The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I am sharing a simple message of the love of Jesus and the sacrifice He paid for sin, in this post. Jesus
Jesus is going to return one day, soon and will judge the world, on account of all its sins. Revelation (the last book of the bible) gives a vivid prophetic view on the return of Christ, stating "every eye shall see". Jesus will decide who is allowed unto the Kingdom of God for all eternity through the straight and narrow path and who passes through the gates of the broad and wide path.
The Kingdom of God is heaven which is described as a place of no more tears, or pains, night or day or hunger or famin. We are told he has the best mansions lined up for his people and has glories beyond our human interpretation.
He also tells us about Hell, a place of weeping and nashing of teeth, a place of eternal punishment and terrible suffering. He also says some will have few stripes and some who reject the word of Lord will have many stripes.
My friends in order to pass from death until life you must allow in the Holy Spirit and must pray for God to come into your life. No amount of charity money or giving or helping will enter you into the Kingdom of God for all eternity except by this way; excepting the Lord Jesus into your life, the same man that took away all man's sins on the cross. John 3:16 "For God so loved the World that he sent his one and only son, for who ever believeth in him may not perish but have everlasting life" Jesus was the perfect sacrifice. He paid the price for sin, in order to get the burden of sin off your shoulders and with you for all eternity in Hell, you need to trust in the Lord Jesus, who died for sin. This is the most important decision you will ever make, either accept you are a sinner and Jesus has taken away your sin or reject Jesus and face Him one day and all eternity in Hell.
God bless and thankyou for your time. If you are interested in any of the points raised in this article or you would like to ask Jesus into your life please feel free to write to me at [email protected]
Jesus is going to return one day, soon and will judge the world, on account of all its sins. Revelation (the last book of the bible) gives a vivid prophetic view on the return of Christ, stating "every eye shall see". Jesus will decide who is allowed unto the Kingdom of God for all eternity through the straight and narrow path and who passes through the gates of the broad and wide path.
The Kingdom of God is heaven which is described as a place of no more tears, or pains, night or day or hunger or famin. We are told he has the best mansions lined up for his people and has glories beyond our human interpretation.
He also tells us about Hell, a place of weeping and nashing of teeth, a place of eternal punishment and terrible suffering. He also says some will have few stripes and some who reject the word of Lord will have many stripes.
My friends in order to pass from death until life you must allow in the Holy Spirit and must pray for God to come into your life. No amount of charity money or giving or helping will enter you into the Kingdom of God for all eternity except by this way; excepting the Lord Jesus into your life, the same man that took away all man's sins on the cross. John 3:16 "For God so loved the World that he sent his one and only son, for who ever believeth in him may not perish but have everlasting life" Jesus was the perfect sacrifice. He paid the price for sin, in order to get the burden of sin off your shoulders and with you for all eternity in Hell, you need to trust in the Lord Jesus, who died for sin. This is the most important decision you will ever make, either accept you are a sinner and Jesus has taken away your sin or reject Jesus and face Him one day and all eternity in Hell.
God bless and thankyou for your time. If you are interested in any of the points raised in this article or you would like to ask Jesus into your life please feel free to write to me at [email protected]
Page:
God said he is the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the father but by me; this means he is the one and only true Messiah, man is not suffecient on his own.
Look at the news, how many murders and attacks are motiveless and how many are done by Christians, when you've figured out the answer, tell me.
Forest Fan wrote:
> There is suffering in this world and so there is racism. Man wanted
> freedom and rejected God and so man has brought this on himself.
Really, if you've got something to offer other than ill-thought through "Yay, everyone give up your free will and do EXACTLY what the church tells you" slogans, I'd love to hear it.
> There is suffering in this world and so there is racism. Man wanted
> freedom and rejected God and so man has brought this on himself.
Really, if you've got something to offer other than ill-thought through "Yay, everyone give up your free will and do EXACTLY what the church tells you" slogans, I'd love to hear it.
Your Honour wrote:
> Light wrote:
> I'm the first to admit that good things have been done in
> the name of organised religion. But you don't seem to want to accept
> that bone-chilling evil has been done in the name of religion too.
>
>
> I agree with that. But my point is that it has been done in the name
> of religion. Religion has not made someone do it.
Yeah, but would it have been done without the justification of religion? It's hard to get worked up enough to burn someone at the stake, or torture them for days at a time, over something like who should be the Lord Chancellor, or which version of Greensleeves is best. Yet when it's over someones immortal soul, people are happy to commit all sorts of atrocitys in the name of God.
In other words, we both seem to be saying that religion isn't divine, it's man made, correct?
>
> I.e., it doesn't say in the bible "kill everyone who doesn't
> believe in me", it just says "if you don't believe in me,
> then you'll go to hell. Which you probabky don't believe exists
> either. Your call."
>
> Having said that, I haven't read the bible cover to cover for some
> time now, so I'll probably be proved wrong any minute...
Heh. Actually, Deuteronomy calls for the extermination of various races of people for the heinous crime of not being believers. Oh, and co-incidentally, living on the land that God wanted to give to His people. So that's alright then...
The Old Testament is pretty hateful when all is said and done; it's only the New which is more like the Hippy Bible we all call to mind. And even then, it's astonishing how many supposedly good christians will reinterpret or ignore the message of brotherhood in the old in order to stick with the messages of retribution and violence in the old.
> Light wrote:
> I'm the first to admit that good things have been done in
> the name of organised religion. But you don't seem to want to accept
> that bone-chilling evil has been done in the name of religion too.
>
>
> I agree with that. But my point is that it has been done in the name
> of religion. Religion has not made someone do it.
Yeah, but would it have been done without the justification of religion? It's hard to get worked up enough to burn someone at the stake, or torture them for days at a time, over something like who should be the Lord Chancellor, or which version of Greensleeves is best. Yet when it's over someones immortal soul, people are happy to commit all sorts of atrocitys in the name of God.
In other words, we both seem to be saying that religion isn't divine, it's man made, correct?
>
> I.e., it doesn't say in the bible "kill everyone who doesn't
> believe in me", it just says "if you don't believe in me,
> then you'll go to hell. Which you probabky don't believe exists
> either. Your call."
>
> Having said that, I haven't read the bible cover to cover for some
> time now, so I'll probably be proved wrong any minute...
Heh. Actually, Deuteronomy calls for the extermination of various races of people for the heinous crime of not being believers. Oh, and co-incidentally, living on the land that God wanted to give to His people. So that's alright then...
The Old Testament is pretty hateful when all is said and done; it's only the New which is more like the Hippy Bible we all call to mind. And even then, it's astonishing how many supposedly good christians will reinterpret or ignore the message of brotherhood in the old in order to stick with the messages of retribution and violence in the old.
Religion is the reason there is pain.
Light wrote:
> I'm the first to admit that good things have been done in
> the name of organised religion. But you don't seem to want to accept
> that bone-chilling evil has been done in the name of religion too.
I agree with that. But my point is that it has been done in the name of religion. Religion has not made someone do it.
I.e., it doesn't say in the bible "kill everyone who doesn't believe in me", it just says "if you don't believe in me, then you'll go to hell. Which you probabky don't believe exists either. Your call."
Having said that, I haven't read the bible cover to cover for some time now, so I'll probably be proved wrong any minute...
> I'm the first to admit that good things have been done in
> the name of organised religion. But you don't seem to want to accept
> that bone-chilling evil has been done in the name of religion too.
I agree with that. But my point is that it has been done in the name of religion. Religion has not made someone do it.
I.e., it doesn't say in the bible "kill everyone who doesn't believe in me", it just says "if you don't believe in me, then you'll go to hell. Which you probabky don't believe exists either. Your call."
Having said that, I haven't read the bible cover to cover for some time now, so I'll probably be proved wrong any minute...
Suffering is a direct cause of racism?
New one on me.
New one on me.
There is suffering in this world and so there is racism. Man wanted freedom and rejected God and so man has brought this on himself.
Notorious Biggles wrote:
> As for the 6 million Jews, yes they were slaughtered for being Jewish.
> But think for a second light, was it for their religion they were
> slaughtered, or was it because racially they were different, not
> being perfect Aryans and all?
Insane Bartender has basically answered that point for me; it's to do with both race and religion.
>
> Yes Hitler hijacked the German Protestant churches. They didn't
> hijack him and then go off to war. They sold out to stay alive. As
> did the Vatican.
Quite a long way from the brave Christian's who were martyred in the 2nd-10th century's AD, eh? Seeing as we get their sacrifice rammed down our throats by well meaning proseltysers, how come we aren't hearing more about how self-serving the church was when it came to facing a direct threat to it's temporal influence? After all, if they were only interested in saving souls, wouldn't they have stood up to Hitler as an organisation?
>
> The point is that it wasn't the churches who told Hitler to take over
> Germany then go off invading countries left right and centre. He did
> it because he wanted to.
And MY point is that religion is used to justify slaughter. And what is more, that justification tends to come with the blessing of whomever is in charge of that particular point. Are you really trying to say that it doesn't count if people only SAY they have God on their side? Tell me, do you think that the crusades would have happened if the God excuse hadn't been wheeled out? D'you think the religious German masses would have been quite so receptive to Hitler had he not been allowed to invoke the name of God in his sloganeering?
It seems to me that you're happy to ascribe positive things to religion, but reluctant to accept responsibility for the negative.
>
> Sure there would have been more deaths if the Crusaders had machine
> guns. I'm fairly certain I didn't say it wouldn't make any
> difference. But bear in mind another thought along those lines: the
> reasons people murder others today are the same reasons they did
> thousands of years ago. Theft. Betrayal. Hate. All of which we can
> all experience without religion. Had guns been around a thousand
> years ago there would have been more deaths because of those said
> reasons outside of religion than actually happened.
That's right, we can. So what gives organised religion the right to say that it can deliver mankind from these evils when it is responsible for perpetuating them? What makes them so afraid of "a godless society where evil flourishes" when you seem to be admitting that it would make no difference to the world if religion did exist or if it didn't?
My point is that basic humanity and decency does NOT spring forth from religion; it's the other way round.
>
> If we're going to get technical only Catholics claim the pope to be
> God's living representative on earth, I certainly don't though still
> am Christian. I'm not going to defend the churches when they stray
> from the bible. The campaign against contraception is wrong and
> downright stupid. Paul said when talking about sex "do not be
> depriving each other of it". If sex for fun was allowable back
> then I don't see why it wouldn't be now.
But didn't you say that the bible has been re-interpreted and some books in both Old and New testaments are considered kosher, and others aren't? So who makes these decisions? After all, your church might say that they're not straying from the bible. But with all that selective interpretation that goes on, how the hell do you know that they're not straying from it?
And more to the point, if the bible is interpreted differently by different people, what makes you think that your church has hit the nail on the head and got the absolutely 100% correct holy writ as intended by
>
> Light wrote:
> If religion stayed as a matter of personal faith I would laud it
> throughout the land. As is, we have Organised religion, and it's a
> tool used to control people. Nothing more, nothing less.
>
> There is more to it than that and you are clever enough to know it.
> People want to know others who share the same ideas and beliefs.
> You're an actor Light. You act with other people. Because it is
> something you want to do. If you don't like the play director or the
> other actors, if you feel they are controlling you in a way you are
> not happy with then you can give it up.
Really? More to it than that? Such as what? The comparison you're making is quite remarkably inaccurate; I act and hand over control of a small portion of my life for a few hours a week. More to the point, if I disagree with the director, I'm unlikely to face excommunication, shunning, stoning, or any of the other entertaining religious punishments. Religion tries to control people 24/7. Lifestyle choices made by an individual do not.
Sharing the same beliefs? Cool; I'm all for people discussing their faith. But it's not sharing, is it? It's IMPOSING on other people's. Which is where we get back to all those wars, battles, massacre's, and plain old fashioned ugly, sordid little murders that boil down to nothing more than one group of people trying to impose their flavour of God onto another group.
>
> As YH says, you aren't forced to watch the TV. Religion on TV is no
> more "forced" on you than football is on women and
> gardening is on me. It simply is programming for an audience that
> does want to watch it. You don't have to be part of that audience.
And as I say, it's compulsory for the BBC to have religious programming. So where is their element of choice?
I'll say again, you're doing your best to blind yourself to the evils of organised religion by saying "They're not really THAT bad..." and then trying to trivialise the negative impact of religion. I'm the first to admit that good things have been done in the name of organised religion. But you don't seem to want to accept that bone-chilling evil has been done in the name of religion too.
> As for the 6 million Jews, yes they were slaughtered for being Jewish.
> But think for a second light, was it for their religion they were
> slaughtered, or was it because racially they were different, not
> being perfect Aryans and all?
Insane Bartender has basically answered that point for me; it's to do with both race and religion.
>
> Yes Hitler hijacked the German Protestant churches. They didn't
> hijack him and then go off to war. They sold out to stay alive. As
> did the Vatican.
Quite a long way from the brave Christian's who were martyred in the 2nd-10th century's AD, eh? Seeing as we get their sacrifice rammed down our throats by well meaning proseltysers, how come we aren't hearing more about how self-serving the church was when it came to facing a direct threat to it's temporal influence? After all, if they were only interested in saving souls, wouldn't they have stood up to Hitler as an organisation?
>
> The point is that it wasn't the churches who told Hitler to take over
> Germany then go off invading countries left right and centre. He did
> it because he wanted to.
And MY point is that religion is used to justify slaughter. And what is more, that justification tends to come with the blessing of whomever is in charge of that particular point. Are you really trying to say that it doesn't count if people only SAY they have God on their side? Tell me, do you think that the crusades would have happened if the God excuse hadn't been wheeled out? D'you think the religious German masses would have been quite so receptive to Hitler had he not been allowed to invoke the name of God in his sloganeering?
It seems to me that you're happy to ascribe positive things to religion, but reluctant to accept responsibility for the negative.
>
> Sure there would have been more deaths if the Crusaders had machine
> guns. I'm fairly certain I didn't say it wouldn't make any
> difference. But bear in mind another thought along those lines: the
> reasons people murder others today are the same reasons they did
> thousands of years ago. Theft. Betrayal. Hate. All of which we can
> all experience without religion. Had guns been around a thousand
> years ago there would have been more deaths because of those said
> reasons outside of religion than actually happened.
That's right, we can. So what gives organised religion the right to say that it can deliver mankind from these evils when it is responsible for perpetuating them? What makes them so afraid of "a godless society where evil flourishes" when you seem to be admitting that it would make no difference to the world if religion did exist or if it didn't?
My point is that basic humanity and decency does NOT spring forth from religion; it's the other way round.
>
> If we're going to get technical only Catholics claim the pope to be
> God's living representative on earth, I certainly don't though still
> am Christian. I'm not going to defend the churches when they stray
> from the bible. The campaign against contraception is wrong and
> downright stupid. Paul said when talking about sex "do not be
> depriving each other of it". If sex for fun was allowable back
> then I don't see why it wouldn't be now.
But didn't you say that the bible has been re-interpreted and some books in both Old and New testaments are considered kosher, and others aren't? So who makes these decisions? After all, your church might say that they're not straying from the bible. But with all that selective interpretation that goes on, how the hell do you know that they're not straying from it?
And more to the point, if the bible is interpreted differently by different people, what makes you think that your church has hit the nail on the head and got the absolutely 100% correct holy writ as intended by
>
> Light wrote:
> If religion stayed as a matter of personal faith I would laud it
> throughout the land. As is, we have Organised religion, and it's a
> tool used to control people. Nothing more, nothing less.
>
> There is more to it than that and you are clever enough to know it.
> People want to know others who share the same ideas and beliefs.
> You're an actor Light. You act with other people. Because it is
> something you want to do. If you don't like the play director or the
> other actors, if you feel they are controlling you in a way you are
> not happy with then you can give it up.
Really? More to it than that? Such as what? The comparison you're making is quite remarkably inaccurate; I act and hand over control of a small portion of my life for a few hours a week. More to the point, if I disagree with the director, I'm unlikely to face excommunication, shunning, stoning, or any of the other entertaining religious punishments. Religion tries to control people 24/7. Lifestyle choices made by an individual do not.
Sharing the same beliefs? Cool; I'm all for people discussing their faith. But it's not sharing, is it? It's IMPOSING on other people's. Which is where we get back to all those wars, battles, massacre's, and plain old fashioned ugly, sordid little murders that boil down to nothing more than one group of people trying to impose their flavour of God onto another group.
>
> As YH says, you aren't forced to watch the TV. Religion on TV is no
> more "forced" on you than football is on women and
> gardening is on me. It simply is programming for an audience that
> does want to watch it. You don't have to be part of that audience.
And as I say, it's compulsory for the BBC to have religious programming. So where is their element of choice?
I'll say again, you're doing your best to blind yourself to the evils of organised religion by saying "They're not really THAT bad..." and then trying to trivialise the negative impact of religion. I'm the first to admit that good things have been done in the name of organised religion. But you don't seem to want to accept that bone-chilling evil has been done in the name of religion too.
They were slaughtered for revenge. Hitler blamed the Jews for Germany losing the first world war (they apparently fled the country, taking their considerable wealth with them, leaving Germany short of funds or something similar), and so persecuted them. Since it can be argued that the Jewish religion played a hand in the Jews being so wealthy in the first place, it can be argued that it was religion that got them slaughtered.
Page: