3 of 4
3
Ten books Sam Harris recommends
Posted: 16 January 2007 02:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2007-01-12

Once again, the point was that no effect can be greater than its cause.  You won’t listen either way, and thats what makes me say you are close minded.  And again, I read all of Dawkins books, Harris’ books, even though I could have considered them a complete waste of time. 

I am not going to convince anyone of anything here, except hopefully that we love you.  I hope that all Christians you come into contact with treat you with love and and tenderness and kindness and respect. 

But I would like an honest answer to an honest question:  Why are atheists almost invariably arrogant about how they try to portray their beliefs?  Is it truly that you think you are much smarter than us?  Because you don’t have to convince us there.  That’s why we are called “sheep” in the Bible.  The dumbest animal alive. 

But why the ubiquitous nature of an intellectually pompous attitude?  How can you live your life like that?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 January 2007 05:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2927
Joined  2006-12-17

[quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]

But I would like an honest answer to an honest question:  Why are atheists almost invariably arrogant about how they try to portray their beliefs?  Is it truly that you think you are much smarter than us?  Because you don’t have to convince us there.  That’s why we are called “sheep” in the Bible.  The dumbest animal alive. 

But why the ubiquitous nature of an intellectually pompous attitude?  How can you live your life like that?

Atheists tend to arrogance because, acknowledging no higher power (be it the Judeo-Christian God, Allah, the Great Spirit, of simply something beyond the material world) they see no reason to practice humility.  Read Dante, the Inferno, in the city of Dis where he encounters some Epicuirians.  On the other hand, a constant belaboring of ones “sheepness” is no recommentation either—smacks a bit of false humility.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 January 2007 05:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2007-01-12

[quote author=“burt”][quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]

But I would like an honest answer to an honest question:  Why are atheists almost invariably arrogant about how they try to portray their beliefs?  Is it truly that you think you are much smarter than us?  Because you don’t have to convince us there.  That’s why we are called “sheep” in the Bible.  The dumbest animal alive. 

But why the ubiquitous nature of an intellectually pompous attitude?  How can you live your life like that?

Atheists tend to arrogance because, acknowledging no higher power (be it the Judeo-Christian God, Allah, the Great Spirit, of simply something beyond the material world) they see no reason to practice humility.  Read Dante, the Inferno, in the city of Dis where he encounters some Epicuirians.  On the other hand, a constant belaboring of ones “sheepness” is no recommentation either—smacks a bit of false humility.

Well, thats we are called in the Bible.  We are called sheep, thats why I used that.  But atheists seem to make a very unbalanced effort at proving their points, both in the form of arrogance and non-acknowledgement of things that could be true.

I just listened to the McGrath lecture on “The Dawkins Delusion” and he said he was recently interviewed for the documentary “The Root of All Evil” where Dawkins asked him a series of questions to which he gave a rebuttal.  Whats funny is, the entire segment of his interview was cut because the directors didn’t like the way it fit in with the them of the documentary.  I find that oddly unbalanced, and really epitomizes the views of many atheists.  Don’t you find that at least somewhat appalling, and really to a very certain degree cowardice to do such a thing?  Seems extremely arrogant to me, and also points to the fact that maybe McGrath had some things to say that were believeable, or at least well thought out.

Your comments?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 January 2007 05:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  775
Joined  2006-12-04

It is difficult to determine if Athiests are arrogant or whether Christians are self-abasing.

After all, Theism begins with “I am inferior…” then looks for something to prove it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 January 2007 07:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2007-01-12

[quote author=“Joad”]It is difficult to determine if Athiests are arrogant or whether Christians are self-abasing.

After all, Theism begins with “I am inferior…” then looks for something to prove it.

I didn’t get an answer to my question.  Why would you back away from something if you know its not true?  Why would Dawkins cut all that tape of McGrath?  You know, if this were a Christian apologetic interview and documentary, atheists would consider it a cowardly disgrace if a Dawkins interview was omitted. 

You will get nowhere in this world with intellectual arrogance.  Newton was arguably one of the smartest, most highly educated scientists in history, and he wrote more books/essays/papers on apologetic theology than he did science.  That’s because he held to Biblical inerrancy.  He could have written many books and shown off how arrogant and smart he was, but why didn’t he?  Because he recognized that an effect cannot be greater than its cause.  And God was the cause of him existing, so he worshipped and obeyed His laws instead of the arrogant laws that would have frankly been perfectly acceptable considering his brilliance.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2007 12:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  765
Joined  2006-08-16

[quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]Once again, the point was that no effect can be greater than its cause.  You won’t listen either way, and thats what makes me say you are close minded.  And again, I read all of Dawkins books, Harris’ books, even though I could have considered them a complete waste of time.

It doesn’t matter what the point was, the speaker has no credibility since he obviously doesn’t understand evolution. If you want me to listen to your opinion then you first have to show that you know what you are talking about. I’m sorry if that sounds close-minded to you but I don’t have the time to listen to every person’s viewpoint. That’s why we call some people “experts”.  They have proven that their viewpoint is worth listening to.

[quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]I am not going to convince anyone of anything here, except hopefully that we love you.  I hope that all Christians you come into contact with treat you with love and and tenderness and kindness and respect. 

But I would like an honest answer to an honest question:  Why are atheists almost invariably arrogant about how they try to portray their beliefs?  Is it truly that you think you are much smarter than us?  Because you don’t have to convince us there.  That’s why we are called “sheep” in the Bible.  The dumbest animal alive. 

But why the ubiquitous nature of an intellectually pompous attitude?  How can you live your life like that?

You come to an atheist forum telling us that evolution is a fraud with nothing but your Bible and a handful of disingenuous arguments and you call us arrogant? Did you expect to win us over merely by the strength of your convictions? Many of us have already researched the points you keep trying to make so you will have to excuse us if we are unconvinced by your arguments.

 Signature 

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire

“Rational arguments do not work on religious people, otherwise there would be no religious people.”—Dr. House

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2007 01:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  765
Joined  2006-08-16

[quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]I didn’t get an answer to my question.  Why would you back away from something if you know its not true?  Why would Dawkins cut all that tape of McGrath?  You know, if this were a Christian apologetic interview and documentary, atheists would consider it a cowardly disgrace if a Dawkins interview was omitted.

Did it ever occur to you that most of what gets filmed for any movie, be it a documentary or entertainment, gets left on the cutting room floor? McGrath shouldn’t feel too bad, I’m sure he’s in very good company.

 Signature 

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire

“Rational arguments do not work on religious people, otherwise there would be no religious people.”—Dr. House

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2007 02:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2927
Joined  2006-12-17

[quote author=“camanintx”][quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]Once again, the point was that no effect can be greater than its cause.  You won’t listen either way, and thats what makes me say you are close minded.  And again, I read all of Dawkins books, Harris’ books, even though I could have considered them a complete waste of time.

It doesn’t matter what the point was, the speaker has no credibility since he obviously doesn’t understand evolution. If you want me to listen to your opinion then you first have to show that you know what you are talking about. I’m sorry if that sounds close-minded to you but I don’t have the time to listen to every person’s viewpoint. That’s why we call some people “experts”.  They have proven that their viewpoint is worth listening to.

 

Or, definition: a spurt is a drip under pressure, so an ex-spurt is….
(Sorry, couldn’t resist the straight line.) 
               
Anybody who wants to argue, scientifically, against evolution has a hard row to hoe. “In order to discover where the professors of any branch of knowledge have erred, one must make a profound study and must equal and even surpass those who know most of it.”
                            Abu Hamid al Ghazali (1058 - 1111)

But if you try to do that, well you might just find yourself agreeing with the evidence and face a crisis of belief.  You can’t just read the books and think up religious arguments against them, you have to immerse yourself in the way of thinking and see how the evidence all fits.  You have to come to the point of being able to say, “Ah, that is what it is all about.”  Then, if there are problems, you can see them in the correct light.  So, bracket your religious beliefs and make the effort.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2007 03:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  95
Joined  2006-12-17

[quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]... its amazing what lengths you guys will go to in order to call something fact.  When did the theory of evolution become the “fact” of evolution.  And the talk wasn’t all about science, although I knew I would get a response like this.  Hey show me an agreement among all scientists that tells the “fact” of evolution…

 

The reason I knew in the first three minutes into his talk that your guy was an ignoramus concerning science was the fact that he STARTED with the assertion that evolution was a theory – as in “nothing but” a theory, as in “not a fact, JUST A THEORY”.

Here’s a clue you can pass on to your alleged learned preacher – ALL of science is theory.  If he rejects evolution because it is “nothing but” a theory, then he must reject ALL of science, e.g., the atomic theory of matter, the germ theory of disease, quantum mechanics theory, etc.  A theory in science is an explanation of the relationship of empirical facts. 

Thus, as I said before, I am sorry, but any person who simply doesn’t understand the above has just shown himself to be an ignoramus regarding science, no matter how many university degrees he may have, regardless of what fields he graduated in, no matter what he can score on an I.Q. test, no matter how accomplished an orator he may be.

[quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]...That is the kind of close-mindedness I am talking about…

Close-mindedness is bad, but so is being so “open-minded” that your brain falls out.  One considers an assertion, looks at the alleged facts offered to back it up, then closes out consideration at some point if the assertion fails of its burden – or when the speaker demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt he knows not of what he speaks.  Sorry, but your preacher falls into this category.

[quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]...  I didn’t put down Dawkins book after he called God an “infanticidal, genocidal, megalomaniacal, jealous, blah blah blah bully.”  I came into the whole thing with an open mind, and that could have been taken very offensively…

 

And on what grounds should you have taken offense at Dawkins statement.  Does the truth bother you somehow?  Dawkins was speaking of the god of the old testament.  Have you read the old testament – do I really need to quote you chapter and verse PROVING that the god depicted there is ipso facto an infanticidal, genocidal, megalomaniacal, etc., etc.?

It is obvious to a person who has no hidden agenda, who has no reason to defend the bible at all costs, who is open and honest and takes as objective and disinterested approach to understanding as is humanly possible – that the evidence speaks for itself – each and every adjective Dawkins uses to characterize the god of the old testament is accurate and true.  A reading of the old testament proves this beyond all reasonable doubt.

[quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]...Of course though, the first thing that “offends” you makes you go right back into your closed mind.  Oh well, your loss there.  Theology aside, he had some great things to say about the 20th century that you probably would have agreed with…

I would be so shocked to know that your preacher actually knows anything whatsoever about the 20th century of which I am ignorant.

You are convinced that I missed out by not listening to his entire speech?  Well, you listened to it all, I take it, so here’s your challenge:  Give me ONE, just one, example of some “great thing” he said that I probably don’t know about, or hadn’t thought sufficiently about, or am confused about – just ONE idea.  If you can do that, then I will indeed listen to his entire speech.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2007 03:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2007-01-12

Now we are talking about 2 different people JGL.  The person you listened 2 close mindedly was the paster at my church.  I don’t think he would have been asked to be on Dawkins documentary.

But surely you aren’t as close minded to think that the opinion of McGrath, one of the most brilliant scientists in England, who discovered God through science, is not credible.  You never answer the questions.

IT WOULD BE A WIDESPREAD APOSTASY IF DAWKINS WAS FILMED ON MCGRATH’S DOCUMENTARY IF SOMEHOW HE GOT CUT.  I CAN HEAR YOU NOW.  “ANYBODY THAT WOULD BE SO DUMB AS TO INTERVIEW DAWKINS AND THEN CUT HIM TOTALLY HAS NO CREDIBILITY WHATSOVER.”  SO AGAIN, WHY BE A BLATANT COWARD, AND I MEAN A COWARD OF THE HIGHEST ORDER TO CUT MCGRATH’S AUDIO JUST BECAUSE YOU DIDIN’T LIKE HOW IT FIT IN THE DOCUMENTARY?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2007 07:01 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  95
Joined  2006-12-17

[quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]Now we are talking about 2 different people JGL.  The person you listened 2 close mindedly was the paster at my church.  I don’t think he would have been asked to be on Dawkins documentary.

But surely you aren’t as close minded to think that the opinion of McGrath, one of the most brilliant scientists in England, who discovered God through science, is not credible.  You never answer the questions.

IT WOULD BE A WIDESPREAD APOSTASY IF DAWKINS WAS FILMED ON MCGRATH’S DOCUMENTARY IF SOMEHOW HE GOT CUT.  I CAN HEAR YOU NOW.  “ANYBODY THAT WOULD BE SO DUMB AS TO INTERVIEW DAWKINS AND THEN CUT HIM TOTALLY HAS NO CREDIBILITY WHATSOVER.”  SO AGAIN, WHY BE A BLATANT COWARD, AND I MEAN A COWARD OF THE HIGHEST ORDER TO CUT MCGRATH’S AUDIO JUST BECAUSE YOU DIDIN’T LIKE HOW IT FIT IN THE DOCUMENTARY?

You are confusing me with some other posters you have been debating on Dawkins and his film.  Please reread my post and respond to my challenge if you care to or think you can.

But, as an aside, as to the allegation of Richard Dawkins being bested in debate with some religionist and then conspiring to delete his alleged intellectual ass-kicking from some film - I really find that idea as implausible as the assertion that Jesus cast the demons into the swine, or walked on water, or rose from the dead.  :D  

From what I’ve seen and read of Dawkins, I tend to think he would have no problem chewing up and spitting out Falwell, Robertson, YOUR beloved home preacher, the head theologian from every seminary in America, the top Jesuit apologist AND the pope - all at the same time.  :D

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2007 07:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2007-01-12

I learned all I need to learn about atheists when I read the following post to a question I asked about the arrogant nature of atheists.

Atheists tend to arrogance because, acknowledging no higher power (be it the Judeo-Christian God, Allah, the Great Spirit, of simply something beyond the material world) they see no reason to practice humility.

That was from burt.  I truly believe now that this is most atheists attitude about life.  But there is a huge problem with that.  You can’t practice what you “preach” so to speak at all.  Eventually, you will be forced to make decisions in your life based upon Biblical principle.  It is an undeniable fact, and you can laugh if you want, but let me ask you this: 

Take the most liberal, god-hating atheist woman, and ask her about marriage.  Ask her this:  What are you looking for in a husband?  And guess how every single woman universally will answer?  They will start giving you Jesus, how they want their man to be loving, sensitive, kind, gentle, understanding.  You see you can’t practice your atheism in that sense.  You HAVE to return to Biblical principle at some point in your life, at virtually every turning point of your existence.  A decision must be made that is inherent in your nature and your very being, in your soul, that requires you to deny the fact that you are a cosmological orphan.  All of us have a yearning and a longing to be loved, and that is a fact.  And atheists cannot explain why that is.  You will start smattering on about your Darwinian heritage and end up running around in an endless circle that comes right back to God. 

When you lower the existence of man to all other things in nature, making man the cousin of every single animal and living thing, you simply cannot live out your atheism without running into road blocks where you have to make a decision based on Biblical principle.  If man happens to be nothing more than an advancement in evolution, and we are related to everything out there, you cannot explain to me why it is okay to kill living creature, but its not okay to kill a human.  You can’t do it without running into morality.  And where does that come from?  Darwin?  NEVER. 

Why is it again that Newton and his discoveries are considered some of the most critical in the history of man, and yet he wrote more books on theology than science?  Once again, because he held to Biblical inerrancy.

“We have educated ourselves into imbecility”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2007 08:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  95
Joined  2006-12-17
[quote author=“nothingbutthebloodofjesus”]….When you lower the existence of man to all other things in nature, making man the cousin of every single animal and living thing, you simply cannot live out your atheism without running into road blocks where you have to make a decision based on Biblical principle.  If man happens to be nothing more than an advancement in evolution, and we are related to everything out there, you cannot explain to me why it is okay to kill living creature, but its not okay to kill a human.  You can’t do it without running into morality.  And where does that come from?  Darwin?  NEVER….

You make about ten or so claims that have no foundation in reason in your last post and I leave them all to other to respond to, if they have the time and desire to help you to some basic understanding, but let me just address your assertion in the above paragraph.

I think you are too ethnocentric in your world view – you seem to think that YOUR particular religious tradition is the ONLY way to have a rational and moral society of humans and I know of no real evident that would back that idea.

On a more important note, when you say it is thus “okay” to kill and be completely immoral if there is no god, or rather a belief in god, then you must explain atheists who for the most part choose to lead moral lives and the many believers in god who chose to commit murder and torture in the name of god.  It would only take ONE piece of contradictory evidence to overthrow your idea and there is TONS of evidence to the contrary.  All and all it is a wash – i.e., one can never show a direct correlation between god belief and moral behavior or immoral behavior, or no belief in god and moral behavior or immoral behavior.  IOW, for every example you could produce to prove your theory, I could counter with a contravening example.

I’ll just use myself for an example: in the 30 years I have been an atheist (from age 28 until now) I have never murdered anyone, or lead a life of criminality or sought to just exploit other people as means to an end.  Far from being perfect, I yet seem to be a law-abiding citizen that can be trusted around the children (unlike several thousand R.C. priests, or former priests).

Since it was “okay” for me to be a Clockwork Orange kind of guy, yet I didn’t, how do you think that could be?  What is the matter with me – why did I not choose a life of criminality when it was, as you say, perfectly “okay”? 

I assume you would go nuts and start raping and killing if you suddenly lost your belief in a god.  Is that correct?  If you claim not, then I ask you “Why not?”  (I would really like to know your answer to this question, if you don’t mind – please don’t just ignore it).

As for belief in god causing a person to understand he or she must be moral, how do you explain either John List or the BTK murderer?  List murdered his entire family, including his mother, wife, and three children, in a well thought-out plan and escaped justice for 18 years before he was caught.  He was a church deacon before he murdered his family, and when caught he was a church deacon in a new church and had remarried a women he met at his new church.  Everyone who knew him was quite surprised, as he was a hard worker, quiet and shy, and was very kind and considerate.

The BTK killer (BTK = bind – torture-kill) was also a church deacon who murdered about 8 people, including several children, all as they say “in cold blood”.  He had attended church the Sunday before he was finally caught.  He WOULD HAVE, no doubt, attended church the next Sunday, just as he regularly did, if he had not been arrested and charged with serial murder.  Again, he was a pillar of the community type that no one who knew him would ever suspect he was a murderer, since he was so kind and helpful and such a good citizen day-to-day.

So, there are just two modern day examples of how god believers also believe it is “okay” to murder for fun.  Explain this, please, and if you can then I promise won’t bring up the 1300 years of murder and torture perpetrated by god believers in Europe and America, the horror of which is comparable, perhaps even worse in many ways, than any atrocity that Hitler or Stalin ever ordered.

[ Edited: 18 January 2007 04:10 AM by ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2007 09:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  775
Joined  2006-12-04

nothingbutthe bloodofjesus wrote:

Take the most liberalgod-hating atheist woman, and ask her about marriageAsk her this: What are you looking for in a husband? 

As I posted elsewhere, they would prefer Forrest Gump over Jesus.

Atheists tend to arrogance because, acknowledging no higher power (be it the Judeo-Christian God, Allah, the Great Spirit, of simply something beyond the material world) they see no reason to practice humility.

But why should we be humble to nothing? We are often humble. But there has to be something to deserve that humilty.

Chistians aren’t humble. They are quite arrogant in their slavish worship of their master.

We don’t base our decisions on Biblical principles because there are none. If you study history, you will find that all your ‘so-called’ Biblical principles were stolen from pre-existing laws.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 January 2007 11:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  61
Joined  2007-01-12

First of all JGL, I never said it was “okay” to murder another human.  Man kills animals, and plants for that matter, and its okay.  But when it comes to the murder of a human, how do you explain where you get that sense of it being completely wrong and immoral?  You can’t without first recognizing that you are basing your feelings on how YOUR CREATOR made you.  You didn’t develop a sense of moral justice from the Darwinian theory, and I do say THEORY. 

As far as your question about what I would do without God.  I can’t answer that exactly, but I would definitely say that it is distinctly possible that I would be a murderer or a rapist.  I cannot say for sure that I wouldn’t do those things.  Now that would be arrogant. 

Something that is chaotic does not, and never will, produce order.  Something this is immoral, and all of us are immoral and sinful, does not produce something that is moral. 

Society cannot survive on atheism.  We start turning atheism into mysticism, angel worship, palm readers, etc etc, which is a way of us “inventing” new religion.  We are not and never will be inherently “atheistic.”  You have to be educated to be an atheist.  Thats why you don’t find mentally challenged atheists, unless they have been brainwashed into thinking that way.

Thats why Hellen Keller, when asked about God, responded, “I always knew He was there, I just didn’t know His name.”  We are talking about a person that hadn’t seen the world, heard anything in it or been able to discern anything that requires the ability to see or hear or speak. 

I am not arrogant about my worship of my Creator.  I hope that I am truly humble in that.  We are here to serve, and Christianity has done pretty well when you find the fundamental group that holds to the inerrancy of the spoken Word of God. 

You can bring up all the examples that you want about the extremist idiots that claim God’s name in the murder and terrorism that happens today.  But you cannot say that religion is therefore more harmful than good in a society and that we should eliminate it.  Sorry man, that will never ever happen.  In fact, it is an impossibilty. 

All of you bring up these examples of extremeists that bomb buildings and kill the innocent.  I would invite you to visit my church, although I know you wouldn’t.  You know what its full of?  SINNERS.  Sinners that recognize the need for a Savior.  Sinners that struggle every day with their walk with Christ, and sinners that worship Jehovah.  There is nothing weird about it, nothing arrogant about it, and you can feel the genuine love for the Lord and His people in our place of worship. 

I can see God in every single step that I take in my life.  I can see Him in my wife, I can see him in the homes of the families where we minister.  I can see Him in the high schoolers that we teach.  You call it delusional, I call it fundamental.  I say that with confidence, not arrogance. 

You go from chaos to order, but this country has gone from order to chaos.  You have simply narrowed down the human race as just another part of nature.  No better, no worse.  Just more advanced. 

If you find a church, that has the Spirit of the Lord at the helm, and that teaches Biblical principles and holds to our need to be saved, you will find order.  You will find love, comfort, support, patience, kindness, gentleness, self-control, remorse and you will find SIN.  Our spirit is willing but our flesh is weak. 

In atheism, YOU are the standard.  Nobody else.  Whatever YOU say is right.  Whatever YOU choose is right.  You are subject to no law but the law you make up.  And that standard will fail.  It will fail miserably. 

Thats why the Magna Carta was written.  Because it showed that the King needed to be held to a standard that was greater than him.  And thats what we hold to, a standard that is greater than us. 

Charles Hodge, one of the great Calvinistic, fundamental, Biblical theologians said, “They are to be pittied, those that have no greater teachers than themselves.”  You are your teacher.  You set the standard.  You are allowed to disavow anyone else’s standard.  You can do whatever you want, because its YOUR truth that matters.  Not me my friends.  I hold to a higher standard, one that is far greater than this sinner ever will be. 

And thats why we sing “that saved a WRETCH like me.”  We are guilty.  We are sinners.  We need a Savior.  We have Jesus.  And I am not ashamed of that, and I will stand up for that if you put a gun to my head.  “My sheep hear my voice, another they will not respond to” said Jesus.  Its just like you.  You refuse to believe.  We refuse not to believe. 

“To live is Christ, to die is gain.”  What a shame it is to think that you live this life for nothing.  No purpose, no plan, just existence.  Just like you could never, unless the Spirit moved in your heart, believe in Christ, I will could never not believe. 

“I AM NOT ASHAMED OF THE GOSPEL….”

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 4
3
 
‹‹ Kristof      DAWKINS HARRIS 08 ››
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed