Search Results

Remember, this is not a debate. Discuss, exchange idea's and be open about this. I rarely see a thread on this forum nowadays where someone isn't personally attacking and resorting to escapist tactics in order to defend themselves. One's belief is not themselves, always remember that (personal philosophy, too, btw).

What do you feel it means to "accept Jesus"? Is it allegorical? Literal? Metaphorical? What do you feel is the motive behind this notion?


From this, I present a quote that Bunterx has quite beautifully laid out in his signature, "Accepting Jesus Is Like Committing Intellectual Suicide."

- Thoughts on an opinion like this?
- Idea's on why a person could say something like that?


Personally, I think to "accept Jesus" could mean one of a few things. The first of which could mean to accept (but not necessarily understand and put into effect)* his teachings and personal conceptions; this includes being nice to others, love thy neighbor, treat everyone with just as much love as the guy or girl before, etc.

* What I meant by this comment was, a lot of the time, a person will hear or see what Jesus thought and preached for, but will not listen or absorb the very philosophy itself. Too often than not I see a person explaining this ideal and can't necessarily make a basis for it. That's why it should probably be made relevant to sit down and think long and hard about this philosophy.

Secondly, it could mean you personally accept that Jesus existed (more often than not, as fact, rather than a possibility), therefore warranting foundation to the philosophy presented.

Quite simply, pointing out that Jesus existed or not is irrelevant. I suppose Jesus would have been a real person... okay. Now what? If it turns out he doesn't exist, would it have mattered? Of course not, it is the message to be understood. Therefore accepting Jesus in this perspective might not always be something to have an opinion on, but rather, be aware of its branches and possibilities.

Thirdly, and very generally, this applies to an institutionalized perception, of accepting Jesus as a "savior." ** I see that nearly 100% of the time, accepting Jesus as a "savior" is actually an institutionalized paradigm. The Church (whichever sect you refer to it won't matter, many have this either way) seems to have indoctrinated this idea, to create a universal understanding for the general populace to agree on.

(and on an irrelevant note, for myself, I don't find most of the messages widely believed even remotely correct, for in reality, there seems to be a hidden or occult message behind many of the things said in the NKJV or Old Testament, after translation... so a grasp of subjectivity has been inclined to the writings, originally or newly created (after translation).)


And of course the "accepting Jesus is like committing intellectual suicide." You know, this is just as subjective OR objective as the rest of the idea itself. If you do it and give your entire life for it, without making an attempt to understand at the very LEAST, and give some effort and "against-the-grain" attitude against the faith concept, I think very much it will be like committing cerebral purging. So this won't necessarily imply the mind-set of "simply disagreeing and listening why it is wrong." Instead, disagree at first, and create an understanding of it.

And when I use the word understanding, it isn't just knowing. I mean create a foundation, which is what the word actually means. lol

I'd go on and list more of my thoughts, but my hands are starting to cramp.

When will you get boring to me, kh-vids, when?

I slave hours a day just sitting here, reading posts. Let me be free! THE PAINNNNNNNNN.

...I actually enjoy it, so nevermind.