Ron Cusano

As I have mentioned before, there are a great many who call themselves Christians who are suspect to say the least! I have no problem with a death penalty or private ownership of guns. Crimes with guns are commited by the criminal element and guns will always be available on the blackmarket Statistics show that areas with high private gun ownership produce the lowest crime rates. I have owned guns for most of my life and have never even thought of abusing them. I know you have univeral health care, but from what I have read and heard, it's quality is not the best, and many Canadians come across the border for care not available up North. And you are correct, I have a big problem with gay marriage and abortion which are the poster children of secular humanism. I believe that flies in the face of Christian truth and practice. This is my belief and understanding.

So are you saying that you are comfortable with a government based on secular humanist values but would not accept a governmant based on Judeo-Christian values? I don't consider secular humanistic values to be benign by any means, and certainly not moral when viewed from a Christian vantage point. If a government leader is supposed to make judgements based upon what he considers right or wrong, I can't understand how he could not allow his belief system to be the motivating factor. In face, I think it's impossible.

I completely agree with you! Unfortunately, there are many, many who claim to be Christians and yet do not follow Christ or His teachings. Unfortunately, from my perspective, many once solid churches have adopted liberal, "politically correct" teachings that compromise the Word of God. Even Jesus said that "many will say Lord, Lord, but I will say depart from me ye workers of inquity"!! He also said that "the way to heaven is narrow but the way to destruction is wide"! There are many churches and denominations that call themselves Christian, but do not teach the unaltered Word of God.

You are right and I never said otherwise. You made a statement that your officials are mostly secular humanist and make decisions accordingly. Secular humanists and Christians have a different set of moral and ethical guidelines, so my question was, would you expect and accept an official who was a Christian to make decisions based on their Christian understanding of morals and ethics. While both Christians and non-Christians are able to make good moral and ethical decisions, they are based upon a different belief system, and are influenced accordingly. And yes, I agree! Just because one makes religious claims does not necessarily mean they are ethical or moral. I will say that, from my observation and experience, a sincere Christian, although not perfect, will use good morals and ethics in making decisions.

You said that your leaders views are "that of secular humanism, and that we want our elected leaders to reflect these values"! That being said,would you accept the views of a leader who was a Christian with his values reflecting Christianity"??

I don't think I agree with that. When we elect public officials we elect the person that they are and their values and beliefs are essential to their decision making. I think it would be impossible for a persons core belief system, especially religious and moral beliefs, to NOT play a major part in decision making since all decisions come down to one thing . . . is it right or is it wrong?

I don't know Tommy! I used to think of death pretty much the same way you do, but when I came to faith, it was like hitting lottery! I came to realize that the best is yet to come for Believers!! What scares me personally is the way I used to think, figuring that when I was dead, I was dead. Now I know that we all live on, just in different places. The scary part for me was that I was heading to Hell and didn't even know or believe it.

Perhaps, but I get my understanding from the Bible which say's that God breathed life into Adam and he became a living soul. This was not true of the animals.

As a Christian, I do not consider death the end of existance. I believe it is the doorway into eternity. While I have human concerns over weather my death will be painful or the like, I have peace in knowing that this world is not my home and I am only passing through. I believe that God created man different that all other animals because only man has a soul, which live eternally. Where our soul, or consciosness exists in eternity is of the utmost importance from my perspective.

I have heard this asked before and it's a thought provoking question . . . What takes more faith . . . A: To Believe In God and creation!! B: To Believe There Is No God and that everything Just happened by chance??

That great Denise! I personally can't be there tonight but the other will. We will be in the room in the rear. You can't miss it.

Sorry I misunderstood!!

I think the answers to those questions would be that, YES, God does provide for the churches, through the people that go to the churches. And, if a person is "resuscitated", they were obviously not dead in the sense that their soul left their body. Human and medical definations of death are very different than the Biblical understanding.

Tommy, There is a big difference between "foreknowing" and "causing"! You know your kids are going to do bad things, but you don't cause it. That is where the free will part comes in. God gives us a choice, and we make wrong choices. He doesn't condemn us to "torture", we choose it by rejecting His free gift of salvation. The Bibles tells us that all humanity is "without excuse" about the knowledge of God because even His creation provides proof of His existance to those willing to accept it. That includes all people of all time. Remote tribes that have never been exposed to "religion" have been found that had an understanding of God. I think you are sincere in your conviction, but I believe you are sincerely wrong.

Thank-you! I appriciate that!

Jesus did many things to prove his messianiac credentials, including performing miracles and raising the dead. You can't get more evidence and proof than that. God also provided fulfillment of Bible prophecy, among other things, as proof of His existance and the credibility of the scriptures. I believe that the faith part comes in when we accept God and His Word after considering all of the evidence. We "come to believe"!! Jesus said "these things have I given unto you that you may KNOW that you have eternal life", and the New Testament say's "the scriptures are given by inspiritation of God and are profitable for doctrine and reproof"! To believe without any reason is like believing in fairytales, which many unbelievers accuse us of, and I don't believe that God ever intended that for us.

I guess I would define it as believing in something unseen and without definitive proof. With Christianity, there is not definitive proof by scientific standards, but I believe there is enough convincing evidence of it's authenticity to establish believing faith.

I think that Christians might call that "something electromagnetic field " the Holy Spirit!!

I think that fundementalist Christians speak in term of "certainty" because they have weighted all the evidence and have been convinced beyond any doubt that our understanding is correct. I, and I think most other Christians don't believe that the reason unbelievers are destined to Hell is because the chose not to believe. We believe that we were ALL destined to Hell because we are imperfect (sinful) and God is Holy (perfect), we were not fit to be in His presence and have fellowship with Him. The difference between Believers and unbelievers is that we believe that the one who was perfect, Jesus, paid the penalty for our imperfection (sin), making us once again fit to be in Gods presence, and we humbly accepted that salvation as a free gift from God. I think that sometimes unbelievers thing that Christians think they are better that you. Nothing could be further that the truth. We were all unbelievers once too! We aren't better, just forgiven!

What I'm saying is, to reach the conclusion there is a God or to reach the conclusion there is no God, means that you have to make a decision based upon "something"! You are not just born favoring one or the other. To weigh whatever it is you are considering means you have to have somewhat of an open mind either way, other wise there is no decision to be made, because you are closed to it.

From my vantage point, not being able to consider there is a God, is as closed minded as never have ever having a doubt. To make a decision for either position you would think one would have to weigh the evidence to come to a colclusion.

I think to be open minded enough to consider one position is being open minded enough to consider the opposite position.

The praise for being "on the fence" is because they are open minded enough to consider the possibility of God. From my perspective, it is more positive than being closed minded about it. I don't think that most Believer start from a place of faith, consider there could be no God, and then reject it. Most that I know started from a place of not believing, or having strong doubts, and then came to believe for various reasons.

At least you are leaving yourself open to the possibility of there being a "higher power", which is a place that I used to be at. I reasoned that if God wqas real, then there had to be some real evidence of His existance. For me, when I investigated all the evidence, especially evidence that the Bible is devinely inspired, I became convinced that it not only had merit, but was true and that higher power was God.

I didn't come to believe because I was afraid of the consequences of not believeing or because of "blind faith". Once I started to investigate the claims of the faith, I weighed all the evidence and was convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that there was a God and that the Bible we true. For me, it was an intellectual decision for which I believe God provides real, substancial evidence.