It's not a question of whether Christians are better people or not. It's a question of forgiveness of those bad things, and the response to that forgiveness.
Someone who is not religious may do something bad, but there is only his or her conscience to catch them out. Even then, there is no reason to obey the conscience except if another person catches them out. The craftier a non-religious person, the more they can get away with if they choose.
Now, I'm not saying that all non-religious people will try and get away with everything they can, but there is no good reason not too in their eyes. If you are non-religious and have a reason to do good, you have to show that there is an objective 'good' and that your reason to do good is worthwhile.
Someone who is a Christian receives forgiveness for their sin, Christ taking punishment on the cross for them. Their response to this should be gratitude, leading to a greater reluctance to do wrong in the future. This means that someone who is a Christian (and not a pretender - there are many) will become a better member of society over time.
Eternally speaking, the biggie is Judgement Day. The difference between a Christian and non-Christian on this day is forgiveness and heaven (eternal life) and un-forgiveness and hell (eternal death).
Monday, January 9, 2012
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Who did the children of Adam and Eve marry?
The answer to this is easy, though dealing with it as a listener is not quite so easy.
Adam and Eve's kids married each other. They had to because there was nobody else to marry! (That's the easy part)
The natural question that then arises is, "But isn't that wrong?"
So the hard part is accepting that there was no rule (at this stage of history) that said it was wrong to marry a sibling. Some speculate that since it was much closer to the fall, the genetics weren't quite so muddled with mutation. This meant that harmful genetic mutation wouldn't compound the way it does with inbreeding today. Either way, there was no rule until much later.
What is more important in this objection isn't the question and answer, it is the ability to accept an answer that is based in a very different morality than that which we are used to today.
Some more reading from www.creation.com:
http://creation.com/church-shock-can-you-marry-your-relative
Adam and Eve's kids married each other. They had to because there was nobody else to marry! (That's the easy part)
The natural question that then arises is, "But isn't that wrong?"
So the hard part is accepting that there was no rule (at this stage of history) that said it was wrong to marry a sibling. Some speculate that since it was much closer to the fall, the genetics weren't quite so muddled with mutation. This meant that harmful genetic mutation wouldn't compound the way it does with inbreeding today. Either way, there was no rule until much later.
What is more important in this objection isn't the question and answer, it is the ability to accept an answer that is based in a very different morality than that which we are used to today.
Some more reading from www.creation.com:
http://creation.com/church-shock-can-you-marry-your-relative
Thursday, January 5, 2012
What's the big deal between Catholics and Protestants?
Have you ever heard of the Protestant Reformation, sometimes just called the Reformation? If not, then you need to know a little something about this important historical event that has shaped the western world so much.
In the 16th Century (the 1500s), various people (reformers) began to protest against the Roman Catholic Church because of the way they did things. Martin Luther (not Martin Luther King) wrote 95 things he saw that were wrong or unjust about the Roman Catholic Church.
This protest (where the name "Protest-ant" comes from) sparked a huge split in the church with the Protestants bringing the focus back to God and His glory.
All of the Protestant denominations have come out of the Protestant side of things as each splinter group tries to reform further. Some have had success and some have gone too far, becoming non-Christian cult groups who you can often identify by their particular attire or presumptuous and premature titles. Find out more about some of these groups here and here.
In the 16th Century (the 1500s), various people (reformers) began to protest against the Roman Catholic Church because of the way they did things. Martin Luther (not Martin Luther King) wrote 95 things he saw that were wrong or unjust about the Roman Catholic Church.
This protest (where the name "Protest-ant" comes from) sparked a huge split in the church with the Protestants bringing the focus back to God and His glory.
All of the Protestant denominations have come out of the Protestant side of things as each splinter group tries to reform further. Some have had success and some have gone too far, becoming non-Christian cult groups who you can often identify by their particular attire or presumptuous and premature titles. Find out more about some of these groups here and here.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Why does evidence matter when the Bible is only a book of faith?
Is it "only" a book of faith? What happens when the Bible is no longer a historically reliable account (in the parts that it claims to be)?
When you reduce these parts of the Bible down to a few general metaphorical ideas, you establish a way of interpreting scripture. If you then apply that way of interpreting scripture in essential areas (like the historical crucifixion), you end up doing away with everything that matters about Christianity. In short, you are calling the Bible a lie. Joel S. Baden does this, I think without realising, in this article.
Let me make this really clear. If you cast doubt upon one historical account, e.g. the waters parting for Israel, then you also cast doubt upon another, and Jesus no longer really rose again.
The apostle Paul has this to say about this situation:
When you reduce these parts of the Bible down to a few general metaphorical ideas, you establish a way of interpreting scripture. If you then apply that way of interpreting scripture in essential areas (like the historical crucifixion), you end up doing away with everything that matters about Christianity. In short, you are calling the Bible a lie. Joel S. Baden does this, I think without realising, in this article.
Let me make this really clear. If you cast doubt upon one historical account, e.g. the waters parting for Israel, then you also cast doubt upon another, and Jesus no longer really rose again.
The apostle Paul has this to say about this situation:
"...if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins..."
- 1Corinthians 15:17
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
God's chosen people are through Ishmael, not Isaac - Muslim objection
Have you ever come across this objection? Muslims will often make this claim when you speak with them. What is a good approach when it comes up?
You can start by pointing to the bible, and the lineage of Jesus, or the scriptures that show God's people are Israel (the children of Jacob/Israel, son of Isaac)and not Ishmael. This will inevitably bring up the objection about the bible being corrupted which is where you want this conversation to go.
It all will come down to the bible for a conversation with a Muslim. In this objection, they must show that their claim is more reliable. Unfortunately for them, the bible was there first, and their belief that it was deliberately corrupted is nonsense.
It is their religious writings that are unreliable because they came later and even borrowed from the biblical texts enough to try to lend some authenticity.
A final point to try and get in there (if the conversation is still reasonable at this point) is that all nations can be God's people now. Through Jesus, and the cross, salvation is no longer through a single race. Circumcision is of the heart.
You can start by pointing to the bible, and the lineage of Jesus, or the scriptures that show God's people are Israel (the children of Jacob/Israel, son of Isaac)and not Ishmael. This will inevitably bring up the objection about the bible being corrupted which is where you want this conversation to go.
It all will come down to the bible for a conversation with a Muslim. In this objection, they must show that their claim is more reliable. Unfortunately for them, the bible was there first, and their belief that it was deliberately corrupted is nonsense.
It is their religious writings that are unreliable because they came later and even borrowed from the biblical texts enough to try to lend some authenticity.
A final point to try and get in there (if the conversation is still reasonable at this point) is that all nations can be God's people now. Through Jesus, and the cross, salvation is no longer through a single race. Circumcision is of the heart.
Monday, January 2, 2012
But won't heaven be boring?
What will we spend our time with in heaven? At the moment we have TV, computer games, etc. But that kind of stuff doesn't seem to be a part of heaven. Maybe I don't want to go there if I'm not entertained...
If 3D TV is your idea of good entertainment, prepare for something infinitely more amazing. How about viewing something that will never get boring. Not even after a million years!
Even if heaven is merely sitting and staring at God, that will be enough to blow your mind for ever. Think about what that means for a moment. If you stared at your TV for a week straight you would probably be going mad with boredom. Even your beautiful spouse can't captivate you within a billionth of what God can.
I'm sure there will be more to heaven than merely sitting and watching though. Consider the nature of the Kingdom of God, a part of which is merely a perfect version of life and society, not too different to how we live now (though completely different at the same time!)
Heaven won't be boring. I'm certain!
If 3D TV is your idea of good entertainment, prepare for something infinitely more amazing. How about viewing something that will never get boring. Not even after a million years!
Even if heaven is merely sitting and staring at God, that will be enough to blow your mind for ever. Think about what that means for a moment. If you stared at your TV for a week straight you would probably be going mad with boredom. Even your beautiful spouse can't captivate you within a billionth of what God can.
I'm sure there will be more to heaven than merely sitting and watching though. Consider the nature of the Kingdom of God, a part of which is merely a perfect version of life and society, not too different to how we live now (though completely different at the same time!)
Heaven won't be boring. I'm certain!
Sunday, January 1, 2012
Objections - learn to face them head on
If you want an authentic faith, and want real confidence in your message, you should learn to face objections head on.
As you deal with the objections, rather than hiding them under the rug, you will gradually form a message that integrates well with the rest of your life and is harder for objectors to ignore.
At the very least, you should face objections because people are good at sensing when you are bluffing your way through. Much better to know why the objection is no real challenge to your faith.
As you deal with the objections, rather than hiding them under the rug, you will gradually form a message that integrates well with the rest of your life and is harder for objectors to ignore.
At the very least, you should face objections because people are good at sensing when you are bluffing your way through. Much better to know why the objection is no real challenge to your faith.
One strategy to prevent being overwhelmed by objections is to deal with one at a time. Pick one and deal with it inside and out. Often many other objections fall away when you do this.
Happy New Year, and God bless!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)