God alone provides Salvation - Ezekiel 36

[Pat_De]

What make sense to me might not make sense to others, or else all would come to believe in only one belief system. Provide that the Bible was canonized by men, how do u know that u’re not using the wrong Bible? Given that the book of Romans was put in there by men, how do you know for sure that it is true? How do you test the book of Romans given that the whole Bible was canonized by the Church? Jesus Himself never told His disciples to write down His word, then it must follow that the 4 Gospel must be unbiblical. Did the author of Hebrews told the people to put the book in as part of the Scripture? Did Paul and Peter told their followers to do likewise? Then it must follow that the whole Bible itself is unbiblical.

How did God teach you? -edited out-

What do people do when they read Romans 9? What if one drive at a different conclusion than you? How do you know if that person is right or wrong anyway? Tell me why should I believe in your interpretation rather than what he early Church Fathers, the ones that canonized the Bible believed? Tell me why, tell me how to test all these things without authority.

Jesus didn;t invest His authority to the Bible, you should remember who did He invest authority to, it was the Church, through St.Peter, that Jesus gave His power. And it was by that same Church that produced our Bible, the same book that you’re holding.

What did Paul say in regards to the Bereans? **10 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed, and also not a few of the Greeks, prominent women as well as men.

In Psalm 86 we read: **"10 For You are great and do wondrous deeds; You alone are God. 11 Teach me Your way, O LORD; I will walk in Your truth; Unite my heart to fear Your name. 12 I will give thanks to You, O Lord my God, with all my heart, And will glorify Your name forever. **

Psalm 25 Make me know Your ways, O LORD; Teach me Your paths.

Psalm 94 **"Blessed is the man whom You chasten, O LORD, And whom You teach out of Your law; **

Psalm 119 Blessed are You, O LORD; Teach me Your statutes.

Psalm 119 Teach me, O LORD, the way of Your statutes, And I shall observe it to the end.

Psalm 119 **The earth is full of Your lovingkindness, O LORD; Teach me Your statutes. **

Psalm 119 O accept the freewill offerings of my mouth, O LORD, And teach me Your ordinances.

Romans 10 ***"14 How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? ***

You might want to read verses 12-21 to really get the full context here.

Luke 22: ***"You are those who have stood by Me in My trials; 29 and just as My Father has granted Me a kingdom, I grant you 30 that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. ***

What if the Lord did not grant?

Now this is probably one of the most definitive teaching about how one understands the Scriptures and the things of God in Ephesians 3:

14 For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name, 16 that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man, 17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; {and} that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God.

I’ll stop at this last one, but I can keep showing that repentance, justification, sanctification, glorification, redemption and even faith are grants or gifts from God; without which no one would either chose God or be in heaven, no not one…praise be to God!!

2 Timothy 2 states: *The Lord’s slave must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, 25 with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, * 26 and they may come to their senses {and escape} from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will.

The point is that God does it all and he uses the preacher and the message of the Gospel to effectually call in the elect. And if you believe that is unfair, then consider that all are rebellious toward God and not one, no not one would chose God because our nature is so opposed to His that unless He granted mercy and grace, no one would be in heaven because no one would chose God. Two religions in the world and that is it; only two. The religion of human achievement (man-centered) where God does His part and hopefully man does his part and in the end he will make it to heaven or the true way of salvation which is by God’s grace alone, through His gift of faith alone, through His Son alone for His glory alone. Only two and you can’t have God living in you and not know it.

 

[Pat_De]

Good night and may God grant all of you salvation; it is late and got to get some sleep so Lord willing I can continue on tomorrow.

 

[pcusack1]

Why do you have Catholic marked as your religion; what are you really claiming to be a Jew who believes God just has taken a vacation?

We’ll shall soon see who is the real Messiah.

On another note, God is always widdling down the choosen people.: Able over Cain, Jacob over Esau, Isaac over Ishmael; Noah over the world, etc etc. Don’t be surprized if you are not in the Remanent.

 

[pcusack1]

How many sins did it take to cast out 1/3 of all the angels? How many sins did it take for God to cast man out of the garden? What does the Scripture teach about how many sins need to committed against God to condemn a person. Just one.

Well the Angels had full knowledge of God -they saw him face to face. Yet they rejected him with full knowledge of what they were doing. You can’t compare our situation on earth as dull wited creatures with the superior angels.

BTW why do people always attack the person on htese posts. My religion is of no influence on the Truth.

 

[Crown_of_Thorns]

A.D.M.G.e.i.H.M.

You are putting words in my mouth; I never said there was not a visible church in fact I said their are churches filled with tares among the wheat; so what are you talking about???

I sincerely apologise for misrepresenting what you wrote before. Perhaps it is truer to say that you believe in the visible Church, but reject it’s authority to teach the truth in a way that is binding on its members, because it is so full of tares that its teaching has become corrupted.

If that is what you are meaning to say, I would respond that Christ’s reference to the Church in Matthew 18 and to Peter’s authority to “bind and loose” in Matthew 16 necessitate the existence of an authority that will remain, even until the end of time. If it is possible for the original Church of Christ to become corrupted in its teaching, then Jesus’ command to “tell it to the Church” in Matthew 18 becomes meaningless, because as soon as the Church would decide against the claim of a party, that party would simply claim that the Church was corrupted. The whole thing would very quickly fall apart, with the result that the objective truth of the Gospel would be lost amid a sea of claim and counterclaim - of which this thread is a prime example.

To a non - Christian who has read the bible you are able to offer your own interpretation of it. I am able to offer the consistent interpretation taught by the Church over 2000 years. Only the Catholic Church offers an interpretation of Scripture that has a basis other than individual interpretation.

You are kidding yourself if you believe the Catholic church is the only visible church on earth or has the authority to dispute matters of church discipline in non-Catholic churches. I know you did not specifically say that, but the implication is either they can exercise discipline or they don’t see the other church buildings as churches. The local church and the offices of Bishop and Deacons at the local level is very clear in the pastoral epistles.

The Catholic Church is the original Church. The Orthodox Churches were part of the original Church, but are now in schism. Please God, in my lifetime that schism will be healed.

Other protestant churches aren’t churches in the proper sense that they can trace their roots back to the apostles. They are more properly to be regarded as “ecclesial communities”, which is how the Catholic Church refers to them in official documents.

Everyone knows the Pontiff was an invention and very recent in light of 2000 years since Pentecost. All one has to do is read the first 3 chapters in Revelation and you will see names of seven specific localized churches which Jesus Himself names by name.

The papacy is not a modern invention. We can trace the succession of Popes right back to St. Peter. The existence of localised Churches doesn’t disprove this at all. Catholic Churches in different cultures today have a different feel and different customs - but one Faith and one set of teachings.

Not only that, but before Vat II, the Catholic church was very inclusive within itself and its members and the need to be in the Catholic membership to be saved and now liberalism has infested the church to the point where there are multiple paths to God and people are Catholic even if they don’t know it.

No, the Church doesn’t teach that there are multiple paths to God. Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life, and he founded one Church, who continues to guard the deposit of Faith Christ left her. The ordinary means of salvation is through the life of grace in the Church.

However, the Church has reflected on the possibility of salvation and has concluded that there may be extraordinary paths to salvation. These may range from those who lived and died having never had the Gospel proclaimed to them, right through to faithful protestant Christians who never knew the truth that the Catholic Church was the one true Church. However, these extraordinary paths are pure speculation, after reflection on the just but merciful nature of God.

 

[Crown_of_Thorns]

Don’t get me wrong; I have nothing against the Catholic people or the Catholic church, but I do believe they teach another gospel and that they have been so liberalized that it has taken a 180 degree turn in less than 60 years from my perspective only. Just as the Catholic church believed since the reformation and even earlier that the “Protestants” were apostates, but now they are “separated brethren”; that is Liberalism. It goes both ways for many Protestant mainline denominations have been infested with Liberalism and don’t even preach or teach the gospel or the nature of God or the nature of man. Those that do are called bigoted and narrow-minded, but the Gospel is very narrow. IOW, the visible church is a mess and the true church is in perfect unity and yet to be revealed.

The Catholic Church has not changed any of her consistent teachings. The example that you cite of the description of protestants is an example of a change of language, not a change of teaching. The original protestants were, of course, apostates. They denied the religion to which they had belonged, which is the epitome of apostasy. However, as the years have gone on, each generation has become further removed from the original act of apostasy and so it less culpable for it, such that the Church recognised that “one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation]” (Catechism of the Catholic Church 818). This change of language is also recognition that the old language was unhelpful to ecumenism, which may one day heal the Church of schism.

The Church doesn’t however, change in her actual teachings. She may reflect on them over the course of time and see a deeper meaning, but core dogmas can NEVER be changed, which is why women may never be admitted to the priesthood.

With regard to the accusation that the Church doesn’t preach the gospel, or the nature of God, or the nature of man, I would point out:

a) Nobody is perfect and there will be some priests and some Catholics who do this more and better than others, and there may be a range of reasons why the weaker participants are weaker - some of those reasons will be because of sins for which they are culpable, others for non - culpable reasons. In the end, God will judge, not me.

b) What you really mean is that the Church doesn’t teach what you believe about the gospel, the nature of God and the nature of man. But with respect, how do you know that you are right. Whenever someone comes along with a new interpretation of the gospel, it would be absurd for the Church to abandon what she has always taught from the very beginning with the apostles. The Church’s official teaching is the truth, taught in every age. You may protest against it, but unless you are speaking with an authority greater than yourself, why would the Church depart from the teachings of Christ and the apostles?

May God bless you and keep you always and guide you in the path of justice and truth.

 

[Pat_De]

I care not a whit whether it took 6 days, or 6 billion years.

I care that God created all the universe, and that God cared and loved me enough that he created me… and of course all of you, too.

144,000 is symbolic, my brother. Every theologian knew that until recently.

Now you are just making stuff up. Your lack of reverence for His word equates to the same to the One who spoke them.

 

[NotWorthy]

Now you are just making stuff up. Your lack of reverence for His word equates to the same to the One who spoke them.

How do you equate my comment with “your lack of reverence for His Word”?!? Do you know of any of the Church Fathers that said the 144,000 was literal?

My only “lack of reverence” on this thread has been for your interpretation skills.

 

[Pat_De]

You know, I really don’t understand this theology. You’re saying that God made man bad? Man had no choice but to be wretched? And then God got mad at him for being wretched?

God made man good, but man rebelled against God and God cursed the entire creation. So since the fall of man, sin entered into the whole creation including man. So by nature man is a sinner as many characters in the Bible proclaim by phrases such as “in sin did my mother conceive”. I’m trying to get you to see how bad sin really is. Until one is broken to pieces over their sin and understand the nature of the Object of that sin is they will never see God. Look at Isaiah, the most righteous man in God’s sight at the time and when He saw God’s holiness he cursed himself and said I am a man with unclean lips and with a people of the same (paraphrased). This was a prophet of God, one whom God had already set His love upon, who had a glimpse of His holiness and he cursed himself. Think about that for a moment. People are perishing because they do not understand just how bad sin is and the Bible speaks so much on it and the consequences of it. People have no fear of God because preaching has made God the God of love and He is the God of love, but to display that He also is glorified in His anger and He is very angry God with sin and sinners that are unregenerate and will not keep striving with men. Jesus first words out of His mouth when He started His earthly ministry as recorded in Mark 1:15 was this:“The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.” Jesus is the Gospel! Eat, sleep, and drink the Gospel. But the good news is predicated to an understanding of the bad news.

Salvation is a supernatural miracle wrought by God alone.
Listen to Paul in Romans 8 speak about the creation and man: 18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. 23 And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for {our} adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.

This is the groaning of the Christian heart; if you are a Christian you know you are because you have that groaning, you love what God loves and you hate what He hates and you know what those things are because you want so much to be like Him you read and study and read and study and pray to be like Him and your life is consumed with that; not the material things of this world or doing things out of fear of going to hell. Do you see or understand now where I am coming from?

 

[Pat_De]

We’ll shall soon see who is the real Messiah.

On another note, God is always widdling down the choosen people.: Able over Cain, Jacob over Esau, Isaac over Ishmael; Noah over the world, etc etc. Don’t be surprized if you are not in the Remanent.

I already know where I stand before God. I am consumed by the love of God and desire what He desires, that men would come to the knowledge of His truth and be saved and I hate what He hates the things that destroy men’s souls; sin and rebellion against Him. That would include your soul!

 

[Pat_De]

Well the Angels had full knowledge of God -they saw him face to face. Yet they rejected him with full knowledge of what they were doing. You can’t compare our situation on earth as dull wited creatures with the superior angels.

BTW why do people always attack the person on htese posts. My religion is of no influence on the Truth.

No one has full knowledge of God except God; so your first statement is a fallacy and blasphemy against God. The Jews saw God in human flesh and murdered Him, but only because it was part of God’s plan of redemption. The only truth in your post is the last sentence. May God remove the veil of blindness to all of man.

 

[Pat_De]

A.D.M.G.e.i.H.M.
I sincerely apologise for misrepresenting what you wrote before. Perhaps it is truer to say that you believe in the visible Church, but reject it’s authority to teach the truth in a way that is binding on its members, because it is so full of tares that its teaching has become corrupted.

That is not what God’s word teaches; a faithful pastor-teacher is worthy of double honor and respect and likewise the other Deacons or Elders are as well. The fact is that so many tares have entered the Pulpit it is hard to find a faithful local church anymore. They are still out there, but you have to be very discerning as a Christian to know truth from error.

I would respond that Christ’s reference to the Church in Matthew 18 and to Peter’s authority to “bind and loose” in Matthew 16 necessitate the existence of an authority that will remain, even until the end of time.

It is a rare thing to see church discipline in any church; only a few actually practice it according to Scripture. Look at your own church for evidence that what I am saying is true, but it is not just your church it is widespread everywhere.
Look at true discipline on the pastors and put that in light of your own church and tell me this is being practiced; it is not.

17 The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching. 18 For the Scripture says, “YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING,” and “The laborer is worthy of his wages.” 19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses. 20 Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning. 21 I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality. 22 Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others; keep yourself free from sin.

Can you imagine a priest being defrocked before the congregation? Ever seen or even heard of such a thing; yet this is exactly what God says to do and He states the reason why in the second half of verse 20.

It does happen in Protestant churches rarely, but not as often as it should and when it does half the congregation still wants the preacher. It is ridiculous and pervasive.

Concerning Matthew 18 you have it all wrong, but you have to in order to force it into what you believe. Jesus is preaching to a crowd; where do you think the little girl came from and why it has so much of the same language as the Sermon on the Mount?

Concerning the Pope’s authority:
The Roman Catholic Church claims to be sanctioned with an ultimate ruling and infallible teaching authority over the entire Church of Jesus Christ through the unbroken succession of popes and bishops from Peter. Vatican I, which met in 1869-1870, essentially set out the following propositions on the right of papal rule and infallibility:1

   1. Christ gave Peter the primacy of jurisdiction over the entire Church as well as the entire world.
   2. Inherent in the primacy of jurisdiction is also an infallible teaching authority over the entire Church.
   3. This right of jurisdiction is passed down to Peter’s successors, the bishops of Rome, for all time.
   4. When speaking ex cathedra, that is, when speaking in his official capacity as pope, and defining a doctrine on a matter of faith or morals, the Roman pontiff teaches infallibly.
   5. The Roman pontiff has absolute authority in himself; possesses authority over all councils; his judgment cannot be questioned; he, himself, can be judged by no human tribunal.
   6. The Roman Church has ever remained free from all blemish of error and the doctrines of the Catholic faith have always been kept undefiled by her.
   7. If any questions of faith arise within the Church universal they must be defined by the judgment of the Roman pontiff.
   8. It has at all times in the history of the Church been necessary that every Church throughout the world should agree with the Roman Church.
   9. These teachings have always been held by the entire Church through all ages and can be validated by the Scriptures, ***the canons of general councils and the unanimous consent of the Fathers.***
  10. It is necessary for salvation that everyone who professes to be a Christian must be submitted to the authority of the Roman pontiff in all areas of faith, morals and discipline, and if anyone disagrees with these teachings of Vatican I they are anathematized.

This is the cornerstone of the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church’s tradition. According to Vatican I, papal rule and infallibility rest on two foundations: the Scriptures and the facts of history. source:

To a non - Christian who has read the bible you are able to offer your own interpretation of it. I am able to offer the consistent interpretation taught by the Church over 2000 years. Only the Catholic Church offers an interpretation of Scripture that has a basis other than individual interpretation.

This explains why over 2000 years they have interpreted a handful of scriptures and their is no verse by verse commentary on the entire Bible; you can’t fool me. It is also contrary to how the word of God is taught to an individual, which is why you lean on man’s understanding and not on the word of God; calling me a non-Christian. God knows me and set His love in me; does He know you?

However, the Church has reflected on the possibility of salvation and has concluded that there may be extraordinary paths to salvation.

God hasn’t.

 

[Pat_De]

The Catholic Church has not changed any of her consistent teachings. The example that you cite of the description of protestants is an example of a change of language, not a change of teaching. The original protestants were, of course, apostates. They denied the religion to which they had belonged, which is the epitome of apostasy. However, as the years have gone on, each generation has become further removed from the original act of apostasy and so it less culpable for it, such that the Church recognised that “one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation]” (Catechism of the Catholic Church 818). This change of language is also recognition that the old language was unhelpful to ecumenism, which may one day heal the Church of schism.

The Church doesn’t however, change in her actual teachings. She may reflect on them over the course of time and see a deeper meaning, but core dogmas can NEVER be changed, which is why women may never be admitted to the priesthood.

With regard to the accusation that the Church doesn’t preach the gospel, or the nature of God, or the nature of man, I would point out:

a) Nobody is perfect and there will be some priests and some Catholics who do this more and better than others, and there may be a range of reasons why the weaker participants are weaker - some of those reasons will be because of sins for which they are culpable, others for non - culpable reasons. In the end, God will judge, not me.

b) What you really mean is that the Church doesn’t teach what you believe about the gospel, the nature of God and the nature of man. But with respect, how do you know that you are right. Whenever someone comes along with a new interpretation of the gospel, it would be absurd for the Church to abandon what she has always taught from the very beginning with the apostles. The Church’s official teaching is the truth, taught in every age. You may protest against it, but unless you are speaking with an authority greater than yourself, why would the Church depart from the teachings of Christ and the apostles?

May God bless you and keep you always and guide you in the path of justice and truth.

Get real and wake up to the truth; your soul depends on it. Go speak to a pre-vatican II Catholic with your nonsense concerning change to liberalism, which you admitted halfheartedly on the previous post. Furthermore, other threads discuss this very concern to a testimony to what i have stated is the truth and you know it.

 

[Pat_De]

How do you equate my comment with “your lack of reverence for His Word”?!? Do you know of any of the Church Fathers that said the 144,000 was literal?

My only “lack of reverence” on this thread has been for your interpretation skills.

I know Scripture because I have God because God first set His love on me. Now you are limiting your attacks to being personal and making stuff up as you go; very common for the unregenerate who does not knows nor cares anything about the God who gave His only Son and crushed Him so that sinners could escape the day of judgment. Read Romans 3 and see if you don’t see yourself; I did and repented.

When you don’t care if it is six days as God said or 6 billion years and that it doesn’t matter to you, then you show yourself as one who could careless about what God has said, which means you don’t really care regardless of what you claim.

 

[Pat_De]

I’m done with all of you here; you have the truth you can read Ezekiel and Romans 3, 8, & 10 and see the gravity of sin and the way of salvation. What you do with it is between you and God. This has become way to personal for me and I don’t have the restraint that God has and not sin.

 

[fhansen]

God made man good, but man rebelled against God and God cursed the entire creation. So since the fall of man, sin entered into the whole creation including man. So by nature man is a sinner as many characters in the Bible proclaim by phrases such as “in sin did my mother conceive”. I’m trying to get you to see how bad sin really is. Until one is broken to pieces over their sin and understand the nature of the Object of that sin is they will never see God. Look at Isaiah, the most righteous man in God’s sight at the time and when He saw God’s holiness he cursed himself and said I am a man with unclean lips and with a people of the same (paraphrased). This was a prophet of God, one whom God had already set His love upon, who had a glimpse of His holiness and he cursed himself. Think about that for a moment. People are perishing because they do not understand just how bad sin is and the Bible speaks so much on it and the consequences of it. People have no fear of God because preaching has made God the God of love and He is the God of love, but to display that He also is glorified in His anger and He is very angry God with sin and sinners that are unregenerate and will not keep striving with men. Jesus first words out of His mouth when He started His earthly ministry as recorded in Mark 1:15 was this:“The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.” Jesus is the Gospel! Eat, sleep, and drink the Gospel. But the good news is predicated to an understanding of the bad news.

Salvation is a supernatural miracle wrought by God alone.
Listen to Paul in Romans 8 speak about the creation and man: 18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. 23 And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for {our} adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.

This is the groaning of the Christian heart; if you are a Christian you know you are because you have that groaning, you love what God loves and you hate what He hates and you know what those things are because you want so much to be like Him you read and study and read and study and pray to be like Him and your life is consumed with that; not the material things of this world or doing things out of fear of going to hell. Do you see or understand now where I am coming from?

The awareness of sin and the aching for God is nothing new to Catholics-they’re all over the board on this-some with much conviction of sin and a deeper walk and some quite shallow but in any case this is nothing new.

 

[NotWorthy]

I know Scripture because I have God because God first set His love on me. Now you are limiting your attacks to being personal and making stuff up as you go; very common for the unregenerate who does not knows nor cares anything about the God who gave His only Son and crushed Him so that sinners could escape the day of judgment. Read Romans 3 and see if you don’t see yourself; I did and repented.

When you don’t care if it is six days as God said or 6 billion years and that it doesn’t matter to you, then you show yourself as one who could careless about what God has said, which means you don’t really care regardless of what you claim.

Tell you what, brother, Jesus is going to wait til I die before He judges me. I’d appreciate the same from you.

And, now that he’s banned, brother pcusack1 (our “Catholic” brother) won’t be around to judge me either!

 

[fhansen]

I think it’s a sad state of affairs when a religion gets to the point where it’s so convinced of tenets such as the total depravity of man and the need for a solely imputed righteous to justify him and so questions any righteousness that may appear to reside in him that a simple act of loving kindness such as the Good Samaritan demonstrated, let alone Mother Theresa or a caring neighbor down the street, is considered bogus out of hand. This attitude not only defies common sense but can be dangerous and in any case is a sickness that reveals a great deal of immaturity, an immaturity BTW, that I was unfortunately participating in a bit too happily at some points earlier in life.