How can I talk to a "literalist"???

[Kent]

 

I have been having an online discussion with a person that identifies himself (or herself) as a "literalist".

By that, he takes the Bible literally. Literal fire, literal hell, literal eternity, etc.

But I think I may have taken the conversation too far when, out of frustration, I asked if he expected a 7 headed sea monster, with crowns, to LITERALLY come up out of the ocean. Then I said something about Godzilla vs King Hydra The Talking Sea Monster.

I get this way, sometimes, when I get frustrated. Instead of being all sweetness and light, I go for the sledgehammer.

Is there a way to do this right? Without the smarty pants comments? Is it an exercise in futility?
I didnt start this conversation, BTW. He responded to one of my posts and we have been going back and forth for some time now. I think he is trying to "witness" to me...

[lilitalienboi16]

I have been having an online discussion with a person that identifies himself (or herself) as a "literalist".

By that, he takes the Bible literally. Literal fire, literal hell, literal eternity, etc.

But I think I may have taken the conversation too far when, out of frustration, I asked if he expected a 7 headed sea monster, with crowns, to LITERALLY come up out of the ocean. Then I said something about Godzilla vs King Hydra The Talking Sea Monster.

I get this way, sometimes, when I get frustrated. Instead of being all sweetness and light, I go for the sledgehammer.

Is there a way to do this right? Without the smarty pants comments? Is it an exercise in futility?
I didnt start this conversation, BTW. He responded to one of my posts and we have been going back and forth for some time now. I think he is trying to "witness" to me...

Well ask him how a lake can be made of literal fire, a lake is made of water, not fire

But yea... theres plenty of stuff you could say to them.

If the bible is literal then why did Jesus say that we have BEAMS in our eyes, i certainly don't see any literal beam in my eye when i look in the mirror. Or perhaps when Jesus told the christian to cut there arms or legs off and enter heaven maimed then have there whole bodies thrown into the fire, why isn't your friend walking around with missing eyes, legs, and arms? Certainly these things have caused him to sin? I speak as a fool.

Good luck and God bless,

Alex

[Kent]

Thanks.

I am thinking back to when I was younger, and even then, as a kid, I knew that the Bible cannot be literal, because of all of the symbolism and parables.

For some reason, and I cannot figure out why, most christians call themselves literalists, and just cannot bring themselves to realize that not all scripture is literal. Maybe I just need to mature more.
But I am close to just going my own way and not talk about it anymore.

That will last until someone else brings up "eternal hell". Then it starts all over again...

[DuluthGA]

Here's another idea, Kent, from Ray's Gehenna Fire Judgment paper:  http://bible-truths.com/lake16-D4.htm


In Jesus' Sermon recorded in Matt. 5:21-26, Jesus was not teaching His disciples on the mount that they would be brought before the Judgment of the nation of Israel if they hated a brother; or that they would be brought before the High Council of the Jewish Sanhedrin if they called a brother Raca; or that they would be burned at the Jerusalem garbage dumped in the valley of Gehenna if they called a brother a fool; or that they would be thrown into a prison of the Roman Empire if they did not quickly rectify a grievance with a brother. It is nonsense to think such a thing. These are Jesus' Judgments for His disciples and followers through all ages.

And so to take any of these teachings literal is to make a liar out of Christ. No, these are Christ's words and they are Christ's judgments. Jesus will not turn over judgment of His chosen Elect to the nations and counsels and judgment seats of this world. What do they know about spiritual judgment? Jesus gives four examples of sin and four examples of how those sins will be judged, and all of those Judgments are CHRIST'S JUDGMENTS:

"For the Father judges no man, but has committed all judgment unto the Son" (John 5:22).



Janice

[jER]

But I think I may have taken the conversation too far when, out of frustration, I asked if he expected a 7 headed sea monster, with crowns, to LITERALLY come up out of the ocean. Then I said something about Godzilla vs King Hydra the Talking Sea Monster.

I get this way, sometimes, when I get frustrated. Instead of being all sweetness and light, I go for the sledgehammer.

Try using a mallet, one with a shorter-handle that is used to strike a surface without damaging it and chisel away the wood, literally! 

Often times, making statements in the form of questions (giving another the opportunity to answer for themselves) may lead them to an understanding that "all is not as it seems", nor a Disneyland fantasy. Jesus did not always correct (i.e. Reincarnation) - rather, He taught the truth to the multitudes in parables.

Although, there may be those occasions where confrontation is inevitable, and you must pick your weapon: the hammer, silence or forgiveness - keep in mind, "they have not been given an understanding", as of yet! A Literalist sees the explicit, not the implied (spirit). They view the words precisely as written, even if figuratively speaking – otherwise it is not real.

Keep asking in His Name (character).

-jER

[Chris R]

I have been having an online discussion with a person that identifies himself (or herself) as a "literalist".

By that, he takes the Bible literally. Literal fire, literal hell, literal eternity, etc.

But I think I may have taken the conversation too far when, out of frustration, I asked if he expected a 7 headed sea monster, with crowns, to LITERALLY come up out of the ocean. Then I said something about Godzilla vs King Hydra The Talking Sea Monster.

I get this way, sometimes, when I get frustrated. Instead of being all sweetness and light, I go for the sledgehammer.

Is there a way to do this right? Without the smarty pants comments? Is it an exercise in futility?
I didnt start this conversation, BTW. He responded to one of my posts and we have been going back and forth for some time now. I think he is trying to "witness" to me...

Well Kent, i have tried all of that, made my share of mistakes, said more than my share of harsh words, and in the end, havent convinced a single person of anything.

But there's no shame in trying to help someone see some truth, but it is God himself that sends a dillusion, so that these will believe a lie.

If after all you have shown, They still cannot understand...shake the dust from your shoes..and walk away.

Hope this is of some help

Chris R

[jER]

Chris,

Very true! We are to be at peace with all men, as much as possible, even if it means "departing."

A friend in Christ

-jER

[Dennis Vogel]

Does he have his eyes and all his limbs?

Mat 5:29  And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Mat 5:30  And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

[musicman]

Does he have his eyes and all his limbs?

Mat 5:29  And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Mat 5:30  And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Churchians can't cut off their limbs.  They wouldn't be able to wag their fingers at us for missing church.  Well, I guess they could with their left hand instead.

[Deborah-Leigh]

How does he explain " The words I speak to you are Spirit and they are Life." John 6:63

John 15 : 7 If you abide in me and my words abide in you, you shall ask what you will, and it shall be done for you.

So cut up the pages of the Bible and eat the pages? They will still not abide in you if you do that
and eating the pages literally out of the Bible will not make anyone live longer or cause the words of life to abide in you. He might think so but that just shows how blindness can be so foolish.

Peace to you

Arcturus

[chav]

Hi
I too have tried to speak of these things to a few people , but they just don't get it. But then up to a year or so ago I didn't get it either.
How about the bottomles pit (submerged chaos) mentioned in Revelation, presumably if it is a literal bottomless pit you could throw a new born baby into it, and that baby would grow into aduldhood and age and die without hitting the bottom.
How will we recognise Jesus at the end of the age ? easy he's the man with a sword coming out of his mouth.
Having been a bit of a literalist at one time it seems so foolish now, but at the time you genuinely feel you are defending the truth, and that does not leave you very open to the fact that you might be wrong, which is not a good place to be in.
I am so grateful to God that he has opened my eyes to see so much more of his truth, and that what it really comes down to ,God opening eyes.
Dave UK

[josh]

Kent,

Hi. I don't believe we've met before... my names Josh. Nice to meet you.

I can relate to the frustration you must be feeling when it seems like you have hit a brick wall with someone you are attempting to discuss the scriptures with who has an opposing view to yours. It has been almost two years now since I first began to wrestle with the ideas of universal reconciliation and an interpretation of the scriptures that differs from the common beliefs of mainstream christianity...

I have been consistently baffled at the responses of others to the idea of God's love for all humanity not failing in the salvation work... I have encountered a multiplicity of response... some who wish to argue, others called me names and tried to label me as part of a "cult'... some who could no longer accept me as a friend...

I have had to remind myself constantly now on my journey that there was a time that I believed much like those who now reject my beliefs... a time where i believed in a more literal interpretation, a time where I believed in eternal punishment, a time where I accepted ideas about God that could not be scripturally supported because I believed the words of well meaning pastors, friends and family...

In realizing this I don't get so frustrated as often... day by day, I'm coming to terms with that God is truly working all in all and it's not my responsibility to "convince" anyone of anything. My job is to simply seek God and the truths of God's word... and to live those truths in a way that others can see.

Arguments, debates, heated conversations, etc. will never change anyones mind and will only wear you out... my suggestion to you is to love this person, pray for them... but don't exhausted yourself trying to figure out ways to talk to them so that they will see your point of view... if we're honest, we cannot see now because we chose to... but because God saw fit to open our eyes.

God's Peace.
Josh

[Grateful]

I learned the hard way within the past 2 years that once a person's mind is made up, about their own religious beliefs, especially where the veracity of the Authorized King James Bible Version is concerned.  A couple of people told me, when I said "There is no Hell,"  "Yes there is....God is JUST! "    Sheeeee...... !!!  They were SO adamant about it, and one of them even said that Jesus mentioned "Hell" more times than He did "Heaven", that I just simply had to maintain Silence.  At that time, I had not yet looked up every occurrence of the word "hell" in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, and discovered FOR MYSELF that in every single instance it was referred to as "the grave" and "hades" (a place of fiery torment for the unsaved).   Now I understand it when the Bible says, "Ye are a stiff-necked people..." , referring to those who refuse to HEAR and to SEE.  And, gee, it's so sad when that happens.....how  FREE  their whole Inner Being would FEEL , if they only KNEW the TRUTH !!!!!!!!!!!!      Because of being liberated out of a religious prison, my spirit feels like FLYING, or DANCING, quite often!!   

HALLOWED be the BELOVED , forever!!!!

Linda

[Bradigans]

All true born again (John 3:3, John 3:7) bonafide believers are literalist. Just not from a carnal perspective.

-1 Corinthians 2:14 - But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

-2 Corinthians 5:7 - (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)

It all depends on your perspective of literal...

[Deborah-Leigh]

Regarding what is literal and what is spiritual here is something to consider. Quote from http://bible-truths.com/twelve.htm

TRUTH NUMBER 1

[A] "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the Last Adam [Jesus Christ] was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is NATURAL; and afterward that which is SPIRITUAL" (I Cor. 15:45-46).

"It is sown [first] a NATURAL BODY [a physical body which dies]; it is raised [afterward] a SPIRITUAL BODY [which is made immortal and never dies]..." (I Cor. 15:44).

[C] "Who shall change our [first] VILE BODY, that it may be fashioned like unto His [afterward] GLORIOUS BODY..." (Phil. 3:21).

[D] "If I have told you EARTHLY things [first], and you believe not, how shall you believe, if I tell you of HEAVENLY [spiritual] things [afterward]?" (John 3:12).

The sequence of God's plan of salvation for mankind is most important—First is the physical and then comes the spiritual.

Without the knowledge of this principle of Scripture, it is impossible to understand what man is and what is his destiny. Have you not been taught that the first Adam was indeed a "quickening, living, immortal spirit," and that afterward, at the resurrection; his immortal soul will be given an ETERNAL PHYSICAL BODY? (Then there is also the ungodly doctrine called the "Law of Circularity" which teaches that we have always existed as spirits, and are now spirits having a physical experience—just the opposite of the truth).

It was the natural body of Adam that became a living soul after God breathed into him. And that living soul was subject to death (Gen. 2:17 and Ezek. 18:4 & 20). Even this simple, straight-forward truth of Scripture is universally denied.

God said that Adam would "SURELY die" (Gen. 2:17). But most have been taught that Adam was an immortal, spiritual soul that can NEVER, EVER DIE. I just received a DVD from Internationally famous, self-styled prophet, Jack Van Impe, in which it is stated: "Once we are born, WE NEVER DIE." Jack Van Impe parrots that Old Serpent who told the world's first recorded lie, when he said: "you shall NOT SURELY die" (Gen. 3:4)

It is universally taught (and believed) that Adam and Eve were already formed and created in the very spiritual image of God way back in the garden. This is not, however, how the Hebrew manuscripts read, as a perfect creature formed in the very spiritual image of God, that not only does not sin, but cannot sin. The reason that Jesus (made unto sinful flesh) did not sin, was not that He could not sin, but rather His Father WOULD NOT LET HIM SIN. Jesus was born with a physical body, and therefore that body had to die. But I assure you that Jesus did not possess a "carnal mind" in that body of flesh. He sinned NOT.

Making mankind into God's own Image is a process that involves a lifetime of trials and tribulations that includes the crucifying and mortifying of the carnal human mind and body. I realize that from the King James and many modern translations it sounds like it was a "past tense" made in His image at creation, but actually it was not. Gen. 1:26-27 is equivalent to our English imperfect. Here is how one Version translates it:

"And saying is God, Make WILL WE [a continuing action] humanity in Our image..."

and

"And CREATING [a continuing action] is God humanity in His image" (Gen. 1:26a & 27a Concordant Literal Old Testament),

Man is not a "spirit being" having a "physical" experience, but rather man is a "physical and mortal" being having a "spiritual" experience. We are first born mortal [physical], but in the resurrection God gives us immortality (the spiritual). Throw away this marvelous truth of Scripture, and you will be as deceived as Kenneth Copeland when he stated that when Adam was created, he was so shining, so glorious, so spiritual, so GOD-like, that one could not even see his body for the glorious radiance of his spirituality. Oh really? And is that why he was "naked," although he "...knew not that he was wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and NAKED" (Gen. 3: 7 versus Rev. 3:17)?

Just prior to Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit, we read that Eve:

"...saw that the tree was good for food ['the lust of the flesh,' I John 2:16],

and that it was pleasant to the eyes ['the lust of the eyes,' I John 2:16],

and a tree to be desired to make one wise ['the pride of life,' I John 2:16],

she did eat... and he did eat" (Gen. 3:6).

It is not just the eating of the fruit that was a sin, but the "lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and pride of life" that went before the eating. And just why where they so filled with sin at their very creation? Because they were in the "perfect spiritual image of GOD?" Poppycock. They were natural, physical, carnal, and "...the carnal mind [with which Adam and Eve were created] is enmity [hatred] against God, for it is not subject to the law of God ['But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it...' Gen. 2:17], neither indeed can be" (Rom. 8:7).

So, do the Scriptures really teach what the world has been taught—that Adam and Eve were made into the perfect spiritual "image of God?" Get real.

Here is how GOD says He created Adam and Eve:

"For the creature was made subject to vanity [King James Margin: "futility"], not willingly, but by reason of Him [God] Who has subjected [Gk: 'subjects'—aorist tense—subjecting is still going on] the same in hope" (Rom. 8:20).

In Dante's inferno, "all hope is gone...," but in God's realm He subjects the entire creation "...in HOPE,"

God willfully, wantingly, knowingly, purposely, and wisely, created mankind "subject to vanity," subject to failure, but beyond the failure, God also subjects the same in "hope." Once again, contrary to all orthodox doctrine, there is hope for all of God's carnal-minded, God-hating people on planet Earth. God Himself says so, in the same breath: "because the creature itself [the same creation that God subjects to vanity, futility, failure, and carnal-minded hatred against God] also shall be [ah, did you catch that? 'shall be'], delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God" (Rom. 8:21). Do you believe the Scriptures? Really—what about this one?

And so God, "made the creature subject to vanity"—failure, but later in mankind's development, the creature "shall be"— [future tense]... shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption." Ah yes, God created them in a condition of "bondage" and "corruption," and therefore not "immortal" as is taught, but rather in "bondage of corruption." But thanks to God, in the resurrection of the dead, '...this corruption must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality' (I Cor. 15:54).

Yes, of course, first comes the PHYSICAL (death), and then the SPIRITUAL (life). There it is—the hope of all humanity. Corruption and mortality (the physical first) must put on incorruption and immortality [the afterward spiritual).



Peace to you

Arcturus

[Bradigans]

All true born again (John 3:3, John 3:7) bonafide believers are literalist. Just not from a carnal perspective.

-1 Corinthians 2:14 - But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

-2 Corinthians 5:7 - (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)

It all depends on your perspective of literal...

God's perspective is always the literal (carries the most clout) perspective. This is why THE CHURCH is admonished in Ephesians 4:17-18 - This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart (spirit).

Here's another verse to consider.  Romans 4:17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. Notice that i underlined and calleth those things which be not as though they were. Now that sounds literal. It's not imaginary. The faith of CHRIST isn't imaginary. That's the best perspective (the most literal perspective) that you can have.

Folks have warp views of what's literal (real) and what's not. Matthew 24:35 - Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.God's perspective is always the literal. It's just a matter of whether or not we've got the faith to see, embrace, and acknowledge it...

[Deborah-Leigh]

Hello Bradigans

Perhaps this will add to how you are percieving Gods perspective. From http://bible-truths.com/kennedy2.htm

RELATIVE VS. ABSOLUTE

If a theologian can't see the "absolute" versus the "relative" in Scripture, he is in no position to teach anyone.

A little boys asks: "Why did God say in Gen. 3:9: 'Where art thou [Adam]?' Mommy says that God knows everything." (I Jn 3:20). You say, "Of course God knew where Adam was. Adam sinned. Adam felt bad. He thought he could hide from God. God was condescending to man's level. It was for Adam's benefit that God asked, 'Where art thou Adam?'" You say, "That's not a problem. That's easy to understand and answer. It's stupid to think that God didn't know where Adam was."

And, of course, we have Scriptural proof that God knew where Adam was because "He [God] knows all" (I Jn 3:20)

Neither did our Lord ask questions out of ignorance:

"Believe ye that I am able to do this?" (Matt. 9:28)

"Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?" (Matt. 12:48)

"How many loaves have ye?" (Matt. 15:34)

"Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?" (Matt. 116:13)

Christ asked dozens of questions during His ministry. But He already knew all the answers:

" ... because of His knowing ALL men ... " (Matt. 21:27).

Christ even answered questions by asking questions. The Pharisees asked why His disciples transgressed the "traditions." Our Lord knew how to "answer a fool according to his folly" (Prov. 26:5) by asking: "Wherefore are you also transgressing the precept of God because of your tradition?" (Mat. 15:3)

This brings up another apparent contradiction, however, because Prov. 26:4 says: "answer not a fool according to his folly ... " Our Lord knew how to do that as well: "Neither am I telling you by what authority I am doing these things." (Mat. 21:27). These two scriptures in Proverbs should teach us to never pit one verse of Scripture against another. Verse 4 and 5 do not contradict. They are both true.

So if it's stupid to think that God didn't really know where Adam was, a relative statement condescending to man's level, isn't it then, likewise, stupid to believe that God contradicts Himself in the following verses:



THE RELATIVE:
THE ABSOLUTE:

" ... seek, and ye shall find ... " (Mat. 7:7) "Not one is seeking out God" (Rom. 3:11)
"God changed His mind" (Ex. 32:14) "God is not a man Who changes His mind" (I Sam. 15:29)
" ... choose you this day whom ye will serve." (Josh. 24:15) "Ye have not chosen me,
but I have chosen you ... " (Jn. 15:16)
" ... whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God ... " (I Jn. 3:10) "All is of God" (II Cor. 5:18)
"Zechariah was just before God" (Lk. 1:5) (Comparing him to the corrupt priests) "Not one is just" (Rom. 3:10)
(Comparing man with God)



One is the "relative" the other is the "absolute." One is from man's point of view, comparing men with men, the other is from God's point of view. One shows how a thing is perceived while the other shows how it actually is. One is for minors while the other is for the mature.

Both Scriptures are true. The relative is true and the absolute is true. They do not contradict. However, one really is "relative" while the other is "absolute."

Theologians are always taking Scriptures that speak of the relative, from man's point of view, and insist that these verses are absolute. By doing this they commit a double sin. Because then they insist that these relative truths actually nullify God's absolute declarations. They won't admit to this in their own words, but this is what they do when they retain the "relative" at the expense of rejecting the "absolute."

Even theologians admit that their free will theory is limited. So they have invented "limited free will." They use analogies like a cow on a tether or a fly in a jar or a lion in a cage. Their freedom is limited to the confines of their restraints, but within those confines they are nonetheless, free. Is this true? Is there such a thing as "limited" free will? Or is this just more theological double-talk?

Only in religion do simple words lose their meaning. Let's look at Webster's Twentieth Century Dictionary: Page 963, "limited, a. Restricted." Page 682, "free, a. without restriction." So here then is what theologians want us to believe: Man has a will that is restricted without restriction.

Man does not have "limited" free will. Otherwise God would have "limited" sovereignty. Man has no free will and God has total sovereignty. Theologians try to make high what is low and try to bring low what is high. These teachings do not glorify God.

Somebody has been taking William James too seriously. God is not sitting around waiting to see what man will do through his "free will" so that He can then figure out what to do about it. Rather than conclude from the "wisdom of the world" that man has a free will (and thus deny the sovereignty of God), we must conclude that since God is sovereign, man can not and does not have a free will. This is logical, sensible, and lawful. It is Scriptural and it glorifies God.

Theologians condemn scientists for their inability to see beyond the "relative" in our universe. Surely these scientists must see that a God must be behind everything. However, except for rare persons like Dr. Einstein, they can't.



Peace be to you

Arcturus

[Kent]

Thank you all for your responses. I read them all. There is a lot of wisdom and experience in each of these responses.

It is hard to relate to people that have, in the past, believed in "hell", because I simply never believed in it. I just didnt know the answers, so I kept my mouth shut, knowing with absolute certainty that I would know, by faith, the answers in time. Now that I know, I can defend against this monstrous doctrine and it is hard to keep my mouth shut. But I am learning.

It's not so much as I was trying to "win" an argument. I couldn't care less about that.
In that board I was posting at there are christians, satanists, atheists, agnostics, hindu, buddists, etc.
The non-christians already have a preconceived notion of what christians believe, and they want nothing to do with it, precisely because of this doctrine of demons called eternal hell, and some other doctrines you are all aware of.

My "argument" was more meant to show them that not all of us are like that, not to convince a self-proclaimed christian. Some of those people have dead loved ones and simply dont want to believe in a hell, and it seems that it is almost mandatory for all christians to believe in hell. Well, when someone comes in with that eternal hell doctrine, then I have a hard time in not responding to that, and to show that there is another perspective for them to consider. Then, the unbeliever can decide who "wins".

It's odd. I have more in common with agnostics it seems, than I do with other christians. They are much more open to these types of conversations and we go back and forth discussing things in a friendly manner. It's sad to say, but I have more hope for them than I do for those stuck in churchianity.

I threw some seed out there. I'll just have to wait and see if any of it grows and bears fruit.

Again, thank you all. I do appreciate it.
Kent

[rvhill]

The thing about the inerrantist you have to remember is that they are idolaters. Their god is not the father or Jesus, but the book that they read.  The bible say that the word of God is with out error, and the word of God is Jesus. The Bible is not Jesus.

[indianabob]

Friend Kent,
Thank you for the summary.  I have experienced the same thing and have gotten a more thoughtful and balanced response from "polite" non-believers in many instances.  It is very much harder to UN-learn memorized error than it is to consider new information with an open mind.

Of course the agnostic has limitations in that they are usually not yet being called, but they are also usually thinkers/doubters in that they don't believe men's theories or desire to join any group that will accept them.  True scientists are similar in that they are willing to grow and learn AFTER they receive their degree in philosophy  (PhD= piled higher and deeper)

Please share any new experiences with us as they occur.

indianabob

Thank you all for your responses. I read them all. There is a lot of wisdom and experience in each of these responses.

It is hard to relate to people that have, in the past, believed in "hell", because I simply never believed in it. I just didnt know the answers, so I kept my mouth shut, knowing with absolute certainty that I would know, by faith, the answers in time. Now that I know, I can defend against this monstrous doctrine and it is hard to keep my mouth shut. But I am learning.

It's not so much as I was trying to "win" an argument. I couldn't care less about that.
In that board I was posting at there are christians, satanists, atheists, agnostics, hindu, buddists, etc.
The non-christians already have a preconceived notion of what christians believe, and they want nothing to do with it, precisely because of this doctrine of demons called eternal hell, and some other doctrines you are all aware of.

My "argument" was more meant to show them that not all of us are like that, not to convince a self-proclaimed christian. Some of those people have dead loved ones and simply dont want to believe in a hell, and it seems that it is almost mandatory for all christians to believe in hell. Well, when someone comes in with that eternal hell doctrine, then I have a hard time in not responding to that, and to show that there is another perspective for them to consider. Then, the unbeliever can decide who "wins".

It's odd. I have more in common with agnostics it seems, than I do with other christians. They are much more open to these types of conversations and we go back and forth discussing things in a friendly manner. It's sad to say, but I have more hope for them than I do for those stuck in churchianity.

I threw some seed out there. I'll just have to wait and see if any of it grows and bears fruit.

Again, thank you all. I do appreciate it.
Kent