Do you believe in the Devil?

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

It's quite clear that the only path to saviour is through Jesus Christ but that doesn't sound right so people reinterpret it

Explain yourself more on this.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I was pointing out that God doesn't give a crap about morality.

Luckily, the Biblical text disagrees with you on this one in countless incidences.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

The only people he will not accept into heaven are those who did not find the bible more convincing than, say, the qur'an or the bhagavad gita.

Well, simply put. An offer of salvation has been made for you. Your sins, will render you guilty. You have the option of a) accepting your guilt, and realising that you need forgiveness, or b) not accepting your guilt, resorting to your pride or c) rejecting it for a different ideology.

In b or c, ones sins will not be paid, and one will be rendered guilty. In situation a, one is willing to accept that one needs a Saviour, and one is willing to accept that Jesus Christ died for their sins, so that they can have another chance to put themselves right with God before the Final Judgement.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Not finding something convincing without supporting evidence is not immoral, in fact in a world where people engage in underhanded tactics to get you to accept their position it is to be encouraged, and yet it is the only thing that will not be forgiven.

How do you mean it is the only thing in the world that will not be forgiven. No doubt even disbelief can be forgiven, but only if one accepts that one needs forgiveness for it. One cannot be forgiven effectively unless one accepts that they need forgiveness.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I don't even see that there is anything to forgive tbh. This idea that bad things will happen to you if you don't accept what you're told is a classic cult tactic. You appeal to fear because you can't appeal to rationality

I don't appeal to any form of fear. I realise I have done things wrong in my life, and I want to put them right, and to aim to be a better person in the future in the knowledge of Christ. I have nothing to fear.

smokingman wrote: »

Maybe it's in reference to not being strong enough to take responsibility for ones own actions and choices without blaming/praising something external for their causes.

The funny thing is, accepting Jesus Christ, is taking responsibility for your own actions. One has to duly recognise that they have done wrong, before they can seek forgiveness. One has to turn themselves away from what is wrong, and to focus on what is just, honourable, and true in the world. I consider that to be taking much more responsibility than avoiding ones wrongdoing because it is uncomfortable.

Fink Goddie

Jakkass wrote: »

Mostly because it makes logical sense in comparison to the alternative of atheism or agnosticism. Lets deal with the weak-minded claim first though. I'm genuinely curious about that.

How is it logical to worship or believe in something that you have no proof is real, other than stories written by uneducated people years ago.

I worship the sun, i can see it in the sky, its has an effect on my life, i'm currently sitting here all tanned

philologos

Banter Joe wrote: »

Absolute stupidity.

If you haven't heard of Christianity and live a completely moral life, it's touch and go whether or not you're going to be tossed into the burning lake of fire.

On the other hand, if you're a serial rapist who turns it all around, converts to Christianity, and pleads forgiveness, you're good to go.

You can consider it whatever you wish.

If you haven't heard of Christianity, it's effectively up to God to determine your fate.

If you have been told about the Christian faith, and if you humble yourself, accept your wrongdoing, and accept that through Christ you need to change from your sin. You will be forgiven. By accepting Christ, you are born again, you are no longer the same person, but a new creation.

Christianity is a faith of mercy, for those who humble themselves enough to accept that they need to be forgiven.

Kipperhell

Jakkass wrote: »

It seems like nothing more than making excuses though. The State promoted atheism through it's media at the time, and destroyed places of religious worship, banned publication of religious material, and persecuted religious believers. Are we willing to accept that happened or not?

I'm saying both cases are motivated by evil.

Religions have done no less when in control. It makes just as much sense to accept it as human nature rather than claim an individual mystical character good or bad for these actions. You are making excuses for religious led states!

In my life time I have seen religious propaganda that puts lives in danger. I watched a great documentary showing a religious publicist run around trying to keep the fanatics quite so the message she wanted out was not shown in a true light.

Fink Goddie

Jakkass wrote: »

By accepting Christ, you are born again, you are no longer the same person, but a new creation.

Like transformers?? :pac::pac:

bakkiesbotha

John 14:6: I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Seems pretty clear to me. If we take the population of the world back in 1 AD, how many of them might have received this message? 1 percent of them?

What did God have against everyone else that he decided not to let them know how to get saved?

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

Explain yourself more on this.

the bible says that all those who believe in Jesus will have eternal life. It also says that the only way to savation is through Jesus. It does not add the caveat that people who didn't have the opportunity to hear of him get a free pass. That is something people added themselves.

Jakkass wrote: »

Well, simply put. An offer of salvation has been made for you. Your sins, will render you guilty. You have the option of a) accepting your guilt, and realising that you need forgiveness, or b) not accepting your guilt, resorting to your pride or c) rejecting it for a different ideology.

In b or c, ones sins will not be paid, and one will be rendered guilty. In situation a, one is willing to accept that one needs a Saviour, and one is willing to accept that Jesus Christ died for their sins, so that they can have another chance to put themselves right with God before the Final Judgement.

I can accept that I have done wrong but not finding a 2000 year old book convincing is not one of those things.

Jakkass wrote: »

The funny thing is, accepting Jesus Christ, is taking responsibility for your own actions. One has to duly recognise that they have done wrong, before they can seek forgiveness. One has to turn themselves away from what is wrong, and to focus on what is just, honourable, and true in the world. I consider that to be taking much more responsibility than avoiding ones wrongdoing because it is uncomfortable.

I can accept that that I have done wrong and atone for it without believing that a 2000 year old Jewish carpenter was the son of the creator of the universe. The fact is christianity claims that if two people live identical lives but one of them finds a different religion convincing and attempts to atone for his "sins" by appealing to his version of God, he will burn for eternity while the other guy gets eternal paradise. Both recognise they have "sinned" and both have attempted to atone for it but only one gets the reward. Christianity doesn't want you to humble yourself because of your sins, it wants you to humble yourself in front of them, anyone else won't do. That's not morality, it's a cult's method of keeping people in line

smokingman

Jakkass wrote: »

The funny thing is, accepting Jesus Christ, is taking responsibility for your own actions. One has to duly recognise that they have done wrong, before they can seek forgiveness. One has to turn themselves away from what is wrong, and to focus on what is just, honourable, and true in the world. I consider that to be taking much more responsibility than avoiding ones wrongdoing because it is uncomfortable.

Sorry Jackass, I don't buy that.
I'm not going to mock you or religion in general but my own view is that I am responsible for my actions and no-one else. Accepting jesus does not mean that you will inherently "turn away from what is wrong" and the atrocities done in any of the gods names will prove that but this isn't the point.
The point is that to think that your life is led for you with a guiding hand (akin to those who believe in fate, destiny etc) is foolhardy.
It discourages the real meaning of personal responsibility.

ShooterSF

When do we get a do you believe in bob thread?

philologos

Kipperhell wrote: »

Religions have done no less when in control. It makes just as much sense to accept it as human nature rather than claim an individual mystical character good or bad for these actions. You are making excuses for religious led states!

I never said they did. I'm not claiming that the Crusades are any better than the Soviet Union or any other state atheist regime. I'm merely saying, both were abuses of power, and both were ultimately Satanic because of the evil that they both unleashed to the world.

I remember reading about the Crusade to Jerusalem, and reading about the 4 inches of blood that ran through the city that day, and I couldn't help but be sickened. I thought to myself, if Jesus Christ were in that city at that time, wouldn't he but have wept at the mere destruction of it all.

Likewise, in the case of the 100 million people who died in those respective countries during the 20th century. Clearly repulsive.

All of these are evil, and the clear presence of evil, to be is a sign of Satan's manipulation in the world.

I amn't making any excuse for any State. I'm merely saying that evil has come in many different forms. I don't need to make an excuse for the Crusades, I regard them as evil. For some reason people want to make excuses for state atheism though.

Kipperhell wrote: »

In my life time I have seen religious propaganda that puts lives in danger. I watched a great documentary showing a religious publicist run around trying to keep the fanatics quite so the message she wanted out was not shown in a true light.

Evil comes in many forms. Twisted religion to political violence, to being motivated by a need to cleanse the land of religious belief. It comes in many different forms.

Fink Goddie wrote: »

How is it logical to worship or believe in something that you have no proof is real, other than stories written by uneducated people years ago.

I worship the sun, i can see it in the sky, its has an effect on my life, i'm currently sitting here all tanned

It's logical to me because it makes sense.

Click the links on my signature, they might help you out a bit more as to why I believe in the Christian faith. It's a pity I can't edit that post, because I have quite a few more that I have thought of since then.

It's not about absolute proof. I am willing to accept that there is a chance that I am wrong, but I don't believe that chance to be a very probable one on the God question.

To me, it is what indicates to me that God exists that is the main form of argument. That's the best we can do in religious debate. What evidence do I have that God is more likely to exist than not? Believe it or not, throughout a number of different ways of argumentation, there is actually a lot of evidence for God's existence. It all depends on how willing you are to research and find it.

If you are not willing, and if you have already answered these questions for yourself, there will be no benefit in anything I or anyone else has to say to you on it.

Kipperhell

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't appeal to any form of fear. I realise I have done things wrong in my life, and I want to put them right, and to aim to be a better person in the future in the knowledge of Christ. I have nothing to fear.

That would be the sin of pride right there!

There is something about the speck in somebodies eye and the log in your own too.

It incredibly arrogant for anybody to claim they know the full meaning of anybody else's words from reading something they wrote. That is then further compounded by the belief you were around in the moment that it has been understood correctly and you understood this interpretation 100%. That is not even considering the time lag of events

You commit the sin of pride by your actions on this thread and have so on others too. As I don't believe in sin it is not an insult but a reflection of the belief system you are commenting on.

A lot of spiritual feels IMHO are a sense of pride.

I personally will look at a persons actions and think they are responsible and not some other being.

Long Onion

Jakkass wrote: »

Mostly because it makes logical sense in comparison to the alternative of atheism or agnosticism.

I completely fail to see how belief in the devil makes any kind of logical sense. The whole fact that religion relies on faith in the unseen is proof positive of this.

Religion has caused as many deaths as your so called athiest wars, to classify one as 'athiest' and say the other was merely misguided is a cop out.

What is completely illogical is the belief that there is a supremely merciful being who is willing to let all kinds of evil be carried out every sodding day on this planet be it in his name or not. This is sadism.

P.S. the devil does exist - he is in the detail.

philologos

bakkiesbotha wrote: »

John 14:6: I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Seems pretty clear to me. If we take the population of the world back in 1 AD, how many of them might have received this message? 1 percent of them?

What did God have against everyone else that he decided not to let them know how to get saved?

Indeed, I believe in this, and I do believe that Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father. Other verses give cause to doubt on whether or not people who have never heard the Gospel will have a chance of salvation. I can only say I don't know, I am not going to make God's decision for Him.

smokingman wrote: »

Sorry Jackass, I don't buy that.
I'm not going to mock you or religion in general but my own view is that I am responsible for my actions and no-one else. Accepting jesus does not mean that you will inherently "turn away from what is wrong" and the atrocities done in any of the gods names will prove that but this isn't the point.
The point is that to think that your life is led for you with a guiding hand (akin to those who believe in fate, destiny etc) is foolhardy.
It discourages the real meaning of personal responsibility.

You're welcome to your own view. I'm only here to give my perspective and to give my understanding, it is up to you whether or not you accept this or reject this.

I personally believe I am responsible for my actions, hence why I believe that I need to recognise my faults, and bring them to God as well as putting them right in a social situation from one person to another. I believe accountability to God is just as important as accountability to one another.

I don't believe that my life is led for me with a guiding hand, infact I think if I wanted I could be very far from accepting God's grace. The point is that I can seek God for guidance and inspiration in my life, and I have decided to do that and to try my very best to listen to what God has to say to me via the Bible. I can only do my best, but I feel that being responsible, means being both accountable to your Creator, as well as being accountable to other individuals. Infact, the former can also affect the latter I have found.

As for the atrocities done in God's name, this has no bearing on what God has actually desired. It just shows that sinful men can abuse faith for their own goals. Pretty much as men can abuse atheism for their own goals. People can abuse politics for their own goals.

These atrocities, don't de legitimise the fact that Christianity is a way to accept ones responsibility and to move forward as moral beings in their communities.

Long Onion: It appears you missed the point in why I brought up state atheism. Please read my posts again.

the syco mentioned that religion has caused a lot of hatred in the past. I mentioned that the abuse of it can, just as the abuse of atheism has. I don't make excuses for the Crusades, they were wrong. However, there is nothing Christlike about either.

Banter Joe

Jakkass wrote: »

Indeed, I believe in this, and I do believe that Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father.

So you believe that every person that hasn't heard of Jesus won't get to heaven?

philologos

Banter Joe wrote: »

So you believe that every person that hasn't heard of Jesus won't get to heaven?

I believe that is up to God. Not up to me. There is doubt on that issue generally within Christianity. It all depends on the judgement of Jesus Christ, whoever will come through Him.

Edit: This has been discussed in the Christianity forum several times, if you want to follow the discussion on it you should search for threads there.

Smart Bug

Banter Joe wrote: »

So you believe that every person that hasn't heard of Jesus won't get to heaven?

That's the very excuse Christain missionaries in the past forced their religion on other cultures, in the process destroying their cultural identity and way of life introduced the teachings of Christ to the ignorant savages of Africa and the Americas.

Apologies, OT.

No, I don't believe in the divil/devil/beelzebub etc, tho if he did exist then the world'd be a more fun place, 'cos I'd imagine that vampires, werewolves, demons, (real) witches etc, and magic would exist also. That'd be cool.

Long Onion

To sum up then ...

cathysworld wrote: »

Aliens? Now, there's something that might just be possible.
But everlasting life?
Big demons sticking red-hot pokers up your arse for all eternity?
I don't think so.

DOOMED

redfacedbear wrote: »

Yes God and the Devil are both equally 'around'. Which is to say that they are both equally non-existant and therefore equally 'not around'.

DOOMED

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

"Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour" I Peter 5 8

SAVED

Fink Goddie wrote: »

Pics of the devil to prove he's real or GTFO!

DOOMED

garrincha62 wrote: »

By state atheist regimes I take it you are referring to Facist & Communist regimes. If this is the case then it should be noted that these regimes did not cause 100,000,000 deaths as a means of promoting atheism or furthering the cause of atheism.

REALLY DOOMED

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Those cases are down to the abuse of communism and political power in general. People overrode their better judgement because they were told to do so by an authority figure, because they had an irrational loyalty to that authority figure. Atheism and humanism are about reason and doing something against your better judgement because an authority figure tells you to is the antithesis of reason. Nowhere but from a Christian do you hear these countries called "atheist regimes", to everyone else they're communist, fascist, totalitarian and/or dictatorship regimes because everyone except those with a vested interest in thinking otherwise recognises that not believing in God was the motivation for those acts, irrational patriotism was. There is nothing in atheism that requires you follow anyone's instructions but the same cannot be said for fascism, communism and religion

SMOTE HIP AND THIGH

Jakkass wrote: »

It seems like nothing more than making excuses though. The State promoted atheism through it's media at the time, and destroyed places of religious worship, banned publication of religious material, and persecuted religious believers. Are we willing to accept that happened or not?

I'm saying both cases are motivated by evil.

FIRST THROUGH THOSE GATES.

Am I right yet Mr Jebus?

Banter Joe

Jakkass wrote: »

I believe that is up to God. Not up to me. There is doubt on that issue generally within Christianity. It all depends on the judgement of Jesus Christ, whoever will come through Him.

Edit: This has been discussed in the Christianity forum several times, if you want to follow the discussion on it you should search for threads there.

It's a simple yes or no answer about your beliefs specifically. If you don't want to answer that's fine.

philologos

Banter Joe wrote: »

It's a simple yes or no answer about your beliefs specifically. If you don't want to answer that's fine.

It's not a simple yes or no answer because I don't know what will happen in these cases. I know according to the Bible that those who reject the Gospel will be rejected themselves at the Final Judgement.

Again, as I have advised you, look up the discussion in the Christianity forum if you want further clarification on this.

philologos

Kipperhell wrote: »

That would be the sin of pride right there!

How is that pride? I have nothing to fear, because there is nothing to fear in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1). It certainly isn't because of my own works.

Kipperhell wrote: »

There is something about the speck in somebodies eye and the log in your own too.

I'm quite aware of that. I'm aiming to remove the log in my own.

Kipperhell wrote: »

It incredibly arrogant for anybody to claim they know the full meaning of anybody else's words from reading something they wrote. That is then further compounded by the belief you were around in the moment that it has been understood correctly and you understood this interpretation 100%. That is not even considering the time lag of events

I don't claim to know the full meaning of anything anyone else wrote. It will take a long time for me to expand my knowledge of the Bible. I can't help but think you have mistaken my post.

Kipperhell wrote: »

You commit the sin of pride by your actions on this thread and have so on others too. As I don't believe in sin it is not an insult but a reflection of the belief system you are commenting on.

You would need to show me what I have committed. In saying that I am a sinner, and in saying that I wish to become a better person in the knowledge of Christ I'm apparently "prideful"?

Kipperhell wrote: »

A lot of spiritual feels IMHO are a sense of pride.

If you say so.

Kipperhell wrote: »

I personally will look at a persons actions and think they are responsible and not some other being.

Your choice. I think that people can change through mercy.

Fink Goddie

Long Onion wrote: »

DOOMED

See you all in hell! :pac:

Kipperhell

Jakkass wrote: »

How is that pride? I have nothing to fear, because there is nothing to fear in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1). It certainly isn't because of my own works.

You are proud of it and you believe you are following the correct path. Arrogance is a form of pride. You have spoke derisively of other Christian faiths showing the arrogance of what you believe being better than those. Do you have no pride for your religious views and how that tough decision you made made you better than those who didn't do what you think is the right thing.

I already explained the arrogance you have about your moment in time.

Jakkass wrote: »

Your choice. I think that people can change through mercy.

Never said they couldn't just that mystical being is not responsible for their actions and they are. People can change all they like and have done so without any super natural intervention.

Fink Goddie

Jakkass wrote: »

It's not about absolute proof. I am willing to accept that there is a chance that I am wrong, but I don't believe that chance to be a very probable one on the God question.

To me, it is what indicates to me that God exists that is the main form of argument. That's the best we can do in religious debate. What evidence do I have that God is more likely to exist than not?

Yes its definately not an absolute proof, spending your whole life worshipping and abiding by 'gods rule' made up by man on the basis that he is more likely to exist than not is madness in my opinion.

I think god and heaven is just something that people believe in because it makes them feel better, that when they die there's something else and that they'll see their loved ones again.
God is like a crutch, so that they think they're not alone and think that their prayers will be answered. Afraid to face up to reality.

Talking about things making logical sense, lets take praying for an example. People are always saying that god answered their prayers.
Why would God answer one persons payer over another, would the children in Africa, children caught up in wars etc not always win, then what would the point be in me praying?
Or does god do a lotto everyday and just pick different prayers at random. He'd be a bit of a sick God then wouldnt he!

philologos

Kipperhell wrote: »

You are proud of it and you believe you are following the correct path. Arrogance is a form of pride. You have spoke derisively of other Christian faiths showing the arrogance of what you believe being better than those. Do you have no pride for your religious views and how that tough decision you made made you better than those who didn't do what you think is the right thing.

Arrogance is the sin.

As for speaking derisively about other Christian faiths, please give me an example of this? I personally disagree with certain denominational views, but this doesn't mean that I am "derisive".

I'm no better than anyone else in existence on this earth.

I am glad that I have received grace, and I am glad that I am a Christian. The sin concerns arrogance, or holding oneself up as being any greater than another.

I already explained the arrogance you have about your moment in time.

Kipperhell wrote: »

Never said they couldn't just that mystical being is not responsible for their actions and they are. People can change all they like and have done so without any super natural intervention.

That physical being is responsible and has been forgiven by grace. If one commits even the most grievous of sins, I believe it is possible for them to change for the better through faith.

TwoShedsJackson

Jakkass wrote: »

I wouldn't consider myself weak-minded in any way. I'd be curious to hear a further explanation of your reasoning though.

Human beings have a major weakness, and it is that we are self-aware.

And because people are afraid of their inevitable deaths, religion is a way for people to attempt to come to terms with their mortality. But it went further than that, and became yet another means for the powerful few to control the weak, corrupt, many - the Catholic Church from the Dark Ages on (where we at least have accounts of the Crusades etc.) is a prime example of this.

People being what they are, a few will always want to control as many of the others as they can, religion is a particularly insidious way of doing so. 'yes believe in MY story and you will have eternal life, and be forgiven all the disgusting, immoral things you do in your short mortal life'.

Hence the 'weak-minded' comment - if it wasn't for people's irrational fear of their own mortality, you wouldn't have irrational belief in heaven, hell, and all the rest of it.

I have no problem with a person being religious, if that's what they want to go for, let them have at it, I say. But the problems arise when someone decides that some heathen would be SO much happier if only they had the same religion as them, and that's when religion ceases to be a mere crutch for people to prop their fears on, and becomes a destructive force that has caused untold misery for centuries.

philologos

Fink Goddie wrote: »

Yes its definately not an absolute proof, spending your whole life worshipping and abiding by 'gods rule' made up by man on the basis that he is more likely to exist than not is madness in my opinion.

Do you expect me to honestly agree with you here? You've made the assumption that Christianity has been made up by man despite having nothing to indicate your position being the case?

You can regard me however mad as you wish. I personally couldn't care.

Fink Goddie wrote: »

I think god and heaven is just something that people believe in because it makes them feel better, that when they die there's something else and that they'll see their loved ones again.
God is like a crutch, so that they think they're not alone and think that their prayers will be answered. Afraid to face up to reality.

I think God is the ultimate authority in this universe. The Creator, the beginning and the end, and that God works through people in this very world.

As for heaven, I have a life to live right now, irrespective of heaven and hell, God is here in this world.

As for "thinking I'm not alone". It isn't so much that, it's more accepting what is real to me. God is a reality to me, accepting God is no different to me than accepting the sky is blue.

I think it's funny that you say that your view is somehow accepting reality. It depends what you view reality to be. I view God to be very much real.

Fink Goddie wrote: »

Why would God answer one persons payer over another, would the children in Africa, children caught up in wars etc not always win, then what would the point be in me praying?

Why would God not always intervene? Primarily because humans have free will. We need to take our responsibility in this world as well as God taking responsibility through us. We are the body of Christ in this world. Blaming what humans have done on God is a bit ridiculous.

The point of prayer isn't only to have whatever you want done. That's a very childish view of prayer. Prayer also serves as a means of giving us spiritual peace.

Your view also excludes the notion that there could be some point to evil, or some underlying reason to evil that we cannot perceive due to our limited intellects.

Fink Goddie wrote: »

Or does god do a lotto everyday and just pick different prayers at random. He'd be a bit of a sick God then wouldnt he!

God answers the prayers that He feels are appropriate to answer for a given time, I would imagine. It is also the place of humans to be able to work for good in this world. After all we are called to be stewards and have dominion over what God has given us.

I understand that God isn't obliged to answer every single prayer, I also understand that I am glad that God didn't answer every single prayer of mine in the past.

You can view God as being however you want. I view Him as being an inspiration and a power in this world.

star.chaser

i actually saw the devil once when i was a teenager. he didn't have any legs but a kind of serpents tail. was flying around my room. admittedly, i had been taking magic mushrooms that evening so it was probably a hallucination but fcuk it was still scary. one of those memories that will stick with me till i die...

Lia_lia

Photi wrote: »

I've always sided with the faction which uphold the belief that he is buried in Killarney.

Great! That's me f*cked then.

smokingman

Jakkass wrote: »

You're welcome to your own view. I'm only here to give my perspective and to give my understanding, it is up to you whether or not you accept this or reject this.

And you're welcome to your view also Jackass, I enjoy reading someone with such an extensive knowledge of the bible all the same though. I will never be a believer myself but I am often curious as to what's behind the views of a devout christian purely because I can't understand the paradoxes myself.

Lia_lia

And not this again.