Why you believe what you believe I

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

Originally Posted by Elemmire

Unless I'm misinterpretting you, it seems to me that if someone like the Buddha or Gandhi could theoretically gain entrance to Heaven, then Christianity is not a prerequisite.

This sparked another very similar question for me.

Ri, do you think a hindu or buddhist could enter heaven if they followed their own religion and have never had the chance to know Christ, or do you think it is just Christians.

[Aragorn]

I'm pretty sure Christianity works under the 'ignorance is no excuse' rule, and if someone has never heard of Christ, they will not gain access into heaven.

I'm an atheist, and I really don't feel like debating my beliefs, but I'll just say that I find it hard to accept a belief system that, if correct, means people like Mohandas Karamachand Gandhi and the Buddha are burning in hell right now. Of course thats not my main reason for my beliefs, but I figured I'd just leave it at that.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

The best thing an atheist can share is this : "I think that there is NO God, and I'll try to convince you to believe this, because I think you're believing a lie, and I think it's better to believe what is true. And this is what is true, IMO - you're an entirely unplanned, accidental event of no intrinsic value, and when you're dead, there's no more you. Life is meaningless - or if you can somehow find meaning in life, then it is gone with your death."

Now I agree that it's better to believe what is true, but what an atheist is saying is true is certainly nothing to write home about!

I disagree - there's a lot to do with one's beliefs that don't need religion, as millions of atheists around the world can attest.

You can believe it's right to be a kind and decent person for non-religious reasons for example.

[Elfhelm]

As I've said, I'm not a Christian so I don't speak on anyone's behalf, but I feel compelled to make a small correction.

Christians are divided on the topic of redemption (who gets into heaven). Baptists believe in particular redemption, for instance, while Methodists believe in universal redemption. It isn't fair to lump them all into one group regarding this. Since Rian is a Methodist, it would be incorrect to assume that she thinks Gandhi is burning in Hell. They believe Jesus brought salvation for everyone and that you're supposed to live according to The Bible. They don't actually connect them together as cause and effect, as has already been pointed out to me.

[Rían]

Oy! For the third time, I'm not a Methodist! That was just the first church I attended. Maybe I'll go back and edit that post and make it more clear! I suppose if I had to check a box, I would consider myself an evangelical Christian, and I go to a non-denominational church. And that's kinda why I made this thread a personal one - why YOU believe what YOU believe.

Nurvi - I'm not saying that my statement about the atheist's beliefs is ALL that's in his/her life. I AM saying, however, that it is a logically necessary deduction from the atheist's beliefs.

Teddi - (TD) - Check back a few posts, I think I answered that one pretty thoroughly - maybe you missed it ... I'll dig up the post number.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Aragorn

I'm pretty sure Christianity works under the 'ignorance is no excuse' rule, and if someone has never heard of Christ, they will not gain access into heaven.

You're quite wrong, Aragorn As I explained over the last few pages, the Bible's position is that people all over the world have entirely sufficient information, with the glories of creation and our inner conscience/morality, with which to choose to seek God or not, and those who choose to NOT seek God are without excuse. For example, Abraham, who is called the Father of our faith, never heard of Christ, yet Abraham is stated by God to have been made righteous by his faith, which is what salvation is. I'll try to dig up some post ids for you, but basically, just check the last coupla pages, or search on my name and "Abraham"

I agree with you - I couldn't love a God that booted people out of heaven on technicalities or unfairly. And the God that's described in the Bible does NOT do this. Read the first section of the book of Romans, and the Gospel of John, for my references (since Christianity is a worldview that references documents, one must give references when making a claim about its worldview beliefs).

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Elfhelm

And the way American Christians seem to think it's OK to bomb civilians...

I just want to lovingly remind you of your statement that you "practice absolute honesty". I think you KNOW this statement about bombing civilians is untrue, Elfhelm. I see that you are a very compassionate person, and these things are deeply troubling to you (as they should be to any person with a heart), and I very much admire and respect that, but please be really careful to not exaggerate on these emotional subjects. Please don't take offense at my pointing this out - I am only trying to gently encourage you to keep holding the truth in high regard, as I've seen you do continually on this thread. And please do me the same favor, and kindly point out to me areas where you see me in the wrong, so I can carefully consider them. A true friend does this, IMO.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Elemmire

Gyaaa! Sorry, I need my eyes checked again. I've got to be clinically blind by now... (btw, I'm not joking )

Oh, sorry - are you very nearsighted?

Originally Posted by Elemmire

Unless I'm misinterpretting you, it seems to me that if someone like the Buddha or Gandhi could theoretically gain entrance to Heaven, then Christianity is not a prerequisite.

Originally Posted by Teddy

Ri, do you think a hindu or buddhist could enter heaven if they followed their own religion and have never had the chance to know Christ, or do you think it is just Christians.

Originally Posted by Lief

Ri, you goofball, show me where creation and conscience alone saved anyone!

(ok, that last quote was a joke, but that's basically what he wanted to know )

Would you please re-read my post #725 - I think it explains this a bit, but I'll write just a bit here, too.

Lief, for you, check out Matthew 2:2 But seriously, I think the missionary example (as opposed to the Hindu one) illustrates this idea - what else could it have come from? But again, I fall back on my supporting info of God's clearly documented love and justness, and Romans chpt. 1, of course! and things like Jer. 32:27. Now I'm not answering any more of your questions, you impertinent whippersnapper , until you do the homework in the Theology thread! *gets back into her rocking chair with her crochet*

Lemmi and Teddi - I think there's lots of things going on here - justice, love, free will - but I think the answer can be found in the heart of God, as I said in that post #725. It's just like we interpret actions of people on earth by what we know of their heart - if I grabbed something from my son and threw it away from him, his first guess would hopefully be that I saw something dangerous about it and was saving him from harm; if a bully did this, his guess would be that the bully was being mean - do you understand what I'm saying? So again, what I see of God's heart, from many, MANY years of knowing Him and searching the Bible and praying, is that He loves ALL of mankind and desires ALL to be reconciled to Him and has done everything possible for this to happen (Ref. 2 Peter 3:9, John 3:16). Yet desiring is different from forcing, and love cannot be forced, and love is what He desires - He will not force love from us - it is our choice.

Now people have asked, "well, if God intended to forgive everyone anyway, then why did Jesus have to die? It seems useless and cruel." A very good question - but they forget the holiness and justness of God, which we see echoed in our souls (a recent example is Elfhelm's anger and concern over the bombing of civilians - because Elfhelm has a strong sense of what is right and wrong, and because he cares about people getting hurt, he is angry about the bombing. If he didn't give a rip about people or justice, he wouldn't care!) So that's why Jesus had to die - in Milton's Paradise Lost, he explains it very well - either people had to die because of sin, or justice itself would be dead. But God loves us and doesn't desire our death - but it is wrong to pass over sin - what is to be done? I like how Milton words it - this is God speaking (in the first sentence, "he" refers to sinful mankind):

Milton, from Paradise Lost, starting at III:210, speaker in brackets

[God]
"Die he or justice must; unless for him
Some other able, and as willing, pay
The rigid satisfaction, death for death.
Say, Heav'nly Powers, where shall we find such love?
Which of you will be mortal, to redeem
Man's mortal crime and, just, the unjust to save?
Dwells in all Heav'n charity so dear?"

He asked, but all the Heav'nly choir stood mute ...

... had not the Son of God,
In whom the fullness dwells of love divine,
His dearest mediation thus renewed:

[Jesus]
"Father, Thy word is past, man shall find grace;
And shall grace not find means? ...
Behold me, then: me for him, life for life
I offer. "

[Rían]

(con't)

So the point here is that Jesus's sacrifice made the way for mankind to be reconciled to a perfectly just and holy and loving God.

And I really don't know much else to say on this question, except what I've said before - God desires all to come to Him, God has made a way for all to come to Him, God says that NO ONE has an excuse to NOT come to Him because there is sufficient info in creation and our conscience to decide to seek Him, and that EVERYONE that seeks Him with all their hearts WILL find Him. It does NOT say that everyone that can brainlessly recite John 3:16 will find Him; it says that those who SEEK Him will find Him. And that is why I think that a person can not know any Christian terms, or even info about that the Son of God was born into humanity in Bethlehem, to be saved. This thread is about why we hold our beliefs - and this is my belief, and I think I can support it scripturally. Yet we as Christians are called to share the gospel with others, and we have NO right to say, "Well, God can just do it on His own". God chooses to work THRU us, and ANY time truth is shared, it will be good for the hearer, so we need to keep sharing the truth.

I am not the final authority on truth; I only have my thoughts, but I have thought long and carefully. I share these thoughts with you guys with a great deal of humility and trepidation; and God help me and you if I'm wrong in ANY area that I've shared here. Yet I think pat and un-thought-out answers and mindless reciting of Scripture is wrong and insulting to both God and the hearers, so I dare to share these things with you, and ask you guys to really think them out in your hearts and minds. And I ask one more thing, a great favor - if you have ANY regard for me, would you think these things thru with a truth-seeking heart? God is truth; if you truly and openly seek truth with all your heart, it is my opinion that you will find Him. God bless you all - I know He longs to do this, and I pray you will receive it.

[Elfhelm]

I wrote:

And the way American Christians seem to think it's OK to bomb civilians...

RÃ*an replied:

I just want to lovingly remind you of your statement that you "practice absolute honesty". I think you KNOW this statement about bombing civilians is untrue, Elfhelm.

I must point out the word "seems" that I used. The context is in terms of my view of the world we live in. So it is an honest statement about the way the world seems to be to me. I have read a few sides of the discussion of Christianity and War. One side thinks Jesus was a pacifist (I am of this ilk), while the other states that there can be a "just war" fought with Christian principles which includes no killing of innocents. Both sides use Biblical passages to prove their points. However, in reality, innocents are being killed even as we debate these niceties and none of these people who argue in favor of a "just war" are being vigilant about making sure that it is conducted according to those Biblical rules they cite. They seem to accept that as long as the commander says prayers, that's enough. For me that isn't enough.

So again, the context was in terms of my perception of the world. It seems as if it's OK to bomb civilians, so I think they got Jesus all wrong. I mentioned it only because you asked what I believe. And I really think we enter a zone here where we could accidentally hurt feelings. On an individual basis, I don't think anyone HERE thinks it is OK to bomb civilians. But it doesn't seem like anyone cares to insure that the engagement is carried out according to these principles. Here's one of the best things I've seen on the subject:

12 Biblical Rules of Engagement in The Just War

There is such a thing as a just war. Sin in the world and the unwillingness of evil peoples to live peaceably with those around them oftentimes oppressing and victimizing vulnerable people makes a just war to stop them a necessity. War is a horrible thing (see Psalm 79:3; Jeremiah 7:33; 15:3; 16:4; 34:20). But if peace and justice cannot be established by peaceful means, a just war is the alternative. The Bible does give guidelines for a just war and they are as follows.

1. Pray for guidance in a just war. Prayer is a declaration of dependence upon God and in the tension between attempting to avoid war as much as possible and also not appeasing foolishly an aggressor to try and maintain peace, God's wisdom and direction is indispensable. God's wisdom is obtained through prayer (2 Samuel 5:17-19).

2. Those fighting a just war should depend on God's resources, not just their own earthly resources. The resources of God are far more important than any earthly resources. For instance, God's angels are far mightier than any human soldier and He will send them to help when we fight in a just war (2 Chronicles 32:8; Psalm 3; 4:8; 35:1-7; Isaiah 37:36).

3. Always keep in mind that earthly wars have spiritual elements. Paul was inspired to write that our primary battle is not against flesh and blood people but against Satan and his minions and we should fight it as such (Ephesians 6:10-18).

4. As much as is possible, overcome evil with good. Even though military force is sometimes needed, mercy and goodness is to be shown to enemies as much as possible (2 Samuel 9:1-8; Psalm 35:11-16; Proverbs 25:21-22; Matthew 5:43-48; Luke 6:27-36; Romans 12:14,20-21).

5. Don't war vengefully but leave revenge in the hands of God. A heart of revenge can lead to atrocities in war. Those fighting a just war must release any thought of revenge to the Lord. Who better to dish out justice rightly than the Just One of the universe? (Romans 12:19-20; 1 Thessalonians 1:6-7).

6. Don't take pleasure in the demise or pain of your enemy. Even though the elimination of a ruthless enemy is sought, we should never take pleasure in the pain of another no matter how evil. Taking pleasure in the pain experienced by an enemy displeases God (Proverbs 24:17-18).

7. Understand there are those who will refuse peaceful means of reconciliation or problem resolution. Some refuse diplomacy (Palm 120:6-7).

8. Understand there are ruthless and evil entities in the world. These need to be dealt with for they destroy the peace and victimize the helpless at every turn (Psalm 41:5; 54:3; Ezekiel 36:5-7).

9. Those who persist in evil and refuse to live at peace are to be firmly dealt with in the Lord. We are not to sit back and do nothing or continually appease those who do evil (Psalm 109). We are not to be naive or pacifistic.

10. Allow the enemy to undermine and defeat himself if possible. Dictators and tyrants are often destroyed from within. Wait for this and facilitate it if you can (Psalm 57:6).

11. Forgive enemies once they are defeated. Jesus said, "Forgive them Father for they know not what they do." Stephen said, "Lord, do not charge them with this sin." We should treat enemies as God has treated us for we were enemies of God before coming to Christ and He forgave us (Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60; Colossians 1:21-23).

12. Fear God more than the enemy. This will motivate those fighting a just war to fight it according to God's rules and not their own (Matthew 10:28).

While I think Jesus was a pacifist, I'm not a pacifist. I would be proud to say my country adhered to these rules. Instead, I feel let down by the people who should be the first to object.

I think if a religion is true, it should actually WORK. Over the last two thousand years, it hasn't worked yet. So I think the religion is at fault. I'm definitely not tossing out Jesus, just the religions that don't seem to represent him right.

[Nurvingiel]

Sometimes you have to defend yourself, I agree. But to do so and back yourself up with the Bible seems wrong to me. If you have to defend yourself, do it. But why make it out that you're riteous in doing so? No one is riteous in a fight or a war. You just do what you have to do.

[Rían]

And I'd like to bring up a quick new angle here, then I have to go for a bit and might not be able to get back on until tomorrow.

Someone asked me a long time ago about what areas I doubt, or have trouble with, in the Christian worldview. I think this is a great question, and one worth answering, if one is brave and honest enough to do so, so I will be bold enough to open my heart and share with you guys, because again, I am a truth-seeker - I'm not interested in winning any debate or argument, only in seeking truth and loving others and loving God.

I chose the username "Rian" because I thought it sounded pretty, and it was short . I don't think Rian did the right thing leaving Tuor to the elves (and I almost didn't pick that name because of this), but I can understand why she did it, because of her great grief over Huor. I like this description of her, which can be found in Unfinished Tales: "By hard fate was she born into such days, for she was gentle of heart and loved neither hunting nor war." I feel like that description fits me, and that's where I have some trouble with the Bible.

I look at the Old Testament, and frankly, I see some verses on fighting that are hair-raising. Yet the more I consider it and research it, the more I come to understand it, altho I don't like it. Yet liking or not liking don't affect if something is true/right or not. Life is hard, and painful, and so is the truth, sometimes, IMO.

And another aspect about this - if someone is completely happy with their worldview and has absolutely no doubts about it, I would seriously wonder about their mental state, or I would conclude that they haven't put much thought into it. And I think the fact that there are some areas in the Christian wv (I'll abbreviate "worldview" as wv now, OK?) that don't sit completely right with me is really just an indication that I didn't make the whole thing up! It has the feel, as it were, of reality, as opposed to a pie-in-the-sky made-up philosophy. Do you see what I mean?

So I read verses about fighting and killing in the OT (which, btw, were NOT all condoned by God!) and wonder why it had to be this way. Yet I also see people confusing killing with ancient weapons with killing cruelly, as if the Israelites had a sword in one hand and a lethal injection syringe in another, and chose to use the sword, and use it in a way that was cruel, to kill a person. People seem to think that just because people had what we would consider barbaric weapons, that necessarily this indicated that people were cruel. I think this is an entirely invalid conclusion, and this should be obvious with a little thought.

Also people think that the people that were killed by the command of God were these totally innocent, nice people. This is inaccurate - many were Baal worshippers, and Moloch worshippers (remember that nice dude, Nurvi, from the other thread?! ), that had "nice" little worship practices such as burning infants alive .

I think societies as a whole have good points, and bad ones. And I think that our society has mistaken apathetic for good. IOW, we are mostly "good", IMO, in our highly civilized countries, because we are well-fed. It's easy to be "good" when life is relatively easy. And I think that one thing the ancient Hebrews had was a strong sense of good, and the courage to do something about it. Now I think they definitely were wrong at times (and so did God, btw), yet I think we're missing something here - we sit on our overweight tushies and watch tv and complain about the world - yet how many of us get up and do something?

Anyway, this is not near as much as I wanted to explain, but I wanted to at least start the topic. I do NOT like the killing I see in the OT, yet - I'm not afraid to dive in and look at it seriously, and take it to God and ask "why?" Yet I think it's important HOW we ask "Why"? Some people ask it, but don't want to know - they just want an excuse to defy and argue. And some ask who really want to know. I hope we can all be like that.

Sorry for the very vague and rambling post, but I hope it starts some good discussion.

[Nurvingiel]

Boy do I ever remember that Moloch guy! *twitch*

You bring up a good point Ri. (What good is a short name if there's an impossible accent on the "i"? )

War is a reality for us flawed, passionate, and sometimes misguided human beings. It's easy for me to live in peace, because I have a home, food, shelter, warmth, and clean water. My rights are respected, and I have freedom of speech. I have no reason to fight. In fact, pretty much everyone in "western" society doesn't have a reason to fight.

But then there's another level of complexity. When governments and nations are involved, there's an aspect to the situation that is outside the control of any one person or small group of people. Events set in motion can have uncontrollable or unforseen consequences.

[Rían]

Elfhelm and Nurvi posted while I was typing -

Yes, Elfhelm, I definitely saw that you used "seem", yet couldn't you have said "SOME American Christians seem to think it's OK to bomb civilians", to be more accurate? Or said what you said : "On an individual basis, I don't think anyone HERE thinks it is OK to bomb civilians." along with the original statement?

Y'know, I probably should have taken that concern to you in a PM instead of a public post. I'm sorry - I was just over-sensitive from the other thread. I should have given you the benefit of the doubt since you used "seem". I'm sorry - would you please forgive me?

ANd thanks for sharing those rules - those are really good!

I don't have time to comment on the rest of the post, or Nurvi's, either - see you guys later! And I'm sorry for being a twit sometimes but at least I'm a twit that cares about you guys! Please bear with me and forgive me...

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

You bring up a good point Ri. (What good is a short name if there's an impossible accent on the "i"? )

(did you notice I left out the accent in my post? I hardly ever do that because I like the way it looksso much! But I'm tired and in a hurry now And you have my blessings to type "Ri" WITHOUT the accent! I like it that way better, actually! altho I like the accent on the full name)

BYE!

[Elfhelm]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Elfhelm and Nurvi posted while I was typing -

Yes, Elfhelm, I definitely saw that you used "seem", yet couldn't you have said "SOME American Christians seem to think it's OK to bomb civilians", to be more accurate? Or said what you said : "On an individual basis, I don't think anyone HERE thinks it is OK to bomb civilians." along with the original statement?

Y'know, I probably should have taken that concern to you in a PM instead of a public post. I'm sorry - I was just over-sensitive from the other thread. I should have given you the benefit of the doubt since you used "seem". I'm sorry - would you please forgive me?

ANd thanks for sharing those rules - those are really good!

I understood as soon as I saw your question. I wasn't clear. No problem. I hope it's clear now. Forgiveness was there before it was given.

On to that other thing... those "hard parts" of the OT. Here's an interesting quote from religioustolerance.org:

Destruction of the residents of Canaan

The Israelites invaded Canaan and, under God's instructions, exterminated seven nations in widespread acts of genocide: the Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites. They continued to commit genocide against other groups.

Deuteronomy 7:1-2: "... the seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them."

Joshua 6:21: "And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.

This latter passage describes one event in the invasion of Canaan by the ancient Israelites. After the walls of the city of Jericho fell, the soldiers ran into the city, and killed all its inhabitants: elderly men and women, mature men and women, pregnant women, youths, boys, girls, infants and newborns. Their goal was to entirely wipe out the Canaanite culture by destroying its people; this is one definition of genocide. Incidentally, the people were butchered by the edge of the sword, because the weapons did not have pointed ends.

Joshua 10:40-41: "So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded. And Joshua smote them from Kadesh-barnea even unto Gaza, and all the country of Goshen, even unto Gibeon."

As recorded in Joshua 11:19-23, God had "hardened the hearts" of the Canaanites, so that all but one city attempted to destroy the Israelites in battle. The sole exception were the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon. "As the LORD commanded Moses", all of the rest were defeated in battle; their cities and populations were destroyed. This included people of all ages: men, women children, infants and newborns.

Joshua 8:24 - City of Ai
Joshua 10:26 - Joshua murdered five defenseless kings of the Amorites in cold blood.
Joshua 10:28 - City of Makkedah
Joshua 10:29 - City of Libnah
Joshua 10:31 - City of Lachish
Joshua 10:33 - City of Gezer "...Joshua smote him and his people until he had left him none remaining."
Joshua 10:34 - City of Elgon "They left none remaining."
Joshua 10:37 - City of Hebron
Joshua 10:38 - City of Debir
Numbers 21:2-3 - City of Hormah
Numbers 21:33-35: Land of Bashan "...they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land."
Deuteronomy 2:21-24: The Ammonite, Horim, and Avim people.
Deuteronomy 2:26-35 - Land of Heshbon "...we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain."
Judges 4:16 - City of Sisera

I think there are many hard things to stomach in the OT, but this one is the hardest for me. I used this quote because it was so thorough. I wonder where the discussion will take us. I have heard some people say that the God-who-should-be-feared in the OT and the God-who-is-love in the NT are the same being, but He changed and that's why he sent us Jesus. That answer never convinced me. My crazy opinion is that there is a viscious being out there who calls himself God, but in fact lies, and it's easy to recognize him by his actions and the commands he gives (even today) to people. And I think SOME Muslims and SOME Christians ( ) are confused and worship that false god when they are supposed to be worshipping the God that Jesus and Mohammed were talking about. Crazy, huh?

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Elfhelm and Nurvi posted while I was typing -

I don't have time to comment on the rest of the post, or Nurvi's, either - see you guys later! And I'm sorry for being a twit sometimes but at least I'm a twit that cares about you guys! Please bear with me and forgive me...

No worries RÃ*an (your name is extra spiffy with the accent ) half the reason I call you Ri is so I don't have to copy and paste your name though!

Who said you were a twit?! I bet no one did... why would you call yourself that?

[Elfhelm]

It's making me chuckle so I hope nobody minds if I post off topic just this once...

Nurv, your language uses 0228, 0229, and 0246. Surely a Swede is comfortable with the [Alt] key. So all you have to remember is RÃ*an uses 0237.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Elfhelm

I understood as soon as I saw your question. I wasn't clear. No problem. I hope it's clear now. Forgiveness was there before it was given.

Thank you very much

On to that other thing... those "hard parts" of the OT. Here's an interesting quote from religioustolerance.org:

Thanks for the quote and your comments. Those are good examples of things that bother me, too.

I think there are many hard things to stomach in the OT, but this one is the hardest for me. I used this quote because it was so thorough. I wonder where the discussion will take us. I have heard some people say that the God-who-should-be-feared in the OT and the God-who-is-love in the NT are the same being, but He changed and that's why he sent us Jesus. That answer never convinced me.

I don't blame you for not being convinced, and it's not biblical, either, considering that God says He never changes. Life is complex, and I don't have a problem with seeking complex answers for hard questions, and I'd like to explore this with whoever wants to. I think if a wv just had pat, easy answers, it wouldn't be much of a wv. It wouldn't be sufficient to take on the complexity of life.

My crazy opinion is that there is a viscious being out there who calls himself God, but in fact lies, and it's easy to recognize him by his actions and the commands he gives (even today) to people. And I think SOME Muslims and SOME Christians ( ) are confused and worship that false god when they are supposed to be worshipping the God that Jesus and Mohammed were talking about. Crazy, huh?

No, it's a rather logical option, IMO, and one I'll think about.

(and thank you for the "some" and the smilie )

I like to ponder things, and I only have 30 minutes before I have to pick up the kiddos, so I won't address this topic any further today, as I'm going to be busy all evening, too. Darn RL!

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

No worries RÃ*an (your name is extra spiffy with the accent ) half the reason I call you Ri is so I don't have to copy and paste your name though!

"extra spiffy" - I like that

Yes, I instantly saw thru your devious plot to save copy-and-paste time when you started calling me "Ri"

(smart plot!) (irritating accent mark!) (but it looks so pretty!)

(why do you think I have all those accented letters in my siggy? My old computer didn't work with the alt-number thingy to get accented letters!)

Who said you were a twit?! I bet no one did... why would you call yourself that?

I called myself that because I acted like one but it's all better now. If you don't understand, don't worry