It’s hard to deny the undeniable

CAUGHT in bed with a woman, a now-departed Hollywood star is reported to have exclaimed to his wife: “It’s not me”!
It’s no surprise she didn’t believe him because it is hard to deny the undeniable.

It’s reminiscent of the joke French writer Gustave Flaubert told about a man taken fishing by an atheist friend.

The atheist casts the net and draws up a stone on which is carved: “I do not exist. Signed: God.” And the atheist exclaims: “What did I tell you!”

To believers, there are indications of God’s presence throughout this world, but some people have difficulty perceiving them because they are unsigned.

And for some who look for signs of God in religion, the dogma stifles any recognition of a creator’s all-embracing compassion and non-discriminating love.

Leo Tolstoy, author of War and Peace, said the kingdom of God was within us all – we were born with it – and no one had need of religious dogma. He said superstitions, science and religions were impediments to achieving freedom through love alone.

It seems that God dislikes religion. Don’t get me wrong; not all places of worship are “religious” – not the best ones anyway.

The word “religion” is derived from the Latin word “religo”, meaning to “bind up”.

Christianity was not meant to be a bound-up religion but a relationship with a loving God. Of course, men and women have tried throughout history to force Christianity into a religious mould with man-made rules and regulations set up to govern and contain the faithful.

The Apostle Paul realised this in the early days of Christianity when he observed the worship of idols in Athens and said “Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects.” The men of Athens probably didn’t realise it at the time but Paul was delivering an insult.

Advertisements

17 thoughts on “It’s hard to deny the undeniable

  1. Some statistics on why Italian men get up at night:
    2% to get a midnight snack
    5% to go to the toilet
    93% to go home to their wife.

    Like

  2. So Bryan,
    Are you dogmatic that war is wrong and that you would not bear arms if we were invaded, or if we had to be part of a larger coalition (remember World War 2) to stop some lunatic like Hitler?

    Is Jesus’ injunction to turn the other cheek something that you as a non-religious Christian obey only when it is convenient to you? Or are you dogmatic that it should be followed at the cost of your life?

    Seems to me that when people say they are Christian but they are not religious, they are signalling to everyone else that they will dump their faith, religious beliefs, if it is convenient, or if it means saving their skins.

    Like

      • I became a consciencious objector due to the fact that the Bible teaches non-violence. And because of my beliefs I am called dogmatic, fanatic, “religious”, etc. And that is from people within my Church. I also lost a lucrative career with the Australian Army because of my beliefs. The hardest thing I had to bear was the confusion that this caused in the church, with half the congregation believing Christians are entitled to go to war, whilst the other part believed they shouldn’t.

        The point in my case is that whilst the Bible teaches a certain doctrine, my church went in a totally different path, because they wanted to be Christian not “religious”.
        Thus when you say:

        “Of course, men and women have tried throughout history to force Christianity into a religious mould with man-made rules and regulations set up to govern and contain the faithful.”

        You are using double speak for saying that religion should be an anything goes affair, where one can still continue in their pre-membership life of sin; to speak against their sins would be politically incorrect; otherwise preaching against popular sins would be forcing people in a man made mould with man made rules and regulations set up to govern and contain the faithful. That was the argument that you used to defend the homosexual lifestyle being brought into the church, and the case for feminist leadership into the church. Whilst Monica (who is another preacher of I’m-Christian-I’m-not-religious doctrine, habitually defends drinking alcohol but bemoans the fact that there is so much problems with drunkenness. Leading to churches that are “Christian-not religious” being rife with alcohol fuelled violence, etc.

        Did you not read the Scripture which says:
        “God is the author of order…” 1 Cor. 14:33
        “Let all things be done decently and in order…” 1 Cor. 14:40

        Perhaps all these “religious” rituals and doctrines that you so often ridicule and condemn do have a purpose in protecting the church from becoming a source of confusion and disorderly conduct.

        Like

      • The law can be summed up in love; love for God and love for others. The law is about relationships; vertical and horizontal. It is about our vertical relationship with our creator and our horizontal relationships with the rest of mankind. It was never intended to be a list of rules that can be relegated to a checklist or mathematical formula. We are talking about love. Religion is the creation of man and is not the intention or design of God.

        Like

      • “Obviously, the law applies to those to whom it was given, for its purpose is to keep people from having excuses, and to show that the entire world is guilty before God. For no one can ever be made right with God by doing what the law commands. The law simply shows us how sinful we are. But now God has shown us a way to be made right with him without keeping the requirements of the law, as was promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets long ago. We are made right with God by placing our faith in Jesus Christ. And this is true for everyone who believes, no matter who we are. For everyone has sinned; we all fall short of God’s glorious standard. Yet God, with undeserved kindness, declares that we are righteous. He did this through Christ Jesus when he freed us from the penalty for our sins. For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin. People are made right with God when they believe that Jesus sacrificed his life, shedding his blood.” ~ Rom 3:19-25

        Like

      • “God saved you by his grace when you believed. And you can’t take credit for this; it is a gift from God. Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can boast about it.” ~ Eph 2:8-9

        Like

      • Obviously it (” For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin. “) didn’t work.

        Incidentally:- (” For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin. People are made right with God when they believe that Jesus sacrificed his life, shedding his blood.” ~ Rom 3:19-25″),
        …the fact is he didn’t “sacrifice” his life ~ any more than any of the rest of them did; he was arrested, tried and executed for making a nuisance of himself.

        Like

    • That is true. But I’m not sure what Bryan is all about when he speaks about religion. After ANZAC day he wrote an article insulting every veteran that ever served in a conflict since we became a nation.

      But last year he ran articles honouring Nelson Mandela, despite the fact that Mandela had been sentenced to life imprisonment for inciting and promoting violence as a means of achieving political outcomes. Add to violence, extortion. Because he had been released from life imprisonment on the grounds of ending the violence which he’d been party to introducing in SA to begin with. The film MANDELA goes as far as making it clear that he would not have been released from jail had he not worked to stop the violence that he’d started in the first place.

      This is what I mean when I see people telling me they are religious but not Christian. They are quite happy to take the opposite stand on any issue if it is politically advantageous to do so.

      Like

      • davinci/Hassan,

        You said “After ANZAC day he wrote an article insulting every veteran that ever served in a conflict since we became a nation.”

        How exactly did that article insult every veteran? I’d like an apology or an explanation for that because I don’t think it is so.

        Like

    • What an utter load of bullshit!
      When I have a week to spare I’ll disprove EVERY SINGLE (UNfounded) assertion he makes.

      Like

      • The ONLY human need (as distinct from ~ maybe ~ ‘desire’) along with that of every other life-form is the ‘need’ to survive.
        And THAT’S based entirely on competition. God does NOT provide.
        Our species is the dominant one because (for the moment) we’re easily the most successful competitors; ie, the most proficient and ruthless killers of any opposition.

        What we can’t subdue to our requirements we destroy.

        ……and, in a Divinely sarcastic footnote, our survival depends almost completely on our ability to produce shit!
        ……physically and figuratively. 😉

        Like

  3. This is a prime example of bias and brainwashing by marketing agencies:- To believers, there are indications of God’s presence throughout this world, but some people have difficulty perceiving them because they are unsigned.

    There are also ample unsigned indications of Satan’s presence, and nobody has any difficulty “perceiving” them.

    The question is, which one of them is the plagiarist? 😯

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s