My Christian Blog

[Cornfed]

So in order to amuse myself I've started a blog about Christianity - link in signature. I intend to do a post most days. The good thing about the topic is that there are a potentially limitless amount of topics, but does anyone have any suggestions? It is early days so far, but at some point I would hope to be able to monetise the blog. Any suggestions as to how to go about this?

[Gali]

One topic could be the postmodern Christian who does not take his religion seriously.

[gsjackson]

Intelligent Christian apologetics -- the sort of thing Lewis did -- is definitely an open market right now. I signed up as a follower. You're a better man than I for having figured out how to get a Wordpress blog up and running. I paid for a month of help and wasn't even able to get the picture up at the top of the front page.

[Gali]

I like this kind of stuff


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mQ0bryC58Y&t=119s
A Hilariously Bad Quran Verse (Feat. David Wood @Acts17Apologetics)

[Gali]

David Wood Eating Quran
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k8P7l3IkPE

[Cornfed]

Intelligent Christian apologetics -- the sort of thing Lewis did -- is definitely an open market right now. I signed up as a follower. You're a better man than I for having figured out how to get a Wordpress blog up and running. I paid for a month of help and wasn't even able to get the picture up at the top of the front page.

I'm still using the stock photo, lol. I want to get a church photo but none of the many churches around here look that impressive. Yes, articulating some rational basis for Christianity would be good. I'll think about it.

[MrMan]

So in order to amuse myself I've started a blog about Christianity - link in signature. I intend to do a post most days. The good thing about the topic is that there are a potentially limitless amount of topics, but does anyone have any suggestions? It is early days so far, but at some point I would hope to be able to monetise the blog. Any suggestions as to how to go about this?

I would frame the question not as 'getting into heaven' but as one of attaining to the resurrection or being saved. I said something to a Bible college professor from New Zealand (an Englishman who'd settled there and worked in Indonesia) about going to heaven when you die and he made the comment that the Bible never mentions going to heaven when you die. I was kind of aware of that, but that drove the point home. The New Testament emphasis, from the words of Christ, and certainly Paul is on the resurrection of the dead. We might infer going to heaven at death, but it is not that explicit in the Bible and certainly not an emphasis.

The fact that salvation is by grace through faith is important. I do not believe Paul wrote what he wrote just because there were Jews teaching salvation by keeping the law, but because what he was saying was true and he believed it. We can look at what he meant by 'works' or 'works of the law.' Paul also wrote about God rendering 'to every man according to his deeds-- to them who by patient continuance in well doing-- eternal life. But unto them that are contentious and do not obey the truth-- indignation and wrath. Fornicators, idolators, man-bedders and softies, etc. do not inherit the kingdom of God according to Paul. There are certain consequences for sin referred to in Paul's writings.

[Cornfed]

I would frame the question not as 'getting into heaven' but as one of attaining to the resurrection or being saved.

I don't agree of course but if you want to make an embeddable video stating the case I'll consider posting and commenting on it.

[MrMan]

I would frame the question not as 'getting into heaven' but as one of attaining to the resurrection or being saved.

I don't agree of course but if you want to make an embeddable video stating the case I'll consider posting and commenting on it.

I try to preserve my anonymity on this forum since I have encountered a couple of hostile posters and one who seemed possibly mentally ill over the years, not you, though I don't agree with many of your ideas.

If you want to look at the New Testament on the topic, skim through the New Testament references to it here, and click the arrow to follow on the the next chapters: https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearc ... rsion=NKJV

In the New Testament, Pharisees and Christians believe in the resurrection of the dead, but Saducees oppose the idea. For a few selections here, read these passages on the resurrection:

Jesus Christ's view on the Resurrection
23 The same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, 24 saying: “Teacher, Moses said that if a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. 25 Now there were with us seven brothers. The first died after he had married, and having no offspring, left his wife to his brother. 26 Likewise the second also, and the third, even to the seventh. 27 Last of all the woman died also. 28 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her.”

29 Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels [g]of God in heaven. 31 But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” 33 And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.

Saducee Denial of the Resurrection
Zadok was an ancestor of the branch of priests in charge of the temple in Jesus' day. The Zadokite(Tsaduki)/Saducee group also had a doctrine perspective named after them. Their domain was the temple. Apparently, they did not like the doctrine of the resurrection being taught in the temple. The apostles preaching the resurrection of Christ counted as teaching the resurrection of the dead.

Acts 4
1 Now as they spoke to the people, the priests, the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees came upon them, 2 being greatly disturbed that they taught the people and preached in Jesus the resurrection from the dead. 3 And they laid hands on them, and put them in custody until the next day, for it was already evening. (NKJV)

Acts 23
5 Then Paul said, “I did not know, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’ ”
6 But when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee; concerning the hope and resurrection of the dead I am being judged!”
7 And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided.
(NKJV) (Bold emphasis mine)

Denying the Resurrection is Denying the Gospel
I Corinthians 15
12 Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. 14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. 15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. 17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.

20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.
(NKJV) (Bold emphasis mine)

The Bible Teaches to Comfort Christians to Lose Loved Ones with Talk of the Resurrection
13 But I do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who have fallen asleep, lest you sorrow as others who have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus.

15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.
(NKJV) (Bold Emphasis Mine)

As far as historical orthodoxy goes, those who reject the resurrection are considered unorthodox, since they deny both the Apostle's Creed and the Nicene Creed in addition to the scriptures.

The Apostles Creed says,
"I believe in...the resurrection of the body".

See

Code: Select all

https://www.churchofengland.org/our-faith/what-we-believe/apostles-creed

And from the Nicene Creed,
"We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come."
See

Code: Select all

http://anglicansonline.org/basics/nicene.html

You can also look through references to 'heaven' in the Bible and see if you can find any direct references to dying and going to heaven. https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearc ... rsion=NKJV

The idea is loosely inferred from Paul saying he would rather be absent from the body and present with the Lord. There were saints in the early days who asserted that the spirits of the dead went to be with God. But man is incomplete without our body, and we look forward to the resurrection, not in our current mortal corrupt state, but in immortal resurrected bodies.

[Winston]

What is the point of your blog Cornfed? Christianity has been analyzed to death from all sides, pro and con. By apologists and critics and those in between. Pretty much everything has been said about it already. What new things do you have to add to it?

Also, what kind of Christianity do you believe in? There are over 30,000 denominations already. So many different variations. Which variation are you and why? Are you the typical evangelical fundamentalist type? Why or why not? Can you clarify?

I also don't get why anyone should take a religion so seriously that is written by men. How is that any different than the Koran or Book of Mormon or Book of Enoch or Hindu Scriptures or any other book?

[Cornfed]

What is the point of your blog Cornfed? Christianity has been analyzed to death from all sides, pro and con. By apologists and critics and those in between. Pretty much everything has been said about it already. What new things do you have to add to it?

Also, what kind of Christianity do you believe in? There are over 30,000 denominations already. So many different variations. Which variation are you and why? Are you the typical evangelical fundamentalist type? Why or why not? Can you clarify?

I also don't get why anyone should take a religion so seriously that is written by men. How is that any different than the Koran or Book of Mormon or Book of Enoch or Hindu Scriptures or any other book?

I'm pretty sure I've covered this.

[Cornfed]

I'm getting followers from different places already and the blog has only been up for a week. Where does one generally advertise these kind of things?

[Cornfed]

I thought there would be infinite topics to post on for the blog, but I have stumbled into trying to present a non-retarded explanation of Christianity with one post a day, so it is in fact a little difficult to keep coming up with things. It would be good if people could suggest topics. It would also be good if people could suggest other non-retarded material. I don't know whether it is good or bad that there doesn't seem to be any.

[Spencer]

I thought there would be infinite topics to post on for the blog, but I have stumbled into trying to present a non-retarded explanation of Christianity with one post a day, so it is in fact a little difficult to keep coming up with things. It would be good if people could suggest topics. It would also be good if people could suggest other non-retarded material. I don't know whether it is good or bad that there doesn't seem to be any.

Matthew 12 31-32 mean what type sin for today man

[Cornfed]

I wouldn't say my daily blog posts are the last word in quality religious scholarship, but they do seem to be unique. Most blog posts are girly feel-good bullshit of some sort. A few are rationalizations for a particular church position, often where it is apparent that the poster hasn't given the subject much thought. Non-retarded honest thoughts on the subject seem to be confined to pretty much me. This comes as a bit of a surprise.