[net.religion] Thoughts on Sefton versus Nichols

rob@hhb.UUCP (Robert R Stegmann) (10/23/84)

[...]

The following are some thoughts about Ken Nichols'
response to an article by Laurie Sefton.
Remarks prefaced by '>' belong to Mr. Nichols.
------------

> ... Why should you get to make the standards that you
> live by.  The Bible says, "There is a way that seemeth right to a man, and 
> the end thereof is death."  Your 'good' deeds are nothing but dirty rags in
> the sight of a holy God.  Nothing you do is going to make you deserving of
> anything from God but death and punishment in hell forever and ever.

Why should we get to make the standards by which we live?
Because we live in a democracy.  See the Constitution and the Bill of
Rights for further references.
``America - love it or leave it!'' - this sentiment is like
that of ``Christ - accept him or burn!''.
Would you resent this type of exhortation?

> ... , in order to become justified in God's sight, we must first
> accept the gift that God gave in the form of Jesus.  Doing this involves:

> 1.  Admiting you are a sinner by birth and by choice, and that you can nothing
>     to get rid of your sin.   Then you repent (turn from) that sin and ask
>     God to forgive that attitude of rebellion against God that you were born
>     with.

American law presumes innocence until guilt is proven, not the contrary.
Perhaps Chilean `law' is a superior system?

> 2.  You must beleive that Jesus Christ was who He said He was, God's son.  He
>     was 100% man and 100% God (not logical, but true).  This means beleiving
>     that Jesus Christ is deity.

Shall we believe everyone who claims ultimate authority?
Obedience and blind faith on the part of
the masses have have allowed men like Hitler and Khomeini to
reshape the world.
Surely some leaders reshape the world for great good rather than great evil,
but how many victims must die needlessly until people adopt a more
skeptical attitude before igniting a jihad?
Skepticism is a good thing, not a bad thing, and it is up to you to
exercise the skill to convince others of a valid point of view.
Rarely is this done by repeating tautologies, and the people who are
so easily swayed are seldom worth anything to the cause.
Doesn't the Bible have something to say about this?

> 3.  Accept the fact that Jesus Christ came and died because of YOUR sin.  His
>     death satisfied the debt that you owed to God because of your rebellion
>     against Him.  Recongnize that there is absolutely no other means to reach
>     God or to be saved.

MY sin?  You cannot have it both ways - if I am guilty a priori of my
predecessors' transgressions, then you are of yours -
you are culpable for the atrocities perpetrated by all the past
members of Christianity, including those of the Catholic Church, no matter
how vociferously you may deny any association with them.

There is absolutely no other means to reach `God' or be saved?
Then a large percentage of mankind will end in hell with
no idea of why they are there.
If you are treating your subject seriously, you will realize that that
is an awful punishment for mere ignorance.
Not only that, but imagine the consternation of the various church
missionaries when they, too, arrive in hell, consigned there because
they didn't reach all the heathens in time!

> 4. Receive Christ into your life.  This means that because you beleive 3 above
>     you want Christ to become a real part of your life.  You thank Him
>    because of the price He paid for your sin, and you want Him to control your
>     life in return.  This is the difference between Christianity and other
>     religions.  We are given the opportunity to have a relationship with the
>     God of the universe in the person of Jesus Christ.  A friendship, if you
>     will, with the Saviour of the world.

I want someone to control my life so much, that to me it is a profound
disappointment that 1984 has not turned out to be like what Orwell
prophesied.
What am I supposed to do with this cursed `free will', anyway?
It seems, run right back to the store and return it!

> 5.  Make Jesus the Lord of your life.  You express the desire for Him to be
>     the ruler of your life instead of yourself.  This does not come easy.
>     You will gradually turn different areas of your life other to the Lord as
>     you continue in your Christian walk, but you should start at salvation by
>     relinquishing your pride in yourself with the joy of your new relationship
>     with God.

No, relinquishing one's pride does not come easy.
But there seem to be a number of institutions which specialize in
persuading living beings to relinquish their pride.
The practice of breaking horses, and the Marine Corps come to mind.
Sun Myung Moon also seems to have developed a good technique.
Perhaps your religious authorities should look into these approaches.

---------
> Man's morality is worth nothing in the sight of a holy and just God.

As I understand it, the sin for which mankind was expelled from
paradise is, in general, that of disobeying a direct order from God
and in specific, eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge
between good and evil.
If morality is the ability of man to perceive what is good and
what is evil, then we judge evil in the world, in other people,
and in ourselves, based on this perception.
If our morality is `worth nothing', then we cannot judge evil or
goodness in ourselves, and we have no business atoning for `sins'.
Furthermore, we cannot judge the worth or worthlessness of any
tracts on morality, including but not limited to the Bible.
Not only that, but again, if you are in any way serious about
your subject, then the horrible punishment of being expelled from
paradise seems in no way commensurate with the crime of disobeying
God to acquire such a `worthless' item.
Do you recommend that parents follow God's example, and turn their
children out of the home should they indulge in an expressly
prohibited snack?

-------
> "...holding forth the                       Ken Nichols
>  word of life..." Phil. 2:16                ...!ucbvax!dual!qantel!ken

The arguments above proffered for Christianity more resemble
`holding forth the word of death' rather than the word of life,
and do a disservice to many people who believe in a compassionate
Creator. (Not to mention any such Creator!)

None of the churches to which I have belonged espouse the
doctrines of guilt, fear, and threat that Mr. Nichols does.
If I had found him teaching in the same religious school in
which I taught, I would have had him removed from the presence
of young people.

It has been my experience that many people who come to accept Christ
have done so because of a profound dissatisfaction with the
course of their lives.  Many come from a less-than-ideal home environment
and have been plagued by troubles with drugs and unsavory peer-groups.
There is often an inverse correlation between the `softness' of one's
life and the vigor of a `born-again's' belief.
This is not to imply that religious belief is in every case a panacea
or crutch.
However, it can be an extremely effective medicine.

Now, to those who would un-convince believers:
would you deprive them of their medicine?  And just what do you expect
their reaction to be?
You cannot hope to convince them of the inefficacy of the medicine,
when they have proof, by virtue of personal and intimate experience,
to the opposite.  Is it so surprising that they react in anger
to attempts to snatch the medicine away?

To those who have found something in which to believe:
Man's intolerance of the ideas of other men is the greatest danger
facing the world.
If we do not acquire the wisdom to live amicably with those of differing
views, we may all end in a real lake of fire -
one like that formed under the epicenter of a high-yield
nuclear airburst.

To those who will argue that since our temporal existence is
insignificant, that it does not matter if we nuke ourselves
into the afterlife, I would point out that there exist
differences of opinion on that score, as well.
Now, if `we' believe life has innate value, and you do not,
and you by your actions and exhortations pose a threat to `our'
world, shall we eliminate you from it to reduce the danger to
ourselves?  How about your wife, kids, and whomever else
you may have tainted with your sociopathic philosophy?
You see how the `us' and `them' method of viewing the world
can cause virtually anyone to come to grief?


rob
{allegra,decvax,ihnp4}!philabs!hhb!rob

I in no way represent my employer in this matter.
(How about my God? - now THERE is a strange loop!)

dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) (10/25/84)

> 
> > ... , in order to become justified in God's sight, we must first
> > accept the gift that God gave in the form of Jesus.  Doing this involves:
> 
> > 1.  Admiting you are a sinner by birth and by choice, and that you can nothing
> >     to get rid of your sin.   Then you repent (turn from) that sin and ask
> >     God to forgive that attitude of rebellion against God that you were born
> >     with.
> 
> American law presumes innocence until guilt is proven, not the contrary.
> Perhaps Chilean `law' is a superior system?

God knows you inside and out, and so does not have to presume
innocence; He knows better.  The American legal system does not
know you inside and out.
-- 
Paul DuBois		{allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois

"Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church,
and gave himself for it."	Ephesians 5:25

Would you die for your wife?