Go to The Reverend Kooka Speaks About Religious Bulls#!t
- Add a comment
- Go to WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT, HOW YOUR LIVE YOUR LIFE OR BELIEF IN GOD?
unicorn
You said 'Now, just because I did all that so called 'good deeds', it doesn't amount to a hill of beans if I didn't have Christ in my heart.' That says it all right there. Good deeds are meaningless unless you do them in the name of God or Jesus. Unless you have some other meaning for 'doesn't amount to a hill of beans'
I just left this same comment in your blog as well.
You did not leave any clear answers. according to you a person is judge by their heart, but somehow only good Christian have good heart, all others are bad and go to hell. I guess you are saying that God puts faith in him above morals, but then that does not go with any kind of loving God. And at the shame time you are claiming hat one can only live a truly moral life through finding God, which is very insulting to me because I know too many Christians who say they have found God but do not live moral lives, but it seems they can get into Heaven and I can't when I do live as clean and moral a life as anyone, including yourself little pastor B. All you have done is danced around the question and tried to justify your beliefs while at the same time showing that you do not believe in a loving God, but rather a egotistical God who puts his need for worship above all else.
If you can read then you can find out if someone is talking about you. I do not care if someone writes a post about me and does not tell me. I am saying it in the open, not behind your back. You can come and see my post and read it and defend yourself. I am sorry if you have some insecurity about it all. I am often talked about in other's posts and I really do not care. Lighten up a little there. Go put your name in the search box and see how many others have been talking about you. That's what I do when I am curious as to who has anything to say about me.
posted by
kooka_lives
on September 21, 2004 at 5:31 PM
| link to this | reply
I'd like to point out
that if I thought doing good deeds was a bad thing or a useless thing, then I certainly would not be doing them myself. And if I felt that way, than that would nulify what Acts 10:38 says, making it appear a lie to me-which the Bible-the Word of God-is not. I cited clear answers to your guestions on my last post in Footprints.
Speaking of good deeds, one Kooka might like to undertake in the future is that if you write a blog and bring up a fellow blogger in it, you should have the decency of letting that person know so that they might have an opportunity to defend themselves or comment back. That's only good morals afterall. Not talking behind someone elses back and the Golden Rule and such. Besides, it might get you more 'clicks' and that is after all what Kooka and others here are craving.
Pastor Brenda
posted by
PastorB
on September 21, 2004 at 5:10 PM
| link to this | reply
Ody
I know of no one who could not.
posted by
kooka_lives
on September 21, 2004 at 1:14 PM
| link to this | reply
sannhet
Agreed
posted by
kooka_lives
on September 21, 2004 at 1:13 PM
| link to this | reply
aardvark
Well said. That is a point that many Christians have a hugh problem with. I myself also think there is a level at which a person should be able to make amend for their misdeeds, but when they ask for forgiveness on their death bed because they are worried that they had lived their lives wrong, well at that point they have done nothing to make amends and at some level do not really deserve to be forgiven. They had the chance to make things right through out their life and decided not to, but when faced with the idea that their deeds might put them in Hell they are going to ask to be forgiven. At that point anyone who has even a weak belief in God will most likely ask to be forgiven, but that does not say that they would be a better person if given more time to live.
posted by
kooka_lives
on September 21, 2004 at 1:12 PM
| link to this | reply
Witty Woman
I never claimed to be worried about getting to heaven.
I do agree with the rest of what you say however. I have a strong belief that if one were to worry more about how they live life day by day and less about what comes next things would get better.
posted by
kooka_lives
on September 21, 2004 at 1:05 PM
| link to this | reply
Kooka
I think you and I could both use some humility, that is: Hu.mil’i.ty n. - modesty in self-estimation.
posted by
telemachus
on September 21, 2004 at 11:44 AM
| link to this | reply
Kooka - Here's My View
Living a right life - doing "good" things and not "bad"; loving and not hating or creating fear - that's what matters most. If there is no afterlife, then at least one has tried to be positive in one's life, which helps others to be positive. If there is an afterlife, then one is "one up" on those who did not live the "right" life.
posted by
sannhet
on September 21, 2004 at 11:41 AM
| link to this | reply
We express similar ideas in our blogs today. Here's a quote from mine. "The just atheist is just as just as the believer. An agnostic can be just a good a mother as the true believer. Good people are good people regardless of their creed. Commitment to correct principles and good behavior count more than faith in my book."
posted by
aardvark
on September 21, 2004 at 10:55 AM
| link to this | reply
Oops - typo: did a "there" instead of a "their". Wonder if I'll go to hell for that?
posted by
Witty_Woman
on September 21, 2004 at 10:54 AM
| link to this | reply
What you're saying is confusing - how can you be worried about not getting to heaven if you don't believe in God?! What we believe or don't believe doesn't matter, all that matters is that we behave decently while we're here, regardless of whether or not there is anything afterwards. And if there is, then those who have lived a 'decent' life will be rewarded for it. If hell did exist, there would be as many Christians in it as any other denomination, because they wouldn't be judged on their religion, only on their behaviour, attitudes and so on.
If more people lived there lives assuming there was nothing afterwards, there would be less war, less famine, less crime ... and no need for religion.
posted by
Witty_Woman
on September 21, 2004 at 10:53 AM
| link to this | reply