It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by AllIsOne
I presume you are a "liberal" Christian who believes in Jesus?
Originally posted by AllIsOne
You consider other faiths' prayers to be answered by the one god. Right? But how about this:
John 14:6: "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."
Originally posted by AllIsOne
So, Muslim prayers are answered, i.e. the baby gets healed, but she (as a Muslim) is condemned to an afterlife in hell, because she's got the wrong belief system?
Originally posted by bogomil
(I take it, that you by 'spiritual survival' mean a continuing non-corporeal existence after physical death).
Originally posted by bogomil
IF the bible is true, and IF 'god' is the source of everything, he's the guy, who made all the rules from the beginning.
Originally posted by bogomil
So what do you mean by: "...he will have no choice...". He should be able to do, what he wants.
Originally posted by bogomil
1/ Either we have free will, but if we use it as we please, then we perish. Not much of a free will after all, if we have to go by the rules or else.....
2/ If we don't have free will, then 'god' is ultimately responsible for everything, also for those perishing.
Originally posted by bogomil
It's 'original sin' all over again. The whole point is not about being in contact with 'god', being 'righteous' or loving 'god'; it's about obedience, grovelling and submission to an insane entitity with uncontrollable fits of rage, paranoia and megalomania.
Originally posted by bogomil
This what you want or need to believe personally; fine with me. But don't even suggest, that these fairytales apply to me.
Originally posted by bogomil
I already have my own fairytales, which I try to keep somewhat rational and which I don't push as universal 'truth'.
Originally posted by bogomil
That's certainly a sweeping statement, which could do with some clarification and evidence, if it's not to be taken as an example of bad semantics or a clichée. As it is on its own, it's a clear expression of hidden 'agenda', and that's to be avoided in an open dialogue....isn't it?
Or are you just parrotting something you don't understand?
Originally posted by bogomil
Better get the hostility sorted out first. Fundamentalists with an agenda containing exclusivity, monopolism, elitism and even violence more often than not start from assumptions, which are difficult to uphold except through a 'faith', which 'proves' itself circularly. To hasten sales some of such believers invent their own twisted form of logic, where their messages can be sneaked in through the backdoor. The innocent or naive sometimes buy it.