Christian apologetics insurance plan...

[derrick09]

Hello again guys, this thread has a lot to do with my overall Christian apologetics thread that I did sometime ago. Overall, I'm still doing really good as far as my faith and the overall case for Christian Theism is still very good. Because it is good and I want it to remain good I wanted to post this thread for personal "insurance" reasons It's two part, one I'm going to ask you all what you all would do in certain disaster scenarios and then I'm going to show you my laid out plan and see if you all think it's a good plan to go by. Anyway, the first part, what all would you do in the crazy and unlikely scenario if many of the major arguments for God's existence were somehow disproved? Out of these possible scenarios would you...

A. Give up the faith and become atheist or agnostic
B. Still remain a Christian but rely on emotion or emotional experiences
C. Still remain a Christian but rely on family or social tradition
D. Still remain a Christian but start to believe that all of science is a conspiracy and that all the data used to disprove Christian Theism is fabricated
E. Still remain a Christian but rely on blind faith
F. A combination of B-E

Well I know that if all of them get disproved or certain ones like the resurrection of Christ were disproved I would be forced to give up Christianity and if the cosmological argument were disproved I would have to give up all forms of theism. But also what would you do if things like macro evolution were somehow proven true or that substance dualism is shown to be false? I know that a few, not all, but a few apologists are so dedicated to different types of arguments, doctrines, or flavors of Christian apologetics that if things like substance dualism or even things like young earth creationism are proven false, they would throw everything out, Christianity, Theism all of it, and they would become atheists. Now I personally have spent so much time, effort, money and have so much wrapped up in Christian Theism being true that even though I know my faith is tied to arguments (or certain core arguments like the resurrection) that if they are disproved I would have to give up the faith, but if other things that I hold to like substance dualism, old earth creationism, intelligent design, fine tuning, objective morality, and so on were disproved I could adopt other lesser known, less popular doctrines and arguments to keep my faith going and still keep it reasonable. I call it sort of a step-down plan or a apologetics insurance plan and here is how it works.

Ok, so currently if the universe is proven to be eternal or proven to come from nothing, or if the resurrection of Christ is disproved I will be forced to intellectually give up the faith. The other "sub" views I hold currently are old earth creationism/ID, substance dualism, objective morality, futurism (in terms of eschatology). Now these things are not near as important as things such as core things like the universe having a beginning and the resurrection, but regardless they are very major beliefs that I hold to show to skeptics and to myself that my faith is reasonable and is the most likely view to be true over all other competing views. But thankfully, even in the ultra strange event that some of the other "sub" views get disproved I have backup plans or backup doctrines. Here is a rough draft on how it would work.

Old earth creationism and ID get disproved - I then move to theistic evolution
If substance dualism gets disproved - I then move onto a Christian "physicalism or all physical view of the mind" and I also adopt the soul sleep doctrine (i.e. Christians on this earth who die before the resurrection of the dead are nonresistant until God supernaturally recreates them)
If objective morality is disproved - I concede with the secularists that morality is not objective in a all around social or scientific sense but because God says certain things are wrong certain moral principles would still be objective in that sense alone.
If futurism (in eschatology) is disproved - I would move onto a view of partial preterism or idealism.

That's how my backup plan or my "next step" plan would work. I was wondering if that is something you all have going on with your own Christian views as well or if you let your whole belief in God or in Christianity not just rest on the essential and necessary things like the universe having a beginning or the resurrection of Christ but on other things like Old earth creationism (or young earth creationism for yecers), eschatological views, or even on views of the mind/brain or on objective morality? I know ideas like theistic evolution are very controversial but I know they are out there, they are popular, and many highly intelligent believers hold to it. But just like the many nay sayers of TE, I happen to currently agree with them, that's why I'm not currently a theistic evolutionist and nor will I be one unless things get so bad for all creation views that creation ministries go out of business, big proponents of creationism and ID people like Hugh Ross, Stephen Meyer, Michael Behe, our own Rich Deem recant their views and the whole social, scientific, and philosophical world rejects all forms of creationism without evolution then and only then will I except theistic evolution. Let's just hope and pray that things will never get this bad for oec, ID, and all the other sub views that I and maybe you hold as well, but just in case, like I said, I have back up plans or in this case, a apologetics insurance policy. Anyway, let me know your questions and comments on this. Thanks and God bless.

[RickD]

Derrick, your questions are beginning to trouble me. It seems that Christianity to you is purely rational and scientific. Do you have a relationship with God through Christ? Do you have the Holy Spirit in you? The Bible says that God gives us the Holy Spirit as a deposit guaranteeing what is to come Ephesians 1:14 and 2 Corinthians 1:22. The witness of the Holy Spirit in me is "proof" that God will deliver on His promises, and that He alone is who we should put our trust upon. Nobody could ever do anything to me to "prove" God doesn't exist. He lives in me just as clearly as the sun shines.

[derrick09]

Hello, well first off I don't believe Christianity is ONLY rational and scientific, I think it should be largely rational and scientific as in be and REMAIN compatible with science and rationality and as of NOW I feel it still IS. The reason for this thread was to explore the POSSIBILITY of what we would do as Christians and as Christian apologists if and when and if the time comes that our arguments are no longer useful due to advancements of secular science. This doesn't have much to do with one's personal relationship with Christ or the status with that relationship, it mostly has to do with, do we have a good reason for the hope that is within us? If we do and continue to have one that's great and that's what I'm looking for but if we don't I don't see us being much of a help as far as converting people in western nations to the faith, the only hope we will have is reaching people in less developed nations who don't know about all of the latest science, logic and rationality. Now I gave what I think is a good backup plan when and if things get very rocky for Christian apologetics, I was wanting to see what you and others think of that plan specifically for Christian apologetics.

Now it also appears that you are calling into question whether or not I'm truly saved and have the Holy Sprit. Now from what I believe I believe that I will be in heaven when I die because of what Christ has done and that I'm saved by grace through faith. Now that may not be the doctrine of salvation to you but based on studying scripture and studying Christian doctrine that's what I come up with. Now about the Holy Spirit, from what I can tell thus far, we don't have the Holy Spirit because we have some kind of wild or deep emotional experience or have certain feelings inside of us and so on. I believe based on biblical data and Christian doctrine that the way we know that the Holy Spirit lives inside of us is that we are able to produce the fruit of the spirit. Such as if we are able to produce things in our lives such as peace, joy, long suffering, conviction of sin and so on, we have His Spirit living inside of us.

Now I also get the impression that you and maybe some others here are confused about the doubting issues that I'm dealing with. Well let me see if I can break this down for you all. First, I have a heart commitment to Christ and Christianity. I have a devotion to Christianity on emotion and sheer will. These facets of me are locked in. The only one that's not locked in completely in my MIND commitment. Now my mind is committed to truth, whatever is true or is mostly likely to be true is what I go with. If I'm in a house that is on fire, even though it is my house and I have a emotional love and commitment to my house, if it's burning down, and my senses and my brain are telling me so, I need to get out of my house and assess the damage and go from there. It would be crazy, illogical and dangerous if I were to remain in the burning house just because I love that house. You see where I'm going? With these intellectual doubts that I run into from time to time and in these last few years I've been bombarded by them because of the fact there are quite a few people and groups of people that would like nothing more than to destroy Christianity and make it unthinkable. And even though I can just ignore it, claim that there is a big conspiracy against my faith (and in a way I do believe that), and keep saying to myself "ask me how I know He lives He lives within my heart" or "the Bible simply says it, that settles it", even though I can do all these things when does it become crazy illogical wishful thinking? I mean, how long can I keep going accepting something with my heart and emotions that my brain is trying to reject?

Well currently the best way so far to do that is through apologetics, though the use of arguments and evidence I can be then instead of what Richard Dawkins calls a "intellectually fulfilled atheist" I can be a "intellectually fulfilled Christian" And then be able to demonstrate that a intellectually fulfilled Christianity is way better and more reasonable than intellectually fulfilled atheism. And for the most part, apologetics has helped me reach that point, again the only thing I'm trying to do in this thread is develop a disaster plan just in case if my intellectually fulfilledness in Christianity becomes greatly challenged. It's not greatly challenged at the moment, but in case if it does, what can I do? And to repeat what I said in the first paragraph I gave what I think is a good backup plan. I'm just trying to see if I can make it better or see if and why it isn't necessary. Basically that's where I'm at right now with my faith, I may not be as emotionally or willfully strong and committed to Christ like you and others like you are but at least my walk with Christ and the Christianity that I try to live out in my day to day life is thoroughly EXAMINED. And as many philosophers say, "the unexamined life is not worth living".

[Mariolee]

Derrick, you just put into words what I've been feeling.

[derrick09]

Hello Mariolee, glad I could help, so what do you think about my apologetics insurance plan? Do you like it or think it needs some adjustments?

[derrick09]

Something else I want to stress, I'm doing this partly in response to all of the Stephen Hawking type or transitional fossil type headlines we tend to see in the news especially over the past few years. I don't want Christianity to rise and fall over a single headline or finding even if proven true, but I also want Christianity to remain reasonable and to remain as the most reasonable religion, philosophy, and view of the world there is, which again I want to stress still is in my view. In many ways we are doing extremely well in areas like archeology and with the fine tuning and design arguments. And plus we are still very much holding our own with the cosmological argument as well as arguments for the soul and life after death. And as usual the case for the Resurrection of Christ is as good as ever. So in the sense we are doing more than good as far as the evidence and arguments leaning in our favor. Now for those of you who think we should through out Christian apologetics and Christian intellectualism all together and just adopt a blind, emotional, "the Bible simply says it, that settles it" type faith, I'm more than willing to see your arguments for that if you are willing to make them. I'm willing to give up my logical and reasonable approach to Christianity. I'm willing to give up William Lane Craig, Gary Habermas, Hugh Ross and Greg Kokul and settle for Jimmy Swaggert , Billy Graham , Joel Osteen , and JAN CROUCH! But you must give me good reasons why I should. So anyway I'll leave it at that and settle back and read the responses. Take care.

[RickD]

Derrick,

This doesn't have much to do with one's personal relationship with Christ or the status with that relationship, it mostly has to do with, do we have a good reason for the hope that is within us? If we do and continue to have one that's great and that's what I'm looking for but if we don't I don't see us being much of a help as far as converting people in western nations to the faith, the only hope we will have is reaching people in less developed nations who don't know about all of the latest science, logic and rationality.

We have to remember that when we are a witness for Christ, whether in the western nations or the less developed nations, we should be led by the Holy Spirit. Is "converting" people really what we as Christians should be trying to do? We are to be a witness to God through Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit inside us. We are a witness by the way we live, as well as preaching the word as we are led by God. It's not our job to "convert" anyone. Only the power of God can change anyone's heart. Intellectual arguments may plant a seed, or get people to think. But, ultimately, only God can change anyone.

Now it also appears that you are calling into question whether or not I'm truly saved and have the Holy Sprit.

Derrick, I wasn't calling into question your salvation. I was posing those questions to make you think about what it really means to be a Christian. It's ultimately not about believing with just our mind. Philippians 1:6 talks about God being the One who works in us. Not us doing the work in and of ourselves. That's what separates true Christianity from every other religion. Derrick, it seems you are being pulled away by something that the enemy knows is a weakness to you. The best way to counter that is to pray and read God's word, and make it a priority in your life. I was involved with a friend many years back who was a Christian, but he was heavily involved with the latest government conspiracy theories. It was bringing me down when I kept being bombarded with all the doomsday stuff constantly. I had to completely distance myself from him. Maybe you need to distance yourself from the people or things that keep putting a doubt in your mind.

I'm willing to give up my logical and reasonable approach to Christianity. I'm willing to give up William Lane Craig, Gary Habermas, Hugh Ross and Greg Kokul and settle for Jimmy Swaggert , Billy Graham , Joel Osteen , and JAN CROUCH! But you must give me good reasons why I should. So anyway I'll leave it at that and settle back and read the responses. Take care.

Just remember you need to pray and read the Bible in order to grow as a Christian. We as Christians need more of the Bible, and less of the other books. I myself need to read the word more. It's something that I've been struggling with myself.

Basically that's where I'm at right now with my faith, I may not be as emotionally or willfully strong and committed to Christ like you and others like you are but at least my walk with Christ and the Christianity that I try to live out in my day to day life is thoroughly EXAMINED. And as many philosophers say, "the unexamined life is not worth living".

Derrick, we all need to be in The Word more. That's how we grow. Pray and read the Bible. Let God do the changing. Stop worrying about trying to be something none of us can be without God.

[derrick09]

Ok fine, I plan on reading the Bible more, but unlike what many chrismatics and anti intellectual believers do, I"m going to read the Bible IN CONTEXT. I'm not just going to pick, choose, and quote simple bible verses here and there to suit a agenda, or use it as a means to control people or present Chrsitianity like it's a wild cult. And finally after that, I'm going to get to the bottom of how the Holy Spirit truly works and get away from these folks that like to use the Holy Spirit as a way to lie and manipulate people. And personally when I do I predict that the Holy Spirit does NOT encourage people to jump up, wiggle and shake, speak in crazy jibble jabble that no one can understand, handle snakes, and claim that God directly speaks to them in audible voices on a constant basis. People like this really give God a bad name. It's amazing that there are not more atheists than what there are due to people like this. Personally, they have caused me a lot of doubt and trouble in my walk with God. And if it wasn't for Christian apologetics, I would have already become an atheist and I would have become one largely, because of these charismatic, anti intellectual and anti DIGNITY "church" groups that make Christianity look like a group of branch davidians in Waco Tx. I can't believe some believers want to keep other believers stupid and in the dark about things, it's very disturbing to say the least.

[Mariolee]

Derrick,

This doesn't have much to do with one's personal relationship with Christ or the status with that relationship, it mostly has to do with, do we have a good reason for the hope that is within us? If we do and continue to have one that's great and that's what I'm looking for but if we don't I don't see us being much of a help as far as converting people in western nations to the faith, the only hope we will have is reaching people in less developed nations who don't know about all of the latest science, logic and rationality.

We have to remember that when we are a witness for Christ, whether in the western nations or the less developed nations, we should be led by the Holy Spirit. Is "converting" people really what we as Christians should be trying to do? We are to be a witness to God through Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit inside us. We are a witness by the way we live, as well as preaching the word as we are led by God. It's not our job to "convert" anyone. Only the power of God can change anyone's heart. Intellectual arguments may plant a seed, or get people to think. But, ultimately, only God can change anyone.

Well yeah, but being intelligent sure as heck helps. God has given us intelligence, mind, and evidence has He not? And if we trust in the Holy Spirit to fill us and intervene through us, then what's the problem? I think what Derrick is trying to get at is that he wants to be an intelligent Christian. I know I'm pretty sick and tired of Christians believing in a fairy tale, and then when they are asked about why an Atheist should even consider believing in such a ridiculous deity, the Christian replies that he hopes God will change his heart.

You know what the Atheist does? He chuckles quietly to himself, and then walks away, thinking that you have only further confirmed his belief that Christians are crazy people that made up a supernatural god to feel better about themselves. At least, that's how I see it. Then again, I'm still really new to this apologetics stuff, so you're probably going to rightfully show me why I'm wrong. :p

[RickD]

Derrick,

This doesn't have much to do with one's personal relationship with Christ or the status with that relationship, it mostly has to do with, do we have a good reason for the hope that is within us? If we do and continue to have one that's great and that's what I'm looking for but if we don't I don't see us being much of a help as far as converting people in western nations to the faith, the only hope we will have is reaching people in less developed nations who don't know about all of the latest science, logic and rationality.

We have to remember that when we are a witness for Christ, whether in the western nations or the less developed nations, we should be led by the Holy Spirit. Is "converting" people really what we as Christians should be trying to do? We are to be a witness to God through Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit inside us. We are a witness by the way we live, as well as preaching the word as we are led by God. It's not our job to "convert" anyone. Only the power of God can change anyone's heart. Intellectual arguments may plant a seed, or get people to think. But, ultimately, only God can change anyone.

Well yeah, but being intelligent sure as heck helps. God has given us intelligence, mind, and evidence has He not? And if we trust in the Holy Spirit to fill us and intervene through us, then what's the problem? I think what Derrick is trying to get at is that he wants to be an intelligent Christian. I know I'm pretty sick and tired of Christians believing in a fairy tale, and then when they are asked about why an Atheist should even consider believing in such a ridiculous deity, the Christian replies that he hopes God will change his heart.

You know what the Atheist does? He chuckles quietly to himself, and then walks away, thinking that you have only further confirmed his belief that Christians are crazy people that made up a supernatural god to feel better about themselves. At least, that's how I see it. Then again, I'm still really new to this apologetics stuff, so you're probably going to rightfully show me why I'm wrong. :p

Mariolee, Many people are going to think we are crazy just because of what we believe because: 1 Corinthians 1:18-21. Should we really care that people think we're crazy? It's the message of the Cross, and the Word of God that has the power to transform lives, not intellectual arguments. That's all I'm saying. Of course there's a place for intellectual apologetics, but we can't lose sight of where the real power to transform is. What if instead of worrying about how to win a debate with an athiest, we preach Christ crucified by the power of the Holy Spirit, and let God take care of the rest?

[RickD]

Ok fine, I plan on reading the Bible more, but unlike what many chrismatics and anti intellectual believers do, I"m going to read the Bible IN CONTEXT. I'm not just going to pick, choose, and quote simple bible verses here and there to suit a agenda, or use it as a means to control people or present Chrsitianity like it's a wild cult. And finally after that, I'm going to get to the bottom of how the Holy Spirit truly works and get away from these folks that like to use the Holy Spirit as a way to lie and manipulate people. And personally when I do I predict that the Holy Spirit does NOT encourage people to jump up, wiggle and shake, speak in crazy jibble jabble that no one can understand, handle snakes, and claim that God directly speaks to them in audible voices on a constant basis. People like this really give God a bad name. It's amazing that there are not more atheists than what there are due to people like this. Personally, they have caused me a lot of doubt and trouble in my walk with God. And if it wasn't for Christian apologetics, I would have already become an atheist and I would have become one largely, because of these charismatic, anti intellectual and anti DIGNITY "church" groups that make Christianity look like a group of branch davidians in Waco Tx. I can't believe some believers want to keep other believers stupid and in the dark about things, it's very disturbing to say the least.

Derrick, it is great to study the Bible in context. But, I'm suggesting reading the Bible and let God speak to you through His Word. Pray that God will speak to you. Studying the Bible is one thing, but we need to read and meditate on the Word if our relationship with God is to grow.

[jlay]

It is the actual questions like we have in the OP that makes me wonder just what is the direction of modern apologetics. Is it just stacking enough evidence on one end of the scale? This is what we call evidentialism, and these type of questions is why I think it ultimately fails. This isn't to dismiss evidence, not at all. Only to say that it shouldn't be the underlying basis for our faith. As an example, I am not a Christian because of the teleological argument. And even if it were demonstrated to be false today, it wouldn't change my faith in Christ. Because my faith isn't in the teleological argument, it is in Christ.
It is very troubling to read of all these escape clauses you have woven in. I'm sorry, but that doesn't sound like Christian faith at all, but merely rescuing devices.

Specifically addressing a few points:
-There is no such thing as blind faith when it comes to Christianity. Faith is mentioned in many forms in the scriptures, such as ,'child like,' but never blind. Blindness, particularly spiritual blindness, is abhored and is caused by following the world and its arguments.

Ok, so currently if the universe is proven to be eternal or proven to come from nothing, or if the resurrection of Christ is disproved I will be forced to intellectually give up the faith.

First, let's be clear. You can't actually prove the universe to be eternal or have a beginning. We can only examine the evidence and make conclusions. And even if the universe were proven to be eternal, I don't see how it would undermine Christian faith. Unless you are building your faith on such a premise. Which I find very foolish. So to make this claim seems utterly absurd too me. It may make more sense to examine your own spiritual condition than to examine these particular evidences and give them such weight.

-Science is not a conspiracy anymore than science is a being. Scientist may certainly conspire, but science itself is only a concept used to help us understand the natural world.

I think your OP is an example why so many ride these roller coasters every time 'science' presents a new discovery, or declares a 'new contradiction' in the bible. "What are we going to do???" Panic. run in circles. I don't mean to downplay Derricks question. Just being honest, but it makes me weep for the state of many who share this same outlook. It isn't the, "hope to which we are called," that is for sure.

My faith first and foremost rest on Jesus Christ. The fact that I am a wicked sinner, in need of a great savior, who God has graced me to know.

Without the truth that the Bible reveals, there could be no way to even ponder such notions. Have you ever even considered this? Why would there be life, reason, or even laws of logic to question things? Why is there anything? It is only because God is, that we can posit questions to discover his being. Sadly we abuse this very revelation to doubt Him through all sorts of ridiculous notions. Without Him and His word, there is absolutely no reason why there would be anything except for chaos, much less an intelligent life to observe and draw conclusions on such chaos.

It is very interesting that tonight I am giving a presentation on this very subject. That being the basis of apologetics. Evidentialism vs. Presuppositionalism. I'm printing your OP as an example for tonight. God does work all things together. Thank you Lord.

[jlay]

Here are some excerpts from today's newsletter from Living Waters publications. I'm not endorsing anything, or even saying it directly applies to anyone here. But it did come today, and it did relate to this topic. Specifically to how people fall pray to 'arguments' when their faith is based in them.

After seven seasons as host of Canada's "most listened to spiritual talk show," Drew Marshall announced to his listeners that he is no longer convinced there's a God.(1) ABC News recently reported that a Southern Baptist pastor has become a closet atheist,(2) and an evangelical Bible Belt pastor said that he had been living a lie and confessed, "I live out my life as if there is no God."(3)

The doubting talk show host said that he became a follower of Christ in 1981. But it wasn’t until recently that he verbalized that he wasn’t convinced that God existed, saying "I feel pretty close to walking away from my faith."(4)

But the talk show host’s problem is bigger than himself, and it’s deeper than his nagging doubt. We have millions of people within the contemporary Church who have been convinced intellectually of the existence of God, but they’ve never been converted experientially by the power of God. So when someone comes along with what they perceive to be a more convincing argument, they begin to doubt their salvation. And so they should--because they are not saved. They are false converts; something Scripture refers to as "goats among the sheep", "tares among the wheat", "bad fish among the good."

False converts aren’t the genuine article. They are pretenders that sit among God’s people. This should come as no surprise to the skeptics. They have always said that the Church is "filled with hypocrites." And there the pretenders will remain, right up until Judgment Day when God separates the genuine from the false.

Spurious converts don’t experience the "power" of the gospel (see Romans 1:16). The message they heard didn’t come to them "in power, in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance."(7) This is because the cross is the center of the gospel. It is the supreme expression of God’s love to the sinner and there is a good reason it was obscured to them. The only way to see the love expressed in the cross is to see sin in its true light. And the only way to see our sin clearly, is to understand the moral Law. A cure is of little worth to a healthy person, and the cure of the cross is of little value to those who have never seen how deathly sick they are before a morally perfect God.

If we haven’t personally seen the cross, then we haven’t personally experienced the love of God. This is the tragic case of Drew Marshall, expressed in his own words......

[August]

This gets into a lot more as well, but it need not be that complicated. The obvious question is why you believe, and then also why so many other people believe?

All the evidence, all the arguments, all the debates, doubts and reasons to believe has to regress at some point into what is properly basic to believe. I break it down for myself into just two things:
1. Where did everything, including myself, come from? What am I, as a human being?
2. How can I, or do I, know that? Or for that matter, how can I know anything?

The answer is that no answer but the Christian God makes any sense of the two questions. They are logically prior to any other questions we can ask, and as such, any answers to any other questions has to presuppose God. Whenever doubts arise in my mind, I go back to those two questions, and remind myself that in terms of ontology and epistemology, the Christian God is the only rational and logical answer. Everything else necessarily flows from that.

We have to ask ourselves what is it that we are? Where we come from is what answers that question. If we are just material, vessels of water and carbon, brought forth by chance out of some quantum-physical soup, and everything more than that is purely illusion, then the atheists are right. Then whatever we have in terms of knowledge and emotion is meaningless, as it is an illusion served up to help us breed better. If we believe that we are more than that, that we have a mind and soul that is separate from the material, which can comprehend knowledge and emotion, then atheism is a-priori wrong, and we have to find the most rational and logical explanation for transcendental existence apart from the physical.

Only the Christian God makes sense as an explanation. Other god-proposals fail on logical and/or historical grounds.

[derrick09]

It is very interesting that tonight I am giving a presentation on this very subject. That being the basis of apologetics. Evidentialism vs. Presuppositionalism. I'm printing your OP as an example for tonight. God does work all things together. Thank you Lord.

I take it that you are a dedicated presuppositionalist, I just hope that in your presentation thing, you are not going go up there and paint me as a "John Q. LOST PERSON" or as a "goat or tare" that the scriptures use to describe a professing believer who doesn't really know Christ. I mean just because I'm not a chrismatic, or have a bad case of touchy feelys, or experience crazy hallucinations and dreams, or have the kind of faith that jonestown and branch davidian cult members have, does NOT mean I'm not a true believer. Now I believe that I will be in heaven when I die based on Christ's work on the cross and that I'll be saved by His grace through faith. I'm really getting sick and tired of people trying to paint me as a lost person because I don't have a blind, emotional, cult like faith based on subjective experiences. No I may not have that, but I have a faith that is based on logic, reasoning, and GOOD DOCTRINE.