Christians claim god does exist, give me proof.

1. 61

   EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years ago

   I have seen Christians challenge a lot of people to prove that their beliefs are real. In that respect, I challenge Christians to prove to me that their God is real. The Bible does not count as a credible source of information for this challenge either. Use of and quotations from the Bible to try and support your cause will mean failing the challenge. Good luck.

   replyreport
   1. 74

      BLACKANDGOLDJACKposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Oh yeah, topic number  1,000,000 on this very same subject.
      
      Hallelujah for you! You win the gift card for Satan's Slipper.
      
      Buy something you can wear where it's hot.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Ask for a challenge and you receive empty threats, instead.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            That is to be expected. I know how much this has been done through out time and the world over. However, I've never found a decent answer to the challenge. I've come to find that it is pointless, but I like to see what people have to say and if there is any new information as well.

            replyreport
      2. 0

         Emile Rposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         So true. Whoever said there's nothing new under the sun must have spent time on the hub pages religious forum. This subject has been done back and forth, ad nauseam.

         replyreport
         1. 78

            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I thought we were told not to quote the Bible?

            replyreport
   2. 0

      JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I claim knowledge of God in a personal belief kind of way, as I know that there is no empirical way for me to present my experiences to anyone else as proof.
      
      If we could all just let people believe what they want to believe, and not be overbearing about our beliefs... what a world that would be...

      replyreport
      1. 61

         EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I've heard it said that the kingdom of Heaven is a Kingdom of Conscience or it's nothing at all. You love and serve your God which is fine, I just get tired of people trying to shove that belief down my throat and trying to force me to take it as my own when it is not and never will be. I can respect your answer and I thank you for it. I love that last sentiment as well.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I understand. I feel the same thing when I hear a Christian/Muslim/Any other religious person talking about their beliefs in that way, as if they are 100% true and anyone who doesn't believe them is going to hell and you are a horrible person for not believing them.
            
            See, I think that everyone had better be accepting of everyone else, or they will burn for eternity!!!!

            replyreport
2. 67

   jdflomposted 12 years ago

   As an FYI, I'm an atheist, but I wanted to give a response to your proposed question. People like Kirk Cameron have tried posting proof -- the example that comes to mind is his eye vs. camera spiel which isn't proof to me, but believers try to use that argument. At any rate, they cannot really give absolute proof because they have faith.
   
   On the other side of the coin, I can't say with absolute proof there is no higher power, but it seems the most logical to me. I think that having faith in a higher power is more logical to believers because its more comforting to have that understanding of what is truly unknown.
   
   That being said, I'm curious as to what kind of responses you will get.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I am curious as well, which is why I posted the challenge.

      replyreport
3. 0

   brotheryochananposted 12 years ago

   If one does not understand the "fine tuning" of the universe or how wonderfully and specially placed our planet is with its rare circular orbit around a rare yellow sun with a moon the exact right size to help keep our tilt in proper placement. IF one denies the Cambrian explosion and ignores the fully developed phyla that just show up miraculously. If one has never known a horrid person or a desperate person to find peace and change their life because of knowing God. If one looks at the words of the bible and disses the amazing sober recollection of a consistent telling of time from beginning to end and if one avoids the archeologically discovered evidences. Then lots of persuasive evidence will be overlooked.
   God does not just magically appear and say "here i am". God requires faith and faith can only be necessary if there is an eternity, why have faith in God if there is no everlasting life after this life?
   So God protects our faith, an example of this is as follows:
   I reach into my pocket and pull out my fist and ask you "what is in my fist?"
   You say a coin
   I say are you sure
   You say yes
   Now by faith you are saying yes and by faith you are believing that there is a coin in my fist.
   Now let me destroy your faith..... I open my fist.
   Now you know what is inside my fist and faith is no longer required.
   
   The proof is in the making of the pudding, so they say.
   Get yours soon     as we have ours now

   replyreport
   1. 61

      EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      FYI I'm not an atheist, in anyway shape or form. I have my own set of beliefs. You mention archaeological evidence that God does exist, yet you don't even try to hand out a link to show the evidence. archaeological findings are very hard to consider proof even still, as everyone will interpret things in the way that they choose to. 
      
      Having read the bible front to back myself, I do not find it consistent. Knowing that it comes from an oral background that was eventually written out and then assembled, gives me even less reason to trust it. Facts change as they are handed down orally. For instance, you ever played the game telephone in school? I'm sure you know the one. You take a group and put them in a straight line. Then you whisper a word to the first person in the line and have them whisper it to the next and so on. By the time the word reaches the end of the line, it's nothing like the original.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         The telephone game is not relevant in this discussion.
         the telephone game is done in whispers, the oral of the hebrews and jews was done audibly so all could hear and the audience acted as correctives when someone diverged from the accepted course of the story. So the telephone is not a premise to base your view of unreliable testimony about the bible. The game and the oral tradition are not even remotely close enough to be compared.
         As to links to archeology. just type into google and you will find all that you need. There are excellent books as well. I do not need to link to that because it is not hidden knowledge.
         As to contradictions, if there were an actual contradiction in the bible it would be public knowledge. All the atheist sites have are sloppy interpretations.
         Thanks for your reply.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I actually have a list of over 100 contradictions that are in the bible.
            
            The telephone game is perfectly relevant to this as Christianity was originally a mystery tradition. In other words it was something practiced in secret and in private. This means that everything was not boasted out loud as you claim. A little research would've shown this.
            
            I've looked through the "archaeology" you can find on google. Not surprisingly it is all linked to, and through, sites devoted to Christianity. When you look the findings by themselves, they have to Christian interpretations and do not support the bible. Again, this deals with what you want to see. Much like scientists tend to find what they wish to find.
            
            Atheists may have sloppy interpretations, but I'm not an atheist. Never have been.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Why did you not listen to me?
               
               The telephone game is nothing like the oral tradition from an ORAL CULTURE who put a huge amount of EMPHASIS on getting what was SAID CORRECT and MEMORIZING and not passing it on until they had it CORRECT. In the telephone game there is no audience listening and interrupting when some INCORRECTNESS is being said and CORRECTING the people in the telephone lineup every time something is said that is INCORRECT. I am so sorry but your child's game of telephone is not on par with the adult determination of keeping the story straight. Not even close. The words in Hebrew tradition WERE NOT WHISPERED they were spoken LOUD AND CLEAR to an audience. Again this child's game is not at all like Hebrew oral tradition. In this you do greatly err.
               
               You do not have a list of over 100 contradictions. You in fact have no list containing no contradictions what you have are sloppy interpretations which are in fact, augmentations and supplements, but definitely not contradictions.
               
               I agree with scientists finding what they wish to find, but honest christianity is not concerned with that, honest christianity lets the book dictate the criteria and we change to come in line with the book - not the other way around. So if you see sites that are christian, don't go there and keep looking for sites that are not christian, lol. You may just find that because these are bible archaeology subjects that the christians are indeed interested in them and the secular world would rather go dig up egyptian stuff. So be it.
               Go to the library and get some archeology books - do some real research, research that is quite different from your research about the telephone game and oral tradition.
               
               Atheists do have sloppy interpretation, in fact, just stupid interpretations; but i did not use this to imply that you were atheist, so i hope you don't take other things personally, especially when i have to put my foot down and become quite adamant like above... but i mean it all in the very best of intentions.
               
               Whatever stuff that was about "Christianity originally a mystery tradition. In other words it was something practiced in secret and in private" will need further explanation because it see this is as being both weird and unsupported. I do hope you are not going to say, ooops typo i meant mystery religion... because that will be defused pretty quick. As for things said in private, if you mean the parables.. there is reason for this and it is not what the general populace thinks.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  This shows how little you actually know and have bothered to find out about your religion. There is a lot that people refuse to see and it saddens me that you would rather out right lie then put in the study to learn the truth. This "childs" game as you call it, is actually quite the point. While in bondage, if the slaves were even heard speaking of their religion, then they were put to death. None were allowed to speak out about it, so it was done in secret and through whispers. That is how it was kept alive. However, it was not put to paper the first time until well after that. Thus my point is proven here.
                  
                  You have no idea what I have, so you should not speak on it. I do in fact have a list of 101 bible passages that are all different, or even completely contradictory at some points. I keep a record of such things as I come across them as they for some, they help them to understand exactly what the bible is.
                  
                  Again it seems you are speaking on things that you do not understand. We do not change to come into alignment with any book. My research is very well founded and I am sorry that you do not like the fact that it doesn't come into alignment with what you believe. It however, changes nothing.
                  
                  The road to hell is paved with the best of intentions, or so they say. Perhaps you should think about that when you decide to use that phrase. We are not of a like mind, and I have no qualms with that. Nor will I get upset about it. Just don't think that your way is the only possible right way and that you have to pound it into people as so many other Christians have. You responded, and I responded. Just because you don't like what I have to say doesn't mean that I'm not right. It's obviously hitting you pretty hard and generally the things that hit us hardest are those that we don't want to believe or wish to see. Something else that should pondered.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     odd the slaves did not have much of a religion to talk about if you are speaking of their time in Egypt. Or do you think they were whispering in the desert or in the lands they occupied or in Jesus time, did Jesus not read from the scroll of isaiah, aloud in the temple.  Or are you speaking of their time in exile to Babylon or Persia or Rome... just what period of time are you talking about when you say they had to whisper?
                     
                     Exodus 24:7   And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.
                     Numbers 21:14   Wherefore it is said in the book of the wars of the LORD, What he did in the Red sea, and in the brooks of Arnon,
                        Obviously there are books around.
                     So what oral traditions are you referring to?
                     
                     i await your email of these supposed contradictions. When it comes to contradiction elimination you have no idea what i have.
                     
                     I am not hard hit i am trying to understand what in all that vagueness you are trying to say.

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        You've resorted to quoting the bible which means you have failed the challenge.
                        
                        While they were slaves, as the Egyptians recorded, they put to death any Hebrew who spoke of their beliefs for fear of their society being polluted with such ideals. Again, using what is rational and established OUTSIDE of the bible, I can reasonably conclude that in order to hold on to their beliefs they whispered them amongst themselves.
                        
                        Their have been books around for a long time, but almost no one was ever taught to read. You had to either be royal or taught to read for a specific reason, as in it was required by their lifes function. History more than proves this over and over and over again. Your working on the assumption that society hasn't changed at all in over 3,000 years. Your assuming that everyone, everywhere, no matter who they were, was taught to read. History has proven this to be far from the truth. A historian would be able to read, and write. They could not however, write things down that they did not observe. In order to give full credence to the bible, first we have to find records of historians by the names of the authors of each and every book. We know beyond the shadow of a doubt though that this will never happen. We are unable to even find records that record the names of the authors that supposedly wrote the new testament. Hence why though it is a great story, we cannot uphold it as fact.
                        
                        If you wish for me to email you the contradictions then I will do so, even if there is a couple of things I could state openly that no one has been able to refute. That however, is a topic for another time.
                        
                        You say that this has not hit you hard, though your posts are screaming to the contrary.

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           "While they were slaves, as the Egyptians recorded, they put to death any Hebrew who spoke of their beliefs for fear of their society being polluted with such ideals. "
                           prove this.
                           
                           They were given the knowledge of God by moses, to bring them out of egypt. The law came at mount sinai - after they were out of egypt. Their so called beliefs got a huge upgrade after they were out of egypt.
                           Once we establish this reading and oral stuff came after they were out of egypt we certainly can see that they did not have to whisper in the wilderness.
                           
                           I am not assuming that everyone was taught to read and write; the point we are discussing is their whispering.. i say the oral traditions were aloud and the audience corrected the speaker if he varied.. you say its a telephone game where nobody knows what is being said. Moses had books - i used the bible to show you how far back scrolls go. A person does not have to read to hear and to learn to hear and to memorized to hear.
                           
                           As far as the gospels go.. the Early Church (first century) had no problem believing the names attached are the correct names.. but thats another story for another time.

                           replyreport
                           1. 61

                              EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              Starting at the last of what you posted, you said the Early Church. There in lies 99.9% of the problems that exist today. The Early Church. The Early Church dictated this, and the Early Church dictated that. Unfortunately The Early Church was proven wrong even then. Hence why Christianity never conquered every other religion.
                              
                              What your saying is Moses read from a Book, which he didn't. Moses read from tablets that were supposedly inscribed by god in lightning on top of mount sinai. Again, this goes back to making assumptions that aren't there. In your long winded debates, know that your talking with someone who's read the bible a few times cover to cover. Yes I say that the tradition was whispered. Once they left Egypt perhaps they were spoken out loud, but by then the tradition was very polluted and no one knew the truth of it. Hence why they began to worship idols and other gods. Thous shalt not worship engraven images (meaning idols) and thou shalt put no other gods before me. But wait, that part is always skipped over to imply that other Gods are Idols..yet another product of the Early Church.
                              
                              It doesn't matter why you used the Bible. The Bible is not a historical record for those that choose not to believe in it. I specifically stated that using the bible meant you failed the challenge. Congrats on failing. You could not support your claims without resorting to it. Which just furthers my point in the entire matter.
                              
                              As to your prove this, well I asked you to prove God without the Bible first. But if you must have proof, feel free to research Egyptian history. It's all laid out there very clearly, all you have to do is pull your nose from the bible and stick it in some actual historical records.

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 sorry, your ideas are a joke.
                                 and your thinking i failed the challenge is proof.
                                 
                                 I quoted the bible to prove ANOTHER point, about books... not at all concerning the challenge you posted. While we dallied around some idea you have about whispering hebrews, which is laughable, I showed you written material existed and we know egypt had use of papyrus long ago. There simply were no oral traditions back then, in this you are greatly confused, as in other areas. So you think i failed the challenge? is just typical of how you process information - you gather it to meet your needs you don't let it shape you.
                                 So skip these last posts and reflect on my original post, which having no biblical quotes is still completely unanswered by you.
                                 
                                 As to your egyptian history, it is common knowledge that the egyptians wrote their own history, they erased previous pharoahs - destroyed their statues etc. and only wrote the positive stuff, i.e. battles they won - not lost. So be content with the 'actual' history of the Egyptians but it is not the honest history of Gods people. The reason they worshiped the Egyptian gods is because they lived in Egypt for 400+ yrs, without the Law or freedom or God - assimilation happens  - not because of some whimsical idea that the non existent oral traditions were polluted.
                                 
                                 You also missed the part about my referring to the Early Church in the FIRST century... that would not refer to 325 or 425 ad.. but prior to 100ad. You know the churches, there are letters written to them - the church in Rome, Ephesus, Phillipi, etc.. "The early church proven wrong"... is a statement that shows you just don't get it, but i am not here to joust about all your false beliefs and misunderstandings, you have my submission to your post
                                 enjoy

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 61

                                    EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                    You failed the challenge because your proof had to resort to the bible. You could not find one instance outside of the bible of things such as that. Hence why you failed. It has nothing to do with my ideals, as that is not what the challenge is about, it's about your ideals and the proof you have to back them up. Unfortunately the proof of a Christian God relies heavily on the bible and assumptions drawn from there. Further, you forget to mention that Moses was raised to be a Pharaoh and therefore would have all the benefits of education in the Egyptian world, which included reading and writing. Of course Moses could read, but the rest of them could not.
                                    
                                    It does not matter what point you were attempting to prove. The fact is that you could not do so without resorting to the bible. Even then your doing so to draw incorrect and totally biased conclusions which further disproves your point entirely.
                                    
                                    If you want to talk about common knowledge then you must go all the way. Especially with a statement as you have just made. ALL governing bodies of ALL conquering and/or winning nations have rewritten their History to best fit the needs of what they think they will need or want. It was extremely common practice and as a result, we have lost much that would have clarified a lot of history. Being secular about it proves nothing other than your trying to view it from one point and one point only. Don't bother trying to say that the church never participated in such practices because we know for a fact that they did. Including burning books that taught things they felt the public should never know.
                                    
                                    My statement is directly on Key. The Early Church was around before the first century. What your talking about is the Establishment that has become the Church. Just to clarify, where in Rome, was the first Church before Constantine? As Rome had a law until Constantine that prevented the worship of a One true God I would love to see evidence to the contrary. The others we don't have letters to. You in the bible that letters were sent to these places and said thus, but nothing outside of it as of yet.
                                    
                                    My statement is highly valid. I'm getting the feeling however that you are one who likes to argue for the sake of arguing. You have no intentions of using Historical evidence that we have to attempt to prove anything. Instead your beliefs is completely uncompromising to anything outside of the bible and you wish to believe that God does exist so that you can feel better about yourself. That is fine. Trying to manipulate things so that you appear to be right however is not. Use factual, historically proven evidence, outside of the bible, to prove your point, or don't waste my time or the time of others on this thread.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 0

                                       brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                       I said
                                       As far as the gospels go.. the Early Church (first century) had no problem believing the names attached are the correct names.. but thats another story for another time.
                                       You said
                                       What your talking about is the Establishment that has become the Church. Just to clarify, where in Rome, was the first Church before Constantine?
                                       
                                       No i did not say that. I clearly said the early church was before 100ad.
                                       
                                       You also need to reread this again:
                                       
                                       If one does not understand the "fine tuning" of the universe or how wonderfully and specially placed our planet is with its rare circular orbit around a rare yellow sun with a moon the exact right size to help keep our tilt in proper placement. IF one denies the Cambrian explosion and ignores the fully developed phyla that just show up miraculously. If one has never known a horrid person or a desperate person to find peace and change their life because of knowing God. If one looks at the words of the bible and disses the amazing sober recollection of a consistent telling of time from beginning to end and if one avoids the archeologically discovered evidences. Then lots of persuasive evidence will be overlooked.
                                       God does not just magically appear and say "here i am". God requires faith and faith can only be necessary if there is an eternity, why have faith in God if there is no everlasting life after this life?
                                       So God protects our faith, an example of this is as follows:
                                       I reach into my pocket and pull out my fist and ask you "what is in my fist?"
                                       You say a coin
                                       I say are you sure
                                       You say yes
                                       Now by faith you are saying yes and by faith you are believing that there is a coin in my fist.
                                       Now let me destroy your faith..... I open my fist.
                                       Now you know what is inside my fist and faith is no longer required.
                                       
                                       The proof is in the making of the pudding, so they say.
                                       Get yours soon  smile   as we have ours now
                                       
                                       No bible quotes, none.
                                       you have my original post
                                       enjoy.
                                       
                                       I must also add that other nations may not produce an honest report of their history as you supported here:
                                       ALL governing bodies of ALL conquering and/or winning nations have rewritten their History to best fit the needs of what they think they will need or want. It was extremely common practice and as a result, we have lost much that would have clarified a lot of history
                                       and thankyou (although not ALL but, indeed most) BUT Gods people reported honestly their history as we can be certain because God overlooked their history and more frequently than not, they had no reason to rewrite, and we can see honesty when they report even the battles they did lose and gave reasons why they lost, which shows more honest integrity than Egypt showed.
                                       
                                       So to quote you... "don't waste my time or the time of others on this thread" and just try to admit where i am correct and carry on not carry on having a tantrum.
                                       have a nice day

                                       report
                                    2. 61

                                       EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                       Let us go back to your original post then. God requires faith. Faith does not prove anything. Faith is believing in something because you want to, not because there is any proof of it. Which leads again to you failing the challenge by not having anything to actually add to the subject except that time honoured you must have faith. Faith is not proof or evidence of anything.
                                       
                                       Moving to you saying Gods people reported honestly their history, your a fool and a liar. You assume that the Jews fully reported everything that ever happened and did so honestly. Fact is that Jews are one of the few people who never bothered keeping a recorded history to begin with. Which there in negates that argument.
                                       
                                       To the next thing you are probably going to say, I didn't say Jews I said Gods people. Well first you must understand that all Christianity came from the Jews. The were first. Jesus himself was a Jew and followed and maintained all Jewish laws and tenants as reported in the bible. This includes being married in order to be able to teach. This includes never once denouncing his faith in any way shape or form. This also includes that he never labeled himself more than man. The Jews called him the Messiah, which means Prophet. He was a prophet of their faith who came to fulfill their laws and customs in order to prove that it could be done. He was not divine, which is why they don't worship him. He never once came to change the laws in anyway, shape, or form. These are things done by man, and that is going on believing that Jesus was an actual person who really existed according to the bible. The Jews are were Christianity began, and if they had a historical record, they would probably be the end of it as well. There is a reason they don't believe in Christs divinity even though he was one of them.
                                       
                                       As for quoting me, go for it, but don't accuse me of having a tantrum just because you refuse to see what's right before you. If I wanted to throw a fit or be upset, I would be, and I wouldn't be able to combat you with logic instead of pettiness that doesn't even amount to circumstantial evidence of a God or a divine son.

                                       report
         2. 57

            A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Sorry, nothing there that supports your irrational beliefs.

            replyreport
   2. 57

      A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, we know you don't understand any of that, no need to remind us.
      
      
      
      Ah, so you speak for God?
      
      
      
      Sorry, but that's the best example you can come up with to defend your faith in God? Utterly laughable.

      replyreport
4. 59

   mischeviousmeposted 12 years ago

   Go to any church and they'll indotrinate proof into you, you have to remember to leave your brain at home though.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      fallacy
      You need to find a church like you would find a job or a house or buy a car. YOU SHOP AROUND. There is no point going to a catholic church if you are a baptist - you will only be frustrated, obviously.
      There is no commandment to support or attend your local church. You are free to check out any and every church within a hundred mile or further if you desire radius until you find, the job or house or car or church you always wanted. There is no difference.
      Then you will find that the indoctrination is replaced by teaching and teaching coupled with good biblical understanding.
      Really we have to look at the things of God through grown up eyes and not as children, unthought and careless in our assessments.
      As to leaving your brain at home that is just garbage.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Actually, The bible states that you must come to him as a child. According to the bible jesus was the one who in fact said this. So you do have to look at things through eyes of a child, otherwise you completely miss the point. Which is to be malleable, moldable, and allowing your brain to be susceptible or left at home.
         
         In the rest of it your pretty much correct. Unfortunately, having attended many churches myself over the course of coming to where I am, they all do pretty much the same thing. It's just a matter of which one uses the most theatrics to entertain you while doing it.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            you must have a different definition of theatrics than i do.
            So you never found a church to your completely acceptable liking and so your search never concluded. Did you pray and ask God to help you find the church he wanted you in or did you just decide that you didn't like them.
            
            Huge difference between the two.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               After watching many preachers/pastors/teachers or whatever you want to call them practice speaking in tongues and such, I consider it pretty much all theatrics. I've heard that Catholics and Mormons don't do this. However, I've heard that instead of celebrating their Faith, Catholics tend to lead more towards mourning it. Mormon's I've heard believe that their founder used a special pair of magical glasses and an angel to transcribe some magical tablets to create their faith. Way to far out there for me. Which leaves those that celebrate their faith, yet there isn't anything real that I've seen thus far.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  brotheryochananposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  interesting but again you come to conclusions without true understanding.
                  Some forms of Pentecostalism practice 'receiving the holy ghost' as something one can call down, that the believer can, at some tent meeting or whatever, just 'speak out the 'words''.
                  This is wrong doctrine.
                  The pattern for baptism in the HG is to wait for it.
                  The principle for receiving the HG is that your life is acceptable to God.
                  The path for receiving is to want the HG.
                  
                  In short we cannot call down the HG, nor is the HG given at some tent meeting - oh sure there may be one or two kinda thing that do actually receive the HG, but majorly, no. The HG is a gift from God which cannot be called down or summoned, one has to desire and wait. And when God is ready and sees that person is ready, then He gives the gift.
                  
                  So whether you enjoy listening to tongues or not or believe in it is beside the point. You are probably listening to someone who has been taught wrong and are actually just babbling.
                  
                  As to bringing up catholics and mormons - yes there are silly people in the world who believe absolutely ridiculous things. Why? I do not know, neither of these beliefs make any sense to me at all and i cannot extrapolate any foundation of reason for such believing.
                  So i do not compare the wonderfulness of the HG to either of these, nor would i compare Pentecostalism to them either. 
                  
                    Luke 24:49   And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.   ( expect )
                    Acts 1:5   For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. ( wait )
                    Acts 2:2   And SUDDENLY there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
                  ( the gift )

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     More bible quotes *pukes*
                     
                     At least this time though you don't try to challenge what has been my personal experience. Though for the record it is Pentecostal, Baptists, Protestants, Nazarene, and many other churches that I have been to which all do the same thing. They tend to give a big show of theatrics to entertain while they attempt to get things in your head. Again, PERSONAL experience. Nothing that can be argued about.

                     replyreport
      2. 57

         A Troubled Manposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Or, the church doesn't want anything to do with certain individuals who they find are far removed from the teachings of that church and are deeply saddened and disturbed by that individuals actions, very much like the Pentecostal church in your home town, for example.

         replyreport