"I don't believe that anyone knows where they go when they die. If anything, God would have final judgment on that. Why can't all religions just be a path to God? Everyone has the same intentions."


The Bible explicates the opposite of that, in 1 John 5:12-13-

He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

Here is God's witness, as clear and concise as it could possibly be. On the other hand, the witness of man says that all roads lead to God. We are told that sincerity is the most important thing. As long as you are good intentioned, God will surely receive you. But I will believe the witness of God over the witness of man.

He says that either you have Jesus Christ, and thus eternal life, or you are still dead in your sins. Now, the narrow-mindedness of this is that it's basis is from the Holy Bible, so of course if you don't believe in the Holy Bible then this probably won't apply to you in your own opinion.

KlawedFlaw : I would like to say that the first thing you wrote would not be a valid point, because we are talking about God here. I mean, he is omnipotent. It is not hard for Him to do that. We might not be able to comprehend it, but there are so many things that we cannot comprehend about God.

Here's a thought about the day thing: The Bible states that each day is represented when "there was evening, and there was morning"

Finally, everything has a similar "blueprint" or "building blocks" of life, but that is irrelevant with evolution.

NotJon : I can be ok with Christians are still Christians if they believe in an old earth or a young earth (even though the view of old earth would imply that Jesus would be lying in Mark 10:6)"

However:

"Religion adapts."
Manmade religion, yes, but God's truth would remain.

"Your beliefs may be slightly different from the church in the next town, but, you are all Christians."
The keywords are "slightly" and "church"...which means it is a different denomination which disagrees in secondary issues, but they all agree to the primary issues. So they all ARE Christians.

"I don't believe that anyone knows where they go when they die. If anything, God would have final judgment on that."
God already decided that. tRIUNE gave a good example, but there are plenty more from the Bible that exclusively says how a person is saved or not. A shorter example is from what Jesus said: "I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish." (Luke 13:3)

"Why can't all religions just be a path to God? Everyone has the same intentions."
We can see the exclusivity of how the Bible states about that. From the beginning, idolatry, the worshiping of other gods is a sin, in the new testament, it talks about the "narrow gate" and "path" leads to life, while the "wide gate" and "path" leads to destruction....Jesus says there will be those that would call Him Lord, but He would say that He will not know them. Even in Galatians, it talks about if there is a person or an angel who shares a different gospel other than the one being shared here, let them be "condemned." There are all these verse that are showing how exclusive Christianity is.

"I can be ok with Christians are still Christians if they believe in an old earth or a young earth (even though the view of old earth would imply that Jesus would be lying in Mark 10:6)""

It's only a lie if you interpret it to be so. I don't think any of us as Christians believe that humans came from monkeys and eventually came from asexual microorganisms so this wouldn't be a lie....at least not how I read it.

I think that Christian's cannot be considered any more narrow minded than any other person. This is called prejudice. Now if the thread were is christianity (the religion) narrow minded it would be different. But i get the point and the only thing I have at this point is I blame a lot of the intolerance on the style of the preachers that especially newer christian churces use. Their goal is usually to get u "fired up" about being a christian, when people get "fired up" they also tend to get full of themselves which I believe leads to not only narrow minded thinking, but ignorant behavior as well. I think it's important to add here that I am a Christian and I do get fired up over the lord at times (what christian doesn't?), which leads me right back into my prejudice statement, not all of us get the same way when were fired up, not all of us are narrow minded, not all of us are anything except for our stance on how to get into heaven.

play4fun : You know, this is all translated to English. This is not the word of God in its truest form. Much of it is vague. Adam and Eve for example are the first two humans in the world, yet, that would mean that everyone comes from them. Wouldn't that mean that incest would have had to have taken place for there to have been more people? As I recall, they only had two sons, so, that would mean that Eve would still be the only woman around. The point is, the Bible does not have an answer to everything. Isn't it possible, that it is open to different interpretations? I may read it one way and you may read it another way. I may see stories that provide examples and you may read it in its most literal sense. Did you know that there are Bibles all around the world with some additional books added? Many of the stories in most of the English Bible left out many of the stories about some of the bad things that Jesus was said to have done as a youth.

"So they all ARE Christians."

Yes, that was what I said.

"We can see the exclusivity of how the Bible states about that. From the beginning, idolatry, the worshiping of other gods is a sin, in the new testament, it talks about the "narrow gate" and "path" leads to life, while the "wide gate" and "path" leads to destruction....Jesus says there will be those that would call Him Lord, but He would say that He will not know them. Even in Galatians, it talks about if there is a person or an angel who shares a different gospel other than the one being shared here, let them be "condemned." There are all these verse that are showing how exclusive Christianity is."

This is what I was saying. This "narrow gate" and "wide gate" can be open for interpretation. Some interpretations of the the word of God are called Judaism and Islam. People fought over religion for 200 years in the Crusade and what was the point? The word of God is not set in stone, if it was, then there wouldn't be so many interpretations and what not. Every devout of their religion says the same thing. Something along the line of: "What I believe is right and I will be rewarded while those who believe in different things are wrong and will not be rewarded." Of course differing devouts will be as passionate about their religion and may be just as against another. Who would know who is right?

There wasn't really a place for this so I'll just leave it here: You get your religion from your parents. It is up to you what you do with it.

I'm Atheist, and I find that the vast majority of Christians do not respect out faith (or lack there of). Not to say all Christians are terrible people, it's just a respect thing. I tolerate religions, and their people, so the same should be both ways. Just rambling though.

legacyme3 : I only call myself Christian since I don't have that quote that actually describes my beliefs on hand... Oh wait. *goes on Metalsucks.com*

"I feel compelled to broaden the parameters by saying that I am more of an agnostic under the banner of Christianity. That means that while I have an unerring belief in the basic ideals of Christianity, within those wide parameters I am searching. This is not out of any sense of being unfulfilled, but borne more from a need to be constantly genuine." - Samantha Escarbe from Virgin Black

Got it.

legacyme3 : I think that if a Christian does not respect someone's being an atheist then that is narrow-minded. Honestly though I find it easier to believe there is a God than not to believe . But disagreements should not lead to disrespect.

NotJon : "The word of God is not set in stone, if it was, then there wouldn't be so many interpretations and what not."

I'll quote this from here --

There may be ten suggested interpretations, but at least nine of them are false. The interpretation is what the writer intended with the vocabulary he used. But this does not limit application, because although the interpretation is single, application may be multiple. It is the work of the Holy Spirit to illumine hearts to see a variety of applications to life. But the applications, to be valid, must be true to the author’s intended interpretation as expressed in the written text.

"Every devout of their religion says the same thing. Something along the line of: "What I believe is right and I will be rewarded while those who believe in different things are wrong and will not be rewarded." Of course differing devouts will be as passionate about their religion and may be just as against another. Who would know who is right?" -NotJon

I think what differentiates Christianity from the others is the recognition of God Himself residing within you in the Person of the Holy Spirit. It is one thing to say that you are a Christian and another to recognize the Holy Spirit within you. What other religion can claim the literal recognition of God within?

geeogree : Well I can't quite say everyone, but yeah I know what you mean. And I'm sure you know what was getting at.


NotJon : "You know, this is all translated to English."

I'm going to stop you right there. (don't worry, I read the rest of what you wrote, but this is the key point) So are many of the books that you have today...if you read western lit, you will get a bunch of greek, italian, old english type books that are translated to English and they are deemed reliable to scholars...with that being said, I answered this topic from this thread post already: https://www.vizzed.com/vizzedboard/thread.php?id=12193&ppp=20&page=0#192909

I didn't bother answering the questions that you asked for two reasons. 1) I don't think you are looking for answers to them. 2) I think we should address the heart of what the problem is, which is the reliability of the Bible.

If you really want me to answer them, there are answers for those questions that you asked, because these have been asked before (I can't say that there are answers to everything, cuz I'm not God, I'm know wayyy less than what he knows.) But there is such a thing as THEOLOGY, "Faith seeking understanding" The understanding in faith. Christianity is not some feeling, personal opinion based club, it's a declaration and seeking of truth.

As for the narrow gate, wide gate verse, here is the actual verse: "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." (Matthew 7:13-14)

Now I know there are some different interpretations for some verses, but not all of them. This one is exclusive as well, because you need to look at the context, that is why I also gave cross reference verse. And you can tell from the verses before and after this verse what Jesus is talking about, it is call context. You do that for your English books as well. You cannot randomly interpret a text, you need to look at context.

Now here is where it intrigues me. You said that you are a Christian, but for the past few posts, you have rejected so many things about Christianity, from the Bible, to beliefs of what Christians believe, etc...so I was curious, what do you believe that makes you a Christian?

Are Christians as a whole narrow-minded?

The answer is no. There are many Christians that are very broad minded and are very knowledgeable about other religions and can accept the religions for what they are and don't hold religions against people.

Are Some Christians narrow-minded?

The answer is yes. There are some extreme Christians that won't talk to non-christians and persuade others to follow their path. There are christians that take it to the limit and the second their church says that they have done "research" about a certain topic and say it is not right for Christians to eat doughnuts or something, will be the first one to follow without to much proof. I think that we should understand other religions and not take knowledge as a sin. Actually, if we are true Christians, then understanding other people's religion's and beliefs should actually make are beliefs firmer and strengthen our belief in god.

Is the Bible true?

I believe some parts can actually be used as historical records. When the Israelites were in the Babylonian cities, they created the first written copy of the bible to preserve their heritage and beliefs. I also some parts could have been proved using the moabite stone, but sadly we don't have it (Darn you people that destroyed it thinking that there was gold inside ) Another famous example is the writings in the library founded by aserbatapau (I don't know how to spell his name ) It had the result of the Assyrian-Isrealite war exactly with the same details, except with different outcomes.

Should the Bible be interpreted literally?

I believe that we should treat the Bible like a history book. Just because in a history book some priest hanged himself by his thumb doesn't mean that we should do the same. Likewise, with the bible we don't need to follow it word for word. We should listen to the 10 commandments, behave morally and ethically right, but not take it in the extreme.

play4fun : Being part of a religion doesn't mean that you believe every single fact of it. There are many parts of Christianity that I disagree with, but that doesn't make me non-christian.

I believe that nobody can prove that someone is not part of a religion if they say they are. Everyone has their differences and everyone can't be expected to believe everything that is spoonfed to them. Actually that is more narrow minded and blind to do so. Before I readily believe something that is told to me, I usually take the time to research it and understand the topic completely before choosing what I believe. If I decide that I don't believe in a certain thing from the Bible or told to me by the Pastor doesn't mean that I'm a different religion, it just means that I'm not blindly going to believe anything.

((Ouch my hands hurt, i'll end this post now))

play4fun : "I can't say that there are answers to everything, cuz I'm not God, I'm know wayyy less than what he knows."

This is all that I wanted to hear. There is so much that we don't know. For all I know everything that I said could be wrong and everything that you said could be right. Anything is possible. I'm just saying, I don't like to place judgment over other people or claim that I am the authority over everything.

"Now I know there are some different interpretations for some verses, but not all of them. This one is exclusive as well, because you need to look at the context, that is why I also gave cross reference verse. And you can tell from the verses before and after this verse what Jesus is talking about, it is call context. You do that for your English books as well. You cannot randomly interpret a text, you need to look at context."

There is nothing random about interpretation. Everyone has different experiences, upbringings, and whatever that everyone sees different things from the same thing.

"what do you believe that makes you a Christian?"

I believe that it would be ignorant to claim that there is no higher, divine being out there. People who say that, must know more than the rest of us. I believe that the Bible is a book of examples and stories to learn from. It is a place to go when there is nothing else. I believe that if you take everything as it is vaguely written literally, you're missing the point. You have to consider where the people who wrote these verses were coming from. They did not understand the world around them as much as we do now. We all want answers. We also like people to behave; we like order. The Bible was what it needed to be in its time. It was something to give people answers, morals, and put many people in their place. However, one must look at the evolution of religion. It is not so different from science. Both were one in the same for a long time. It just seems close-minded and backwards to not look at the world now and the knowledge that we have gained and just brush it off. I mean, it's good to be skeptical, however, after a while it just gets ridiculous. I can understand someone having faith; proof is not needed in a matter of faith. Just be respectful towards others with differing opinions.

tRIUNE : "What other religion can claim the literal recognition of God within?"

Buddhism?

http://thisiswarhuhwow.ytmnd.com/

I had to do it. This thread is becoming interesting, and intriguing.

NotJon : Buddhism denies the existence of a personal God. In other words of what I'm saying is, to receive the Holy Spirit, the Person of the triune God, one must be born-again. It's with this new nature that you recognize that God is within you, because it is God who is supernaturally controlling every aspect of your life.

Example would be recognizing that you have new thoughts and motivations that you normally would not have had; and yet now they come naturally to you, as of not premeditated or of yourself but from God the Spirit within you.

tRIUNE : God gave us free will. So everything would be possible because he gave us life, however, we choose our actions ourselves.

NotJon : "This is all that I wanted to hear. There is so much that we don't know."

Now wait a sec, I said that just to reaffirm that I am human just like everyone else, but we can say what we do know. And the claim from Christianity is that Christians do know what person goes to heaven or hell.

"There is nothing random about interpretation. Everyone has different experiences, upbringings, and whatever that everyone sees different things from the same thing"
This is sooo true, but this also would lead to wrong interpretations of the Bible. We do not want to impose or input our understandings, experiences, and presuppositions in the text (we can list them to be aware, but not put them in) The text has a context and authorial intent which can be for a certain time or a specific context. We need to practice exegesis, and taking what the text says, not putting our understanding into it.

"I believe that the Bible is a book of examples and stories to learn from. It is a place to go when there is nothing else. I believe that if you take everything as it is vaguely written literally, you're missing the point"
Here is what the Bible states about itself, now you can agree or disagree, but know that this is the Christian view of what the Bible is: "All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness," (2 Timothy 3:16)

If you read what's in it, you can tell that there are soo many things that are not vague. I do agree with you that we cannot take EVERYTHING literally. When Jesus said I am the door, it's not that He is literally a door with hinges and a knob. But there are things that are clear. This is not just about morals, the Bible is stating that it is true, even Jesus Himself said that He is THE truth.(John 14:6)

"proof is not needed in a matter of faith."
I will actually talk about this in a different thread.

Here is an example of what Christians believe, it is with confidence and have specific things that they actually believe in:
"I believe in God the Father Almighty; Maker of heaven and earth.
And in Jesus Christ His only Son our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; the third day He rose from the dead; He ascended into heaven; and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit; the holy catholic Church; the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen." (Apostles Creed)

septembern : For your first two points, I would like to understand what you mean by "narrow-minded". Are you saying that Christians are not to evangelize because it is narrow-minded?

For your second 2 points, the question is whether the Bible is the authoritative word of God: https://www.vizzed.com/vizzedboard/thread.php?id=12193&ppp=20&page=0#192909

"Being part of a religion doesn't mean that you believe every single fact of it. There are many parts of Christianity that I disagree with, but that doesn't make me non-christian."

Well, maybe you need to clarify what you disagree on and what it means to be a Christian, because there are some secondary issues and debates (calvinism vs Arminianism, pre-trib or post-tri, baptism theology, etc) that are in the Christian community, but there are primary topics that cannot be disputed if you are a Christian, otherwise, you would be standing on crumbling ground in terms of your theology as a whole. So please clarify.

"I believe that nobody can prove that someone is not part of a religion if they say they are. Everyone has their differences and everyone can't be expected to believe everything that is spoonfed to them. Actually that is more narrow minded and blind to do so."
You don't understand that a conversion is not a headknowledge type of thing, it is a transformation of a person's life. God would give you a new heart with new desires when someone is truly saved. Converts are called a "new creation." The Bible talks about false converts and those that call Jesus "Lord Lord", and He will say "I never knew you."

"Before I readily believe something that is told to me, I usually take the time to research it and understand the topic completely before choosing what I believe. If I decide that I don't believe in a certain thing from the Bible or told to me by the Pastor doesn't mean that I'm a different religion, it just means that I'm not blindly going to believe anything."

It is true that you should test everything, but you cannot say that if you disagree with something in the Bible, you are still a Christian, especially when Christians believe that the Bible is the authoritative word of God. If you disagree with the pastor, that's fine, because he is human too, and He could have human error on interpretation (sometimes very bad ones lead to heresy), but you compare him back to the authority of scripture. Anyways, back to before, you should clarify your position.

So, how does everyone interpret the verse about men having long hair?

That verse was only relevant to the time period, as sexual perverts had long hair at that time. And, what about girls who wear men's clothing? Are they going against God? Are men who wear skinny jeans going against God? There's a verse about crossdressing.

KlawedFlaw : That verse should be in Leviticus...I think. Well, these old testament laws under the old covenant, while when Jesus died and rose again, it is the beginning of the new covenant. The Old Covenant was basically like this. "Follow God as a nation, I'll bless you; disobey, I'll curse you and use other nations to punish you" The laws were there to establish a standard for a holy, priestly nation for the nation of Israel. These priestly and tradition laws (not moral laws) are used to distinguish the kingdom of Israel from the pagan idolatrous nations around the area. Shaving hair was associated with pagan nations at that time. Now that we are under the new covenant (and reaffirmed because it was not prohibited in the new testament), it's fine with shaving.

Crossdressing is different. It says in the Bible in the old testament to not wear opposite gender's clothing. In our culture, jeans, pants, and slacks are wore by both male and female, but they do not distinguish whether a person is male or female. However, dressing on a regular basis as a way of life to make oneself look as the opposite gender and live like it would go against Romans 1:24-27. So this is prohibited even under the new covenant.

play4fun : I believe that God would forgive people that are truly repentant.

I'm sorry but how do we know what the correct interpretation is of the Bible? Yes, yes you speak of context, but, what good does context do you if the context too is unclear? The punishments are often clear, but, just the nature of the way the Bible is written is not as simple as I would think. Instead of say: Only Christians can go to Heaven, everyone else will go to Hell. We instead get: "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it" (Matthew 7:13-14). Perhaps vague is the wrong word; this is a hassle. Why can't it just be simply stated? Why is there this poetic jargon?

"All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness," (2 Timothy 3:16).

Wouldn't this support my point? Wouldn't correction imply that things would be unclear or in need of an update? Wouldn't this also mean that you can use it as you wish? More than one option is given.

play4fun : No. There is a verse in the New Testament that says something about long hair. I know it. It's in one of Paul's letters.

I'm not saying that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit make you sinless, but rather He makes you to sin less. My point here is that the Holy Spirit bears witness with the spirit of a Christian that he or she is a child of God, and if a child then an heir of eternal life.

Other religions have a way of salvation but it is only something that can be obtained, but there is not an assurance that you will obtain it. It's not set in stone; you will only have to wait until you find out. For the Christian, Jesus is the assurance of eternal life. I think that because of this simplicity most reject it. But for me, I would rather know now if I have eternal life.