jaybird18c

Jesus is the head of his church. Why would what other people do embarrass me? Now that's silly.

"Christianity" has a marketing department? So some people's misrepresentation of what Jesus looks like for selfish reasons is one of your big hangups? What has that got to do with anything real?

That's not true at all. There's nothing wrong with being rich. Joseph went from being a slave to being rich and powerful. He used it for good. What's bad is loving your wealth more than God. That's the point of the scripture you referenced. But I think you knew that.

No. No one knows what he looked like. However, Jesus was a 1st century Jew. So he would have looked like a 1st century Jew.

Well…the good news is for all tribes.

Yeah…yeah… And we all know that bad people do bad things to other people and always have, religious or not. And it’s also true that the bad things people do in the name of Christianity in no way takes away from the truth of the biblical message, which is peace to mankind through Jesus Christ.

But we just KNOW that most wars and deaths were because of religious zealots though, right!

“some 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history categorize only 123 as being religious in nature. This is only 6.98% of all wars. The percentage is less than half that, at 3.23%, if you subtract those waged in the name of Islam (66). The relationship between religion and war, which skeptics have depicted, is in stark contrast to the facts. Despite this reality, people like Richard Dawkins, who in his book The God Delusion, claim that without religion there would be no labels by which to decide whom to oppress and whom to avenge. Critics of religion continue to make such claims which allude to religion as the ultimate factor responsible for world oppression and violence, and in doing so seem to insinuate that it in some way has anything to do with the coherence of the religious view. Still, it is clear that religion has not played a significant role in most of the world’s wars, though even if it had, that fact would be irrelevant in trying to prove a religious viewpoint false.” “secular reasoning and naturalistic philosophies have actually been involved in the most bloodshed. The number of people who perished in religious conflicts pales in comparison to the slaughter and butchery which has taken place under non-religious leaders. Ideas have consequences, and in the 20th century they contributed to the democide of an unprecedented number of people. Russia’s communist USSR gave rise to both Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Illich Lenin whom murdered 42,672,000 and 4,017,000, China’s communist Mao Tse-tung and militarist/fascist Chiang Kai-sheck whom murdered 37,828,000 and 10,214,000, communist Cambodia’s Pol Pot whom murdered 2,397,000, Germany’s fascist Adolf Hitler whom murdered 20,946,000, and Imperial Japan’s militarist/fascist Tojo Hideki whom murdered 3,990,000. From 1917 to 1987, in a span of under 70 years, roughly 121,332,000 human beings were murdered by these government regimes.” https://blogs.uoregon.edu/dylanjtjohnson/2016/04/21/has-religion-been-a-chief-cause-of-wars-throughout-history/

An awful amount of people were killed in the name of secularism.

Well…that’s accomplishing something then!

No hostility. Just trying to show empathy. It’s got to be hard when all that free speech is up in your face all the time. It’s even worse when it’s shoved down your throat!

There seem to be a lot of things “in your face” all the time. Theology is just all up in your face, isn’t it? That’s rough man.

Just two true statements from different perspectives. The command from our perspective is to "repent and believe" (Mark 1:15). But is anyone "willing" to believe apart from an act of God? I say no. From God's perspective, as with Ezekiel's vision in the valley of dry bones, They will remain dead unless God breathes life into them.

If you say you're something, but you're missing a key component of what that something is, are you still that something just because you identify with or feel like you're that something?

I'm not saying people throughout history haven't killed each other for countless reasons including religion, even in the name of christianity. What I'm saying is that you don't see many christians running around killing others over their faith. It's just a stupid generalization. But those seem to be in generous supply here.

He would if you ever got over yourself.

Here's an example, regardless of Catholic/Protestant, regardless of denomination. Jesus is the Son of God. The deity of Jesus Christ is a historical, fundamental, and essential belief included in what it means to be christian. A mormon does not believe in the deity of Christ. Therefore, they would be considered as a christian cult. That's just a classification. I mean, they and others calls themselves christian. However, they don't believe in a fundamental aspect of what a biblical christian believes. Anyone can call themselves anything they want. It doesn't make them that thing. A person calls themselves a skydiver and hangs out at the DZ. But if they don't own or can borrow a rig to jump. Are they really a skydiver?

We may disagree on non-essential details. However, there are core fundamental beliefs that every christian agrees on if they are in fact christian.

Yeah...you see lots of christians running around killing folks over their faith.

Muslims who die for their faith are obviously convinced and committed. I'm not arguing against that. However, I would say that they probably wouldn't die for their cause if they knew it to be false. Likewise, Christian martyrs also would not have died for what they knew was false or a lie. They knew It was true. They and over 500 others witnessed it. They died heinous deaths because they refused to deny it. That gives credibility and reason to believe. "Chuck Colson, former special counsel to President Nixon and founder of Prison Fellowship, said that when the Watergate scandal broke, he and 11 other men—some of the toughest and most powerful in the world—met secretly, came up with a story, and swore to maintain it. But these powerful men broke. Quickly. Colson said, I know the resurrection is a fact, and Watergate proved it to me. How? Because 12 men testified they had seen Jesus raised from the dead, then they proclaimed that truth for 40 years, never once denying it. Everyone was beaten, tortured, stoned, and put in prison. They would not have endured that if it weren’t true. Watergate embroiled 12 of the most powerful men in the world—and they couldn’t keep a lie for three weeks. You’re telling me 12 apostles could keep a lie for 40 years? Absolutely impossible."

Now THAT is just silly.

Kind of like when gowlerk posted the video "Reason to Believe" by Tim Hardin earlier. Singing is good!

Amazing grace how sweet the sound That saved a wretch like me I once was lost, but now I'm found Was blind but now I see 'Twas grace that taught my heart to fear And grace my fears relieved How precious did that grace appear The hour I first believed Through many dangers, toils, and snares I have already come This grace that brought me safe thus far And grace will lead me home When we've been here ten thousand years Bright, shining as the sun We've no less days to sing God's praise Than when we first begun Amazing grace how sweet the sound That saved a wretch like me I once was lost, but now I'm found Was blind but now I see

No. That’s not it. But what they did supports my belief. Miracles don’t change the heart. You can always reason them away. You’ll always ask for a bigger and better sign. God is the only one who can change the heart. Miracles just point to the truth. God caused me to humble myself, my conscience being more aware of the depth of my sin and my ultimate fate apart from Christ. He also made me realize the lengths to which he went on my behalf to secure eternal life with him.

(1 Corinthians 1:18) For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.