A serious question for evangelical christians

[DeletedUser]

Those that shout in subways understand little about Jesus, ask yourself would Jesus do that? Those who argue in an attempt to prove their religious point of view, lost it. Understanding the Gospel happens when a person dedicates their life to God with a desire to endure to the end. Gradually things are revealed to them by God, it happens bit by bit.

Those who go around telling strangers that Jesus loves them have a poor understanding and feel a desire to share the little they know, which is true. What I say is not to belittle anyones belief. I hope I addressed the original question.

 

[DeletedUser]

And Justin, even if you don't believe in Catholicism, you have to accept that it's been around as long as Christianity has. Saint Peter was a Catholic!

ATTN: I'm not bashing the Catholics, I'm just setting the facts straight.

oisinallen, you're a nice guy, but you're ignorant on this subject. That's not meant to be an insult; I like you a lot. But you're just plain wrong. Peter was not a Catholic. Read your history: the Catholic Church did not even start to organize, let alone appoint popes, until 400 A.D.

Christianity, obviously, was here before that.

We are all guilty; we've all sinned; we all deserve hell.

This is where my viewpoint for my religion differs, I believe we are put on earth 'Clean as a whistle' and our primary objective is to make something of ourselves and enjoy what god created. But doing something bad to take more than your fair share, such as Bernie Madoff, or taking away someone elses life when not in a battle, like the countless evil men that have been on this world, would get someone sent to hell. Helping others achieve the goals to enjoy gods creations is just extra credit . . .

David, do you believe that we are all sinners?

I'm going to (mis) quote someone, but...

"I personally think that arguing over which religion is best is like two kids arguing about who has the best invisible friend"

We're not arguing about God. We're arguing about the plan of Salvation. Like I said, you should be able to follow the arguments and see the important differences.

For all intents and purposes the Roman Catholic Church was the first "Official" Church (they are the folks who decided which gospels to keep and which to toss and are responsible for the current form of the New Testament) Conversion/spreading the gospel through conquest and coercion was the beginnings of modern evangelism

This is three big lies. Obviously, you all know my first objection.

Second: The Catholic church did NOT decide which books were canon and which were not. All of the books of the Bible were in circulation amongst the early church (pre-400 A.D.) by 90 A.D. That's a fact.

And third: The Roman Catholic Church started the bloodiest, the most inhumane, and disgusting persecution of non-believers ever. Full of coercion and conquest. Definitely not Christ like.

http://www.trailofblood.com/The Trail Of Blood.htm

http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1676.cfm

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/inquis1.htm

http://www.mtc.org/inquis.html

I am not endorsing everything on these websites. However, their information on the Roman Catholic Inquisitions is good. The first link is especially important. Read the true history of the early church.

 

[DeletedUser]

We're not arguing about God. We're arguing about the plan of Salvation. Like I said, you should be able to follow the arguments and see the important differences.

You're arguing about religion. Which is exactly what my quote covered.

As for the specifics of each religion, again, from my perspective it's like arguing which are the cooler elves from Lord of the Rings -- the ones that lived in Lothlórien, Mirkwood or Rivendell...

Does it really matter? It's all fiction, anyway...

I am not endorsing everything on these websites. However, their information on the Roman Catholic Inquisitions is good. The first link is especially important. Read the true history of the early church.

Given a long enough time-line, any church will have the same questionable history.

That's the thing...Christianity (or any religion, for that matter) doesn't have a corner on the morality market.

 

[DeletedUser]

That's right, Adelei; we're all sinners. We deserve hell. That's why Jesus died for us.

 

[DeletedUser]

Peter was not a Catholic. Read your history: the Catholic Church did not even start to organize, let alone appoint popes, until 400 A.D.

It is an integral part of all Christianity (except Catholicism, obviously) that Peter wasn't a Catholic, and wasn't a pope; because if one of the apostles was pope, then non-Catholics don't really have a leg to stand on. And because it is such an important part of non-Catholic Christianity, the only way I could convince you it wasn't true (and really, it's such a hazy topic that I'm not even sure if it's true or not) would be to convert you.

And really, converting people is not something I want to be a part of. I think it's ridiculous to go around trying to tell people that they've been wrong their whole lives, when the converters can't even prove that they're right. Missionaries really get on my nerves.

(At least that last bit was on topic)

So I'll skip past Peter.

There have been people calling themselves Popes since Peter. First was Linus, then Anacletus, and so on. Until the schism, there was only one group of Christians, who had a pope (for example, Leo IX, who was pope at the time of the schism.).

Catholicism is at least part of the original Christianity (Eastern Orthodox being the other main part).

And since the catholic church still has a pope, who is in the same succession as Leo IX, you might argue that they are the bigger part (meaning that Orthodoxy is less similar to original Christianity than Catholicism is).

The Roman Catholic Church started the bloodiest, the most inhumane, and disgusting persecution of non-believers ever. Full of coercion and conquest. Definitely not Christ like.

I'm not defending the inquisition, but I'd say that the holocaust was far bloodier, more inhumane, and more disgusting.

And while it wasn't specifically against non-believers, Jews were the biggest target. Catholics were occasionally targeted (2579 Catholic priests were sent to Dachau, and parishioners were also sent to concentration camps. Polish Catholics in particular, though some German Catholics were sent as well. This seems ironic as Hitler was raised Catholic, but he hated Catholicism.). And the few non-Christian, non-Jewish people who lived in Germany at that time would also be sent to concentration camps.

 

[DeletedUser]

And all of this relates to "the motive for these screaming evangelical banshees in subway stations" how?

 

[DeletedUser]

I got a little side-tracked, but there was still a little bit of on-topic in my post:

And really, converting people is not something I want to be a part of. I think it's ridiculous to go around trying to tell people that they've been wrong their whole lives, when the converters can't even prove that they're right.

 

[DeletedUser]

Jesus' word should be spread, but in a more passive way than shouting to people in the subway that their way of life is wrong and that they must convert. Those few people make the rest of us look like lunatics and start to give christianity a bad name. If I were an atheist I wouldn't convert because some nut in the subway who thumps people over the head with a bible told me that my life is wrong. In fact that would give me another reason why not to convert.

 

[DeletedUser]

That's right, Adelei; we're all sinners. We deserve hell. That's why Jesus died for us.

Well, that's the fable, anyway...

 

[DeletedUser]

The topic is: "the motive for these screaming evangelical banshees in subway stations."

(( Stay On Topic - No additional warnings will be provided on this thread regarding derailing or posting off-topic. ))

 

[DeletedUser]

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Matthew 24:14

The bible says the lord will come again after all have HEARD the word of god, and w/ satellites now, the word has gone out to all the corners of the earth.

Some people go OUT OF THEIR WAY TO DO THIS and it turns people off but the message was heard by you even if you perceived the people who did it to be crazy and the means by how it was done to be radical.

 

[DeletedUser]

The main argument against these psychos is that they cannot prove they are right. Nobody can prove that their religion is right. Otherwise, everyone would follow the same religion!

However, based on the fact that they're trying to get everyone to hear the word of god, another argument is:

There will never be a time when everybody has heard the world of god. Every single second, people are born. Newborn babies have not heard the word of god.

Ergo, it is impossible for everyone to have heard the word of god.

 

[DeletedUser3717]

The main argument against these psychos is that they cannot prove they are right. Nobody can prove that their religion is right. Otherwise, everyone would follow the same religion!

However, based on the fact that they're trying to get everyone to hear the word of god, another argument is:

There will never be a time when everybody has heard the world of god. Every single second, people are born. Newborn babies have not heard the word of god.

Ergo, it is impossible for everyone to have heard the word of god.

Very true and if somebody prooved that god and jesus Existed wouldn't that end Christian religion?

 

[DeletedUser]

It cannot be proven, for or against, so it is an irrelevant debate point.

 

[DeletedUser]

Why would anyone want proof? Then they would understand the need to obey Gods laws and yet their hearts would still be set on the things of this world without the desire to change. So the knowledge would condem them. God seeks to bless lives not curse them. Obeying the commandments of God can only be done through free agency and a willing heart. God respects your decision whether right or wrong altimately we will be rewarded according to that choice and our works. Thats another reason why subway preaching is fruitless and untill they realize that they remain motivated to do it.

 

[DeletedUser]

Why would anyone want proof? Then they would understand the need to obey Gods laws and yet their hearts would still be set on the things of this world without the desire to change.

Then why do Christians try to convince people to believe based on the fear of damnation? Why would the Bible speak of it?

So the knowledge would condem them. God seeks to bless lives not curse them.

This I don't get at all. An empty threat is a blessing and a known threat is a curse?

Obeying the commandments of God can only be done through free agency and a willing heart. God respects your decision whether right or wrong altimately we will be rewarded according to that choice and our works.

How does certainty that a threat is real in any way diminish the choice to do the action or not?

How does uncertainty that a threat is real make someone more of a "free agent and willing heart"?

 

[DeletedUser]

Why would anyone want proof?

I'm not saying you need proof to be religious. After all, you can't have proof and be religious. Otherwise there would only be one faith, and everyone would follow it - since it had been proved right.

I'm religious, and I can't prove that I'm right. Nobody can prove their religion right. Some religions can be proved wrong, however.

My point was: Since you can't prove that you're right, you have no right whatsoever to go around yelling at people to convert to your faith. (Even if you could prove it, you still wouldn't have that right, but not having proof makes it even worse.) The Door-to-Door salvationists are just the same, but worse. They force themselves specifically on you, while the subway-bellowers simply yell to the whole crowd.

 

[DeletedUser]

The main argument against these psychos is that they cannot prove they are right. Nobody can prove that their religion is right. Otherwise, everyone would follow the same religion!

However, based on the fact that they're trying to get everyone to hear the word of god, another argument is:

There will never be a time when everybody has heard the world of god. Every single second, people are born. Newborn babies have not heard the word of god.

Ergo, it is impossible for everyone to have heard the word of god.

There is an age of accountability and when you reach this you are then able to be able to discern for yourself right and wrong and so on, there is no set age, so babies and toddlers have not reached this AGE and if they die they go to HEAVEN because they did or did not decide to accept CHRIST.

 

[DeletedUser]

Does Christianity have every excuse in the book? Seriously, they can just say anything and POOF it is word.

 

[DeletedUser]

There is an age of accountability and when you reach this you are then able to be able to discern for yourself right and wrong and so on, there is no set age, so babies and toddlers have not reached this AGE and if they die they go to HEAVEN because they did or did not decide to accept CHRIST.

That is completely un-related to what I said. I never said babies went to Hell. I said they hadn't heard the word of god.

And anyway, what about those who are both deaf and blind? Will you feed them the gospel?

Also, what happens if you're wrong? And you end up reincarnated as a bug, for not following the Hindu faith? Since you can't prove that you're right, you have to consider the possibility that you're wrong.