So what determines what we take on faith?
This is probably my last discussion topic before my blog post maybe next week.
Hamby's blog argued that faith is compounding, what if Bob's faith on man being sinful got him to build houses for the poor, but his faith on drinking being a sin caused unnecessary problems? If Bob takes sinful nature on faith, what's stopping him from taking that drinking or lusting is bad on faith?
But closer examination leads to some problems in this line of thinking.
If I went to Bob and said that playing sports is a sin, that football is the work of Satan and that it should be banished or our society will degrade.
What do you think the likely hood of Bob believing me is?
Or even take the example of drinking being a sin.
Who's more likely to think so, Bob who lost his friend to a drunk driver, or Jeff who parties all the time? Jeff may be a little reluctant to give up his booze, so he may just rationalize it.
After all, I know lots of Christians that get loaded, so why do they take the Jesus ticket to heaven on faith, but not the drinking/lusting as a sin?
The point is, is Christianity should be universal in the people it produces. Portugesse Christians should be like Canadian Christians, after all, it's the same religion right? [I'm talking the same denomination]
If I asked 100 Christians as to whether this or that is a sin I will get 100 different answers.