him. Basically (just in case y'all didn't know) he said that he believed in God, just not religion. While I did not agree with him on most of what I read, it was fascinating to read.
> 
> The reading was taken from The Writings of Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason, Chapter 1. the Author's profession of faith if anyone cares to read what he wrote.


Cool  

Thanks for bringing that to my attention and I did go look it up. Needless to say I do agree with much of what he said. :thumb:

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/age_of_reason/part1.html#1

.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

naturelover said:


> I watched it too. I don't know if any of it was lies and half-truths or how many of the people quoted were atheists. That doesn't matter to me though - I think the biggest impression the video made on me was that it was using fear tactics and dramatic threats of everlasting despair and ----ation for people who are non-believers. It was very sad and morbid and made me go "Eeewwww". Because of that I wouldn't give its' message any credence or validity at all. I think it's wrong (and rather desperate) for anyone to try to coerce people into their kind of belief system by using fear tactics on them. Kind of like emotional blackmail.
> 
> .


I believe that fear tactics in religion, such as fear of ----ation/hell are, ironically, anathema to Christianity in particular, but to most religions. This is one of the things I love about my own church/faith. It teaches love, and service, honesty and charity as well as forgiveness. We don't believe in any literal lake of fire whereby folks roast for eternity. That is NOT a literal biblical concept. Fear tactics only breed ego, arrogance, and hatred. 

I think the results of this survey make perfect sense when you really think about it for a minute. Most American atheists, according to this survey, were born into Christian homes, became disaffected, explored other religions, before falling away from religion entirely. They don't spend as much time studying the religion they grew up in as they do alternative ones, and they become fairly knowledgeable in those religions. 
Mormons, on the other hand, are always having to defend themselves, and to do so, we must be armed with at least some degree of knowledge and wisdom. We also have weekly classes whereby we read and study the bible, word for word. We also do family scripture study daily, as well as individual scripture study.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Oggie said:


> A sad reflection on non-thinking followers.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Make's sense.
Religion, is created by man. Therefore, it is a thing that can be written in a book and taught. It is tangible. It is routine. It is can be 'understood' by everyone (believers and unbelievers).

Jesus spoke a lot about religion, and 'religious' people.
And not favorably I might add.
Matthew 23 addresses the 'religious' leaders, and their 'religion'.

So this article would be accurate. Those who do not know Christ, do not understand Christ. It's about 'relationship' not religion. 
Anyone can understand religion. Atheist and Agnostics have brains, they can read, they can learn about any religion just like anyone can learn Math, Science, Reading, Writing.....it's just another subject!


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Kung said:


> I'm not sure if you realize that you're taking me to task...for your agreeing with me.
> 
> I said previously in another post that
> 
> ...


It wasn't taking you to task it was to add support.


----------



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

thequeensblessing said:


> I believe that fear tactics in religion, such as fear
> of ----ation/hell are, ironically, anathema to Christianity in particular, but to most religions.
> This is one of the things I love about my own church/faith. It teaches love, and service,
> honesty and charity as well as forgiveness. *We don't believe in any literal lake of fire
> ...


******************************************************
Christians, that *MOST* of what is now called the Christian church, 
take exception to that statement. We've all heard that old adage that 
just because a person hangs out in a chicken coop, it doesn't necessarily 
make him a chicken, the same holds true of those who hang out in a 
temple and call themselves 'christian' mormans.....

So .... I guess we'll have to take you to task on that comment (highlighted and enlarged above) 
and be prepared to defend your 'beliefs' and how it actually relates to what the Bible has to say 
about hell.......seeing as how you say; i.e. (mormans) that it's "not a literal biblical concept".....

Strangely enough, Jesus had a much different view of it, as he definitely preached on it, 
as a place to avoid if at all possible. If it wasn't a 'literal' place, then why would he take 
the time and be concerned about warning people or even mention it's existence???

_No less than 13 times is the word "hell" is mentioned in the in the 
New Testament and another 10 times, where the word "hades" is used. The word
'sheol'; an early Judaic 'concept' of the afterlife, is mentioned 67 times in the 
Old Testament. The "lake of fire"; considered another term for 'hell', is mentioned 
an additional 5 times in the book of Revelation. Here, below, are but a few of those 
verses that the Lord Himself, made mention of:
_
Luke 16:19 - "Now there was a rich man, and he habitually dressed in purple and fine linen, joyously living in splendor every day.
Luke 16:20 - "And a poor man named Lazarus was laid at his gate, covered with sores,
Luke 16:21 - and longing to be fed with the crumbs which were falling from the rich man's table; 
besides, even the dogs were coming and licking his sores.
Luke 16:22 - "Now the poor man died and was carried away by the angels to Abraham's bosom; 
and the rich man also died and was buried.
Luke 16:23 - "*In Hades *he lifted up his eyes, *being in torment*, and saw Abraham 
far away and Lazarus in his bosom.
Luke 16:24 - "And he cried out and said, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send 
Lazarus so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool off my tongue, 
*for I am in agony in this flame.*'
Luke 16:25 - "But Abraham said, 'Child, remember that during your life you received your good things, 
and likewise Lazarus bad things; but now he is being comforted here, and *you are in agony.*
Luke 16:26 - 'And besides all this, between us and you there is a great chasm fixed, 
so that those who wish to come over from here to you will not be able, and *that none may cross over from there to us*.'
Luke 16:27 - "And he said, 'Then I beg you, father, that you send him to my father's houseâ
Luke 16:28 - for I have five brothersâin order that he may 
*warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'*
Luke 16:29 - "But Abraham said, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.'
Luke 16:30 - "But he said, 'No, father Abraham,_* but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!'*
Luke 16:31 -* "But he said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, 
they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.'"
*_


Matt. 10:28 - *"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; 
but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."*


If you had the power to save someone from a burning building, by either instructing them 
on an exit route or actually showing them the way to 'escape', but did* NOTHING*.......
and let them burn to death.......your gentle 'platitudes' will mean little to those who perished 
or to their loved ones when they find out you did nothing to save them. If you had the *ONLY* 
medicine that would save thousands from a horrible plague, but kept it safe and secure in a locked 
and 'refrigerated vault' for a rainy day.......your medicine (and religion) is worthless. If a church 
is *NOT* preaching fire and brimstone and how to avoid it.....it is not a saving church.....
otherwise, how will you know, from what there is to be saved from, if you do not know or hear that 
there is an eternal and final consequence for sin? There is no escape, once you cross over that great divide.

Romans 6:23 - "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

copperkid3 said:


> ******************************************************
> Christians, that *MOST* of what is now called the Christian church,
> take exception to that statement. We've all heard that old adage that
> just because a person hangs out in a chicken coop, it doesn't necessarily
> ...


 Yes, so I've been told.  However, what mainstream Christians think of me/us, isn't really the point, is it? It's what the Lord thinks. You know, by our fruits and all that stuff? 
Oh, and I don't know what a "Morman" is. It's Mormon. Not trying to be critical or anything. Just want to inform. 


copperkid3 said:


> So .... I guess we'll have to take you to task on that comment (highlighted and enlarged above)
> and be prepared to defend your 'beliefs' and how it actually relates to what the Bible has to say
> about hell.......seeing as how you say; i.e. (mormans) that it's "not a literal biblical concept".....


 I am always prepared to defend my beliefs hon, however, do you really want to hijack this thread to be the same old Mormon-bashing debate? It's been tried a time...or two already. 


copperkid3 said:


> Strangely enough, Jesus had a much different view of it, as he definitely preached on it,
> as a place to avoid if at all possible. If it wasn't a 'literal' place, then why would he take
> the time and be concerned about warning people or even mention it's existence???
> 
> ...


_ We'll stop here for a moment, ok? Now, if you'll look at the passage you emboldened, you'll see where I said we didn't believe in the literal lake of fire. I didn't say we disbelieve in a hell. Big difference my friend, big difference. 
Ok, let's continue:


copperkid3 said:



The "lake of fire"; considered another term for 'hell', is mentioned 
an additional 5 times in the book of Revelation. Here, below, are but a few of those 
verses that the Lord Himself, made mention of:

Click to expand...

_


copperkid3 said:


> [/SIZE]
> Luke 16:19 - "Now there was a rich man, and he habitually dressed in purple and fine linen, joyously living in splendor every day.
> Luke 16:20 - "And a poor man named Lazarus was laid at his gate, covered with sores,
> Luke 16:21 - and longing to be fed with the crumbs which were falling from the rich man's table;
> ...


This says nothing about a literal "lake of fire". Yes, it mentions flame and torment, however, is it literal? You take it to be so. Do you equally take Christ's words "ye shall be as gods" so literally? Or do you pick and choose what to take literally? He's asking for a drink, to cool off his tongue. He is thirsty. Is this "fire" akin to the parching of the desert? He doesn't scream that his skin is being scorched off afterall, as one would assume he would be doing were he roasting over the literal lake of fire. 


copperkid3 said:


> Matt. 10:28 - *"Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul;
> but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."*


 As I said earlier, we acknowledge the existence of a hell, so this is a moot point. 


copperkid3 said:


> If you had the power to save someone from a burning building, by either instructing them
> on an exit route or actually showing them the way to 'escape', but did* NOTHING*.......
> and let them burn to death.......your gentle 'platitudes' will mean little to those who perished
> or to their loved ones when they find out you did nothing to save them. If you had the *ONLY*
> ...


 Christ did not teach fire and brimstone very often. He more often preached love, repentance, acceptance, and humility. Humility is in direct conflict with the constant preaching of fire and brimstone. One begets love. The other begets arrogance. 


copperkid3 said:


> otherwise, how will you know, from what there is to be saved from, if you do not know or hear that
> there is an eternal and final consequence for sin? There is no escape, once you cross over that great divide.
> 
> Romans 6:23 - "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."


I don't deny this either. You see, you missed my point entirely because you didn't really listen. You assumed. 
I can quote scripture too, and will if it makes you feel better about the discussion. 
Rev. 20:13 _ And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works._ So hell is the literal lake of fire, according to you, wherein the wicked are tormented for eternity, yet here, John clearly says he sees the dead being delivered up out of hell to be judged according to their works. So they were in hell, in the lake of fire, before their judgment day, before they were even resurrected?

And then there's this a little further on the same chapter: 
Rev. 20:14 _And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And whoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire._ Hell is cast into the lake of fire?? I thought hell WAS the lake of fire, at least according to you. But yes, John explains just a little bit here; "This is the second death." So we have a spiritual vs. physical, first vs. second death thing going on here. This obviously ties in with the judgment and resurrection. Obviously, it's not as cut and dried "hell = hades = literal lake of fire - period", as some would have us all believe. 

We believe in a hell. We don't believe we will be turned on a spit over a literal lake of eternal fire. If you spend some time studying the bible, you wouldn't either.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

Uhm, I've spent quite a bit of time studying the Bible; but I don't believe it says anything about turning anyone over a spit. 

As far as the rest of it goes, we've been over it before; and will simply have to agree to disagree because I know we hold different viewpoints.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Sorry Kung.  That's my mental image when someone tells me I'm going to roast over a lake of fire for being Mormon...being trust up like a chicken, impaled on a spit and being turned by some huge hand that relishes the torture being inflicted. It just doesn't mesh with the loving, forgiving Christ of the bible. It's just not the God "I" know. So, in light of that, I suppose those who say I, as a Mormon, worship a "different" Christ than they do, are probably right. Mine would never do that. Hopefully, we won't ever know hell, as we'll most likely see one another in heaven. At least, that's my belief.


----------



## copperkid3 (Mar 18, 2005)

while you are correct in my spelling error.....you err on the part of the this being a 
Mormon-bashing debate.....as well as in 'assuming' that hades, hell, sheol and the 
lake of fire are one and the same thing. They are all places that are how shall we say it......
_*UNPLEASANT*_? And I also don't want to be accused of hijacking this thread; 
rather, it was my attempt at pointing out, how it might 'explain' the notion of why many 
atheists as well as other 'free thinkers' who refuse to believe that a loving God could 
even consider sending a portion of HIS creation to a place of everlasting torment.

I find it somewhat amusing (if it wasn't so sad), that you accuse me of taking the 
various passages that Christ Himself spoke of, as "literal"......which you do not......while 
at the same time pointing out the verse of "ye shall be as gods".....of which the Mormon 
theology hangs a large portion their hat on. Most biblical scholars when studying the 
parts of sheol, are inclined to see it as a "waiting" compartment consisting of two separated 
partitions; one of paradise or Abraham's bosom and the other of hades. This area was 
reserved for those who died *BEFORE* Christ came to live, and die on the earth. 
Who and/or what do you think the Spirit is talking about in the following verses:

Ephesians 4:8 - Therefore it says, "WHEN HE ASCENDED ON HIGH, HE LED CAPTIVE A HOST OF CAPTIVES, AND HE GAVE GIFTS TO MEN."
Eph 4:9 - (Now this expression, "He ascended," what does it mean except that He also had descended into the lower parts of the earth?
Eph 4:10 - He who descended is Himself also He who ascended far above all the heavens, so that He might fill all things.)
Eph 4:11 - And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,
Eph 4:12 - for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;
Eph 4:13 - until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.
Eph 4:14 - As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming;
Eph 4:15 - but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ,

I believe that hell is a far *WORSE* place than hades or that portion of sheol that was 
mentioned *BEFORE* the Lord's resurrection and that eventually when Satan and his 
demons (of which Hell and/or the Lake of Fire was originally prepared for) are thrown into it......
that those who have rejected the message of salvation, will also be there to join them. 

Mark 9:43 - "If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,
Mark 9:44 - where THEIR WORM DOES NOT DIE, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.
Mark 9:45 - "If your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame, than, having your two feet, to be cast into hell,
Mark 9:46 - where THEIR WORM DOES NOT DIE, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.]
Mark 9:47 - "If your eye causes you to stumble, throw it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into hell,
Mark 9:48 - where THEIR WORM DOES NOT DIE, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.
Mark 9:49 - "For everyone will be salted with fire.

I did notice that while quoting 'some' of the things that I'd presented, you conveniently 
overlooked and failed to address the analogy of the burning building or the life-saving medicine. 
********************************************************


thequeensblessing said:


> Yes, so I've been told.  However, what mainstream Christians think of me/us, isn't really the point, is it? It's what the Lord thinks. You know, by our fruits and all that stuff?
> Oh, and I don't know what a "Morman" is. It's Mormon. Not trying to be critical or anything. Just want to inform.
> I am always prepared to defend my beliefs hon, however, do you really want to hijack this thread to be the same old Mormon-bashing debate? It's been tried a time...or two already.
> We'll stop here for a moment, ok? Now, if you'll look at the passage you emboldened, you'll see where I said we didn't believe in the literal lake of fire. I didn't say we disbelieve in a hell. Big difference my friend, big difference.
> ...


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

copperkid3 said:


> while you are correct in my spelling error.....you err on the part of the this being a
> Mormon-bashing debate.....as well as in 'assuming' that hades, hell, sheol and the
> lake of fire are one and the same thing. They are all places that are how shall we say it......
> _*UNPLEASANT*_?


 I didn't assume they were the same place. When speaking to me (warning me, saving me, call it what you will), they are used interchangeably by mainstream Christians. If they don't mean the same place, then don't use them to denote the same place. So, you believe in more than one "place" unpleasant place where the wicked go?


copperkid3 said:


> And I also don't want to be accused of hijacking this thread;
> rather, it was my attempt at pointing out, how it might 'explain' the notion of why many
> atheists as well as other 'free thinkers' who refuse to believe that a loving God could
> even consider sending a portion of HIS creation to a place of everlasting torment.


 Perhaps you are right. Perhaps they are. I don't so much think they find the idea of a "hell" so hard to swallow, I mean, we see examples of hellish things here on Earth all the time. We make our own hell in life many times. No, the idea of "hell" itself isn't so hard to imagine. It's what mainstream Christians have turned the concept into that is so hard to take. As for their being "free thinkers" as you call them, I think it's great to question all things, and to hold fast to that which is true. While I may not agree with the conclusion they've come to, I reserve their right to hold to it, as I do your right to hold to your beliefs. 


copperkid3 said:


> I find it somewhat amusing (if it wasn't so sad), that you accuse me of taking the
> various passages that Christ Himself spoke of, as "literal"......which you do not......while
> at the same time pointing out the verse of "ye shall be as gods".....of which the Mormon
> theology hangs a large portion their hat on.


 Yes, therein lies my point, thank you for pointing it out.  We don't pick and choose what to take literally. We believe the scriptures are like an onion, made up of layers upon layers of understanding, dependent upon where in the journey any individual is. One cannot say THIS must be taken literally, and THIS must not be. You say I MUST take the concept of a lake of fire literally, yet when Christ says "ye shall be as gods", well, he didn't mean that literally. I don't think he meant either one of them strictly literally. I will never be equal to Christ or Heavenly Father...never. Neither will I roast over a lake of fire. But more often than not, the truth is there, metaphorically, and brought out in a manner in which the early believers would most be able to understand complex and foreign concepts. 


copperkid3 said:


> Most biblical scholars when studying the
> parts of sheol, are inclined to see it as a "waiting" compartment consisting of two separated
> partitions; one of paradise or Abraham's bosom and the other of hades. This area was
> reserved for those who died *BEFORE* Christ came to live, and die on the earth.
> ...


 Leaving this scripture aside as I believe it has more than one layer, let me say that you won't find any Mormon who disagrees with you on there being places where we go after death to await judgment and resurrection. I think we're on the same page there. 


copperkid3 said:


> I believe that hell is a far *WORSE* place than hades or that portion of sheol that was
> mentioned *BEFORE* the Lord's resurrection and that eventually when Satan and his
> demons (of which Hell and/or the Lake of Fire was originally prepared for) are thrown into it......
> that those who have rejected the message of salvation, will also be there to join them.
> ...


 I have no issue with any of this. I simply don't believe it is saying to literally cut off your hand or poke out your eye anymore than it is talking about literal fire. I do believe there is ----ation, but not literal fire. 


copperkid3 said:


> I did notice that while quoting 'some' of the things that I'd presented, you conveniently
> overlooked and failed to address the analogy of the burning building or the life-saving medicine.
> ********************************************************


No, I did not overlook it. I addressed it. I guess you didn't catch it though. Here, I'll try again in another manner.

I have a woodburning fireplace in my home. When one understands how to use it, it gives good heat and can even feed one. Someone else, who is only used to electricity to get their heat, recognizes the danger inherent in the fireplace and begins to try to save me from my own folly of burning wood in the fireplace by ranting about the dangers of it. "Come and let me introduce you to electricity. It's the true way, the safe way, to get heat. If you don't, you will surely die a painful death from the fire that will ravage your entire building. I say "I know the fire, I have studied it and I know I won't burn up in it. It is my choice to heat my home this way. You and I cannot become good friends because every time you are in my home, you lecture me about my fireplace, you warn me repeatedly, rather than learning about my fireplace. Everytime I am in your home, you lecture me about my fireplace. I know you are doing what you think is right, but instead of warning me, and then watching the fruits of my work (heat, warm food, ambiance, etc.) and 
judging me thus, you continue to rail against it. The only way to know if my house will not burn down with me in it, making all your attempts to save me from the sure fate of a burning building, will be to watch and wait. If you truly wanted to save me from my fireplace, you'd be patient with me, love me, showing me by your fruits that electricity is the only way. Instead, there is arrogance regarding your electricity which repels me completely. 
Understand?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Why would anyone worship a God that they believe torments people eternally?


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

mnn2501 said:


> Why would anyone worship a God that they believe torments people eternally?


For the potluck suppers?

Or, you could strip Christianity back to its basic beliefs and recognize the notion that the goal is being close to God, which is goodness.

The other option is sin, which moves us away from goodness or God.

So, it's basically a choice.

You can go back to creation stories (the fruit of the tree of knowledge, etc.) if you like when man was in close communion with God and our failure, but the basic message is the attempt to regain the spiritual closeness, and therefore the goodness of God.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

thequeensblessing said:


> Sorry Kung.  That's my mental image when someone tells me I'm going to roast over a lake of fire for being Mormon...being trust up like a chicken, impaled on a spit and being turned by some huge hand that relishes the torture being inflicted. It just doesn't mesh with the loving, forgiving Christ of the bible. It's just not the God "I" know. So, in light of that, I suppose those who say I, as a Mormon, worship a "different" Christ than they do, are probably right. Mine would never do that. Hopefully, we won't ever know hell, as we'll most likely see one another in heaven. At least, that's my belief.


You're right, God is a loving God. I've seen many Christians, not just from the Mormon faith, that says God is a loving God, so He wouldn't do that. What I feel they are forgetting is that although He's a loving God, He's also a Righteous judge. Each of us will be judged according to how we have lived and the decisions we have made. What's the since in judgement if there are no consequences? You state you believe in hell, how to you imagine hell to be if you don't take the literal interpretation of lake of fire? I'm not writing this to bash, I'm seriously curious about these beliefs. Thank you.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

I totally agree with you Oggie (the whole reason is to regain that closeness with Heavenly Father, not the potlucks. ;p )

The OT stories are a great example. Adam and Eve were thrust out of the Garden of Eden and into what had to have amounted to hell, as compared to Eden, the wide world, full of pain and danger. But because he's a loving Father and doesn't want to see His children suffer eternal torments for our lack of obedience to his laws, because he still wants us to regain that closeness with him, he provided a Savior for us. He gave his OWN Son for us. Now that is love!


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Sonshine said:


> You're right, God is a loving God. I've seen many Christians, not just from the Mormon faith, that says God is a loving God, so He wouldn't do that. What I feel they are forgetting is that although He's a loving God, He's also a Righteous judge. Each of us will be judged according to how we have lived and the decisions we have made. What's the since in judgement if there are no consequences? You state you believe in hell, how to you imagine hell to be if you don't take the literal interpretation of lake of fire? I'm not writing this to bash, I'm seriously curious about these beliefs. Thank you.


Hell is the eternal separation from our loved ones. Hell is ever knowing that it was our own actions that are keeping us from being with them. Hell is knowing that it was our choices that have separated us not only from family, but from that closeness to the Father that those who are indeed righteous will be rewarded with. That separation will truly consume us as a fire. The scriptures speak repeatedly about just such a separation; the wheat and chaff, etc. True hell will be knowing that it is our own fault. So yes, to adapt a line from Dickens, it is knowing that we forged the chain that binds us, that restrains us from all those we love and from the very presence of God, link by link, by our own actions. There is no need for any lake of fire when there is such profound loneliness and emptiness. And God won't doing it to us, he won't be punishing us...we will have done it ourselves.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> Why would anyone worship a God that they believe torments people eternally?


Why would anyone live in a country who locks its citizens up in prisons?

Get the point or do I need to explain it?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Sonshine said:


> You're right, God is a loving God. I've seen many Christians, not just from the Mormon faith, that says God is a loving God, so He wouldn't do that. What I feel they are forgetting is that although He's a loving God, He's also a Righteous judge. Each of us will be judged according to how we have lived and the decisions we have made. What's the since in judgement if there are no consequences? You state you believe in hell, how to you imagine hell to be if you don't take the literal interpretation of lake of fire? I'm not writing this to bash, I'm seriously curious about these beliefs. Thank you.


I really don't think if Hell is a lake of fire or just a total separation from God or a black pit of loneliness is worth taking the time to argue about. What matters is how you prevent yourself and others from going there.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

watcher said:


> Why would anyone live in a country who locks its citizens up in prisons?
> 
> Get the point or do I need to explain it?


 Not even a comparison. Locking someone up and tormenting someone eternally are waaaaaay far apart.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

thequeensblessing said:


> Sorry Kung.  That's my mental image when someone tells me I'm going to roast over a lake of fire for being Mormon...being trust up like a chicken, impaled on a spit and being turned by some huge hand *that relishes the torture being inflicted.*


And therein lies part of our difference, I think; I don't believe He relishes it, nor do I believe that He is 'consigning' us to that fate; I believe we do it ourselves. But you know this already - at least you know that's the way I believe it.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Kung said:


> And therein lies part of our difference, I think; I don't believe He relishes it, nor do I believe that He is 'consigning' us to that fate; I believe we do it ourselves. But you know this already - at least you know that's the way I believe it.


In your version (if you'll permit me the liberty of calling it that) of it, he created the lake of fire specifically for the purpose of tormenting his children for eternity.

In the LDS version (if you will), WE created it.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Kung said:


> And therein lies part of our difference, I think; I don't believe He relishes it, nor do I believe that He is 'consigning' us to that fate; I believe we do it ourselves. But you know this already - at least you know that's the way I believe it.


nevertheless, in your version He set up the rules, He created the lake of fire for the express purpose of tormenting someone that does not follow His rules by burning them forever.

Makes no sense whatsoever.


----------



## naturelover (Jun 6, 2006)

watcher said:


> I really don't think if Hell is a lake of fire or just a total separation from God or a black pit of loneliness is worth taking the time to argue about. *What matters is how you prevent yourself and others from going there*.


Got control issues much?



mnn2501 said:


> nevertheless, in your version He set up the rules, He created the lake of fire for the express purpose of tormenting someone that does not follow His rules by burning them forever.
> 
> Makes no sense whatsoever.


In my version god didn't create hell (people create their own hells) and god doesn't punish people or have control issues about people following any rules. It's ridiculous to think that an omnipotent god would have such control issues.

It doesn't make any sense at all, in fact it makes me angry that some people equate god with a jealous and tormenting child who makes rules and then throws temper tantrums and punishes people in hell for not following the rules, or even for not believing in god.

.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

Naturelover - how does what he said equate to 'control issues'? Call it what you like, but he IS correct; a true Christian truly IS concerned about someone's eternal state. And a true Christian doesn't 'know' they've made the 'right' choice because they feel all superior and smugly confident. I could care less about controlling someone; if anything the LAST thing I want to do is control anyone. I'll let God handle it. How that correlates to me or others 'controlling' someone is beyond me.

I think that's what bothers me the most about so many unbelievers - there are SO many believers who are TRULY concerned about those who do not believe; and yet so many unbelievers are convinced that we believers stand around and are 'smug' and superior because 'we' are 'saved.' And that is flat out NOT true. Some might feel that way, but 'some' people don't define everybody.

In any event...



mnn2501 said:


> nevertheless, in your version He set up the rules, He created the lake of fire for the express purpose of tormenting someone that does not follow His rules by burning them forever.
> 
> Makes no sense whatsoever.


Standing around discussion 'whose' version says what is rather ridiculous, to be blunt. If you don't believe, you don't believe, and I won't waste time on it; if you have a problem with Him, then your problem remains with Him. :shrug:


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

thequeensblessing said:


> Hell is the eternal separation from our loved ones. Hell is ever knowing that it was our own actions that are keeping us from being with them. Hell is knowing that it was our choices that have separated us not only from family, but from that closeness to the Father that those who are indeed righteous will be rewarded with. That separation will truly consume us as a fire. The scriptures speak repeatedly about just such a separation; the wheat and chaff, etc. True hell will be knowing that it is our own fault. So yes, to adapt a line from Dickens, it is knowing that we forged the chain that binds us, that restrains us from all those we love and from the very presence of God, link by link, by our own actions. There is no need for any lake of fire when there is such profound loneliness and emptiness. *And God won't doing it to us, he won't be punishing us...we will have done it *ourselves.


I agree, God doesn't do it to us. We make our own choices. Thank you for explaining your point of view and beliefs.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

watcher said:


> I really don't think if Hell is a lake of fire or just a total separation from God or a black pit of loneliness is worth taking the time to argue about. What matters is how you prevent yourself and others from going there.


I agree whole heartedly. I was just curious about others beliefs. I like to ask questions, it's a great way to learn.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Kung said:


> Standing around discussion 'whose' version says what is rather ridiculous, to be blunt. If you don't believe, you don't believe, and I won't waste time on it; if you have a problem with Him, then your problem remains with Him. :shrug:


 Kung, as we've discussed many, many times over, the exact same thing may actually be true about YOU. I mean, if you don't believe, you don't believe, and I won't waste time on it. If you have a problem with Him (and the way He does things or doesn't) then your problem remains with Him. You don't have a corner on the Christian market my friend. There's room on that corner for all who believe.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

thequeensblessing said:


> In your version (if you'll permit me the liberty of calling it that) of it, he created the lake of fire specifically for the purpose of tormenting his children for eternity.
> 
> In the LDS version (if you will), WE created it.


Actually, in the version I believe it was not created for God's children at all, but for Satan's and his minions.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

thequeensblessing said:


> Kung, as we've discussed many, many times over, the exact same thing may actually be true about YOU. I mean, if you don't believe, you don't believe, and I won't waste time on it. If you have a problem with Him (and the way He does things or doesn't) then your problem remains with Him. You don't have a corner on the Christian market my friend. There's room on that corner for all who believe.


Not going down that path.  However, I wasn't actually addressing you here; I was specifically addressing someone we both know flat out chooses not to believe in God at all...and my point was that if they harbor resentment towards God for doing it the way He's doing it, then it would do no good for me to 'interject' myself between the two to try to explain, because their quarrel isn't with me - it's with His Word.

You and I, at least, have belief in God/Christ/the Holy Spirit in common, although we do disagree on what I believe are very major issues/topics.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Sonshine said:


> Actually, in the version I believe it was not created for God's children at all, but for Satan's and his minions.


Oh, ordinarily I'd agree with you, Sonshine, however, if you're being literal about it, Mainstream Christians don't believe using the lake of fire was an afterthought for God. They believe, as do we, that God is omnipotent and omniscient, therefore, he knew when he created his children that they would disobey and fall away, (now this is where we definitely part ways spiritually) so he created the lake of fire, for Satan and his minion, yet at the same time knowing that he could and would use the place to send his disobedient children to for eternal torment. So, to say it wasn't created for us is disingenuous at best, unless you're going to admit that God hadn't taken everything into consideration at the moment that he originally built the "lake".


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

naturelover said:


> Got control issues much?


Nope. I give people the news and its up to them to make the choice. 




naturelover said:


> In my version god didn't create hell (people create their own hells) and god doesn't punish people or have control issues about people following any rules. It's ridiculous to think that an omnipotent god would have such control issues.
> 
> It doesn't make any sense at all, in fact it makes me angry that some people equate god with a jealous and tormenting child who makes rules and then throws temper tantrums and punishes people in hell for not following the rules, or even for not believing in god.
> 
> .


In some people's version god is hiding behind a comet and the only way to meet him is to drink poison and cover yourself with purple cloth.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

thequeensblessing said:


> Oh, ordinarily I'd agree with you, Sonshine, however, if you're being literal about it, Mainstream Christians don't believe using the lake of fire was an afterthought for God. They believe, as do we, that God is omnipotent and omniscient, therefore, he knew when he created his children that they would disobey and fall away, (now this is where we definitely part ways spiritually) so he created the lake of fire, for Satan and his minion, yet at the same time knowing that he could and would use the place to send his disobedient children to for eternal torment. So, to say it wasn't created for us is disingenuous at best, unless you're going to admit that God hadn't taken everything into consideration at the moment that he originally built the "lake".


Yes, He already knew what our decisions will be, yet we still have a choice.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Sonshine said:


> Yes, He already knew what our decisions will be, yet we still have a choice.


Yes, we still have agency, no doubt about that. My question is still that if God didn't create the lake of fire for us, then was it an afterthought?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

thequeensblessing said:


> Yes, we still have agency, no doubt about that. My question is still that if God didn't create the lake of fire for us, then was it an afterthought?


My belief is that it wasn't an after thought. As Kung stated, there are things we'll have to agree to disagree on. I don't try to change anyone or try to talk them into leaving whatever Church they attend. If I believe they are incorrect in their theology, I just pray and ask God to either show me where I'm wrong, or help the other person see where they are.

It would be too much of a high jack of this thread to go into all the reasons why I believe there is a literal lake of fire, and my purpose here is not to debate the issues, but to learn from others about their own beliefs and why they believe that way.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

If there is a literal lake of fire, why would it be so scary if we are no longer of the physical world?

Without a body, there is no physical pain.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Oggie said:


> A sad reflection on non-thinking followers.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Curious.
How many "christans gone athiest" do you think did so, because their parents spent more time at 'church' volunteering their brains out......neglecting their first duty......which is the family?

Curious to know if these kids / adults were brought up inside a building every time the doors swung open, shooed off to a room to 'color', drug around to every function.....and when they got home, saw a very different set of parents? You know all 'churchy and godly' in public, but harried, bitter, angry, or worse.....absent at home?


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> Curious.
> How many "christans gone athiest" do you think did so, because their parents spent more time at 'church' volunteering their brains out......neglecting their first duty......which is the family?
> 
> Curious to know if these kids / adults were brought up inside a building every time the doors swung open, shooed off to a room to 'color', drug around to every function.....and when they got home, saw a very different set of parents? You know all 'churchy and godly' in public, but harried, bitter, angry, or worse.....absent at home?


I think that the number of folks who became atheist because they thought that their parents volunteered too much would pale in comparison to the number of folks who decided that their parents were dogmatic, legalistic, authoritarian, autocratic and used religion to "keep their children in line."

Many of the atheists I know rejected the limitations of the religious box that their parents created.

Instead of finding a more comfortable box, they rejected the concept of the box altogether.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Oggie said:


> I think that the number of folks who became atheist because they thought that their parents volunteered too much would pale in comparison to the number of folks who decided that their parents were dogmatic, legalistic, authoritarian, autocratic and used religion to "keep their children in line."
> 
> Many of the atheists I know rejected the limitations of the religious box that their parents created.
> 
> Instead of finding a more comfortable box, they rejected the concept of the box altogether.


*deep sigh*
And that's what you get with 'religion'.
I agree with what you said.
Religion, stinks!!


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Oggie said:


> If there is a literal lake of fire, why would it be so scary if we are no longer of the physical world?
> 
> Without a body, there is no physical pain.


That's actually a very good question, Oggie. 

Speaking for myself only here, it's not so much fear, or scary, as it is incongruous to attempt to equate torture with a merciful God. That being said, if there was no physical manifestation of this literal lake of fire, then what is the point of this lake of fire being literal?

The scriptures, especially revelations, are replete with symbolism and metaphor, from the windows of heaven, the pillars of heaven, the 4 horsemen, the seals, etc. Most Christians don't take everyone of them literally. They symbolize something, such as death, famine, plague, war, or the symbolism in baptism, or casting out "demons" to cure disease. The lake of fire is likewise symbolic, to set forth a concept that the ancients admittedly had a difficult time envisioning. In the scriptures, hell is likened to Gehenna, the great garbage dump in Jerusalem where fires were kept burning constantly and things were utterly consumed, but it is done for the purpose of putting forth the idea of what John called the second death, not eternal torment. That is the real fear, the second death.
Here is an excellent article for anyone who really wants to know more about hell, that very fairly covers all aspects of this mysterious place we call "hell". You can read it in it's entirety here: http://www.14lds.com/hell.htm


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Kung said:


> Not going down that path.  However, I wasn't actually addressing you here; I was specifically addressing someone we both know flat out chooses not to believe in God at all....


If you are talking about me here, you are 100% wrong, I'm LDS; a convert of 17 years now.

This was one of the reasons I left the Protestant Church of my childhood and early adulthood, what kind of sadistic entity would set things up to eternally torment someone in a lake of fire? and how could anyone believe in that "god" and justify it. No mainstream Christian has been able to answer that yet - they always mumble something about 'us doing it to ourselves' then they usually get all huffy when I point out what I did (that this God they believe in set up the rules and the lake of fire for the express purpose of eternal torment).
I guess you are not the one that will finally be able to answer me.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> *deep sigh*
> And that's what you get with 'religion'.
> I agree with what you said.
> Religion, stinks!!


Laura, I shared your opinion at one time, and I still can totally sympathize with the sentiments! I never considered myself atheist, as I always felt in my bones, if you will, that there was "something" or "someone" out there. I felt that connection somehow. But I totally rejected the faith of my parents when it exposed itself to me for what it was. I floated asea for a while, until I found my place. I suppose that's what I like about where I am now. I'm in a place that stresses the lasting importance of family, that sets the rate of import in our lives as 1.God Establishing a personal relationship with Him.
2. self (if you are not "well", you aren't going to be able to truly care for others. You must care for self first.
3. family. This is our prime responsibility after our own health/safety. (Of course as parents we are willing to sacrifice ourselves for our family if need be. But if we don't take care of ourselves first, our children and families will suffer for it, despite our good intentions)
4.Church After you feel you've taken care of the previous 3 things, you attend to your church obligations. We all take turn cleaning the church building. (we take the kids with us), we, as a congregation, cut firewood, paint a house, or build a ramp for families in need. We willingly take on unpaid positions within the church such as teaching Sunday School, etc. 
Yes, it's a juggling act at times, but when all the parts are working together, it really does work. It's when something gets out of balance; family time is lacking, personal health suffers, marriages deteriorate, etc., that it's time to stop and reevaluate things. It sounds like you've hit this point. I was there not too many months ago myself. I had to let some things go and take a leave from a position within the church that was just too much for me. I tended to the things I had to do at home and with family. I breathed and enjoyed working on the pressing things. I now have the "machine" working in order again, and find I have the mental clarity and energy, time, etc. to again devote to my church obligations. 
It wasn't the religion that was flawed. It was the people, both in the church, and within my own family, who are flawed, as am I. I guess it's like every other aspect of our lives, it's about finding balance. Some have issues with work, some with church, others with family. We all have to find our own balance, and that's not easy.


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

Oh, and I guess that I should mention that the moron who started this thread doesn't seem to even know how to spell atheist.

It's from the Greek:

A - meaning without

and 

Theos - meaning deity

A-THE-IST

Get it right, knucklehead.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Oggie said:


> Oh, and I guess that I should mention that the moron who started this thread doesn't seem to even know how to spell atheist.
> Get it right, knucklehead.


 Probably was distracted by a cat

:nana:


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

thequeensblessing said:


> Yes, we still have agency, no doubt about that. My question is still that if God didn't create the lake of fire for us, then was it an afterthought?


The lake of fire was 'created' for Devil and his followers. We were given free will which means we can choose who we follow. 

But anyone who has studied the Bible knows there are some things which can not be taken literally. I really don't think even the stanchest literalist would picture Christ as a door. Anyone who reads Revelation will see it is not meant to be taken literally.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Oggie said:


> If there is a literal lake of fire, why would it be so scary if we are no longer of the physical world?
> 
> Without a body, there is no physical pain.


And you base this on what?


----------



## Oggie (May 29, 2003)

watcher said:


> And you base this on what?


Physiology.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> If you are talking about me here, you are 100% wrong, I'm LDS; a convert of 17 years now.
> 
> This was one of the reasons I left the Protestant Church of my childhood and early adulthood, what kind of sadistic entity would set things up to eternally torment someone in a lake of fire? and how could anyone believe in that "god" and justify it. No mainstream Christian has been able to answer that yet - they always mumble something about 'us doing it to ourselves' then they usually get all huffy when I point out what I did (that this God they believe in set up the rules and the lake of fire for the express purpose of eternal torment).
> I guess you are not the one that will finally be able to answer me.


So you are saying there is no punishment for spitting on God? You can just ignore Him and His commandments and when you leave this world He will just forget all of that?


----------



## FourDeuce (Jun 27, 2002)

Depends on how you define "loving", I guess. A "loving" person(or being) doesn't punish the people it supposedly loves just because they refuse to worship it, at least not by any definition of "loving" I've ever heard.
I don't change the meaning of words I use just to excuse the actions of supreme beings.:cowboy:


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

mnn2501 said:


> If you are talking about me here, you are 100% wrong, I'm LDS; a convert of 17 years now.
> 
> This was one of the reasons I left the Protestant Church of my childhood and early adulthood, what kind of sadistic entity would set things up to eternally torment someone in a lake of fire? and how could anyone believe in that "god" and justify it. No mainstream Christian has been able to answer that yet - they always mumble something about 'us doing it to ourselves' then they usually get all huffy when I point out what I did (that this God they believe in set up the rules and the lake of fire for the express purpose of eternal torment).
> I guess you are not the one that will finally be able to answer me.



Any of us can post anything we want; but after 17 years, regardless of what is posted (and I've been a Christian, and one who studies what he believes, at that), it would change nothing. I've debated and discussed topics like this (to include this topic) both here and elsewhere at length; and I don't think I've seen one person's mind changed.

You're hung up on how God could create a lake of fire; my point is that regardless of WHY He set it up, there's an escape from it. People will either rail against the escape, or the fact that it was created - or both - and use that as justificaton for a lack of belief. Again, one's quarrel isn't with me; I don't make the rules. :shrug:


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

Kung said:


> Any of us can post anything we want; but after 17 years, regardless of what is posted (and I've been a Christian, and one who studies what he believes, at that), it would change nothing. I've debated and discussed topics like this (to include this topic) both here and elsewhere at length; and I don't think I've seen one person's mind changed.
> 
> You're hung up on how God could create a lake of fire; my point is that regardless of WHY He set it up, there's an escape from it. People will either rail against the escape, or the fact that it was created - or both - and use that as justificaton for a lack of belief. Again, one's quarrel isn't with me; I don't make the rules. :shrug:


I just wanted to remind you that you HAVE seen someone's mind changed from all the debating, or at least it has contributed to the change of mind/heart. It's happened with two different people on two different forums.  Just sayin'. (although admittedly, one to atheism, and one to catholicism)


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

watcher said:


> So you are saying there is no punishment for spitting on God? You can just ignore Him and His commandments and when you leave this world He will just forget all of that?


Where do you think I said that?????!!!

What I don't believe is that burning in a lake of fire forever is real.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Kung said:


> I don't make the rules. :shrug:


 What I don't understand is why would anyone want to worship a god that created that rule?


----------



## ChristyACB (Apr 10, 2008)

mnn2501 said:


> What I don't understand is why would anyone want to worship a god that created that rule?


Exactly!

And since I don't believe in it at all and seem functionally incapable of believing in anything that doesn't have physics behind it, then wouldn't I be considered one of those disabled folks like the severely retarded or the water brain babies or crack babies or FAS babies that will never know enough to "accept" the deal? Therefore, innocent? I mean, since I was born functionally incapable of magical thought, doesn't that also count?

So, if I'm wrong...which I'm not...then I'll go all lawyer on him. If whoever this angry temper tantrum sky daddy is actually calls me on not using his name whenever I do a good or right thing (but I'm still doing the right thing but ALL that matters is, of course, if I mutter the magical phrases while doing it) then I'll say...Dude! It's your fault since you made me without the ability to engage in magical thinking! I'm pretty sure if I'm wrong...which I'm not...that he'll be all cool and take me over the speed lane where all the FAS, crack, water brain and other messed up kids are. Of course...all those lovely christian Mommies and Daddies who leds lives that led to FAS and crack babies will be going to another line if they didn't mutter the magical words after they took each drink or smoked each hit. 

Magic words...gotta LOVE that. Excuses everything.

However, I'm not wrong so alas, when I die it's just all over..poof.


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

ChristyACB said:


> Exactly!
> 
> And since I don't believe in it at all and seem functionally incapable of believing in anything that doesn't have physics behind it, then wouldn't I be considered one of those disabled folks like the severely retarded or the water brain babies or crack babies or FAS babies that will never know enough to "accept" the deal? Therefore, innocent? I mean, since I was born functionally incapable of magical thought, doesn't that also count?
> 
> ...


Wow...tell us how you REALLY feel! 

I can understand how you feel. I sincerely can. I've been there, more or less, before in my life. I may not agree with this way of thinking now, but I defend your agency to feel this way and believe this way. The only exception I want to make is that there IS physics behind the possibility of the existence of "God".


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> Where do you think I said that?????!!!
> 
> What I don't believe is that burning in a lake of fire forever is real.


As I said I'm not hung up on what the punishment is or isn't. Lake of fire, having to stand on one foot, putting a fly in your ear, doesn't matter. 

I do have to ask if you think the punishment is eternal?


----------



## ChristyACB (Apr 10, 2008)

watcher said:


> As I said I'm not hung up on what the punishment is or isn't. Lake of fire, having to stand on one foot, putting a fly in your ear, doesn't matter.
> 
> I do have to ask if you think the punishment is eternal?


Wow, must be a realllllly realllly disturbed and vindictive creep. Think about what sort of serious mental defective requires eternal torture because you didn't use their name before being a really great person and doing really great things. I guess some people realllly need to claim all the credit.

LOL...


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

watcher said:


> I do have to ask if you think the punishment is eternal?


In the sense you stated, no I don't, I believe that some people will be cut off from God eternally knowing that they themselves were the cause - thats the punishment.

Let's use the example you cited earlier of spitting on God -- do you think ETERNAL, never ending punishment of any kind is a fair sentence for doing that?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> However, I'm not wrong


That's ONE *opinion*


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

ChristyACB said:


> Exactly!
> 
> And since I don't believe in it at all and seem functionally incapable of believing in anything that doesn't have physics behind it, then wouldn't I be considered one of those disabled folks like the severely retarded or the water brain babies or crack babies or FAS babies that will never know enough to "accept" the deal? Therefore, innocent? I mean, since I was born functionally incapable of magical thought, doesn't that also count?
> 
> ...


LOL, the funny thing is I said the same exact thing you did about going all lawyer. We LDS do not believe in the magic word theory and eternal punishment and many other things many main stream christians believe. The LDS religion is the only religion that ever made sense to me.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's ONE *opinion*


 and yours is another opinion, and mines a third, etc.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> and yours is another opinion, and mines a third, etc


Exactly
Some seem to think theirs is FACT


----------



## thequeensblessing (Mar 30, 2003)

mnn2501 said:


> The LDS religion is the only religion that ever made sense to me.


Amen!! :clap:


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

ChristyACB said:


> Exactly!
> 
> And since I don't believe in it at all and seem functionally incapable of believing in anything that doesn't have physics behind it, then wouldn't I be considered one of those disabled folks like the severely retarded or the water brain babies or crack babies or FAS babies that will never know enough to "accept" the deal? Therefore, innocent? I mean, since I was born functionally incapable of magical thought, doesn't that also count?
> 
> ...


I'm really sorry to see you stating your views in this manner.


----------



## bluesky (Mar 22, 2008)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Exactly
> Some seem to think theirs is FACT


Yep - I guess we all tend to do that but as I've asked before, how is someone "knowing" something any more valid than me "knowing" the exact opposite? In matters of faith, it's exactly that - faith. None of us _really_ know, even though we say we do - actually what we do is _believe_ and that's not the same as _knowing_.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

AngieM2 said:


> I'm really sorry to see you stating your views in this manner.


x2.

TQB - yes, true, but as you said, one chose to convert to atheism; and the other to catholicism (which I personally have no issue with to a CERTAIN extent).


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> In the sense you stated, no I don't, I believe that some people will be cut off from God eternally knowing that they themselves were the cause - thats the punishment.


As I have said what the actual punishment is doesn't really matter. For one thing we can't know what the actual punishment for disobedience will be.




mnn2501 said:


> Let's use the example you cited earlier of spitting on God -- do you think ETERNAL, never ending punishment of any kind is a fair sentence for doing that?


Look at it this way. You are suddenly transported to somewhere where the rule of law says if you paint your house pink you will be shot in both knees. Even though you know the law you paint your house pink. You are arrested and at your trial you say its not fair to be shot for painting your house pink. What do you think the judge will tell you? The odds are he'd tells you that its not up to you to decide what's fair, you knew the law and justice demands the law be followed therefore you will be shot.

Do you really think you are going to stand before God and tell Him you didn't follow His rules is because you didn't think they were "fair" and He's going to say "By golly, you are right, I never thought of it that way. Come on into Heaven."?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

mnn2501 said:


> LOL, the funny thing is I said the same exact thing you did about going all lawyer. We LDS do not believe in the magic word theory and eternal punishment and many other things many main stream christians believe. The LDS religion is the only religion that ever made sense to me.


So do you believe in eternal rewards?


----------



## Guest (Oct 1, 2010)

Proving once again that the biggest brains have the biggest hissies.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

I'm fairly intelligent, and yet I'm not exactly lying on the ground beating it with my fists sobbing hysterically.


----------



## Guest (Oct 1, 2010)

LOL, neither am I!!!


----------



## FourDeuce (Jun 27, 2002)

mnn2501 said:


> What I don't understand is why would anyone want to worship a god that created that rule?


How do people usually react to a PERSON who creates rules like that and then insists everybody follow the rules? Most people consider a person like that a "bad" person, but if they say a "supreme being" did the exact same thing, that thing is magically a "good" thing. I've always found that interesting, how the people who are fond of claiming that morality is absolute seem to want to make all kinds of exceptions to their own rules.:nana:


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Yep - I guess we all tend to do that but as I've asked before, *how is someone "knowing" something any more valid than me "knowing"* the exact opposite?


It's NOT

That's what I said

The problem is when one thinks their *opinion *is "fact"


----------



## bluesky (Mar 22, 2008)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It's NOT
> 
> That's what I said
> 
> The problem is when one thinks their *opinion *is "fact"


I was agreeing with you. Sorry it didn't come across that way.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Oggie said:


> A sad reflection on non-thinking followers.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


http://www.pewforum.org/Other-Beliefs-and-Practices/U-S-Religious-Knowledge-Survey.aspx

Well duh.
I scored 14 out of 15 answering this question wrong:
*11.* According to rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, is a public school teacher permitted to read from the Bible as an example of literature, or not?
I said they are not permitted.
Why?
Because that is what EVERY TEACHER EVER TOLD ME.
So of course I got it wrong.

Look at the questions.
They are talking about "religions". If you can read a calendar, you can get 90% of the questions right.

Of course Athiest and Agnostics "know" stuff. It's 'book' knowledge. They 
read about all different kinds of religions, because they are not in a committed relationship with Christ!

Now......
I will say, that 'shame on churches / preachers' for not equipping Followers of Christ with the Knowledge and Wisdom to go out and Preach the Gospel. 
That's why we have these mega churches....
Run out, get someone, take them to church, listen to this awesome speaker.

Um, if you are a follower of Christ, you have the Holy Spirit.....no greater Speaker exists. Anywhere. Ever.

Churches are designed to bring people in, entertain them, make them feel good, take their money, and off you go.
That is NOT what Christ taught. That is NOT what the Word says.

So all though this survey is bupkis, Those who Call themselves by His Name, need to reevaluate their Walk with Him....and rethink what goes on in church.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I was *agreeing with you*. Sorry it didn't come across that way.


LOL
It's so rare I guess it caught me by surprise


----------



## HOTW (Jul 3, 2007)

If G-D created ALL things why is there even a debate about the lake of fire?

Faith is different from religion you can have faith but not a religion. Is religion so important to G-D? I think the balance falls much heavier on the faith side. He did not set forth a religion in the beginning, only when he saw how Man was, shall we say, "screwing up" did He set down rules to abide by. If G-D knows our decisions why have choices, some ask? So that we may learn from our own mistakes so when we stand before our maker we can know right from wrong and be able to stand behind our decisions. We make our own Journey for that is the difference between man & Beast, we have knowledge to make choices, they rely on instinct.


----------



## Callieslamb (Feb 27, 2007)

FourDeuce said:


> How do people usually react to a PERSON who creates rules like that and then insists everybody follow the rules? Most people consider a person like that a "bad" person, but if they say a "supreme being" did the exact same thing, that thing is magically a "good" thing. I've always found that interesting, how the people who are fond of claiming that morality is absolute seem to want to make all kinds of exceptions to their own rules.:nana:


Doesn't this depend on WHY a supreme being would make the 'rule'? God isn't out to manipulate us into a comic stage production. His laws are to help us find joy, peace, happiness. You are over generalizing on your last sentence. Not all people that believe in morality's absolutes make exceptions and not all of them are out to condemn others if they choose not to agree.


----------



## Callieslamb (Feb 27, 2007)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> Churches are designed to bring people in, entertain them, make them feel good, take their money, and off you go.


No. Not all churches.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

HOTW said:


> If G-D created ALL things why is there even a debate about the lake of fire?


Why? In my mind, that's easy. Bluntly put, if it wasn't the lake of fire, it would be (and often has been) something else. Everyone's got a reason for why they don't agree/believe; it's convenient. Not that I understand everything about my own faith - which is why I'll be studying it until the day I die. But while many DO know why they don't believe, I know many MORE that have myriad reasons for not believing, when the reasons are rather silly.

Like the whole Psalm 137:9 Scripture, which reads "Happy is the one who takes your babies and smashes them against the rocks!" Of course, that's 'proof' that God supports infanticide.



It takes about 2 minutes of exegesis to discover that it was NOT God who supported it, but a victim of a Babylonian raid, who was essentially saying "You're gonna get yours, pal! See how YOU like it!"


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

> There are those on this forum, many of them "Christian" who would disagree with you...Knowing him ain't enough as far as their concerned...Ya gotta pays your dues, got to Church, be visible to your fellow "Christians" or you just ain't up to par.


the only thing that counts is do I try to live the way God tells me to in His word. I really honestly do not care what other people think. 



> Faith isn't enough. Anyone can say they believe in God.


Saying you believe is not faith. Faith is acting on that belief so that others can see it with out you saying anything.



> Now......
> I will say, that 'shame on churches / preachers' for not equipping Followers of Christ with the Knowledge and Wisdom to go out and Preach the Gospel.


That is why we have the Bible. God expects us individually to confirm what the preacher says in the word. Preachers are human too and they will get it wrong. Scripture is not human and will not be wrong.


----------



## Guest (Oct 3, 2010)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> Now......
> I will say, that 'shame on churches / preachers' for not equipping Followers of Christ with the Knowledge and Wisdom to go out and Preach the Gospel.
> That's why we have these mega churches....
> Run out, get someone, take them to church, listen to this awesome speaker.
> ...


Agreed.

I get amazed at the number of Christians I run into who are born again and going to church and yet don't know the most basic tenets. IOW, they are not learning how to grow spiritually.


----------



## FourDeuce (Jun 27, 2002)

Callieslamb said:


> Doesn't this depend on WHY a supreme being would make the 'rule'?
> 
> *Not to me, it doesn't. If a Supreme Being wants me to worship him, he better obey the rules he makes up for me. If he doesn't even meet my standards for a decent human being, I certainly wouldn't worship him as a Supreme Being.*
> 
> God isn't out to manipulate us into a comic stage production. His laws are to help us find joy, peace, happiness. You are over generalizing on your last sentence. Not all people that believe in morality's absolutes make exceptions and not all of them are out to condemn others if they choose not to agree.


I never said they ALL did, but I still find it ironic that many of the same people who claim that morality is absolute(and objective) also claim that all those moral "laws" don't apply to their own Supreme Being. If there is anybody those laws don't apply to, they're not absolute.
You may say that SOME people who believe in absolute morality don't make exceptions, but I can't recall ANY person who believes in a god saying that their god did something "bad" or morally wrong, even when the actions of that god would be called morally wrong if a human did them.


----------

