A problem that very few Christian Fundamentalists ever consider

[uscitizen]

I never understood why Christians who insist on how real the threat of hell is almost never seem to take it seriously.

If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy? I would think that the vast majority of them would live a life of almost total poverty because they'd give all of their money to charities. They'd live like a monk. Even if, say, there were only 10 million "true" christians in the United States, I can't see why all of them are not giving up all of their worldly wealth at the very least. Maybe they could buy a safe enough place to live, decent clothes and food and such. But little if any real luxuries should be allowed.

We would have no truly homeless or extremely poor people in the U.S. if we had that many true Christians.

Further, you'd have to do more than just give up everything you own. You'd have to be very dedicated to preaching and studying the Bible. So of those 10 million Christians, tons of them should be leaving the U.S. and going to the most dangerous, anti-Christian nations in the world and preaching the gospel.

The ones who stayed behind would be still be living like monks, studying every detail of the Bible to make sure they got it right. Who knows how much you might have gotten wrong, and therefore damned your eternal soul?

In fact, since so many people need organ donation, shouldn't all christians jump at the chance to donate their organs, even if they can't live without them? "greater love hath, no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends". Even plenty of other christians could use a donated organ. Don't do it, and theres a much greater chance of going to hell.

Shouldn't they have special monastaries or something to raise children in? If you really think associating with the world will get them sent to hell forever because they could so easily be deceived into an unchristian lifestyle, why would you even think of raising them in normal society? Ignoring them in such a way seems sinful enough to get you sent to hell.

I just don't understand it. If you really do believe in the threat of hell and trying to avoid it, why not do everything you can? Obviously, very few Christians do.

Which would probably mean that they're going to hell.

Funny how non Christians who refuse to know anything about Christianity think they can tell Christians what they need to do. If you knew anything you would know that being a Christian is as simple as believing in Christ. God sent Jesus because he knew that us humans cannot DO anything to be Holy, we failed miserably at that. We are Holy through our faith in Christ. Salvation is through Christ by the grace of God, not by anything we can do.

So a murdering theiving child molesting drug addicted pedophile is going to heaven if he believes in Jesus/god?

Not sure I would want to spend eternity with someone like that.

 

[alan1]

I never understood why Christians who insist on how real the threat of hell is almost never seem to take it seriously.

If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy? I would think that the vast majority of them would live a life of almost total poverty because they'd give all of their money to charities. They'd live like a monk. Even if, say, there were only 10 million "true" christians in the United States, I can't see why all of them are not giving up all of their worldly wealth at the very least. Maybe they could buy a safe enough place to live, decent clothes and food and such. But little if any real luxuries should be allowed.

We would have no truly homeless or extremely poor people in the U.S. if we had that many true Christians.

Further, you'd have to do more than just give up everything you own. You'd have to be very dedicated to preaching and studying the Bible. So of those 10 million Christians, tons of them should be leaving the U.S. and going to the most dangerous, anti-Christian nations in the world and preaching the gospel.

The ones who stayed behind would be still be living like monks, studying every detail of the Bible to make sure they got it right. Who knows how much you might have gotten wrong, and therefore damned your eternal soul?

In fact, since so many people need organ donation, shouldn't all christians jump at the chance to donate their organs, even if they can't live without them? "greater love hath, no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends". Even plenty of other christians could use a donated organ. Don't do it, and theres a much greater chance of going to hell.

Shouldn't they have special monastaries or something to raise children in? If you really think associating with the world will get them sent to hell forever because they could so easily be deceived into an unchristian lifestyle, why would you even think of raising them in normal society? Ignoring them in such a way seems sinful enough to get you sent to hell.

I just don't understand it. If you really do believe in the threat of hell and trying to avoid it, why not do everything you can? Obviously, very few Christians do.

Which would probably mean that they're going to hell.

Atheists like you and Cammmmmpbell make the rest of us honest atheists look bad.
Seriously, why do you care how a religious person lives their life when it has no impact on you?

 

[rdean]

I never understood why Christians who insist on how real the threat of hell is almost never seem to take it seriously.

If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy? I would think that the vast majority of them would live a life of almost total poverty because they'd give all of their money to charities. They'd live like a monk. Even if, say, there were only 10 million "true" christians in the United States, I can't see why all of them are not giving up all of their worldly wealth at the very least. Maybe they could buy a safe enough place to live, decent clothes and food and such. But little if any real luxuries should be allowed.

We would have no truly homeless or extremely poor people in the U.S. if we had that many true Christians.

Further, you'd have to do more than just give up everything you own. You'd have to be very dedicated to preaching and studying the Bible. So of those 10 million Christians, tons of them should be leaving the U.S. and going to the most dangerous, anti-Christian nations in the world and preaching the gospel.

The ones who stayed behind would be still be living like monks, studying every detail of the Bible to make sure they got it right. Who knows how much you might have gotten wrong, and therefore damned your eternal soul?

In fact, since so many people need organ donation, shouldn't all christians jump at the chance to donate their organs, even if they can't live without them? "greater love hath, no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends". Even plenty of other christians could use a donated organ. Don't do it, and theres a much greater chance of going to hell.

Shouldn't they have special monastaries or something to raise children in? If you really think associating with the world will get them sent to hell forever because they could so easily be deceived into an unchristian lifestyle, why would you even think of raising them in normal society? Ignoring them in such a way seems sinful enough to get you sent to hell.

I just don't understand it. If you really do believe in the threat of hell and trying to avoid it, why not do everything you can? Obviously, very few Christians do.

Which would probably mean that they're going to hell.

Believe me, without health care and at minimum wage, most already do live a life of poverty. The lack of education will keep them there. It's why the single largest group in America getting food stamps is right wing conservatives.

 

[Cammmpbell]

I fish with 2 strict Christian fundamentalist Baptists. They are great guys and very generous with their time and fellowship. I enjoy their company each time they come.
Every time we go somewhere and are unwinding after a couple of beers the subject turns to wondering where we are going to go after death. This is a large issue with both of them. They ask me don't I think about that and wonder and I always say no, I rarely if ever think about that.
I find this to be the norm with most of the Christian fundamentalists I know. They are so concerned with where they are going to end up that is why they are so strict with the religous, political, family and community beliefs. They are constantly working on their idea of where they are going to go and worryiing if they are fundamantal, strcit, conservative and religous enough to get there.

So they have already sold what they had and given it to the poor:

James 2

14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

Matthew 5

48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

 

[code1211]

I never understood why Christians who insist on how real the threat of hell is almost never seem to take it seriously.

If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy? I would think that the vast majority of them would live a life of almost total poverty because they'd give all of their money to charities. They'd live like a monk. Even if, say, there were only 10 million "true" christians in the United States, I can't see why all of them are not giving up all of their worldly wealth at the very least. Maybe they could buy a safe enough place to live, decent clothes and food and such. But little if any real luxuries should be allowed.

We would have no truly homeless or extremely poor people in the U.S. if we had that many true Christians.

Further, you'd have to do more than just give up everything you own. You'd have to be very dedicated to preaching and studying the Bible. So of those 10 million Christians, tons of them should be leaving the U.S. and going to the most dangerous, anti-Christian nations in the world and preaching the gospel.

The ones who stayed behind would be still be living like monks, studying every detail of the Bible to make sure they got it right. Who knows how much you might have gotten wrong, and therefore damned your eternal soul?

In fact, since so many people need organ donation, shouldn't all christians jump at the chance to donate their organs, even if they can't live without them? "greater love hath, no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends". Even plenty of other christians could use a donated organ. Don't do it, and theres a much greater chance of going to hell.

Shouldn't they have special monastaries or something to raise children in? If you really think associating with the world will get them sent to hell forever because they could so easily be deceived into an unchristian lifestyle, why would you even think of raising them in normal society? Ignoring them in such a way seems sinful enough to get you sent to hell.

I just don't understand it. If you really do believe in the threat of hell and trying to avoid it, why not do everything you can? Obviously, very few Christians do.

Which would probably mean that they're going to hell.

Funny how non Christians who refuse to know anything about Christianity think they can tell Christians what they need to do. If you knew anything you would know that being a Christian is as simple as believing in Christ. God sent Jesus because he knew that us humans cannot DO anything to be Holy, we failed miserably at that. We are Holy through our faith in Christ. Salvation is through Christ by the grace of God, not by anything we can do.

So a murdering theiving child molesting drug addicted pedophile is going to heaven if he believes in Jesus/god?

Not sure I would want to spend eternity with someone like that.

I think, and this is from observation only, that when a person accepts Jesus Christ as his personal Savior, the life of that person is immediately and irrevocably changed.

Think of Paul on the road to Damascus.

 

[Gadawg73]

I fish with 2 strict Christian fundamentalist Baptists. They are great guys and very generous with their time and fellowship. I enjoy their company each time they come.
Every time we go somewhere and are unwinding after a couple of beers the subject turns to wondering where we are going to go after death. This is a large issue with both of them. They ask me don't I think about that and wonder and I always say no, I rarely if ever think about that.
I find this to be the norm with most of the Christian fundamentalists I know. They are so concerned with where they are going to end up that is why they are so strict with the religous, political, family and community beliefs. They are constantly working on their idea of where they are going to go and worryiing if they are fundamantal, strcit, conservative and religous enough to get there.

So they have already sold what they had and given it to the poor:

James 2

14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

Matthew 5

48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Don't know, don't care. I do not judge my friends by that criteria.

 

[Ariux]

I believe you have missed my point entirely.

Just so I know what I am dealing with:

Are you a Christian? If so, what is the basis of your Christianity?

Are you familiar with the Bible?

Let's try to raise the level of the conversation.

Did I say something that suggests I'm not familiar with the Bible? What is the point that I missed? ...

Raise the level as high as you want. So far, you've been critical of people living moral lives (following "don'ts"). Do you have anything to add?

 

[buckeye45_73]

I never understood why Christians who insist on how real the threat of hell is almost never seem to take it seriously.

If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy? I would think that the vast majority of them would live a life of almost total poverty because they'd give all of their money to charities. They'd live like a monk. Even if, say, there were only 10 million "true" christians in the United States, I can't see why all of them are not giving up all of their worldly wealth at the very least. Maybe they could buy a safe enough place to live, decent clothes and food and such. But little if any real luxuries should be allowed.

We would have no truly homeless or extremely poor people in the U.S. if we had that many true Christians.

Further, you'd have to do more than just give up everything you own. You'd have to be very dedicated to preaching and studying the Bible. So of those 10 million Christians, tons of them should be leaving the U.S. and going to the most dangerous, anti-Christian nations in the world and preaching the gospel.

The ones who stayed behind would be still be living like monks, studying every detail of the Bible to make sure they got it right. Who knows how much you might have gotten wrong, and therefore damned your eternal soul?

In fact, since so many people need organ donation, shouldn't all christians jump at the chance to donate their organs, even if they can't live without them? "greater love hath, no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends". Even plenty of other christians could use a donated organ. Don't do it, and theres a much greater chance of going to hell.

Shouldn't they have special monastaries or something to raise children in? If you really think associating with the world will get them sent to hell forever because they could so easily be deceived into an unchristian lifestyle, why would you even think of raising them in normal society? Ignoring them in such a way seems sinful enough to get you sent to hell.

I just don't understand it. If you really do believe in the threat of hell and trying to avoid it, why not do everything you can? Obviously, very few Christians do.

Which would probably mean that they're going to hell.

The answer lies in that you dont know about Christianity. We all sin and fall short, not a single person outside of Christ is perfect.

Morality is important in christianitly but it's also important if you're not a christian. Rome was built on a very moral and dependable society, then they got lazy and decadent and booom, here comes the Huns, Vandals, goths and no more roman empire. So the idea is that a moral society is far better than an immoral society. The founders said that for the Constitution to work you have to be moral. If you're immoral then why have the Constitution, this explains liberals and the past 50 years, they ignore it.

Now back to religion, since we all fall short the main thing is to be a christian and believe in Easter, you belive in that, you're gonna be ok, you dont, you really need to worry.

 

[barry1960]

I believe you have missed my point entirely.

Just so I know what I am dealing with:

Are you a Christian? If so, what is the basis of your Christianity?

Are you familiar with the Bible?

Let's try to raise the level of the conversation.

Did I say something that suggests I'm not familiar with the Bible? What is the point that I missed? ...

Raise the level as high as you want. So far, you've been critical of people living moral lives (following "don'ts"). Do you have anything to add?

I did not say that you were unfamiiar with the Bible. I was merely trying to ascertain what your background was.

As far as being critical of people living moral lives, that is not my point. I believe that living a moral life is a good thing and it should be the goal of every Christian. As you correctly pointed out this is not that common. Certainly Jesus wants believers to conform to His life and this includes living morally. I, myself live a moral life.

The drinking is a side bar. I included it because it is one of many don't that Christians advocate. As far as it being right or wrong, Jesus turned water into wine, so it would be difficult to say drinking in and of itself is a sin. I abstain because I believe it improves my Christian witness. No needt o latch onto this subject.

My point is that Christians can do so much more than merely living a moral life. Eventually God will bring His kingdom to earth, but I believe that it is a Christian's responsibility to bring it to pass to the greatest degree possible right here, right now. A moral life is not unique to the Christian life. Many people who are not Christians live moral lives, are good spouses, and good parents. If Christians are to be the light of the world, then we must do more.

In Jesus time the Pharisee's were good rule followers. They perfect the don't life, but Jesus condemned them. In the parable of the sheep of the goats, Jesus spoke of helping others, not just living a moral life. In fact, those who did not reach out to those in need where rejected.

The American protestant church seems to encourage adding Jesus to your life to make yourself a better person. A true and noble idea, but an insufficent one. Jesus calls us to a transformed life, one that will be marked by reaching out to the spiritual and physical needs of others., especially those less fortunate than ourselves.

The church seems to have the reputation of being judgmental when it takes stands against abortion, homosexuality and sex outside marriage. All good causes, but if love is not demonstrated, it is insufficient and will have the effect of repelling those from Christ.

As far as labeling me a failed Christian I must agree with you. I could do better, even though I read my Bible regularly, am a good spuse and parent, and live a moral life. However I fail in the spirit of Jesus' two commandments:

1) Love God with all your strength
2) Love your neighbor as yourself

I have no problem having a discussion with you, but I have no intention of wrestling with a pig. I will just end up caked with mud and the pig will be as dirty as ever. can we raise the level of discussion?

 

[AmericanFirst]

I never understood why Christians who insist on how real the threat of hell is almost never seem to take it seriously.

If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy? I would think that the vast majority of them would live a life of almost total poverty because they'd give all of their money to charities. They'd live like a monk. Even if, say, there were only 10 million "true" christians in the United States, I can't see why all of them are not giving up all of their worldly wealth at the very least. Maybe they could buy a safe enough place to live, decent clothes and food and such. But little if any real luxuries should be allowed.

We would have no truly homeless or extremely poor people in the U.S. if we had that many true Christians.

Further, you'd have to do more than just give up everything you own. You'd have to be very dedicated to preaching and studying the Bible. So of those 10 million Christians, tons of them should be leaving the U.S. and going to the most dangerous, anti-Christian nations in the world and preaching the gospel.

The ones who stayed behind would be still be living like monks, studying every detail of the Bible to make sure they got it right. Who knows how much you might have gotten wrong, and therefore damned your eternal soul?

In fact, since so many people need organ donation, shouldn't all christians jump at the chance to donate their organs, even if they can't live without them? "greater love hath, no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends". Even plenty of other christians could use a donated organ. Don't do it, and theres a much greater chance of going to hell.

Shouldn't they have special monastaries or something to raise children in? If you really think associating with the world will get them sent to hell forever because they could so easily be deceived into an unchristian lifestyle, why would you even think of raising them in normal society? Ignoring them in such a way seems sinful enough to get you sent to hell.

I just don't understand it. If you really do believe in the threat of hell and trying to avoid it, why not do everything you can? Obviously, very few Christians do.

Which would probably mean that they're going to hell.

Funny how non Christians who refuse to know anything about Christianity think they can tell Christians what they need to do. If you knew anything you would know that being a Christian is as simple as believing in Christ. God sent Jesus because he knew that us humans cannot DO anything to be Holy, we failed miserably at that. We are Holy through our faith in Christ. Salvation is through Christ by the grace of God, not by anything we can do.

So a murdering theiving child molesting drug addicted pedophile is going to heaven if he believes in Jesus/god?

Not sure I would want to spend eternity with someone like that.

If he is repentant, meaning giving up or turning away from his/her sin. The only unforgivable sin is denying, or blaspheming, the Holy Ghost.

 

[Avatar4321]

So a murdering theiving child molesting drug addicted pedophile is going to heaven if he believes in Jesus/god?

Not sure I would want to spend eternity with someone like that.

Then repentence would be a good idea.

 

[Ariux]

As far as being critical of people living moral lives, that is not my point.

Then you should think more about how it sounds when you say, oozing sarcasm, "Oh yea, and follow a few don't." There's a movement in Christianity that is proudly non-critical of immoral behavior (if that behavior is Politically Correct).

A moral life is not unique to the Christian life. Many people who are not Christians live moral lives, are good spouses, and good parents. If Christians are to be the light of the world, then we must do more.

It's a pretty bad witness when certain non-Christian groups live more moral lives than Christians. (That's everybody else, when the example is divorce.)

In Jesus time the Pharisee's were good rule followers. They perfect the don't life, but Jesus condemned them. In the parable of the sheep of the goats, Jesus spoke of helping others, not just living a moral life. In fact, those who did not reach out to those in need where rejected.

Jesus condemned the Pharisees for not following the rules. He accused them of not following the rules when the public's eye wasn't on them. He accused them of using tradition as an excuse to not follow the rules. And, I believe you're trying to excuse not following the rules by denigrating God's rules as a list of "don'ts" that Christians follow in lieu of following Christ.

The church seems to have the reputation of being judgmental when it takes stands against abortion, homosexuality and sex outside marriage. All good causes, but if love is not demonstrated, it is insufficient and will have the effect of repelling those from Christ.

How is this love demonstrated? By not taking stands against abortion, homosexuality, and sex outside of marriage? Why is it that only Christians are accused of being judgmental? Everyone has their standards. Look at liberals going scorched earth over anyone [white] accused of using a racial slur. Look at cities banning the Boy Scouts from public properties. So on and so on.

You're condemning Christians for having Christian standards, to please non-Christians. That's not love.

 

[barry1960]

As far as being critical of people living moral lives, that is not my point.

Then you should think more about how it sounds when you say, oozing sarcasm, "Oh yea, and follow a few don't." There's a movement in Christianity that is proudly non-critical of immoral behavior (if that behavior is Politically Correct).

A moral life is not unique to the Christian life. Many people who are not Christians live moral lives, are good spouses, and good parents. If Christians are to be the light of the world, then we must do more.

It's a pretty bad witness when certain non-Christian groups live more moral lives than Christians. (That's everybody else, when the example is divorce.)

In Jesus time the Pharisee's were good rule followers. They perfect the don't life, but Jesus condemned them. In the parable of the sheep of the goats, Jesus spoke of helping others, not just living a moral life. In fact, those who did not reach out to those in need where rejected.

Jesus condemned the Pharisees for not following the rules. He accused them of not following the rules when the public's eye wasn't on them. He accused them of using tradition as an excuse to not follow the rules. And, I believe you're trying to excuse not following the rules by denigrating God's rules as a list of "don'ts" that Christians follow in lieu of following Christ.

The church seems to have the reputation of being judgmental when it takes stands against abortion, homosexuality and sex outside marriage. All good causes, but if love is not demonstrated, it is insufficient and will have the effect of repelling those from Christ.

How is this love demonstrated? By not taking stands against abortion, homosexuality, and sex outside of marriage? Why is it that only Christians are accused of being judgmental? Everyone has their standards. Look at liberals going scorched earth over anyone [white] accused of using a racial slur. Look at cities banning the Boy Scouts from public properties. So on and so on.

You're condemning Christians for having Christian standards, to please non-Christians. That's not love.

I sought common ground. You twist everything I write for argument's sake. No sense wrestling with a pig.

 

[Marie888]

I never understood why Christians who insist on how real the threat of hell is almost never seem to take it seriously.

If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy? I would think that the vast majority of them would live a life of almost total poverty because they'd give all of their money to charities. They'd live like a monk. Even if, say, there were only 10 million "true" christians in the United States, I can't see why all of them are not giving up all of their worldly wealth at the very least. Maybe they could buy a safe enough place to live, decent clothes and food and such. But little if any real luxuries should be allowed.

We would have no truly homeless or extremely poor people in the U.S. if we had that many true Christians.

Further, you'd have to do more than just give up everything you own. You'd have to be very dedicated to preaching and studying the Bible. So of those 10 million Christians, tons of them should be leaving the U.S. and going to the most dangerous, anti-Christian nations in the world and preaching the gospel.

The ones who stayed behind would be still be living like monks, studying every detail of the Bible to make sure they got it right. Who knows how much you might have gotten wrong, and therefore damned your eternal soul?

In fact, since so many people need organ donation, shouldn't all christians jump at the chance to donate their organs, even if they can't live without them? "greater love hath, no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends". Even plenty of other christians could use a donated organ. Don't do it, and theres a much greater chance of going to hell.

Shouldn't they have special monastaries or something to raise children in? If you really think associating with the world will get them sent to hell forever because they could so easily be deceived into an unchristian lifestyle, why would you even think of raising them in normal society? Ignoring them in such a way seems sinful enough to get you sent to hell.

I just don't understand it. If you really do believe in the threat of hell and trying to avoid it, why not do everything you can? Obviously, very few Christians do.

Which would probably mean that they're going to hell.

Can try to encourage, but doubt you will do this. All I can tell you is read the book of Romans and ask God to reveal to you Who Jesus Christ is. Then read it again, and again, and again, until you are dead in the body nor can read it any more.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=KJV


Or if you can't stand to read the whole book, read Romans 8, over and over and over, and ask Him yourself what is the truth.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans 8&version=KJV


"We", ourselves do not make ourselves Christians. "We" are not righteous. It is only by HIS righteousness are we saved. His, and His alone. Think of it as a big classroom. Are there any two students alike? Are there more learned than others? Do all need growth in some area? Doesn't pride affect us all, even when we can't see it ourselves?

We never stop learning in this life. We never stop learning to deal with our own sin in this life and how to better love others. What helps us all though, is when we take our eyes off of "others" sin, and focus on our own issues, and most importantly, looking to Him first.


.

 

[code1211]

I never understood why Christians who insist on how real the threat of hell is almost never seem to take it seriously.

If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy? I would think that the vast majority of them would live a life of almost total poverty because they'd give all of their money to charities. They'd live like a monk. Even if, say, there were only 10 million "true" christians in the United States, I can't see why all of them are not giving up all of their worldly wealth at the very least. Maybe they could buy a safe enough place to live, decent clothes and food and such. But little if any real luxuries should be allowed.

We would have no truly homeless or extremely poor people in the U.S. if we had that many true Christians.

Further, you'd have to do more than just give up everything you own. You'd have to be very dedicated to preaching and studying the Bible. So of those 10 million Christians, tons of them should be leaving the U.S. and going to the most dangerous, anti-Christian nations in the world and preaching the gospel.

The ones who stayed behind would be still be living like monks, studying every detail of the Bible to make sure they got it right. Who knows how much you might have gotten wrong, and therefore damned your eternal soul?

In fact, since so many people need organ donation, shouldn't all christians jump at the chance to donate their organs, even if they can't live without them? "greater love hath, no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends". Even plenty of other christians could use a donated organ. Don't do it, and theres a much greater chance of going to hell.

Shouldn't they have special monastaries or something to raise children in? If you really think associating with the world will get them sent to hell forever because they could so easily be deceived into an unchristian lifestyle, why would you even think of raising them in normal society? Ignoring them in such a way seems sinful enough to get you sent to hell.

I just don't understand it. If you really do believe in the threat of hell and trying to avoid it, why not do everything you can? Obviously, very few Christians do.

Which would probably mean that they're going to hell.

The answer lies in that you dont know about Christianity. We all sin and fall short, not a single person outside of Christ is perfect.

Morality is important in christianitly but it's also important if you're not a christian. Rome was built on a very moral and dependable society, then they got lazy and decadent and booom, here comes the Huns, Vandals, goths and no more roman empire. So the idea is that a moral society is far better than an immoral society. The founders said that for the Constitution to work you have to be moral. If you're immoral then why have the Constitution, this explains liberals and the past 50 years, they ignore it.

Now back to religion, since we all fall short the main thing is to be a christian and believe in Easter, you belive in that, you're gonna be ok, you dont, you really need to worry.

Reality check.

The Romans were a vicious and blood thirsty civilization. Their savagery and organization combined to build and maintain their empire which thrived on tribute from conquered nations and tribes and used the slave labor of the conquered to maintain their life styles.

The Roman Empire thrived for about 800 years. Our "Empire Age" has lasted for about 60 years so far and it's looking a little pessimistic for an additional 740.

The sexual behavior of the average Roman would land him in jail between the pedophilia and the bi-sexuality and the rampant and pervasive behaviors of the open marriages.

The society itself was quite stratified and movement between classes was generally rare and usually based on success in the military looting foreign lands for profit.

The Roman civilization was the one that originally both rose from and conquered the etruscans. The sexual behavior of the Etruscans was as best amoral- not much different than a college campus in the 70's.

The thing that created the most prosperity for Rome was the Pax Romana that the far flung legions maintained.

 

[Ariux]

I sought common ground. You twist everything I write for argument's sake. No sense wrestling with a pig.

That's twice you accused me of being a pig rather than addressing my points. I'm not twisting anything. I see you for who you are, and what you're saying. You are the real pig. You are a hypocrite, the failed Christian that the first poster is talking about.

First post: If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy?

You: There should be a radical difference in the way Christians live their lives that extends far beyond the don'ts.

The first poster remarks on Christians falling far short of holy lives. You just blow off his concern and then you dive into gibberish about "sacrificially showing God's love." (If you bothered explaining that phrase, I'm sure it would come off as sounding like you're saying Christians should be doormats.)

 

[barry1960]

I sought common ground. You twist everything I write for argument's sake. No sense wrestling with a pig.

That's twice you accused me of being a pig rather than addressing my points. I'm not twisting anything. I see you for who you are, and what you're saying. You are the real pig. You are a hypocrite, the failed Christian that the first poster is talking about.

First post: If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy?

You: There should be a radical difference in the way Christians live their lives that extends far beyond the don'ts.

The first poster remarks on Christians falling far short of holy lives. You just blow off his concern and then you dive into gibberish about "sacrificially showing God's love." (If you bothered explaining that phrase, I'm sure it would come off as sounding like you're saying Christians should be doormats.)

First, I did not call you a pig. The reference comes from a farmer's saying "If you wrestle with a pig, you will both end up covered with mud." The meaning is that is your engage with an uncivil person, you will simply sink to their level, rather than influencing the uncivil person. Hopefully this clear up your misunderstanding. This means I am calling you uncivil which is self-evident from your posts.

Second, I have already have stated the importance of living moral lives. In fact, by all appearances I live a moral life. Refer to my second post and read it more carefully (in fact, when you read posts i suggest you look for areas of agreement first, then expound of points where their might be disagreement).

I have not blown off living a moral life. Nor do I advocate living our lives as doormats. We demonstrate God's love by helping others, not just living moral lives.

You state that you see me as I am, but in reality you have built up a strawman of who you perceive me to be. This strawman is twisted by your own prejudices and anger. What made you this way? You state I am a hypocrite, but on what basis? I LIVE a moral life.

Now I will seek points of agreement between us:

1) Living a moral life is important
2) Taking a stance against abortion is honorable
3) A majority of Christians do not know or follow Jesus words in the Bible.

Now points of possible debate:

1) As Christians we must go beyond living moral lives, we must demonstrate God's love by helping others.

2) Living moral lives alone is insufficient, even non-Christians can do such

Wisdom is that i should not engage you, but here is one more try.

 

[Avatar4321]

I sought common ground. You twist everything I write for argument's sake. No sense wrestling with a pig.

That's twice you accused me of being a pig rather than addressing my points. I'm not twisting anything. I see you for who you are, and what you're saying. You are the real pig. You are a hypocrite, the failed Christian that the first poster is talking about.

First post: If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy?

You: There should be a radical difference in the way Christians live their lives that extends far beyond the don'ts.

The first poster remarks on Christians falling far short of holy lives. You just blow off his concern and then you dive into gibberish about "sacrificially showing God's love." (If you bothered explaining that phrase, I'm sure it would come off as sounding like you're saying Christians should be doormats.)

And how exactly do you determine that they aren't doing everything they can do to be holy? Do you have some instrument or tool that can examine their soul?

I think God is alot more merciful than some tend to think, and more just than others do.

 

[Ariux]

1) Living a moral life is important

Q: If one REALLY believes in eternal damnation for not being a Christian, why would they not do everything in their power to be holy?

You: As Christians we must go beyond living moral lives, we must demonstrate God's love by helping others.

You look like you're dodging the question.

The First Post also asks why Christians don't do more to help people, but it does so by giving specific examples rather than the nebulous "demonstrate God's love by helping others."

 

[Ariux]

I think God is alot more merciful than some tend to think, and more just than others do.

If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” and again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

I think God is a lot less merciful than some tend to think.