You all convinced me, I'm now an Atheist!!!

[Esquilax]

It is just belief, but as Christ says, belief begets works... It is not the works that save but the belief, but as James tells us Faith without works is dead. Our works are the 'fruit' or proof of who we are and what we believe.

But it's the belief that saves; are you saying that it's impossible to believe without having fruits you would approve of? You can't have it both ways, Drich: either the belief is what matters, in which case you can't determine a person's christian status by their actions, or the actions do matter, in which case you're contradicting the bible.

Besides, there are some folks in your religion who dismiss the possibility of works at all; it's not a works-based religion, they say. How do you intend to demonstrate that they're wrong, and you're right, if indeed you're asserting the importance of works?

Can someone mirror a 'fruit producing Christian' and not know Christ?/Not be counted among the saved? Absolutly! again the parable of the wise and foolish builders tell us this.

So obviously the fruits aren't how you tell a true christian from anyone else, meaning when you do exactly that, you're aware that it's not something that's going to work. You're undercutting your own premise, here.

The threshold is very simple to grasp. Before one can have forgiveness one (per Paul, and the book of galations) must follow the Gospel as He outlines it. If one does not follow the teaching of the Canonical version of Jesus then He is not under the attonement offered by the Canonical Christ.

But a moment ago you were saying it's belief that saves you, not actions. Which is it?

Which means if one does follow the canonical Christ then he will have forgiveness in his religious efforts. If he does not follow the biblical version of Jesus then his religious efforts will yeild the same as unforgiven sin. Why? Because NONE OF US are 100% correct in our various versions of Christianity, but through the attonement offered by Christ all of us can be.

Would this be the canonical Christ who whips people? The one who invented the concept of hell?

See, this is the problem with what you're saying: on the one hand you say follow Christ, but on the other you're deliberately discounting any aspect of Christ that doesn't fit the definition you had decided on before looking at the actions and beliefs of Christ. What it really is, is the things you approve of and then superimpose on the bible later. Why should anyone follow that?

If slavery is not Ok then then you have alot to answer for, as i pointed out modern life is built on the backs of slaves.

Oh, for fuck's sake: I am not responsible for an infrastructure built by other people, nor am I required to be bound by the lazy equivocations on slavery you use.

Also? A tu coque fallacy is not an answer to the issue. Do you have a real response to this point on slavery, or just more "oh yeah? Well, you're just as bad!"?

Killing and Murder, what are the differences? Murder is an unsanction taking of human life. you know kinda like abortion. While killing is indeed a sanction taking of human life. Like Hunting down the C.Hebdo murders and killing them.

If you're fine with killing someone when god orders you to, then obviously killing isn't something that should discount one from being a christian. Yet another point at which your position contradicts itself.

Because again morality is man's joke version of right and wrong. It is ok for man to lift the bans on say slavery and murder if he renames the act. "Sweat shop/Migrant workers" or "Abortion/Planned parenthood" which is the same thing as slavery and murder as the net result is the exact same! But for some hypocritical reason when God did these things 4 or 5 thousand years ago He can not be forgiven?

I don't accept your false equivalencies as valid.

Oppps I just did it again! (defined my beliefs.)

Too bad what you said was loaded with vagaries and contradictions, then.

Wishful near sighted thinking my friend. The continueity I have provided to you has been consistant here on this website since day one. Some of you see it, other's can't because you have your heads burried in your 'positions' so deeply you will never see past your own beliefs.

See above.

What in your minds eye is considered to be evidence or justification? I was recently repermanded by a mod for posting too many 'unsolicited' bible verses.

If you cannot demonstrate that your specific interpretation of the bible matches the initial intent of the biblical authors, then I have no reason to believe that your views reflects some kind of "true" christianity. You won't be able to demonstrate that by pointing to bible verses and then telling me what you think they mean at any rate, but more importantly since the bible authors are anonymous your ability to know what they think is entirely compromised anyway.

That's my point: your position is unjustifiable and untenable, making the conclusions you come to with it completely irrelevant.

Indeed being skinny does have rules... or do i really need to explain how caloric intake works?

An effect is not a rule; caloric intake may cause one to stop being skinny, but one does not stop being skinny the instant one does so. Which is also not my point, which is that by definition, one cannot be both skinny and obese, because those two terms are antonyms, or at least excluded from co-existing. Same with atheism and christianity: the former requires no belief in god, the latter requires belief in a specific god. Just as A cannot equal Not-A, a theist cannot be an atheist.

Christ does not see different denominations. He sees one united 'Body.' As Paul says each body has many parts with different functions, all are needed to cover the different functions as the body of Christ.

By what right to do dismiss those denominations you don't approve of, or the members thereof that don't act as you want, as not being a part of that body, performing a function you don't understand?

[CapnAwesome]

You can call yourself what you like, I'll still call you an idiot.