Evangelism Options

[silly ol' man]

How is his age even remotely relevant to the fact that he is violating everyone who responds to him in this debate with scripture verses to fit each of his arguments, coherent, correct English, and a dignified, respectable demeanor?

I've been following this and smirking every time both of you reply to him because your replies are, simply put, weak. Not only are they teeming with grammatical errors (killing any ethos you might have otherwise held), they are half-witted, childish, and almost always fail to respond adequately.

I'd say you guys are getting owned, but that's just from a mature, anti-tweenage girl point of view.

And don't worry, I'm only 19. Don't go report me to the e-police.

[sweetangel2128]

I've been following this and smirking every time both of you reply to him because your replies are, simply put, weak. Not only are they teeming with grammatical errors (killing any ethos you might have otherwise held), they are half-witted, childish, and almost always fail to respond adequately.

In what way is my response weak? And who cares if theres grammatical errors. The stuff that I mentioned in all my posts were actual facts in the Bible.

[silly ol' man]

Things like "well I don't think the Bible is true" doesn't really validate your entire post. And that's just one example.

[sweetangel2128]

Things like "well I don't think the Bible is true" doesn't really validate your entire post. And that's just one example.

True it is just one example. Read the others

[kimmytree]

How is his age even remotely relevant to the fact that he is violating everyone who responds to him in this debate with scripture verses to fit each of his arguments, coherent, correct English, and a dignified, respectable demeanor?

I've been following this and smirking every time both of you reply to him because your replies are, simply put, weak. Not only are they teeming with grammatical errors (killing any ethos you might have otherwise held), they are half-witted, childish, and almost always fail to respond adequately.

I'd say you guys are getting owned, but that's just from a mature, anti-tweenage girl point of view.

And don't worry, I'm only 19. Don't go report me to the e-police.

Grammatical errors? Are you kidding me? Its a chat room, who cares. Its n0t lyk3 w3'r3 sp3aking lyk3 dis. And it's not like we're writting a research paper or something. Get over it. And tweenage? Give me a break. And my posts are by no means childish. I'm 17, and an honor roll student.

How are our replies weak? We're both backing up our responses with just as much info as he is. We're just not throwing out bs examples of parachutes and jumping out of planes. So is that what's making our responses weak?

And if you're so grammatically skilled and mature, why not participate in the debate instead of sitting back and watching?

[sdingfelder]

From Heath21:
I do have one question though if the Bible is real then how come they've only found bits and pieces of scrolls and they have a whole book? Where'd they get there info? And what proof do you have that it is real? Besides your Faith????

Why not challenge yourself to study the Dead Sea Scrolls as well as how solid the whole New Covenant is. The Bible (Old as well as New Covenants) is a solid, preseved document.

From happykmd:
So are non Christians children of wrath? Would that include Jews?
Wow, that has to be like the most twisted thing I've ever heard.

That's exactly right. Yes to both questions.

2 Chronicles 19:7

"Wherefore now let the fear of the LORD be upon you; take heed and do it: for there is no iniquity with the LORD our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts."

Romans 2:11

"For there is no respect of persons with God"

Growing up, I was constantly told that Jews are God's Chosen People. Now, that's from the standard, Conservative Jewish home. I never bothered to ask what we were chosen for. Scripture shows that the Jews were chosen for the following: (1) to preserve Scripture, (2) to bring forth the Messiah, and (3) to bring the Messiah back. The Jews are not chosen to go to Heaven just for being Jewish.

From happykmd:
Okay, your totally taking the verse out of context and interpreting it to your own advantage. Here's EXACTLY was the verse says, according to the King James Version -

I'm impressed that you'd use the KJV -- good job...

From happykmd:
"Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others."

You know what that says to me? That we USED to be children of wrath. (IE, before Christ died for us). Try to defend yourself on that one.

Oh, and lets continue on and see what the Bible has to say after that verse.

2:4 - But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
(see, that contradicts what you said earlier - he does love us all)

2:5 - Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, by grace ye are saved.

I think that last verse says it all. Heck, go ahead and read the rest of the chapter. It says NOTHING about having to accept Jesus to go to Heaven... and mentions absolutely NOTHING about being damned if you dont.

Wow. Talk about out of context. I didn't realize that I should've asked if you wanted the Bible study.

First, let's look at the context of the Book of Ephesians:
Ephesians 1:1

"Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:"

This is written to the Believers ("saints") in Ephesus. This is not written to those who are not true Christians.

Ephesians 2:1 - 9

"And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;"

Read through chapter one to get to this point. The "you" here are those who have been "quickened" -- Believers. There were dead in trespasses and sins as opposed to those he's not speaking to -- those are not Believers and are still dead in their trespasses and sins.

"Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:"

Before being Believers ("in time past") they walked in the way of the world, walking according to Satan ("the prince of the power of the air").

"Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others."

Prior to becoming a Believer, "we all had" our time in the past being an unregenerate sinner -- fulfilling the desires of the flesh and were children of wrath.

"But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,"

Here's the difference, though, for the Believer.

"Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ,"

The Believer was dead in sins, but has been, once again, "quickened" together with Christ

"And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:"

"Quickened" and saved

"Not of works, lest any man should boast."

From happykmd:
Owned.

As for the context, this was written to the Believer:

1 Corinthians 6:20

"For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's."

I am owned -- thankfully -- by the One who paid for me with His shed blood. Who are you owned by ?

From Heath21:
Both of those verses tell me that Adam was in fact created first and then the Garden of Eden and then Eve was created seeing that Adam was lonely.

I will certainly give credit where it is due, Heath21. I never said that I couldn't be wrong. I was wrong on this one.

From Heath21:
Secondly, you stated that the Bible says that Adam was only banished from the Garden of Eden but it doesn't mention Eve at all being banished. Incorrect. Heres the verse:

Genesis 3:23

23: So the Lord God banished Adam and his wife from the Garden of Eden, and he sent Adam out to cultivate the ground from which he had been made.

This is where it's helpful to go to not only other versions, but also to the original Hebrew & Aramaic. Remember that the Old Covenant was written in Hebrew and Aramaic where the New Covenant was written in Greek.

KJV
Genesis 3:23

"Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken."

Hebrew Tanach
Genesis 3:23

"And the Lord God sent him out of the Garden of Eden, to till the soil, whence he had been taken."

The word from which "sent him forth" or "sent him out" comes is the Hebrew word, "shalach" (shaw-lakh'). If, as your version states, it was supposed to be translated with "and his wife", then there would be the additional Hebrew words "ishshah" which is used in Genesis 2:25, Genesis 3:8, as "and his wife".

Clearly, Adam left with his wife -- otherwise Cain and Abel wouldn't have been born.

Remember that Eve was made to be Adam's helpmeet -- his best friend and helper. Adam was held responsible as the rest of Scripture says that the husband is responsible for the family. It is the husband who will be held accountable for what happens in his family.

From Heath21:
In this verse I believe when they say the "world" that includes EVERYONE not a select few.

You're right -- it does say "world". I never contested that.

He died for the world, but it doesn't say He died for those who would not follow Him. It doesn't say that everyone's saved based on His dying for the world. It is that the world has the opportunity to be saved based on His Sacrifice. His gift is available for anyone in the world who will do as it says in Acts 2:38

"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

The gift of the Holy Ghost only comes after what's called being "born again". I'm sure you've heard this term. From what you've said in your posts, I know you're not born again. Since, though, I've been accused of making assumptions without asking first: Are you born again ?

John 3:3

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

From Heath21:
John 3: 18.

18: There is no judgement awaiting those who trust him but those who do not trust him have already been judged for not BELIEVING in the only son of God.

Basically, what I get out of this is that there saying that there is judgement for those who don't believe, meaning when you die you will have a meeting with God, that's YOUR judgement day and it also states that you will be judged and punished if you DO NOT believe in God..it says nothing about not following his rules but just believing and lastly it also doesn't clarify what your punishment will be. It says nothing of Hell in that verse. And something I'd like to clarify is that I never said I didn't believe in God, I said I am unsure, there is a difference!

KJV
John 3:18

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

The word "condemned" here is "krino" (kree'-no) in the original Greek which is translated as the following:
to try, condemn, punish, avenge, conclude, condemn, damn, decree, determine, esteem, judge, go to (sue at the) law, ordain, call in question, sentence to, think.

So, yes, the word "judge" that your version has can be used. Don't miss that word. You have to understand the meaning of "judge", though. It is judgment -- the same judgment I've been talking about all along. It is a condemning, punishing, and damning judgment. This is the context of this verse -- it clearly compares directly to those who have believed on Messiah. Then, you have to look at other verses and see that the promise of everlasting life is to those who have been born again.

From Heath21:
In case your wondering where I got this info and what Bible. It was the New Living Translation and it says on the front: "Holy Bible, Living Water for those who thirst". If you don't believe what I'm saying to be true and in the Bible look up the verses at - "www.biblegateway.com" it's rather accurate

Please know that I never once questioned what you say as being true. You use a different version of the Bible that has taken liberties with its translation into more modern-day terms.
***********************************
From Heath21:
Anyways...yeah it is quite hilarious he claims we don't know the Bible when I've pointed at several things he was wrong on that he claimed he knew about
***********************************
So, in all the discussions we've had I've been wrong on one. Congratulations.

Please remember that you've been wrong on a lot more -- even if you haven't admitted it.
***********************************
From Heath21:
Scott - ...I also forgot to bring this up in my list of things I found in the Bible, this is more like a question for you but you said in your post that one man sinned and caused the sin of the world if that is so then why does it say that Adam and Eve both sinned? If it was just one man then why is Eve even mentioned in the Bible. I believe that the sin of the world was in fact caused by Adam AND Eve, not just one person.
***********************************
I never said that Adam and Eve didn't both sin. I said that sin was brought into the world because of Adam's sin alone. The world was not condemned through Eve's disobedience.

Again, Romans 5:12

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

Don't just look at this verse's "by one man" and notice the "man" part. Also, notice the "one" in there. If it was by Adam & Eve, it wouldn't be "one".
***********************************
From Heath21:
You also said Eve didn't know of the fruit..later on it says that she told the snake that God told them not to eat from that tree or they'd die. So obviously she did know about it.
***********************************
I never said that she didn't know about the fruit. I said that Eve had never been commanded by God not to eat it. Big difference.

If I had said what you claim I said ("Eve didn't know of the fruit"), then Satan could not have tricked her by asking "Yeah, hath God said...".

Adam was the one commanded by the Lord not to eat of the fruit from the tree of the KOGAE. Since Scripture never says that Eve was given that command by God, you have to assume that Adam is the one that told her.

For Satan to ask "Yeah, hath God said..." gives no contradiction at all. In fact, it makes sense that Satan didn't go to Adam with this question -- God had told him directly !! Adam would've been able to say "Yes !! He did !!" But Eve was basing what God said on what Adam had told her. That's much easier to question since she didn't get it from the source herself.
***********************************
From happykmd:
But honestly, I'm starting to worry over why some 40 something year old man is on a site like this.

From Heath21:
Are you serious he's really 40 something? I was thinking much younger then that.
***********************************
Astounding.

I've said nothing rude nor lascivious in any of my posts. The most unkind thing I've written is the term "people like you" in the same exact context it was written to me first. Yet, you guys are comfortable with the start of implying misconduct on my part for trying to share the message of Scripture with you.

I'm extremely proud to be an almost-40 year old with a beautiful wife and 3 incredible children. I'm even more ecstatic to be able to say that I've been saved from the judgment to come (refer to the discussion above on the Greek word "krino").

I've never once spoken down to anyone for their reponses being childish or immature. I've never implied once that I perceive myself better than any one of you based on my age nor based on the fact that I've received the gift of Eternal Salvation which I neither deserve nor could ever earn.

You girls win. Congratulations. In opening the door to these type of vitriolic statements, you've taken the enjoyment out of getting to discuss these things with you.

I do fear for you, girls. Good luck -- though luck has nothing to do with it. Thank you for giving so much insight into not only what some teens think and believe, but for giving me a reminder of the kind of lies I used to tell myself when I was your age.

silly ol' man, thank you for you kindness even though I assume there are a number of things on which we don't agree (never gotten into a conversation, though). I appreciate your words.

[sweetangel2128]

Growing up, I was constantly told that Jews are God's Chosen People. Now, that's from the standard, Conservative Jewish home. I never bothered to ask what we were chosen for. Scripture shows that the Jews were chosen for the following: (1) to preserve Scripture, (2) to bring forth the Messiah, and (3) to bring the Messiah back. The Jews are not chosen to go to Heaven just for being Jewish.

I will certainly give credit where it is due, Heath21. I never said that I couldn't be wrong. I was wrong on this one.

KJV
Genesis 3:23

"Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken."

Hebrew Tanach
Genesis 3:23

"And the Lord God sent him out of the Garden of Eden, to till the soil, whence he had been taken."

The word from which "sent him forth" or "sent him out" comes is the Hebrew word, "shalach" (shaw-lakh'). If, as your version states, it was supposed to be translated with "and his wife", then there would be the additional Hebrew words "ishshah" which is used in Genesis 2:25, Genesis 3:8, as "and his wife".

He died for the world, but it doesn't say He died for those who would not follow Him.

KJV
John 3:18

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

The word "condemned" here is "krino" (kree'-no) in the original Greek which is translated as the following:
to try, condemn, punish, avenge, conclude, condemn, damn, decree, determine, esteem, judge, go to (sue at the) law, ordain, call in question, sentence to, think.

You use a different version of the Bible that has taken liberties with its translation into more modern-day terms.

So, in all the discussions we've had I've been wrong on one. Congratulations.

Please remember that you've been wrong on a lot more -- even if you haven't admitted it.

***********************************[/color]
I never said that Adam and Eve didn't both sin. I said that sin was brought into the world because of Adam's sin alone. The world was not condemned through Eve's disobedience.

KOGAE.

***********************************
From happykmd:
But honestly, I'm starting to worry over why some 40 something year old man is on a site like this.

From Heath21:
Are you serious he's really 40 something? I was thinking much younger then that.
***********************************
Astounding.

I've said nothing rude nor lascivious in any of my posts. The most unkind thing I've written is the term "people like you" in the same exact context it was written to me first. Yet, you guys are comfortable with the start of implying misconduct on my part for trying to share the message of Scripture with you.

I'm extremely proud to be an almost-40 year old with a beautiful wife and 3 incredible children. I'm even more ecstatic to be able to say that I've been saved from the judgment to come (refer to the discussion above on the Greek word "krino").

I've never once spoken down to anyone for their reponses being childish or immature. I've never implied once that I perceive myself better than any one of you based on my age nor based on the fact that I've received the gift of Eternal Salvation which I neither deserve nor could ever earn.

You girls win. Congratulations. In opening the door to these type of vitriolic statements, you've taken the enjoyment out of getting to discuss these things with you.

I do fear for you, girls. Good luck -- though luck has nothing to do with it. Thank you for giving so much insight into not only what some teens think and believe, but for giving me a reminder of the kind of lies I used to tell myself when I was your age.

silly ol' man, thank you for you kindness even though I assume there are a number of things on which we don't agree (never gotten into a conversation, though). I appreciate your words.

Wasn't Jesus a Jew? :-/

I know you said you couldn't be wrong but you tried to clarify or correct me in saying I was in fact wrong when in fact you were wrong.

Not to go on other versions? I was told by someone that has been studying the Bible for like 40 years that it's one of the best and they don't just put words in there, he says that it's more accurate and better to understand. In my opinion you still got that one wrong, you had specifically told me that there was no mention of Eve leaving the Garden but you assumed she did follow...but there was a mention of her leaving with Adam. Maybe not in your version but my version does state that which obviously is a better version since it doesn't leave stuff out.

What part of the word - "world" do you not understand. He died for the world but not the un-believers. OMG...hun...he did die for everyone, not just the believers. In fact how would people be unbelievers or followers today if he hadn't of died on the cross..they wouldn't because they obviously wouldn't know of God's love. And it even says that Jesus died on the cross to cleanse people of there sins and how he died on the cross because he loved the world so much he wanted to save it.

My version says nothing about being condemned to Hell, it says you will be punished and judged but like I stated before you don't know what that judgement might be, it doesn't state Hell in either one of those verses, your just assuming and fitting it into your own meaning.

Yes, modern day terms, easier for me to understand and read. I like it!

One? I've seen more than one you've been wrong on? Lets see, you told me that there was no verse saying that Eve left the Garden when in fact there was and the fact that you believed and it had said in the Bible that Adam was created after the Garden not before...hmmm..lets see so far that's 2 wrongs not one. I know there's more but I am not going to waiste my time.

Your not someone to judge whether I've been wrong or not. I haven't really and no I am not going to admit anything. Why am I judging you then? Because well I actually looked up the verses to see if you were right and found you to be wrong. And oh I don't claim I'm all knowing either so I think I have a right to be wrong.

Just because it says by "man" doesn't imply the male gender, in todays age "man" also means "humans". Maybe he did bring sin into the world but if they both sinned why would just one man bring sin into the world? That makes no sense at all!

I've been actually wondering this but why do you keep putting the word - "KOGAE" in upper case and what is it anyway? :-/

First of all, how is me asking her if you were really 40 and stating that you seemed younger being rude towards you? I'm confused. I was merely asking her a Question and when I said you seemed younger I didn't imply that as an insult but from your writing you do seem younger, not meaning a child. I would of guessed from the way you wrote that you were somewhere in your 20's not 40's. You've never been rude? In my book you have been rude to me...you basically accused me of following Satan when I'm not just because I choose not to have a Religion, you accused me of not being born again? You do not know me and have no right to judge that. You have also judged me. I am also proud to say that I'll also be seeing you in Heaven HOPEFULLY, maybe we'll have tea up there sometime Neither have I. I am not being childish or anything like that.

GIRLS??????? I'm not a girl, I'm a woman. I'm 24 thank you very much, turning 25 in September.

What lies are you talking about? I am not telling myself any lies, I'm going off of what I believe in my heart and just because I say I don't believe in the Christian religion doesn't mean I don't talk to God and I don't believe he wants me to be like you so that must mean I'm lying to myself? Umm ok.

In case you don't come back...wherever you are I hope you have a good life and I hope that one day you realize that you were wrong in SO MANY areas.

















Oh and just so you know you don't have to be baptsized to be saved or be a Christian. I have never been baptized EVER and I don't believe I need it. If you think you are not saved until you are baptized I can clearly state that you are either Catholic of from a different type of Christian religion because not all Christians believe in that. Am I born again? Depends on what your definition of born again is? I am still trying to figure out my beliefs and I am being honest there. I have switched back and forth a lot out of confusion but if I was one now, I would say yes I am born again and yes I'm saved because I believe in Jesus as being God's son and I do believe in his love and I do try to live my life more like him but you do not need the church, the bible or any of that to be saved or be a Christian, they are merely icing on the cake not the actual cake.

[sweetangel2128]

Why not challenge yourself to study the Dead Sea Scrolls as well as how solid the whole New Covenant is. The Bible (Old as well as New Covenants) is a solid, preseved document.

Why not actually answer my Question instead of dancing around it. I have studied the Dead Sea Scrolls and they have no found enough info to make a huge book like the Bible did you know recently they had found a scroll that contradicts what the whole Bible even says? But the Christians had bought it because they didn't want the actual truth out because it would destroy them.

Here's a good video that pertains to this debate where it originally began - "EVANGELISM"...this is a video called "The Way Of The Master". I recommend you watch the whole video. I agree with his opinion 100%

Heres the video:

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseacti...eoID=1500834616

Ps: This does have the Parachute thing you were discussing, but you got it all wrong and left lots of it out..this is the full example. =]

[kimmytree]

Astounding.

I've said nothing rude nor lascivious in any of my posts. The most unkind thing I've written is the term "people like you" in the same exact context it was written to me first. Yet, you guys are comfortable with the start of implying misconduct on my part for trying to share the message of Scripture with you.

I'm extremely proud to be an almost-40 year old with a beautiful wife and 3 incredible children. I'm even more ecstatic to be able to say that I've been saved from the judgment to come (refer to the discussion above on the Greek word "krino").

I've never once spoken down to anyone for their reponses being childish or immature. I've never implied once that I perceive myself better than any one of you based on my age nor based on the fact that I've received the gift of Eternal Salvation which I neither deserve nor could ever earn.

You girls win. Congratulations. In opening the door to these type of vitriolic statements, you've taken the enjoyment out of getting to discuss these things with you.

I do fear for you, girls. Good luck -- though luck has nothing to do with it. Thank you for giving so much insight into not only what some teens think and believe, but for giving me a reminder of the kind of lies I used to tell myself when I was your age.

I sincerely apologize if I've offended you, but I honestly meant nothing negative when I assumed you were an adult. I mostly based my assumptions on how you seem to have gathered your information, and the intellect behind your posts. I didnt mean that you were 40 in a bad way, but once again, I apologize if I've offended you.

Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by rude. I assume you're trying to witness to us, but you instead seem to come off as being somewhat rude. Your tellling us that we worship satan, and are children of wrath. How is that even appropriate? Whether its true or not (I dont believe it is), its not something you should throw out there, ESPECIALLY when your trying to witness. You try to be an Evangelical Christian, and try to share the truth with others, but you tell them they worship Satan and are evil. Doesnt exactly help the situation.

How have we taken the enjoyment out of discussing things? We're just stating our own opinions. We're not running you down or criticizing you, except maybe when we feel like you're doing the same to us. Are you just upset over not being able to convert us?

[sweetangel2128]

I sincerely apologize if I've offended you, but I honestly meant nothing negative when I assumed you were an adult. I mostly based my assumptions on how you seem to have gathered your information, and the intellect behind your posts. I didnt mean that you were 40 in a bad way, but once again, I apologize if I've offended you.

Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by rude. I assume you're trying to witness to us, but you instead seem to come off as being somewhat rude. Your tellling us that we worship satan, and are children of wrath. How is that even appropriate? Whether its true or not (I dont believe it is), its not something you should throw out there, ESPECIALLY when your trying to witness. You try to be an Evangelical Christian, and try to share the truth with others, but you tell them they worship Satan and are evil. Doesnt exactly help the situation.

How have we taken the enjoyment out of discussing things? We're just stating our own opinions. We're not running you down or criticizing you, except maybe when we feel like you're doing the same to us. Are you just upset over not being able to convert us?

I agree 100 percent on that =]

When you said that telling us were with the Devil basically isn't the right way of converting, not in so many words but that's basically what part of the video is about, it's about evangelising in the right way and explaining why the wrong way is the wrong way. It basically says that if your going to convert someone you shouldn't tell someone that they are going to Hell or that they are following the path of the Devil because that will lead them away from God not to God and it also states how most Churches today use the wrong way of evengelisng. I love this guy he's absolutely amazing when he discusses God you should watch the video.

[*Uronacid*]

I was told to give my view of Gods love here....

Well anyways, God is LOVE.

I could explain:

• God, being LOVE, Loved us and gave us the ultimate gift the ability to love.
• With the ability to love comes the ability to make choices, after all you can't love someone without being able to make choices.
• With the ability to make choices comes the ability to sin.
• With the ability to sin comes the need to judge people for their sin
  • God is just. For him to continue to love us he needs to treat people fairly and equally.
  • Ultimately, the sins you commit need to be payed for so that everyone can be treated fairly. Either through the fire of hell or Jesus' life.
• God doesn't hate anyone. Love is doing what's best, and that's what God is doing. He is the only one who knows what's best.

That's the simple version... ;p I hope you like it.

[sweetangel2128]

I was told to give my view of Gods love here....

Well anyways, God is LOVE.

I could explain:

• God, being LOVE, Loved us and gave us the ultimate gift the ability to love.
• With the ability to love comes the ability to make choices, after all you can't love someone without being able to make choices.
• With the ability to make choices comes the ability to sin.
• With the ability to sin comes the need to judge people for their sin
  • God is just. For him to continue to love us he needs to treat people fairly and equally.
  • Ultimately, the sins you commit need to be payed for so that everyone can be treated fairly. Either through the fire of hell or Jesus' life.
• God doesn't hate anyone. Love is doing what's best, and that's what God is doing. He is the only one who knows what's best.

That's the simple version... ;p I hope you like it.

Very nicely put =]

[kimmytree]

I guess he really has given up?

[sweetangel2128]

I guess he really has given up?

HAHA I guess so but I bet you $million that he still reads this and is lurking around the forum lol.

[kimmytree]

^ LMAO.

[Mulder]

okay guys, please stop spamming

[sweetangel2128]

This topic has been dead for AGES so I figured I'd bring it back up. Anyone want to debate on Evangelism again?

[kimmytree]

Suuuure. lol

According to the Christian faith, in order to go to heaven, one must be saved (believe that Jesus died for their sins). And God is all knowing. So doesnt God know that a large majority of people in the world are going to die without knowing him? And in return, are going to burn in an eternal hell? In a way, its almost like that's pre-determined.

So, why doesnt God insure that ALL are saved, and are going to Heaven?

[sweetangel2128]

Suuuure. lol

According to the Christian faith, in order to go to heaven, one must be saved (believe that Jesus died for their sins). And God is all knowing. So doesnt God know that a large majority of people in the world are going to die without knowing him? And in return, are going to burn in an eternal hell? In a way, its almost like that's pre-determined.

So, why doesnt God insure that ALL are saved, and are going to Heaven?

First of all, in what way is this about Evangelising? Sounds like to me your trying to bring "free will" back up.

But yes your right, he does know that but he gives us free will to choose which side we want to be on. He can't insure everyone that they are going to Heaven because he knew some would not believe him and not follow him so why insure something that is not true?

[kimmytree]

^ Oh, sorry. I thought you were wanting to continue the previous discussion, which was more on Christianity. But if you'd rather debate on Evangelism, then that's fine.

[sweetangel2128]

^ Oh, sorry. I thought you were wanting to continue the previous discussion, which was more on Christianity. But if you'd rather debate on Evangelism, then that's fine.

Well, we can debate on whatever you wish to debate on I was just saying.