oldiesman

Completely agree. Thank you.

No, and no. But "answers" aren't always there for me either. Hi oldiesman, thank you for your answer. The action I was referring in my question though is whether it is okay with God for believers to choose which scriptures to believe and which to discard. Phil 2:12 does not speak to this. It speaks about how obedience is required when working out ones salvation because God will be working in them, at the same time, to be willing to do his good pleasure. Phil 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. 13For it is God which works in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. (The phrase "fear and trembling" is used in two more verses and obedience is mentioned in them as well. They are 2 Cor 7: 15 and Eph 6:5.) Agree, and agree. The first one, I don't know if it's ok with God to believe one "translation" over another; I think it's one of those mysteries but I do believe that God will be judging that from what he sees in our hearts. The second post, agree, eternal life comes with conditions. Thx for the correction.

No argument. It's readily apparent that one must desire to accept all that responsibility presumably for a greater purpose. Here is a catholic prayer to the Holy Ghost: 'oh Holy Ghost, beloved of my soul, I adore thee. Enlighten me, guide me, strengthen me, console me. Tell me what I should do. Give me your orders. I promise to submit myself to all that you desire of me, and accept all that you permit to happen to me. Let me only know thy will.'

Charity, these are profound questions but I will try to answer as succinctly as possible. Disagreements welcome: Christians are free to do this but my question is “Does God say it is okay to do this anywhere in his word?” "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling"? So far for me, becoming an atheist meant that there's not enough of the bible that: - teaches a god who always loves unconditionally and whose gifts are totally free The gifts themselves are free -- no amount of good works can earn them; but, later must be used, otherwise they basically are forfeited. The fruit from the gifts then would be conditional. Like muscles atrophy if left unused? - is authentic without man-made changes, additions and deletions Agree; no originals exist that we know of? - is not based on ancient myths and philosophers Ancient myths can be true or false -- guess it depends on one's own belief? - does not teach absolute obedience to a god or his son in order to avoid punishment (which is not the same as consequences) and hell Agree in part. Punishment is part of getting back on the right track; like our earthly parents would do. But eternal torture (the worst level in hell) is hard for me to believe that God would allow this. - consistently reliable when it comes to putting my trust in what it says. Agree

In the short clip Mr. Hitchens refers to the fear of death. Does he mean 'eternal death'. If so, I would agree, it's there for me. The only comfort I see in eternal death if there's any at all is, it's not eternal fire and brimstone torture. Otherwise I think it's eternally tragic and something to be afraid about.

This carries with it a couple of interesting thoughts at least: (1) The Douay Rheims version says "vomit". This to me conveys the idea that Jesus' reaction to an unconcerned or disinterested churchgoer is one of nausea and disgust. (2) Preterists believe all this already happened, sometime around 70 A.D. and/or shortly thereafter, and the whole bible already has been fulfilled (full preterism); Jesus REALLY meant "I come quickly" he didn't mean 2000+ years later; and talk of "end times" today is BS. "Gathering together" is BS. Preterists also believe the 'millenial kingdom' already happened, but don't ask me how. (Catholics, who have been described as "partial preterists" also think the "rapture" is BS.) Preterism - Wikipedia added for reference purposes

Yes he's funny and very bold. Obviously he threw away the idea a long time ago that he will be meeting the lord when he dies, LOL. BTW Raf, wanted to ask you: is "humanism" the same as "naturalism". Please advise, thx.

Thx Raf. I got to the below comment and it made me smile. Gotta get to work now though! I will read the rest later or tomorrow. "The invisible and the non-existent often look very much alike."

Raf it's two hours long and judging from the first 7 minutes, really can't take her comic act. Can you summarize the most important and impressive points from your point of view?

I hope posts aren't being censored here.. all comments welcome far as I am concerned. Thx.

That explains more, thx Raf.

Got it, thx.

I share this view and believe it was designed to eventually be a base for the one body, i.e., 'the Body of Christ' as we know it.

Charity, if you decide to try any other religion(s) please post about it; would be interested in hearing about your experience.

Respectfully, what is the standard that we may agree on in this thread: the bible is fiction? or the bible happened but some refuse to believe it? or something else?