If you died in the next 15 minutes - - -

Everyone I know could. I talk to people constantly about how Jesus loves them and wants a relationship with them. I have some evangelist in me I think and am always looking for opportunties to witness.

Would it change anything if no one talked about how important Jesus was to me when I died? No it wouldn't, but it would make me very sad if I knew about it, which I wouldn't know because I would be in Heaven.


Psalm 100
A Psalm of praise.

1 Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all ye lands.

2 Serve the LORD with gladness: come before his presence with singing.

3 Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.

4 Enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and into his courts with praise: be thankful unto him, and bless his name.

5 For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations.

 

TS,

There will be only one witness that will matter on that day, and none of them were listed above in your post.

As to whether I would be in Heaven after dying, I would say that this would depend a bit on your eschatological beliefs. If you are pre-mill, you would probably say no. If you were even a partial preterist, like me, then you would definitely say yes.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Where are you if you're pre-mill???

 

If I understand their theology correct, you are still in the ground awaiting the rapture.

Joseph Botwinick

 

No, our bodies are in the ground waiting for the rapture, we are with the Lord, which would be Heaven. Just because the "New Heaven" and "New Earth" are still to come, does not mean Heaven does not exist today. Where else would God be?

 

I don't think so!

"Absent from the body, present with the Lord." Every funeral at my church (which is pre-mill) talks about the departed beleivers as being with Christ right now. What you suggest sounds like soul sleep, which is very aberrant and not pre-mill.

Our bodies are in the ground; we are with Christ!

 

Hey, my little "yikes" icons didn't show up!

I'm trying them again.

They go in the above post.

 

Assume? No. Believe? Yes.

Probably not. I tend to be rather private about my faith, at least verbally. My family, otoh, will vouch for my faith.

Some, perhaps, some might not. If my faith wasn't important to them, they might not have noticed it. However, they probably noticed the fruits of my faith, which is more important than anything I might have said about my faith.

I need no one to stand up and testify about my relationship with Christ. Faith isn't supposed to be a "prove it" sort of thing. Jesus says if I go into my room and pray in secret, my Heavenly Father will hear me. That's good enough for me.

I would still believe I was going to be with the Lord when I die.

 

I don't know. And it doesn't matter, really. We're not required as Christians to "leave wordly historical evidence" behind. If we do, great, if we don't, great.

However, I think it's safe to say that there won't be much evidence left behind to suggest I was a non-Christian.

I know you're subtly referring to Geo Washington. No here has said that Washington wasn't a Christian. They said that he might have been, but the evidence is lacking, so we can't say for sure. Likewise, with me, if there was little or no evidence for it, people 200 years from now might say I probably was a Christian, but the evidence is lacking, so they can't say for sure. That doesn't bother me a bit.

 

Yes, we will. But visibility of fruit, or the lack of fruit, does is not litmus for a determining a person's salvation. Saved people produce bad or no fruit all the time. Unsaved people often produce fruit that one would expect a saved person to produce.

His church attendence and faithfulness in his younger years is not in dispute. Likewise, Peter Jennings' church attendence and faithfulness in his younger years is likewise not in dispute. Yet one is being called a Christian, another is not.

As for Nelly's comments, she did not say it was wrong to question his faith. Look at the whole letter in its full context. She said that when she was young, it would never have occurred to her that his faith was even in question. It was only to his early years that she was attesting to. She as not attesting to his later years. It is accurate to say that, while Washington was probably a Christian, evidence to support that is lacking.

There are no disputed writings. The "Washington prayer book" was not written by him. It's not in his handwriting, and not even his grammer and composition. That's a cold hard fact.

Now, in his writings, there are only a few references to God. There is no doubt that he was a Deist. No one has questioned this. However, references to God in his writings are very few in comparison to the quantity of his writings.

No one here has said this. You have put words in other peoples' mouths. What people have said is that, while it's a strong possibility that he was a man of Christian faith, the evidence for him being so is lacking.

I wasn't aware that the world thought of him as a Christian for 150 years. If the definition of a Christian was a churchgoer, then sure, he fits. If, however, the definition is being born again, the evidence is lacking. Simply visit any thread about church attendence and affiliation on this site, and you'll find a lot of people that don't equate salvation with church attendance.

No one here has said that. We've simply said that, while he might have been, the evidence is lacking.