That's the book of avxo. It has nothing to do with Jesus Christ. I don't hate it but it isn't of God.
Seeing how we haven't established a definition for God, much less proven than he exists, I'll go with my book. If your God wants to save me from himself, it's easy. He doesn't even need to send him son again. A telegram will do.
You should care if you desire to know God and want to live for him.
I don't desire to live for anyone else - I simply desire to live, in the here and now.
For someone that doesn't care you devote a lot of time to discussion about that which you don't care and know is insane and completely false. People that truly don't care don't bother.
If your assumption is correct and I do care, your God must not care enough to save me, since he won't reveal himself to me. Of course, it's more likely that your assumption is, simply, not correct.
Those that know the Holy Spirit don't have to ask those questions.
Look at this from my point of view for just a second: you're claiming to be in touch with a spirit that communicates with you in a supernatural way. If I made such a claim, would you not ask me for proof? Would you not even consider the possibility that I'm hearing voices instead of actually communicating supernaturally with some kind of invisible apparition?
The vast majority of people past and present engage in some form of religion be it Christian or non-Christian.
And? If many people do it it must be right?
It's safe to say it's very much a part of our reality and has definite meaning for countless folks.
So if the vast majority of people believed that the earth was flat, then the reality would shift and the earth would transform from an oblate spheroid to a flat plane? And as to having definite meaning, if that's really the case, why can't a single person articulate this meaning with sufficient precision so that every rational person can be convinced?
TAnd despite your steadfast objection to my meaningless, irrational, insane view of reality here you are day after day. I find that interesting. When I encounter insanity I distance myself.
There's different kinds of crazy. I don't think you're dangerous or insane. I don't share your beliefs and assert that you cannot rationally prove them - something which I think you agree with. That doesn't mean we can't engage in discussion or debate. It's how we all learn and neither of us loses something by trying to convince the other.
In fact, I would argue that I stand to gain something: getting someone to throw off the shackles of superstition and the chains of faith. I gain a person who looks at the world rationally, objectively. Not as a place that's full of unanswerable questions and ruled by supernatural whim, but one that is full of questions and wonders to be examined and understood.
