pajarito 0
pajarito 0
The Gospel: Why not preach that Jesus gives happiness, peace, and joy?
QuoteTwo men are seated on a plane. The first is given a parachute and told to put it on as it would improve his flight. He’s a little skeptical at first, since he can’t see how wearing a parachute on a plane could possibly improve his flight.
He decides to experiment and see if the claims are true. As he puts it on, he notices the weight of it upon his shoulders and he finds he has difficulty in sitting upright. However, he consoles himself with the fact that he was told that the parachute would improve his flight. So he decides to give it a little time.
As he waits he notices that some of the other passengers are laughing at him for wearing a parachute on a plane. He begins to feel somewhat humiliated. As they continue to point and laugh at him, he can stand it no longer. He slinks in his seat, unstraps the parachute and throws it to the floor. Disillusionment and bitterness fill his heart, because as far as he was concerned he was told an outright lie.
The second man is given a parachute, but listen to what he is told. He’s told to put it on because at any moment he’ll be jumping 25,000 feet out of the plane. He gratefully puts the parachute on. He doesn’t notice the weight of it upon his shoulders, nor that he can’t sit upright. His mind is consumed with the thought of what would happen to him if he jumped without the parachute.
Let’s now analyze the motive and the result of each passenger’s experience. The first man’s motive for putting the parachute on was solely to improve his flight. The result of his experience was that he was humiliated by the passengers, disillusioned, and somewhat embittered against those who gave him the parachute. As far as he’s concerned, it will be a long time before anyone gets one of those things on his back again.
The second man put the parachute on solely to escape the jump to come. And because of his knowledge of what would happen to him if he jumped without it, he has a deep-rooted joy and peace in his heart knowing that he’s saved from sure death. This knowledge gives him the ability to withstand the mockery of the other passengers. His attitude toward those who gave him the parachute is one of heartfelt gratitude.
Now listen to what the modern gospel says: Put on the Lord Jesus Christ. He’ll give you love, joy, peace, fulfillment, and lasting happiness. In other words, Jesus will improve your flight. The sinner responds, and in an experimental fashion puts on the Savior to see if the claims are true. And what does he get? The promised temptation, tribulation, and persecution the other passengers mock him. So what does he do? He takes off the Lord Jesus Christ; he’s offended for the Word’s sake; he’s disillusioned and somewhat embittered…and quite rightly so.
He was promised peace, joy, love, and fulfillment, and all he got were trials and humiliation. His bitterness is directed at those who gave him the so-called good news. His latter end becomes worse than the first, and he’s another inoculated and bitter backslider.
Instead of preaching that Jesus improves the flight, we should be warning sinners that they have to jump out of a plane. That it’s appointed for man to die once and then face judgment (Hebrews 9:27). When a sinner understands the horrific consequences of breaking the Law of God, he will flee to the Savior, solely to escape the wrath that’s to come. If we are true and faithful witnesses, that’s what we’ll be preaching that there is wrath to come that God commands all men everywhere to repent: because he has appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness (Acts 17:30,31).
The issue isn’t one of happiness, but one of righteousness. It doesn’t matter how happy a sinner is, or how much he is enjoying the pleasures of sin for a season, without the righteousness of Christ, he will perish on the day of wrath. Proverbs 11:4 says, Riches profit not in the day of wrath: but righteousness delivers from death. Peace and joy are legitimate fruits of salvation, but it’s not legitimate to use these fruits as a drawing card for salvation. If we continue to do so, the sinner will respond with an impure motive, lacking repentance.
Can you remember why the second passenger had joy and peace in his heart? It was because he knew that the parachute was going to save him from sure death. In the same way, as believers we have joy and peace in believing because we know that the righteousness of Christ is going to deliver us from the wrath to come.
With that thought in mind, let’s take a close look at an incident aboard the plane. We have a brand-new flight attendant. It’s her first day. She wants to leave an impression upon the passengers and she certainly does! As she’s walking down the aisle she trips over someone’s foot and slops the hot coffee all over the lap of our second passenger. What’s his reaction as that boiling liquid hits his tender flesh? Does he go, “Man that hurt!”? Yes, he does. But then does he rip the parachute from his shoulder’s, throw it to the floor, and say, “The stupid parachute!”? No, why should he? He didn’t put the parachute on for a better flight. He put it on to save him from the jump to come. If anything, the hot coffee incident causes him to cling tighter to the parachute and even look forward to the jump.
If we have put on the Lord Jesus Christ for the right motive to flee from the wrath that’s to come when tribulation strikes, when the flight gets bumpy, we won’t get angry at God, and we won’t lose our joy and peace. Why should we? We didn’t come to Christ for a better lifestyle, but to flee from the wrath to come.
If anything, tribulation drives the true believer closer to the Savior. Sadly, we have multitudes of professing Christians who lose their joy and peace when the flight gets bumpy. Why? They are the product of a man-centered gospel. They came lacking repentance, without with they cannot be saved.
--Ray Comfort
why do you insist on preaching the lie that jesus is the "messiah" You have yet to provide NON-BIBLICAL evidence that this myth ever walked the earth. the Flood Myth in 'your bible' is factually based on the Egyptian ARGHA-NOA celebration of the annual flood of the nile delta. you really owe it to yourself to read the books referenced earlier in the thread. that you won't proves that RELIGION CONTROLS YOUR MIND.
http://video.google.com/...146&q=sam+harris
http://video.google.com/...146&q=sam+harris
Quote
is more truth about your 'religion' that you can only deny
www.tbknews.blogspot.comwe are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
Royd 0
You said that we had animal instincts LEFT OVER from evolution. That says to me that it has stopped. If I have left overs from supper, the meal is done, and the table has been cleared.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, I've just reviewed my recent postings on the subject and I can't find the posts I made that link evolution / instinct / morality and I can't be bothered to look any further.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right, I've just reviewed my recent postings on the subject and I can't find the posts I made that link evolution / instinct / morality and I can't be bothered to look any further.
Sorry man. It was Billvon who said it.QuoteAnyway, did I actually say 'left over' or did you replace what I wrote with 'left over' and then proceed to infer extra meaning from it?
pajarito 0
QuoteIt’s September 10th, 2001, the day before the attack on the World Trade Center. You’ve been asked to speak to 1000 people on the 100th floor of Tower 1. Your message: The Gospel of Jesus Christ. As you look at the vast sea of faces before you, you realize that within 24 hours most of these people would experience a terror so terrifying, so terrible that defies human imagination. Many of them will become instant human torches. Others will jump 100 stories to their deaths on the unforgiving sidewalks of New York. Others who remain in the building will collapse with it and will be crushed to a point where their bodies won’t ever be recovered. What are you going to tell these people? “God has a wonderful plan for you life?” If the “wonderful plan message” doesn’t apply to those people, how then can it be the Biblical gospel?
--Ray Comfort & Kirk Cameron: God’s Wonderful Plan, Episode 14
If you knew they were going to die, wouldn’t you have to change your message? We are all going to die. It may not happen for another 50 years, maybe 10, maybe next week, or maybe on your next jump. The point is, we don’t know. There is urgency to this message. If they die in their sin, they will suffer righteous judgment for their lawlessness. They need to be told this. Just like you’d warn a blind man walking toward a cliff. You wouldn’t give him a set of headphones and a radio to make his walk more enjoyable and to not offend him. You’d grab him, shake him, and tell him that he’s about to die if he stays on that course.
Rebecca 0
QuoteQuick, I’m a sinner, sinners go to hell, I’ve got three minutes to live, I’m guilty and am about to be judged and punished for my willful disobedience. What is your other way that I might be saved?
You got me. I'm out. Good luck with your mission. I hope it works out well for all those you save.
you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?
pajarito 0
QuoteQuoteQuick, I’m a sinner, sinners go to hell, I’ve got three minutes to live, I’m guilty and am about to be judged and punished for my willful disobedience. What is your other way that I might be saved?
You got me. I'm out. Good luck with your mission. I hope it works out well for all those you save.
I don't save anyone. My question was serious.
Rebecca 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuick, I’m a sinner, sinners go to hell, I’ve got three minutes to live, I’m guilty and am about to be judged and punished for my willful disobedience. What is your other way that I might be saved?
You got me. I'm out. Good luck with your mission. I hope it works out well for all those you save.
I don't save anyone. My question was serious.
I know. It's just that I think we have some fundamental viewpoint differences. I'm bowing out. This is meant as no disrespect to you or anyone.
But I do wonder how many more pages this thing has in it before it goes where all colossal threads go when they die.
you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?
JackC 0
QuoteThe theory is as flimsy as it has ever been.
I do wish you folks would criticise evolutionary biology for what it actually is instead of dragging up the same old straw man arguments.
philh 0
"There is urgency to this message. If they die in their sin, they will suffer righteous judgment for their lawlessness."
No they wont, thats Christian propganda with no evidence to back it up, other than whats in other bits of Christian proganda.
By the way your parachuting analogy - i have something to say on that. first off in the case of a commercial airliner, Do you wear your rig on commercial airliners? I doubt it, the flight will be unconformtable and theres no evidence at all that in the event of a crash it will save. You wont be able to exit the plane anyway. Its a waste of time and effort with only an uncomfortable ride along the way. Just like Christianity.
I give you a challenge. Why dont we do a two way? I will use science to save my life eg a parachute. You leave the parachute and use faith. well see who comes off better.
No they wont, thats Christian propganda with no evidence to back it up, other than whats in other bits of Christian proganda.
By the way your parachuting analogy - i have something to say on that. first off in the case of a commercial airliner, Do you wear your rig on commercial airliners? I doubt it, the flight will be unconformtable and theres no evidence at all that in the event of a crash it will save. You wont be able to exit the plane anyway. Its a waste of time and effort with only an uncomfortable ride along the way. Just like Christianity.
I give you a challenge. Why dont we do a two way? I will use science to save my life eg a parachute. You leave the parachute and use faith. well see who comes off better.
kallend 1,623
QuoteQuoteThe theory is as flimsy as it has ever been.
I do wish you folks would criticise evolutionary biology for what it actually is instead of dragging up the same old straw man arguments.
They can't do that. They would have no argument left.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
pajarito 0
QuoteI do wish you folks would criticise evolutionary biology for what it actually is instead of dragging up the same old straw man arguments.
Quote"Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the alternative is Special Creation, and that is unthinkable."
--Sir Arthur Keith
pajarito 0
QuoteBy the way your parachuting analogy - i have something to say on that. first off in the case of a commercial airliner, Do you wear your rig on commercial airliners? I doubt it, the flight will be unconformtable and theres no evidence at all that in the event of a crash it will save. You wont be able to exit the plane anyway. Its a waste of time and effort with only an uncomfortable ride along the way.
You're kidding, right? Like you said, it's just an analogy. The point has nothing to do with actually jumping from a commercial airliner. Sorry you missed it. By the way, it was not my analogy. I cited the author.
pie pajarito, over 100 times linking "are you a good person" and failing to provide NON-BIBLICAL evidence the 'bible's historical record. The fact is that the HISTORICAL RECORD proves it false!!!
www.tbknews.blogspot.com
www.tbknews.blogspot.com
we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
billvon 2,400
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Science now knows that many of the pillars of Darwinian
>Theory are either false or misleading.
Yeah, I read the book. The quote would more accurately reads "Wells thinks that many of the pillars of Darwinian Theory are either false or misleading."
Here's one example. In England, researchers observed that in soot-covered areas, moths in general got darker to better blend in with the soot-covered surfaces. A photographer killed two moths (a pale one from outside London and a dark one from London itself) and put them on a soot-covered tree to show the difference in protective coloration. Wells then claims that since the moths were killed and placed there it's not a 'real' picture, and thus the entire theory is false.
Several people have used the same technique to claim that the Apollo landings were all faked. After all, if there is anyone, no matter what their motivations, who doubts that we landed on the moon, then both sides should be taught - right? Heck, they should give equal time to the actual Apollo landings and the conspiracy theories that claim they are false! Let kids come to their own decisions.
> Furthermore, since the scientific evidence needed to settle the
>controversy is still lacking . . .
It's not. Both microevolution and macroevolution (speciation) have been observed in the lab.
>it is inaccurate to give students the impression that the controversy
>has been resolved and that all scientists have reached a consensus on the issue.
Again, it is as accurate as claiming that the Apollo landings really happened.
>Since the abruptness and extensiveness of the Cambrian explosion
>are so well documented, there is no excuse for a biology textbook
>to deal with the animal fossil record without even mentioning it.
A false accusation. Every book I have ever read on evolutionary biology mentions the Cambrian Explosion. Indeed, it is one of the central events of evolution - an example of adaptive radiation that, since then, has been mirrored only rarely (as in Ciclid radiation in Africa.)
>Theory are either false or misleading.
Yeah, I read the book. The quote would more accurately reads "Wells thinks that many of the pillars of Darwinian Theory are either false or misleading."
Here's one example. In England, researchers observed that in soot-covered areas, moths in general got darker to better blend in with the soot-covered surfaces. A photographer killed two moths (a pale one from outside London and a dark one from London itself) and put them on a soot-covered tree to show the difference in protective coloration. Wells then claims that since the moths were killed and placed there it's not a 'real' picture, and thus the entire theory is false.
Several people have used the same technique to claim that the Apollo landings were all faked. After all, if there is anyone, no matter what their motivations, who doubts that we landed on the moon, then both sides should be taught - right? Heck, they should give equal time to the actual Apollo landings and the conspiracy theories that claim they are false! Let kids come to their own decisions.
> Furthermore, since the scientific evidence needed to settle the
>controversy is still lacking . . .
It's not. Both microevolution and macroevolution (speciation) have been observed in the lab.
>it is inaccurate to give students the impression that the controversy
>has been resolved and that all scientists have reached a consensus on the issue.
Again, it is as accurate as claiming that the Apollo landings really happened.
>Since the abruptness and extensiveness of the Cambrian explosion
>are so well documented, there is no excuse for a biology textbook
>to deal with the animal fossil record without even mentioning it.
A false accusation. Every book I have ever read on evolutionary biology mentions the Cambrian Explosion. Indeed, it is one of the central events of evolution - an example of adaptive radiation that, since then, has been mirrored only rarely (as in Ciclid radiation in Africa.)
pajarito 0
Quote"Missing Link" Still Missing
Imaginations certainly took flight over Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis, a birdlike fossil with a meat-eater’s tail that was spirited out of northeastern China, ‘discovered’ at a Tucson, Arizona, gem and mineral show last year, and displayed at the National Geographic Society in Washington, D.C. Some 110,000 visitors saw the exhibit, which closed January 17; millions more read about the find in November’s National Geographic. Now, paleontologists are eating crow. Instead of ‘a true missing link’ connecting dinosaurs to birds, the specimen appears to be a composite, its unusual appendage likely tacked on by a Chinese farmer, not evolution.
"Archaeoraptor is hardly the first ‘missing link’ to snap under scrutiny. In 1912, fossil remains of an ancient hominid were found in England’s Piltdown quarries and quickly dubbed man’s apelike ancestor. It took decades to reveal the hoax." U.S. News & World Report, February 14, 2000
"Darwin admitted that millions of ‘missing links,’ transitional life forms, would have to be discovered in the fossil record to prove the accuracy of his theory that all species had gradually evolved by chance mutation into new species. Unfortunately for his theory, despite hundreds of millions spent on searching for fossils worldwide for more than a century, the scientists have failed to locate a single missing link out of the millions that must exist if their theory of evolution is to be vindicated." Grant R. Jeffery, The Signature of God
"There are gaps in the fossil graveyard, places where there should be intermediate forms, but where there is nothing whatsoever instead. No paleontologist . . . denies that this is so. It is simply a fact. Darwin’s theory and the fossil record are in conflict." David Berlinsky
"Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments and that huge gaps exist in the fossil record." Time magazine, Nov. 7, 1977
"The evolutionists seem to know everything about the missing link except the fact that it is missing." G. K. Chesterton
in "the signature of god" mr jeffrey says this' my thesis is this 'the bible is the divinely inspired word of god because it proves itself' TOTAL FUCKING STUPIDITY
Anything I say, or anyone else for that matter is also the divinely inspired "word of god", since this myth is OMNIPOTENT,OMNISCIENT, OMNIPRESENT.
Provide NON-BIBLICAL evidence other than pliny, suetonius, josephus, justin , or any of the others on the link you provided since they are PROVEN FORGERIES. You haven't because YOU CANNOT!
[/url]www.truthbeknown.com[url]
Anything I say, or anyone else for that matter is also the divinely inspired "word of god", since this myth is OMNIPOTENT,OMNISCIENT, OMNIPRESENT.
Provide NON-BIBLICAL evidence other than pliny, suetonius, josephus, justin , or any of the others on the link you provided since they are PROVEN FORGERIES. You haven't because YOU CANNOT!
[/url]www.truthbeknown.com[url]
we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
wishers never choose, choosers never wish
kallend 1,623
QuoteQuote"Missing Link" Still Missing
Imaginations certainly took flight over Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis, a birdlike fossil with a meat-eater’s tail that was spirited out of northeastern China, ‘discovered’ at a Tucson, Arizona, gem and mineral show last year, and displayed at the National Geographic Society in Washington, D.C. Some 110,000 visitors saw the exhibit, which closed January 17; millions more read about the find in November’s National Geographic. Now, paleontologists are eating crow. Instead of ‘a true missing link’ connecting dinosaurs to birds, the specimen appears to be a composite, its unusual appendage likely tacked on by a Chinese farmer, not evolution.
"Archaeoraptor is hardly the first ‘missing link’ to snap under scrutiny. In 1912, fossil remains of an ancient hominid were found in England’s Piltdown quarries and quickly dubbed man’s apelike ancestor. It took decades to reveal the hoax." U.S. News & World Report, February 14, 2000
"Darwin admitted that millions of ‘missing links,’ transitional life forms, would have to be discovered in the fossil record to prove the accuracy of his theory that all species had gradually evolved by chance mutation into new species. Unfortunately for his theory, despite hundreds of millions spent on searching for fossils worldwide for more than a century, the scientists have failed to locate a single missing link out of the millions that must exist if their theory of evolution is to be vindicated." Grant R. Jeffery, The Signature of God
"There are gaps in the fossil graveyard, places where there should be intermediate forms, but where there is nothing whatsoever instead. No paleontologist . . . denies that this is so. It is simply a fact. Darwin’s theory and the fossil record are in conflict." David Berlinsky
"Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments and that huge gaps exist in the fossil record." Time magazine, Nov. 7, 1977
"The evolutionists seem to know everything about the missing link except the fact that it is missing." G. K. Chesterton
What a load of rubbish. Transitional forms are discovered every year. Not all of them are dinosaur size, but they are transitional nonetheless.
Which Biblical creation myth even predicts the discovery of any fossils?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Royd 0
Please explain why the "evolutionists" always say that the alligator has existed for millions of years. Did it just finally decide that it liked what it had become, and therefore refused to evolve anymore.QuoteWhat a load of rubbish. Transitional forms are discovered every year. Not all of them are dinosaur size, but they are transitional nonetheless.
It has always been a reptile, and it has always been an alligator.
Erroll 49
QuotePlease explain why the "evolutionists" always say that the alligator has existed for millions of years. Did it just finally decide that it liked what it had become, and therefore refused to evolve anymore.
Could it be because Crocodilians (Alligatorinae, Crocodylinae and Gavialinae) are some of the most successful animals on the planet and don't need to evolve any more?
Speaking of modern evangelistic techniques of refusing to speak of the reality of hell, judgment, and sin and focusing primarily on God's love and grace:
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites