Witnessing Turns Ugly

There are limited places to share the Good News with strangers in my small hometown. But the streets of downtown afford a friend and me many opportunities to talk about our faith as people have to stand on the sidewalk outside the bars to smoke. One recent summer weekend outing was more memorable than most.

The weekend before, a guy exiting an establishment handed us an advertisement for the bar’s first annual wet T-shirt contest inside the bar the following Saturday. To the best of my knowledge, no similar event had taken place in this town, and certainly not in the last two years I’d been witnessing downtown. I felt very strongly that if the business owners downtown were stepping up their level of wickedness, we Christians should do something.

I spoke to my pastor about getting some people together to go downtown that evening to witness or sing worship songs. He said he wanted to help, and he made some phone calls. I found out at the last hour, however, that he wasn’t available and no one else was willing to help. By that time, I couldn’t even get my friend on the phone. I decided I had to go alone—with the 8-foot-tall cross we often take downtown to help lure people into talking about the gospel.

Because I knew I didn’t have any backup, I thought it would be wisest to stand with the cross in front of the place quietly and wait for God to bring people to me. Several people did talk to me. I had two very heartbreaking conversations with some people who said they were Christians. One was a woman who planned to enter the contest, and the other was an older man who was serving as a contest judge. Reasoning with them about the Bible was like talking to a brick wall.

I’d been standing there for more than an hour when a man, about 60 years old, came over from across the street. We’d never met before, and he introduced himself with a threat: Either I would move on—or he’d knock me into the gutter. I calmly told him I was standing on a public sidewalk and tried to ignore him, hoping he would realize I wouldn’t be moved, and walk away. I was wrong. Before I could react, he hit me above the left eye with his wooden cane. While the pain wasn’t great, a goose egg appeared almost immediately. I pulled out my phone to call the police. The guy tried to knock the phone out of my hand. Thankfully, some other people got him under control, and I called 911.

When the police arrived, they asked me some questions and then arrested the man, who was still sitting on a nearby bench. After the police left, I returned to my place on the sidewalk and the once-calm group seemed to turn against me. Soon, my friend showed up, and we decided to move on to the next bar. As soon as we left, we heard cheering as the contest, which was supposed to start at 7 p.m., started at about 8:30.

The police recommended the guy be charged with 2nd degree assault (two to eight years in the state penitentiary); the district attorney called me and said they were lowering the charges to 3rd degree assault (up to two years in the county jail). That’s fine with me—all I got was a goose egg (which later turned into a black eye). I also found out that his name is Melvin.

The cross, a rich symbol of God’s grace and mercy, seems to be offensive to many. I’ve asked myself why people like Melvin care what I think, and why they bother to ridicule me or my faith. While I know that many of these individuals are under alcohol’s influence, I firmly believe the Holy Spirit’s power is at work, convicting of sin and prompting people to think about their eternal future and examine the Bible.

I struggle with whether my decision that night to witness alone downtown was wise. But I do believe God’s power was at work that evening, and I hope He will use my efforts to plant seeds that lead to salvation in the hearts of Melvin and the others with whom my path crossed that night.

Advertisements

39 Responses to Witnessing Turns Ugly

  1. men4god says:

    Bill, first, I ant to say that if people are smoking outside of bars, it sounds like you live in Ohio, but I think other states have passed similar laws so it could just be a coincidence.

    Second, I would have to agree that witnessing by yourself could be dangerous, I sincerely applaud your bravery and your love for the Lord! I think people are hostile because they are being convicted, and they don’t like it. In other cases, they may see what you have (strong faith, hope, and a clean soul) and they desperately want it but think it is out of their reach. They may even think you are flaunting it in front of them, which you and I know is not the case.

    As for Melvin, besides of course praying for him, you might consider visiting him in jail. What do you think about going and telling him you feel no malice towards him (if true) and offer to help him while he’s in. Oh he might get angry or offended, he might say he doesn’t want your help. Or he may just realize that he is loosing months or years of his life because he popped some guy who was trying to help. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts.

    God Bless you Brother.

    men4god@wordpress.com
    russbonchu.reachby.com

  2. Bill says:

    Russ,

    I live in Colorado. I’ve thought about going to visit him in jail, and I’ll just have to stop procrastinating.

    Thanks,
    Bill

  3. Les Puryear says:

    Bill,

    I rejoice that you were “counted worthy to suffer shame for His name” (Acts 5:41).
    What a great witness!

    Les

  4. morsec0de says:

    I think I’d just like to say, as a non-believer, that I’m glad you’re okay. As far as I can tell you were completely in your right to protest what you saw as something wicked, and this old-man was completely out of line.

    Freedom of speech is for everyone, not just people you agree with. Keep standing up for it.

    “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” -Evelyn Beatrice Hall

  5. barrydean says:

    Bill,

    Praise God you were not injured more than you were. I totally agree with your conclusion, that the Holy Spirit was at work that night. The cross you carried was acting as a light to expose their deeds. They didn’t like having you there, so when you left they cheered. I am very encouraged by your courage to stand for Christ.

  6. Really Robin says:

    1Co 1:18 – For to those who are perishing the message of the cross is foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is God’s power.

    Bill – it would not have mattered if you stood at that cross alone, or had two or more gathered with you where the message of Christ is concerned. Those who are perishing will still see that message as foolish.

    Your [co]mission was to bring the message. You did it well. And the Holy Spirit will continue to aggitate the hearts of those He is calling to Him.

    Well done, brother.

  7. Bill says:

    Thanks for the comments and the encouragement.

    Morsec0de, I agree about the importance of the 1st amendment, and all of the others. Many seem to think they have a right to not be offended, but who determines what is offensive?

    Since you’re a non-believer, I have to ask you what you’re going to do about your sins (such as lying, stealing, lust, disobeying your parents, etc.)?

    Thanks,
    Bill

  8. morsec0de says:

    Hey Bill,

    I was on vacation and without access to the internet, or I would have responded sooner.

    “Since you’re a non-believer, I have to ask you what you’re going to do about your sins (such as lying, stealing, lust, disobeying your parents, etc.)?”

    Well, let’s look at the definition of sin from dictionary.com:

    sin
    –noun
    1. transgression of divine law: the sin of Adam.
    2. any act regarded as such a transgression, esp. a willful or deliberate violation of some religious or moral principle.
    3. any reprehensible or regrettable action, behavior, lapse, etc.; great fault or offense: It’s a sin to waste time.

    Now, if you mean the first or second definition, I don’t have sins. I don’t hold to any religion, I don’t believe in god, and thus I don’t believe there is any divine law for me to break.

    As far as the third definition, I plan on making restitution to whatever people I may have harmed, be they individuals or society as a whole.

    To get more specific, I don’t view morality in such black and white terms. For example, I think lying is generally wrong, but there are many situations in which telling a lie could be morally neutral or even a positive. The same goes with stealing, tough I think it is much more rare to find a situation in which stealing could be positively moral than with lying.

    Lust I do not view as a negative. Certain actions that can be derived from lust, yes, but lust itself is fine.

    As for disobeying my parents, I disagree that such a blatantly absolute rule like “obey your parents” should be followed. Obedience should be given when it is deserved, not by default. That being said, I did obey my parents as a child. But had they mistreated me, I would have done my best to escape them and seek help from others. I was lucky that that did not happen. As an adult, I do not ‘obey’ my parents. I love and respect them, ask for their opinion and help on occasion, and am honest with them almost to a fault. But I am not ‘obedient’ to them in any real way.

    But again, I don’t believe in any such thing as sin. Any immoral things I happen to do make me responsible to whoever I harm, and I will seek forgiveness and give restitution to those people.

    Hope that helps,

    Morse

  9. Bill says:

    Morse,

    Thanks for your response. When I say sin, I mean transgression of God’s law, specifically the Ten Commandments.

    As an atheist (not to put words in your mouth, but that seems to be the case), even though you may not believe you’re under the law, that doesn’t mean you’re not. If someone doesn’t believe in gravity, it doesn’t mean they’re not subject to it.

    If there is a just God, and He cares about people, He must punish murderers. If He cares about truth, He must punish liars. We’ve all broken the Ten Commandments, and just like any guilty criminal we deserve to be punished. No one can get off by simply asking for forgiveness, or being a good person. God is holy, righteous and just, and can’t just let people off without justice being served.

    To you, all of that is a big “if,” since you don’t believe in the God of the Bible. Nevertheless, I think I have to warn you that if the Bible is true, we all deserve hell for breaking His law.

    Thanks,
    Bill

  10. morsec0de says:

    Bill,

    I am in fact an atheist, so you’ve put no words in my mouth.

    I take your meaning with the analogy with gravity, but unfortunately it falls flat. (Pun unintended.) There is evidence for gravity existing that is separate from any belief I may have in the matter. The same is not true for your god’s law. They are presented without question and without anything to back them up but the threat of a punishment for which there is also no evidence. And while some of the decalogue contains good ideas (4 of them, at my last count), the majority are neither self-evident nor terribly sensible.

    And yes, we all have broken one or more of the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments, it is my opinion, seem to have been intelligently designed (pun intended) so that no one is ‘innocent’. Much like the Scientologist’s personality test, where there is no sickness you merely create one so that you can sell the remedy you have.

    I don’t mean that to be harsh, so I apologize if it appears so. I just wish to be clear with my opinion.

    You said “God is holy, righteous and just, and can’t just let people off without justice being served.”

    Justice, it seems to me, would be punishment that matched the level of the crime committed. If I commit a parking infraction, it would be just to fine me for doing so. It would not be just to send me to death row for the same infraction. Your concept of god, it seems to me, performs the latter. Which is no kind of justice at all.

    You also said “I think I have to warn you that if the Bible is true, we all deserve hell for breaking His law. ”

    I thank you for the warning, but unfortunately I have come across Pascal’s Wager many times, and it fails to impress. Unless you, of course, would consider converting to Islam, as if the Koran is true, all good Christians deserve hell for breaking Allah’s law.

    But again, I’m just a godless heathen, so what do I know? :)

    Cheers,

    Morse

  11. Bill says:

    Morse,

    Many people think Hitler did sufficiently horrible things to deserve hell, but would never think the average person ever did anything worthy of eternal punishment. We have a human perspective on things, and think that a sin like lying isn’t that big of a deal. However God is infinitely holy, and when we lie, we’re sinning against Him. That is why hell is eternal.

    I can see where agnostics are being reasonable, but atheists are taking a huge leap of faith. If you had even 1% of all of the knowledge available, you’d be the smartest man alive. However, even then, it would be unreasonable to be an atheist, since there may be more than adequate proof for the existence of God in the other 99% of knowledge you don’t possess.

    Maybe since you’re confident enough in your belief that there is no God, you have answers for a couple of questions I’ve been thinking about. Where did all of the matter and energy in the universe come from? Where did the first life form come from?

    Thanks,
    Bill

  12. morsec0de says:

    Bill,

    “However God is infinitely holy, and when we lie, we’re sinning against Him. That is why hell is eternal. ”

    You and I have a very different idea of ‘infinite’. If I am infinitely strong, for example, and you punched me, I wouldn’t be infinitely damaged. In fact, your punch would be infinitely weak compared to my strength. If a god exists, and is infinite, then the crimes of Hitler (as abominable as they were) must be less than the act of spitting on the sidewalk.

    Humans, being finite, cannot commit finite acts or crimes. Which is why I, personally, view the doctrine of an eternal Hell to be the most reprehensible idea I have ever come across. (My opinion, however, has no effect on whether or not Hell exists. However, if an eternal Hell exists, I would have zero respect for the being who created it.)

    “I can see where agnostics are being reasonable, but atheists are taking a huge leap of faith. ”

    I am actually both an atheist and an agnostic. They are not mutually exclusive. Agnosticism speaks to knowledge, atheism to belief. I do not believe in god. But I understand intellectually that I don’t know if a god exists or not. So I am both agnostic and atheist.

    “Where did all of the matter and energy in the universe come from?”

    I’m not sure. There are differing theories. My personal opinion is that the universe, in some form or another, existed before the big bang and is what caused the big bang to happen. Meaning, the matter and energy didn’t ‘come from’ anywhere, it always existed, just in different forms.

    Maybe I’m wrong. PROBABLY I’m wrong. But I enjoy the search for information on the subject. I have also studied and given serious thought to every religious claim I have heard dealing with the same subject, and none seem plausible in the least. But hey, if they ever get any evidence to back them up, I’ll change my mind.

    “Where did the first life form come from?”

    Abiogenesis. The Miller-Urey experiment suggests that amino acids can be formed with the combination of gas, chemicals and electricity (lightning). Amino acids being the building blocks of life, that looks like a promising theory.

    Hope that helps,

    Morse

  13. Bill says:

    Morse,

    You said, “(My opinion, however, has no effect on whether or not Hell exists. However, if an eternal Hell exists, I would have zero respect for the being who created it.)”

    I appreciate that perspective, and I think it’s better than many people who want to hedge their bets. They want to live life for themselves, but think that if they just do a few religious things they’ll be okay with God. At least you can live your life knowing you have no respect for the God of the Bible, and you don’t have to play games with trying to have a backup plan.

    The Miller-Urey experiment has an unbelievable number of shortcomings. Just to name one off the top of my head, it produced a 50/50 ratio of left and right-handed amino acids, whereas all of the amino acids in life are left-handed (http://www.icr.org/article/105/). Furthermore, amino acids are only the building blocks of proteins. Proteins don’t form by chance.

    Thanks,
    Bill

  14. morsec0de says:

    Bill,

    Thanks for your appreciation. I try my best in all things to be as intellectually honest as I can be. There are many gods that people have presented to me that I would have no problem with (many of them variations of the Christian god). And there are many that I would have no respect for. But I see no evidence for either type existing. I do not expect to go to heaven any more than I expect to go to hell, and I find those who ‘hedge their bets’ to be contemptible.

    As far as the Miller-Urey experiment is concerned, I did not mean to present it as evidence or proof that abiogenesis happened in the way presented in the Miller-Urey experiment. The experiment admittedly does not recreate the specific characteristics of the primordial earth.

    What it does do is show that simple amino acids can form from a process involving only non-biological elements. This makes the potential for something similar having happened on the primordial earth much higher.

    Cheers,

    Morse

  15. tom says:

    abiogenesis…. airborne primorial soup?
    weird….talk about faith!

  16. morsec0de says:

    Creation…magic and mud.

    I’ll go with the science, thanks.

  17. tom says:

    airborne aminos! yea, thats real science!
    i used to beleive that stuf….even taught it to an extent, of course there is always someone who sets up a strawman like the “magic and mud” comment….
    as if to imply that christians are dumb….foolish people trusting in a foolish fairy tale.
    a debate can never be won in a forum as this, but to imply that christians beleive in “magic and mud” is an insulting thing to say without investigating the claims, and “science” proposed by highly intellegent people…. christians who love the pursue of science and are held in high regard by even the athiest among thier peers.
    you should be ashamed.

    here is one thing you cannot deny. if i could take your thoughts, fantasies, and everything you have done in private, put it on a movie screen for the world to see….
    you would be horified. because you have thought things so vile and disgusting that you couldn’t even dare to share them with your closest friend. this is a fact and you know it. deny it till the cows come home but no-one will beleive you.
    you know why? because you are depraved…utterly, hopelessly evil.
    join the club…for i have described the entire human race.
    your only hope is Jesus. think about these things the next time you are having a sleepless night.

  18. morsec0de says:

    “Airborne aminos”? Who said they were airborne? I certainly didn’t. And neither does the theory.

    “Magic and mud” isn’t a strawman. It is an accurate description of genesis…god taking earth, molding it, blowing into it and making it magically come to life.

    “for i have described the entire human race”

    I feel sorry that you feel so bad about yourself and humanity as a whole.

  19. tom says:

    truth is a hard pill….

  20. morsec0de says:

    Agreed. Which is why I don’t expect you to stop taking your sugar pill placebos any time soon.

  21. Sirius says:

    morse,

    Placebo? So will you deny the existence of universal sin? It’s where I began on this search. Universal sin, man’s tendency to sin everywhere he exists, is an undeniable scientifically-verifiable fact of existence. We Christians usually term it “original sin,” but I think the term has lost some of its meaning outside religious circles.

    Take for example, this particular scenario. Did you notice that these guys wouldn’t have their wet T-shirt contest until after the cross was taken away? Did you notice that the very symbol of good, with no words spoken, was enough to condemn them of their sin and to cause one man to erupt into implacable violence?

    Sin is a fact and the cross is no mere placebo against it. It’s the only remedy that will work! More specifically, it’s the only remedy against the wages [deserved earnings] of sin: eternal death. Hell, in other words. damnation. A rejection of God, who is life itself is an embracing of death.

    But God was willing to take your place AND pay your sin-debt that you may have eternal life. The choice of course is yours. To quote Lewis: In the end there are only two types: Those who say to God, Thy will be done, and those to whom God says, Thy will be done.

    –Sirius Knott

  22. morsec0de says:

    “Did you notice that these guys wouldn’t have their wet T-shirt contest until after the cross was taken away? Did you notice that the very symbol of good, with no words spoken, was enough to condemn them of their sin and to cause one man to erupt into implacable violence?”

    Well, no. We can assume that most of these men were Christians, or at least were raised Christian, because most of the people in America are. So a cross has a deep meaning for them. From a young age, at least some of them have had it hammered home to them that sexuality is bad and shameful. Of course they feel guilty about it, because your religion has spent millenia fostering that guilt in people.

    You have no evidence that that guilt would exist without your religion putting it in people.

    “Sin is a fact and the cross is no mere placebo against it. It’s the only remedy that will work!”

    You’re just like the Scientologists. You invent a problem, tell me I have it, and conveniently only you have the cure. Sorry, but I don’t buy it.

  23. Sirius says:

    You’re saying that you wouldn’t know murder or lying was a sin apart from the teachings of the church or religion? From someone who is raising children, I can tell you that a child knows when they’ve done something wrong even before I tell them it’s wrong. Lying is the perfect example. Guilt crosses their face nearly the moment the words escape their lips.

    Whether you buy it or not [whether you’re able to lie convincingly to yourself or not], you are guilty of breaking God’s law. The Bible even calls our conscience God’s law written on our hearts.

    As for assuming that most of these men were Christians, that’s a pretty ribald assumption. The evidence seems to suggest the opposite.

    –Sirius Knott

  24. morsec0de says:

    “You’re saying that you wouldn’t know murder or lying was a sin apart from the teachings of the church or religion?”

    No. I’m saying the questionable church and religious teachings “Sex is bad, gays are bad, don’t build statues to other gods” are just that…religious teachings. Not supported by secular ways of looking at the world. “Don’t kill” and “don’t lie” are supported by secular world views.

    “Whether you buy it or not [whether you’re able to lie convincingly to yourself or not], you are guilty of breaking God’s law. ”

    Oh, I am certain I am breaking many of the laws that are in your holy book that you claim come from a god. But that’s all they are…laws in a book that you claim from a god. Until the god is supported with good evidence, than I really don’t care.

    “As for assuming that most of these men were Christians, that’s a pretty ribald assumption. The evidence seems to suggest the opposite.”

    “No true Scotsman” fallacy. Look it up.

  25. Sirius says:

    Morse,

    Please don’t ever misuse the No True Scotsman fallacy in my presence again. It KILLS me that most of you who invoke it have no idea at all how it correctly applies to an argument. So listen carefully, friend. The No True Scotsman fallacy applies to arguments where the debater erroneously [that’s a key word] states an extra qualification of his group [for example, Scotsmen or Christians] which is not precluded by the commonly understood or agreed upon definition or conditional terms of that group.

    For example, if I say No true Christian would deny that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, you could not invoke the No True Scotsman fallacy. But if I said no true Christian would ever enter a bar or go to a wet T-shirt contest, you could. However, I did NOT SAY THIS. I said that the evidence seems to suggest otherwise AND that you are actually making an unqualified assumption about the patrons of the bar.

    Why doesn’t the sodding Scotsman fallacy apply here? Because there has been no prior claim by anyone that they were, other than yours which was only invoked under the equally fallacious Christian Nation equals all USAmericans are Hypocritical Christians fallacy. You erroneously introduced the idea that they were all in fact Christians simple because they live in USAmerica. We call that a sweeping generalization, a misuse of a cliche and an all around non sequitur to boot!

    You also invoke the No True Scotsman fallacy as if it always holds true. Christianity has qualifications [as do Scotsmen: they have to be born in Scotland or be of genetic Scottish heritage] but qualifications that are more stringent than a mere Scotsman. Nothing suggests that a Christian may not engage in hypocritical activity, but we also know that not everyone who calls themselves a Christian qualifies by the biblical definition. This is again why your appeal to a Christian Nation is errorneous ans why, therefore, you cannot correctly invoke the No True Scotsman fallacy.

    On the other issue, whence sprang your “secular” do not kill and do not steal?

    And given the evidence readily available [for the open-minded, at any rate], what would YOU in your inestimable opinion qualify as “good evidence” for the existence of God? [Keep in mind, it must be consistent with the proposed nature and character of such a God as men claim revelation of]

    Care to take a bite?

    –Sirius Knott

  26. morsec0de says:

    “which is not precluded by the commonly understood or agreed upon definition or conditional terms of that group.”

    The commonly understood or agreed upon definition being “they refer to themselves as Christians and believe in Jesus”. I think it applies, even if they don’t believe in Jesus by not going to wet t-shirt contests.

    “However, I did NOT SAY THIS.”

    You implied it. Good enough for government work.

    “You erroneously introduced the idea that they were all in fact Christians simple because they live in USAmerica.”

    Actually, I didn’t, I said “We can assume that most”. Most…as in more than 50%, not all. In a country where the majority of people are Christian, taking an essentially random sampling would suggest that most are Christians.

    “On the other issue, whence sprang your “secular” do not kill and do not steal?”

    Harm, which we can determine through empathy and observation. For must of us, it’s a simple matter of knowing that we would not like to be killed or have things stolen from us that keeps us from doing it. I don’t need some sort of supernatural being telling me to act that way. If you do, however, for the sake of everyone please keep believing.

    “what would YOU in your inestimable opinion qualify as “good evidence” for the existence of God?”

    I have no idea. But I imagine if this god is omnipotent, it would know how to present good enough evidence for its existence so that everyone believed in it. If it does not, and has given me the mental capacity to expect such evidence before believing such things, I can only assume that it either doesn’t care that I believe in it or it doesn’t exist. And if it is not omnipotent, how is it god?

    -Morse

  27. tom says:

    brothers, if you understand this, then take the advice given here:
    Mh dwte (5632) to agion toiv kusin, mhde balhte (5632) touv margaritav umwn emprosqen twn xoirwn, mhpote katapathsousin (5692) autouv en toiv posin autwn kai strafentev (5651) rhcwsin umav.

  28. Bill says:

    Tom,

    What is that?

    Thanks,
    Bill

  29. tom says:

    it’s greek with strong’s numbers.
    a passage in Mathew 7

  30. Melisa says:

    Revelation 20:10 says “and the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night forever and ever”

    According to this verse, the devil (the master of deception) along with the beast and all the false prophets are being tormented in the lake of burning sulfur forever and ever, but who does the tormenting? If the devil is defeated for eternity (gone forever – does not exist anymore) according to the bible, there will be zero person who do the tormenting right? because the devil can not torment himself.

    If it’s God who does the tormenting, then it means God also rules hell, because the lake of burning sulfur is often called hell. (the place where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth)

    Can anyone explain? Bill?

  31. Bill says:

    Melisa,

    God rules hell. Hell exists as a place where God punishes people who disobey His law (the Ten Commandments). When we break His law, we sin against an infinitely holy God, and therefore our punishment is infinite. God will be glorified when all of creation sees His justice.

    Would you say you’re born again?

    Thanks,
    Bill

  32. alex aviles says:

    that story aboout the man witnessing by himself with a cross at night aroud the bars was very brave my hat goes off to you bro god is good his grace was with you that day at anytime your life could have been taken from you. anyway i am a beleiver i am a independent fundementilist baptist i attend still waters baptist church in outer banks north carolina, god has blessed me in my life with a prison ministry it always gets better every time we go i just wanted to say that its such a great feeling leading more than 30 men to the lord an knowing that they have a place in heaven an not in hell nice website tae care god bless sincerely alex aviles

  33. morsec0de says:

    “When we break His law, we sin against an infinitely holy God, and therefore our punishment is infinite”

    This has never made any kind of sense to me.

    If you are infinitely strong, and I punch you, are you injured infinitely? No. I can’t do anything to you if you are infinitely strong.

    And if your concept of god can be harmed by finite things, how is that a god?

  34. Bill says:

    Morse,

    God is not harmed by our sins.

    If I lied to a child, he can’t give me any consequences. If I lie to my boss, he could fire me. If I lie to a judge while under oath, I can go to prison for perjury. If I lie to the U.S. government, under the right circumstances, I can be hung for treason. The punishment is based on who I lie to, not the lie itself.

    Even if I’ve failed miserably in explaining why this makes sense, hell is what the Bible describes. You don’t have to like it, or understand it, all you have to do is obey Jesus, and repent and put your faith in Him.

    Thanks,
    Bill

  35. morsec0de says:

    But in those situations you are not being punished because you lie, you are being punished because your law is or could cause harm.

    I occasionally will write pieces of fiction. In doing so, I am constantly lying and fabricating. Why is that not punished? Because it harms no one.

    If god is not harmed by our actions, then I don’t see the point. (Of course, as I don’t believe a god exists, I don’t see the point, but I’m going along for the hypothetical.)

  36. morsec0de says:

    Darn typos…

    It’s supposed to read “because your lie is or could cause harm”.

  37. Keith says:

    Bill…you should have called me – I’d have been there.

  38. Bill says:

    Keith,

    Yes, I definitely should have called you. My pastor seemed excited about doing something, so I was kind of relying on him to get some people together. But I pretty much knew that would fall through, but I was hoping against home that my church would come through.

    The Penrose parade is coming up soon. We should go.

    Thanks for commenting,
    Bill

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s