Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
How To Get To Heaven When You Die. Read The First Post. Then Q&A Discussion. Ask Questions Here! (9 Viewers)
- Thread starter Paddington
- Start date
Paddington
Footballguy
Written by those who walked with Jesus and saw Him after the Resurrection:
2 Peter 1:21 (KJV)
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.2 Timothy 3:16 (KJV)
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:Jesus Said:
Luke 24:25 (KJV)
Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
dkp993
Footballguy
The Younger Dryas flood almost certainly did happen about 12,900 years ago. There’s lots of evidence for this. But that in no way proves the story of Noah. Almost every ancient culture has a story of a massive flood. It’s an incredibly common fable.
But the idea of Noah’s Ark is laughable not only for what CC mentions above but also for the fact you can’t restart a species with two creatures. The inbreeding and DNA damage would be off the charts. What about all the food for the animals? The waste? The mixture of predators and pray? The care for the million plus species? Etc etc etc.
BlackCrowes
Footballguy
Wait, someone besides Paddington thinks Noah’s ark was real?
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
As of 2004, not only did the vast majority of Evangelicals believe the ark story is true, but that Moses parted the Red Sea and the world was created in six days.
ABC News Poll
During my church upbringing, there was never a transition to 'these stories are allegorical' when we became young adults.
Last edited:
BrutalPenguin
Footballguy
And where did all the water come from, and where did it go?
Zow
Footballguy
A significant percentage of people think that:
The earth is flat
9/11 was an inside job
We staged the moon landing
Evolution isn’t a thing
Hillary Clinton literally murdered people
Nickelback is a good band
So, I don’t find it that wild that a few fundamentalists Christians desperate to find meaning in the Bible actually think that God told some dude to build an ark despite no technology available to do so and then gather two of every species and house them harmoniously on said ark while God murdered everybody else. We just aren’t that collectively smart and we succumb to confirmation bias.
Zow
Footballguy
Hence my point - all of us have a few questionable beliefs so it doesn’t make sense to judge a person just for one irrational belief.
Unless that person believes ketchup should go on steak.
Paddington
Footballguy
Of course Noah's Ark was real.
Answers
Looking for answers? Discover engaging, topical information on creation, evolution, God, the Bible, science, age of the earth, animals, worldview, and more.
answersingenesis.org
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
I believe it was Groucho Marc who said
“I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.”
I kind of feel that way about this thread.
Being intellectually convinced only goes so far - if you can be persuaded one way, you can probably be persuaded another. Which is to say, if you believe there is a God, and you are inclined to believe in the God of the Bible, and in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, there's still the matter of your spirit/soul.
We cry out to God, to Christ, in prayer and belief, because He is a personal God, not a theory. Faith is choosing to trust in the evidence to believe, and everything we can believe in has some element of faith or mystery involved.
It seems to me, Christianity has enough evidence in historical support, reason, science, etc. that the "leap of faith" it takes is not much of a leap at all.
But faith in Christ is a transformational. Spiritual rebirth changes you from the inside out. It goes beyond satisfying intellectual curiosity or an acknowledgement God exists. It is not belief that He exists - even the demons believe - but a belief to trust in Him, personally, in every aspect of your life.
I hope this is helpful in some way to someone.
“I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.”
I kind of feel that way about this thread.
Being intellectually convinced only goes so far - if you can be persuaded one way, you can probably be persuaded another. Which is to say, if you believe there is a God, and you are inclined to believe in the God of the Bible, and in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, there's still the matter of your spirit/soul.
We cry out to God, to Christ, in prayer and belief, because He is a personal God, not a theory. Faith is choosing to trust in the evidence to believe, and everything we can believe in has some element of faith or mystery involved.
It seems to me, Christianity has enough evidence in historical support, reason, science, etc. that the "leap of faith" it takes is not much of a leap at all.
But faith in Christ is a transformational. Spiritual rebirth changes you from the inside out. It goes beyond satisfying intellectual curiosity or an acknowledgement God exists. It is not belief that He exists - even the demons believe - but a belief to trust in Him, personally, in every aspect of your life.
I hope this is helpful in some way to someone.
dgreen
Footballguy
I could be wrong, but I assume there is agreement that the point of the Genesis flood story isn’t to deliver historical facts. So, if you’re someone who thinks it is historically accurate, hopefully you think there’s a bigger message being communicated. I’d hope those who don’t believe it is historically accurate also believe the author is trying to make some other point.
I’d argue that focusing on the historicity risks missing the intended message. And for those of us who believe the Bible is God-breathed, it should be a big deal to us to receive that inspired message.
I understand that some believe that if the Bible is God’s word then it must be historically accurate. However, I really hope you don’t think that’s the point. I hope you see that the Bible as something much more than a history textbook and have conversations about what it tells us about who God is, what he cares about, and how we are supposed to participate.
I’d argue that focusing on the historicity risks missing the intended message. And for those of us who believe the Bible is God-breathed, it should be a big deal to us to receive that inspired message.
I understand that some believe that if the Bible is God’s word then it must be historically accurate. However, I really hope you don’t think that’s the point. I hope you see that the Bible as something much more than a history textbook and have conversations about what it tells us about who God is, what he cares about, and how we are supposed to participate.
fatness
Footballguy
This has something to do with Cotton Eye Joe.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
To me whole story doesn’t make sense.
God regrets making mankind so he decides to cause a cataclysmic flood to wipe out humanity because they are evil.
Then he decides to save humanity by having one family build a large ship and take care of every animal in the world.
After the flood God allows humans to procreate knowing full well that evil will return.
The whole idea is pretty dumb and not thought out very well.
Zow
Footballguy
It's also mass murder.
Chaos34
Footballguy
And he makes a covenant with Noah sealed with a rainbow. He will never murder all the people on earth with water again, babies included. Next time it will be fire.
Zow
Footballguy
Bobby, I want to address this because I've probably been the one who has "pushed back" the most at you in this thread. I'd make the following points:
1. You and I have always had respectful correspondences and based on that I am confident that you can handle a little push back. I am also trying to do so respectfully. If such has come across differently that has not been my intention.
2. I find this thread to be the type of discourse others have said they wish they could enjoy IRL as it presents a very broad spectrum of beliefs from the true fundamentalist take that the OP espouses to the hardened atheist. Juxtaposed to how we convene IRL where we are naturally going to most hang out in our echo chambers (from being in your church with very like-minded individuals to a group of atheists who probably have nothing nice to say about religion) this thread actually presents this varying viewpoints. Naturally, when these viewpoints collide or one sees somebody he likes and respects voicing a viewpoint directly in contrast, it's going to be uncomfortable. But that discomfort is, to me at least, where true growth comes from.
3. I think in your post identifies the prominent proven point in this thread that the real only factor between a believer and a non-believer is faith. I say this because that is the only logical bridge between uncertainty and the certainty you espouse as, just objectively, we don't have certain tangible proof that God exists (e.g. He literally comes down from the heavens and says something like, "hey guys, I'm here, can we all get all the same page now!?"). In other words, your faith allows you to be comfortable making definitive statements about objectively unprovable things like the Noah flood. But, you also need to understand, recognize, and appreciate that to those without the benefit of such faith, you will appear intellectually dishonest when you say certain things are "certain" when they are simply not from a pure objective standpoint. Heck, such definitive statements are rarely even used by scientists, mathematicians, philosophers, etc. in their own respective fields. To quote Arizona's jury admonition when describing to a jury panel what proof beyond a reasonable doubt means, "There are very few things in this life that we know with absolute certainty..." This applies to situations even where one's faith may be so dominating that such faith overrides one's critical thinking skills.
dgreen
Footballguy
Yay...posts about interpreting the story rather than arguing about the science of it all!
First thing I'll point out is that God's covenant with Noah doesn't say anything about it being fire next time. That comes from 2 Peter 3 and was a line in a song by Woody Guthrie. It looks like that song lyric originated from some negro spirituals and is about a hope for God to deal with their oppressors. I think it was then also used in the Civil Rights movement. Fittingly, 2 Peter is talking about The Day of the Lord, which is a judgment day theme in the OT and typically has to do with putting an end to oppression. (IIRC, on one occasion, it is Israel herself who is on the judgment end of The Day of Lord because she had become the oppressor.) I also notice 2 Peter ends this segment (3:13) talking about all of it leading to a "new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells." As I posted earlier in this thread, I think the flood story is about new creation and Peter seems to be using flood image to talk about another coming new creation. Those are helpful words to an oppressed people.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Once one takes and believes in God at all, I don't think it is a logical stretch to believe that things happened, with God's guiding hand exactly the way they are described in the bible. The mechanics or the engineering of creation via God's hand is just what it is.
However, once you take that step then many cans of worms are opened. For example if God created the universe a little over 6000 years ago, why is so much of the evidence uncovered suggest otherwise? Are we worshipping a deceiver? A liar? That is problematic.
Now some will quickly jump in and argue that it isn't God that is deceiving us, but Satan. Clearly never giving any thought to how problematic the entire idea of Satan is. I mean why is it that those that know God best ultimately reject him?
When you get to the flood story and one states that God had regrets with his creation? Was God merely incompetent? And what do we say when someone tries the same thing over and over and expect different results?
This can continue on and on. So while as a believer I can logically go with "well if there is a God, then why not as described in the bible" for the means of creation, I cannot reconcile a literal translation to what would logically make sense for a god worthy of worship. Maybe that reconciliation is just beyond my ability to understand, but that too is problematic.
The one thing I do know, is that most apologetic attempts to explain how this all makes sense are big turn offs. The make me believe less, not more.
To me Genesis introduces us to God's people in the aftermath of the ice age. A people that were different from their neighbors from the very beginning. Thus the themes of the evil, inhospitible "civilized" people versus God's pastoral nomads. And how the intent was to embrace these differences, but the people all too often saw the grass being greener. And that story continues through out the old Testament. Sure God makes a few cameos and indirectly shows a presence through prophets, but this is almost always to guide God's people on how they should live, but more often than not they fail. And a good bit of that ugly failure is jotted down.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Zow
Footballguy
Fair point - but in such circumstances where I experienced something labeled steak that looked less than appealing I always assumed that's why God created A1 or a similar sauce.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Paddington
Footballguy
I certainly agree with you that my faith is not based on Evidence, Science, Ect. But it is nice to know that it is backed up by the Evidence, Science, Ect. This type of thread is good because first of all, it does give the Biblical plan of Salvation in the first post, but it also addresses questions and discussions on various topics pertaining to the Bible and the Faith of Jesus Christ. I have had real, tangible experiences with Jesus Christ and have no doubt that He is real and that He is the God of the Universe. My goal is to help others come to Faith in Him and believe that He died and rose again as the Sacrifice for their sins.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
I had to get one of those long-handled loofah back handled scrubbers because as I've gotten older I'm not as supple as I once was; there are some area's I can no longer reach. But maybe if I stretched those muscles more I wouldn't have that problem.
good job
Paddington
Footballguy
Did you read the first post? Are you a born again believer?
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
Not a response to your post, but I'm curious what you (or any other Christian in this thread) think of people who proclaim to have found God (whatever they define that as) through another religion or philosophy.
Sparky Polastri
Footballguy
Faith/belief are never based on evidence. By definition they are positions people take that go beyond what the evidence requires.
dgreen
Footballguy
I don’t think I have much of an opinion on that. I know very little about other religions.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
This is another one of those topics that got argued to death 20 years ago. The bottom line is that "What happens with people who believe 'wrong' stuff" isn't up to me and I'm okay with that. And I say that knowing perfectly well that I probably believe a lot of "wrong" stuff myself so this topic definitely applies to me.
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
Regardless of what you saw discussed 20 years ago, the attitude that 'you must believe what I believe to know God or go to get to heaven' is still relevant today. While I appreciate the more liberal views of Christianity that you and others on this board espouse, I don't think they're the majority views of Christians.
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
But I assume you do know Christianity enough to have an opinion on verses like John 14:6.
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
dgreen
Footballguy
I'd say the more I've learned about the Bible, the more I realize I don't know. I'm currently at the point that I think it's kind of weird for most people to think they know what a verse like that meant. John's gospel feels very mystical to me. I think I've said in this thread how much I now appreciate the term "literary tourist". I try hard to always be aware that I'm an outsider when reading the Bible.
I'd favor an interpretation that accounts for Jewish views of that day, links to the OT in some way, and possibly even considers some Roman/Caesar context. What is Jesus even talking about when he says "way", "truth", and "life"? Jesus has 7 "I am" statements in John. I've heard that each "I am" relates to how Jews would have talked about Torah AND relate to Roman gods. So, they could be statements that Jesus is saying I am God (by just using the "I am"), I am Torah (the fulfillment of the law), and I am greater than those Roman gods.
I've also wondered if it relates to the Eden story. At the end of Genesis 3, cherubim guard the way to the Tree of Life. And maybe "truth" relates to the knowledge of good and evil? I don't know. John starts with "In the beginning" and talks about light and dark and he ends with a resurrection scene in a garden with a gardener and Jesus breathing on his disciples to give them the spirit (as God breathed into Adam to give him life), so just about everyone recognizes that he's laying out some argument about Jesus launching a new creation. But, my Eden theory feels like a reach and I'd probably want to see other stuff in the context of John 14 that support that link. Plus, more importantly, I'd prefer to see some actual John scholar suggest that possibility. I'm not assuming I'm uncovering something nobody has ever seen, but I am trying to read the Bible the way I think it's meant to be read and not as a list of rules of how to be saved.
On The Rocks
Evil Conservative
Chaos34
Footballguy
And these?
Acts 4:12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.
John 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
Acts 4:12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.
John 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
dkp993
Footballguy
That’s refreshing honestly as others here have claimed multiple times that it’s “obvious”.
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
I was a semi-practicing Buddhist in my 20s and the philosophy really focused me to work on myself and treat people with kindness and love. I appreciate that Christianity and other religions promote similar personal growth. However, I think it's pretty clear from versus like these that the other religious paths are incompatible with being saved as the Bible defines it.
Chaos34
Footballguy
It's not? Nobody comes to the Father but by me. Salvation is found in no one else. Whoever does not believe stands condemned.
There's no nuance here. It's obvious. I love me some academic hermeneutics. I'm currently reading Christianity The First 3000 Years. It's by an award winning historian and Oxford professor of Religious Studies who is both Christian and gay. I can tell from the first 50 pages I'm in for a good historical ride. There's plenty of room for interpretation and perspective, but I don't see it with the verses Cranks and I are asking about.
I was taught there's two outs. An age of accountability and ignorance of the gospel. So some die too young to be held accountable and some die unaccountable without knowing the gospel. I believe those are scriptural but I'm not certain. I know they launched a hellova bible study backinaday.
Last edited:
dkp993
Footballguy
You’re talking about specificity on a verse(s). Myself and others, are speaking about the interpretation of the Bible as a whole. Some here have stated understanding where a parable is being used and where to take it literally is obvious. Or that interpretation in general is obvious. It’s refreshing to me to see a person of faith like @dgreen admit that it isn’t.
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
Let me know how that goes.
Chaos34
Footballguy
I was all in evangelical born again in the 90s. Loved loved loved my church and pastor. I moved, quit going to church, but never stopped learning. I'm again loving where I'm at spiritually and way different than most, a bit unsure of it all, but not agnostic or atheist, and fascinated by esotericism and mysticism, science and history. It's a journey.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
This isn't a new topic and other people have spilled lots of ink on it. The Catholic church has a far more liberal view on this issue than what anybody seems to realize.
Chaos34
Footballguy
Of course not. Everything we discuss/debate today was discussed and debated in the first 3 centuries AD. Nothin' new under the sun. But why tell me that? It feels unnecessary, maybe a little passive aggressive. Just trynna engage, bruh.
My thought on that is I don't have a firm conviction. Yes, there's the John 14:6 "only through me" verse. But I don't feel too confident in saying I know exactly that's applied.
My former pastor was a colleague of Tim Keller and respected and I remember someone asking him one time if there would be other religions in Heaven and he said, "We'll see". I asked him more what he meant and he said what I believe. There's enough mystery there that it seems maybe arrogant to think we know so much of God to assume we're the only ones getting in.
Chaos34
Footballguy
Yup yup. Considering these verses seems crucial. Nothing in response to them has been in response to them. I'm waiting. Well, I'm driving to Vegas, but anyway.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I gave you a link that would get you started if you wanted to learn more about what assorted Christians think about this issue.
Here's another source that is set up as a "reader." It gives you lots of different perspectives, written by primary authors, along with a pretty helpful overview.
Last edited:
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
This is an interesting reading that I hadn't thought about before. I'll have to chew on this a little while, but it's not absurd to notice parallels like this. I assume we all agree, for example, that we're supposed to notice a parallel between Golgotha and Mount Moriah (Abraham/Isaac). The connection that you noted seems similar.
Thanks. On the "obvious" thing, I've learned over the years that word hardly ever does good.
It almost always, at least in my opinion, has the effect of smugness or insinuation the "other" person can't see what's plain and clear.
So in my opinion, I try to avoid it. Especially on something like faith issues where obviously
there's a lot of gray area.You've probably been able to tell but I also have little interest in trying to debate the back and forth on factual accuracy of 7 literal 24 hour days of creation or how the Ark happened or exactly how old the Earth is. It just doesn't affect me following Jesus very much. And I've found those discussions usually turn to debates and I've found in my experience there not to be much upside. At least for me.
What I have found value in is telling folks what I've found to be true in my own life as a follower of Jesus. That I can speak about from actual experience. And I've also found how I interact with other people has a positive or negative reflection and impact.
