I was thinking about him recently after watching an interview. Nice guy, but hey, who isn't? And smart too. I thought, how did he arrive at this conclusion? He's a militant atheist who's vehemently opposed to Christianity in particular. From what I have heard/seen of him, his act is pretty much rooted in those two things, which, if you think about it, are the same.Apparently, he went to a private Christian school growing up... who'd have thought?! I tend to understand his view. According to him, there is no God, so why not just do whatever you feel like doing (as long as it hurts no one else), because there is no reward for being good, no punishment for being bad, and no purpose to existence anyway. I don't oppose him at all. If atheism is true, his response is understandable.
[Sidenote: How free it would be to have no type of accountability! Yet I can't imagine the hell-existence of one who, without a creator, has absolutely no purpose or hope. I shudder every time I imagine godlessness. On the other hand, it's unwise to create faith, or a god for that matter, to fill that hole. I think a lot of faith out there is just that... forgetting. Faith must be based on truth. (And somehow, that statement seems impossible)]
Looking past all the lewd, the crude, and the rude, what is really there is an absense of belief (duh!). How sad. But, unfortunately, how expected. All things that were once believed spiritual are now explainable by science, there is no valid testimony of spiritual experience, people are only sympathetic of each other because it's good for them. It makes sense; I don't disagree.
Where is there a reason to believe? And if there's a reason, why believe in this God and not some other?
Read any chapter of any gospel and you will see a reason given to believe (for those present) with every path He crossed. Jesus never held back proof of divinity, of extra-terrestrial power; stuff that could be explained in no other way. If you saw one of His miracles you had to believe in a God, whether this was His son or not.
Well He's still alive, why isn't He proving it? Has He changed His mind on proving Himself? Or are we the ones who aren't creating the proof in His stead?
It makes sense, then, that the church in Marilyn's home country can accurately be described by 2 Timothy 3:5 "having a form of godliness, but denying its power."
Incidentally, it goes on to say, "have nothing to do with them".
At the end of the day, Marilyn may just be a product of those who protest his concerts. How ironic.
2 comments:
Shockingly enough, I agree. Minus that one bit that's already been clarified. You're pretty good at backing up what you say, which makes people read with an open ear instead of with an intention to argue. You make people think, not necessarily in a controversial way, but in an "I've never thought of it that way", kind of thought.
*stands up and applauds*
Post a Comment