If God Knows Everything
Doesn't that seem like such a contradiction? If God knows everything that ever has happened, is happening, or will happen...does that not mean that he knew sin would be born into the world? Does that not mean that he already knows if a person is supposedly going to burn in hell? If that is true, then he does not care. And he is unjust.
Do you want to argue about it? There are so many things that we cannot now, nor will ever understand. If science is your major road and you lean that way; who are you hurting??? I, for one, do not object. But picking and picking and picking about the earth's age; something that I am almost positive cannot be accurately discovered, is bananas
Yeah, I know that the "data" supports all the tree bark, and earth levels and tested ash. But it is all dependent upon one another, if one calculation is just 1 number skewed inaccurately. The "drawing board" is now your starting point...again. Or you just wrong, possibly w/o knowing. You publish your findings and because you got your lpc from the dmv in an rv, everybody believes you; and gives you rewards I guess it depends on the tester. But hey... Hes 40!The age old question shelly. As a christian, I do struggle with the concept- but I think I have sort of an idea that may put a little perspective on it. I apologize in advance of anything that may sound offensive, I assure you I do not mean it to be.
I guess I'll start off by saying that God knows...most things, but in essence it is everything. He gave of free will, so that we could choose things. He does not know what we will choose, until we have made the choice. However, He knows what will happen whichever choice we make. Does that make sense?
The problem usually starts with Adam and Eve. People ask why God bothered, if He knew they would sin. This where it gets tricky- the simple answer is because we are His ultimate/greatest creation. The finishing touch on His big huge universe (which we still know little about, beyond our solar system). God loved us SO MUCH He was willing to "do it anyway". He knew what would happen if A and E had not sinned. But He also knew what would happen if they did. The day that A and E ate the fruit His heart was broken. In this sense we have to look at God as a father figure. When you don't listen as a child, there are consequences- which is what He gave Adam and Eve. Many people believe in that instance that God left them, which is an incorrect assumption. Our parents don't leave us when we jump on the furniture, they put us in time out.
I don't think it's quite the right time to talk about the "burning in hell" part, because that is a conversation all it's own. But, for the record- the phrase is quite misleading. There is no fire in Hell. The Hebrew word for hell actually means "waste dump".. I think that would be a more accurate mental image.our free will results in the existance of the shadow, of our choosing against gods will, sin. We are created in the image of God, with free will, in order to allow us to creatively make the choices we want and the one rule from God is to choose among the choices that fall under obeying His commandments. Thats the story of adam and eve and what it is explaining to us about the ramifications of choosing to disobey.
God is supper power, needs no proof to confess, because God never needs a single things from us (human being), our knowledge is much limited, for those who want to differ the God to the things you believe in. Someday you’ll cry for mercy, as you know the almighty of God. Be careful, what to say! The way he loves everything is different with us a limited knowledge creature
Not true, God demands worship and praise from humans, it is our only purpose in life. We have no other reasons to live, even our own families and friends are irrelevant.
I am Muslim, I understand what the prayer is, in my faith, to pray for me not for God, Allah needs nothing from me.
Other than your worship, obedience and praise of Him.
God wants to be first in your heart; no matter what they pull out of the ocean.
He wants us to love everyone as family, parents and siblings should never be able to separate you from him. They may turn away.
Jesus made that statement to illustrate the fact that he put NO ONE before God, and loves all his earthly family equally.Yes, Jesus is first and foremost over any family member. Barbaric.
troubled man, all that we have comes from God, of course we shall praise God before all things, everything is for our benefit. Everything we need is supplied by God around us and within us. We worship God by respecting all that has been created.
Sorry, that is false.
Ridiculous. There is so much wrong with those statements, they completely ignore reality let alone conclusions drawn from a false premise.
senli , we need to confess, we need to clear our minds and discern what we are doing and correct ourselves in order to evolve spiritually. It is solely for our benefit to confess.
1 John 1;9 If ypu confess your sins, He is faithful and just to give you and cleanse you of all unrighteousness.
we are free to turn to God and obey God at anytime , and this freedom is the real thing and what makes us in the IMAGE of God, our free will. If we wisely use our free will we choose willfully choices that fall under obedience to God all through our lives , creating the life we want for ourselves in every choice we make. If we misuse our free will we choose choices that estrange us from God, our loss.
One way to look at this might be ... if you behave properly, I would love for you to come to live with me. If you don't care about going to live with me, you say, "No!" I let a few privileged students hang out in my room because they obey the rules: 1) Be respectful during class, 2) no cursing, 3) no fighting or instigating fights, 4) sit down. Some students say I'm mean because I won't let them come into my room. My requirements are very clear.
God know everything.
God is just God. He gave to us all information we needed. It is impossible to discern God or His Word to the person who walks in five physical senses.
Man did broke the faith (and trust) and trash it in the Garden. Only way to come back is to restore faith. Therefore we are choosing our destiny.
Criticism and doubt of God will never help to understand. The man remains in dark.
To accuse God is he, who never read right the document. Vladimir.He cares and He wants you to choose Him. It is your choice.
The Lord is the only just God. He did know that when He created us we would deny and rebel against Him. Just as well as He knew he'd die for us. He can prevent things from happening, but it is in our hands to make the right decisions. So, if we all said God makes all the choices, then what responsibility do we take for our own sin?
ONLY. Do you mean you think there are more than one God? Are all the others unjust?
Why didn't he know this would happen? I was told he knows everything. All knowing and all powerful?Hi Rad Man, with regard to "more than one God," people make gods out of themselves, politicians, pastors, etc. Chuck Colson, before going to prison where he became a Christian, a man who once said he’d walk over his own grandmother to advance Nixon’s cause.
Read more at http://themoderatevoice.com/144852/chuc … LZtaUD4.99
Richard Nixon was his god. The Israelites made a god while Moses was away getting the 10 Commandments.So - now you understand that "god" is just man made - why would anyone listen to the one you made up?
I certainly understand than man creates gods. However, Isaiah 44:6-"...I am the first, and I am the last;
and beside me there is no God."
Isaiah 43:10-11, "I am he: before me there was
no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
I, even I am the Lord; and beside me there is
no Saviour."
Isaiah 44:8-"...Is there a God beside me? Yea,
there is no God: I know not any."
The omnicient God who knows all that there is to
know says that He is God alone. There is no other
God, no other Creator that exists, or will ever
exist. He says it, and it is so. Psalm 147:5
says-"Great is our Lord, and of great power: his
understanding is infinite."
This God, in whom we live, and move, and have our
being, this Creator of us all, has revealed him-
self to all men. Romans 1:20 says-"The invisible
things of him from the creation of the world are
clearly seen, being understood by the things that
are made, even His eternal power and Godhead."
I have more but didn't want to bore you. Have a blessed day Mark!Other people make gods up but yours is real because the bible sed so?
Right - odd you don't follow it's instructions regarding women preaching.
Let me guess - only some of it applies?
I am certainly not a preacher. I am a Christian who is able to give testimony of the hope that lies within me in and out of season. A preacher leads a congregation in an organized structure. I believe what the Word of God says about leadership.
Do I sound preachy? I was just conversing with you ... I thought. If it sounds preachy, I apologize. Will you forgive me?I don't need to forgive you - it is not me that sets the rules regarding women teaching men.
Rad Man, Because I do believe the Bible, I believe Adam was the first Hu- MAN. He was created a man ... not a baby or child. How old was he? Bible doesn't say. His age was not important. That is what I mean, "created with age, at a certain age." There were trees in the Garden of Eden. Normally, a seed is the beginning of a tree. So since there were trees, the trees were created "with age."
It's interesting. Normally the inability to distinguish fiction from reality is considered a form of psychosis. But when people believe the ancient folk tales of Genesis to be literal truth, we just call it "faith."
Doesn't that strike anyone else as odd?People who think it's literal have not done their research. Genesis is written in poetic form, therefore being heavily metaphorical.
Well, evoloution is now a proven fact making the Adam and Eve fairy tale just that. What is more, people who think there is any truth in Genesis have not done their research.
To say that Jesus' appearance, life and death are not believable is funny. It is more believable than anything we may discuss. You may deny it but then that takes YOUR faith in another direction.
You don't believe... Does that upset you?Not really Brian-
We are never told how long Adam and Eve lived before they sinned. Could have been millions of years. They could have roamed with the dinosaurs. We will never know. And more than likely, they looked nothing like us.
Nope! Ephesians 2:8-9 It is by faith, through grace, that ye are saved, not work works least any man should boast.
Absolutely Scott, it looks like there IS something we both 100% agree on!
Yes, it's odd. And they get away with it because they keep referring to the bible and to a powerful God.
I'd rather not speak about this with you all, but if you want to analyze it, I know what to do :
1. blow your head off with the Gun, and tell every one, the truth. Would it be a laughter again?
Thanks for this thread. Many atheists and non-believers heard the Word of God and the Gospel through this thread. Now the we are not responsible for their blood. They are responsible for their won choice.
May God bless you allBless you back
the Lord's will will be done. One who has not tuned in yet will be saved through this exchange. People make it such a hard road. God's yoke is easy (not yolk) and his burden is light. Faith, love, mercy. If we can do that, we become like Jesus. Sin blotted. Washed by blood (clean because you believe Christ died for you). That simple. The age of the earth will not ever be a factor
Does this mean that we should sin? Heavens no! The blood of Jesus makes you pure. But your heart must believe it too. Out of the abundance of the heart, the MOUTH SPEAKS. What is in you will come out. That is how WE know when we see you. A light shines forth. We see God in you.
Yes Believers believe that God knows everything, but what if God forgets something? That's why all these loudspeakers are in place to remind him of everyone's deeds.
god never forgets something,he is not human. the loudspeakers remind you of god , you should thank him , he created you superior to other living creatures. you have the most important thing; intelligence
God is the only One who is capible to forgive and forget one's sin, when we ask it of Him. Don't you think that is absolutely amazing?
Scott, no, when it comes to 'willful ignorance' Jesus would approve. How else would the most wicked man in the bible gain followers?
I hope you mean disapprove...The Bible says to love God with all your heart, MIND, and soul. This means we cannot sit here and be dumb, or accept just anything anyone says. There are plenty of Christians who believe in evolution, and plenty who call it blasphemy. There are also christians who believe scientific facts to be truth while still believing the Bible is 100% truth. And the Bible does not say that they can't.
That, sir, was the best laugh I've had all day.
Thank you!Perhaps, but I probably don't read his best stuff. He won't talk to me!
Oh, he must have "tried" you already
your resistence has led to a fleeing? (Rhetoric)
His time is short...why waste it??? ilovethislifeofvictory!!!Yes, he must have found me particularly resistant. Pity, because some of the best conversations come from those who think differently.
But you're right, he's certainly not 'wasting' his time on me!
In this case, the best conversations come from the shakable... See, the more YOU talk; the fewer he wins. It pays to keep you at bay
the word of the Lord stands forever, pays to know it for yourself.
To God be the glory for the things he (is doing).
Does he have to be an Atheist from Canada? Wait I know a Brian... I wonder...
I assume he's an atheist, but I don't know. I just know he doesn't like the Bible. He's made that abundantly clear.
I think he's just entertaining himself with all the reactions. I know he's entertaining me as well.
I don't get the sense he's entertained, just angry. Which is kind of out of character for a Canadian.
Genaea, your response is the most baffling, confusing and saddening I have read on this forum yet. I feel sorry for you. You seem like a nice lady. I hope there is some truth in the saying 'ignorance is bliss.'
I read a book years ago that lists a lot of facts that Jesus wasn't the one we believe he was.
And I pesonally don't understand how anyone can "believe" in evolution. And really, I don't know any Christian who 'believes' in Christianity and (!) in evolution without minutes later disagree on one or more evolutionary terms. And, I don't have any problems with religion itself anyone can believe anything they'd like to, the reason for discussions about religion is in my humble opinion that we can't accept what other people want to believe. And this is, for me, the basis for stupid wars about religion happening over and over again.
Christians did that with 'witches' because they didn't understand (and experiments like throwing a witch into a sea with weights attached to their bodies and watch if they come up (which would prove that this is witch) or if they don't (which prove them innocent but they don't care because they are dead...). Really doesn't sound like it was well thought through. And nowadays people still do this, not in the same way of course instead they are using other thing to prove right or wrong.
And of course I listed the extremes not every Christian, islamic (...) is like that.
Happy believing - in whatever you'd like to. :-)Sorry? Never talked about a masked man...
And by the way, why do you feel such an urge to reply to everyone? Is this some kind of "Proselytism 2.0"? Bring everything in order? Just asking, no offend.I like to respond to the comments that move me. How do you know that? You "appear" to be new to the conversation
your persona here is masked and you came, seemingly, from nowhere with your comment. I was just curious about who you were. I did not say that you mentioned a masked man. I pointed out that you were.I am coming into this conversation a little late...and I do not feel like reading through all the previous comments, so I just thought I would ask. How old do you believe the earth is?
I, personally, can go back to my Great grandfather. Beyond that, don't give a hoot. And does it REALLY matter? If the earth was 899 years beyond the highest number ever uttered, I am here now. I need to know how to navigate, now.
Personally I think it matters if you plan to discuss the matter with people of other faiths. God tells to understand, to seek knowledge and to be wise. I think Christians should strive to be knowledgeable about the things they decide to discuss, especially in forums such as these.
Things that we do not have knowledge of we should probably refrain from discussing. Just my opinion but the Bible has a lot to say about knowledge, wisdom and foolishness. Especially Proverbs, I like to look at the verses before I try to discuss things I do not know about.
I think the Earth is supposed to be around 4.5 billion years old, although I know a lot of people seem to think it is a lot younger...I know people that have claimed it to be around 6000 years old, but I personally think that has been disproved and kind of funny/sad.I understand what you mean. I know enough about the subject to discuss it. But I have no idea how to calculate the age of the earth. How did you get your results? This knowledge must be important to you and one that you must have considerable knowledge, since you just now enter the conversation to discuss since this has been the topic. Please relay the procedures for testing the earth's age. Make it simple now, I only got so much earth out back.
Proverbs is excellent! It seems a bit jarring that you know; and state that we should be so concerned about such a thing as the age of the earth at the same time.
OK. Yes, I am new to Hubpages and not aware of "masked man" as synonym for an unknown person ;-)
Welcome to Hubpages
....beware of these forum threads they suck you in!Like in every other forum :-)
And thanks for the welcome. :-)
Can't agree. Nope, definitely not. If I did, well, wouldn't I use this for my personal advantage? Oh, no, that's really not me either. uhm..
You just gave yourself away!!!
just too much darn "emotion" and something else...familiar.
I mean, WELCOME NEW-COMER! Sorry to be so rudeI don't think so.
No problem and thanks for the welcome.
Yes, God knows everything that exists now and in the past. He also knows every possible future and the current future, based on current decisions.
Those who shout and use microphones and repeat things could merely be addressing a crowd of people and making it plain to them. Nothing wrong with that. If they're praying to God, though, repetition is not necessary. Jesus said as much.Ah, then God does know tens of thousands of children will die every day from starvation, yet He continues to create them and they continue to die.
Such a loving God, with absolutely no ego whatsoever.Yet, allowing YOU to eat and to live, despite the fact that you probably are not so innocent.
You don't feel THAT love?
If he had a big ego, he probably would not allow you to speak of him as you do. Right???You mean the love that you admit your God decides who is going to eat and who is not?
What??? God decides who eats and who doesn't??? Well, I know that men who do not work, are not entitled to food. So maybe their children have the same plight. Where are their dads?
The bible says, The poor you will have with you always. I don't think it says why. God provided enough. Some hoard it, some sleep it away. God did his job by providing. Our job is to manage the provisions. We aint doing so well. Is that God's fault?That's what you said.
"Yet, allowing YOU to eat and to live..."
So, God decided to make some people poor and others not but didn't say why. That's exactly what a despot or dictator would do, too.
Where is the evidence to those claims? How do you know that? Who is hoarding and sleeping it away?
No, His job is to make sure we manage the provisions correctly. Our jobs are to worship and serve Him.Oh!!! I see now. You don't want ANY responsibilities. God is not responsible for how we choose to live our lives. We have free will. We have the charge to manage what he provided. He loves us too much to do everything for us. He allows us to do as we wish. Look around you. You know who hoards, and who sleeps away.
Where did I say that?
How we choose to live our lives has nothing to do with His responsibility to make sure we manage what He provides.
He hates us, too.
He sends us to Hell if we do as we wish.
So, you just made that up, like so many other things you make up.You said God is responsible for us eating. HE made some people poor?You also want HIM to "ensure" that we manage the resources given correctly? Now that's a new one
You don't know any loafers??? You don't know any rich, stingy hoarders? Hmmm. That was unexpected. But maybe not. You are not the debater you appear to want to be.
You have no hubs??? Just want to kick and scream about my father??? No problem, he does not mind.No, those are things YOU said. How soon they forget.
Of course, He needs to teach us how to manage what He has provided. We are merely robots programmed for obedience and worship to Him. It would be very irresponsible for Him not to teach us.
The fact that you make things up as you go along has nothing to do with me as a debater.
You have no honesty.
We are pointing your fabrications and nonsense, which have little to do with ones father.
he does not hate you,you hate him, you are disloyal to your god,your creator. does anyone force you to believe him?... you are free to do anything. if you insist on wishing bad thing, will he give you heaven? this will be injustice for good people. if you do not believe, you should not discuss the god with believers. you dont believe his existence,how can you talk about his non existence:? May God show you true path before it is late.
No, this would be the real thing the god should do which is mentioned in the bible. So, either there's no god or there's no god like we were told.
Hm, that's the free will every Christian is talking about. Interesting.
Again, the free will of Christians or any other religious community. Not really surprising me.
If there's any god,
a) what's the free will always mentioned in the bible? (this refers to both: interfering into our lives and choosing the true path for us... are humans that stupid that we need a given choice; I don't think so nor do I think if there's a or more god(s), he wouldn't interfere at all, he won't guide us in any way, he would know that we will find the true path for ourselves individually because he created us and know that we'll the best we can do and if it's not enough, then we at least tried. Which is the best ever creator can hope for.)
b) if there's the god mentioned in the bible who created us - which I don't believe in, there's no such thing as creationism, that's simple denial of evolutionary facts - then why should he show us the real path but instead showing us not make us learn more about life. The latter would be the wiser choice. So, if he needs to tell us the path: he neither wise nor does he thinks very positively about humans (means, he thinks we are too stupid to find the 'real' path by ourselves).
c) I, personally, don't want anyone guiding or choosing the way I should live. Not a minute of my life.Free will has to do with, not being "physically" restrained. It is about being told what is best; then being "free" to decide if you want to do it, or not. As in most areas there is a body that governs. Break the rules; deal with consequences. Live without God in this life, live without access to him in the next. The word is out there. Many examples have been given about how to do it, and the choice is completely yours. The thing mentioned in the bible that God will do is forgive those who believe that Jesus died to save. He loves us all. He did not create puppets. We may say, yes God, come in; or we may say, no "Jack" don't want it. What is the problem with that? If you do not believe, what I say makes no difference. I mean isn't it a waste of time? You would not get me into an in-depth conversation about the tooth fairy. Obviously, there is enough faith to discuss it (some even get angry). Just a hair away from giving it a try
Not really much more as to discuss God. I could prove the existence of a tooth fairy faster than God. :-)
Really? No wonder. The bible speaks of preferring the lie , rather than truth.
This would mean I'd believe in God instead accepting facts,
well you know what my conversation is already. are you still willing to stay and indulge something so...
I will talk to you as long as you want me to. But do you want to hear what I have to say? It seems that everything that I have said to this point is in total disagreement with your being. And you are willing to still participate in this coversation with me??? I choose yes.
Have you read the words of Jesus in the Bible? Have you considered anything that he had to say?I won't choose disagreement just not enough to turn me into a believer. If you know the book called "the tools" or "the cosmic ordering service" you would know in which I can believe in. I can't explain why a wish may come true but I lead people to do so and they're now way happier. The don't need an explaination because all the explaining is done. With God it's different. There's no satisfying evidence.
And yes. I read the bible many times and different ones (maybe 20 years ago... and that's also the last time I went to church). I also read the Koran and also Strotra and Bhagavad Gita (both from Hinduism). And while doing Wing Chun I get in contact again with Buddhism.
What he had to say is, well, don't know how to put it. Self-evident may be the right word to choose. I mean, I don't anyone telling me loving people which are close to me or don't kill anyone. Either don't need no one telling me that I shouldn't steal. Or anything else. 1) That's why we have parents. In my opinion the church's assuming all parents are too stupid to tell the children. 2) Haven't thought about blue-pencil the bible because it's another time. We made several steps further and many people believing 100% what's written in a book which is over 2000 years old (or at least that's what we were told...). See the timespan?
There are different things I don't need to do or to be taught / told. While following someone's word I feel as limited like a blindfolded person.Now that is more of the same, "I don't believe what you are saying". That is fine. I did not choose to speak to you on your matters of what you believe. That is a couple "stations" over. You were talking to me about what I believe. That is what this conversation is about. I don't have much interest in what makes your world complete. It is your world. Why are you trying to stamp out what I am saying that exists in my world? Again, your subject has nothing to do with why I came to this conversation. Else, I would not be in the conversation. I know my limitations
Hey, I got angry not because of your faith or your belief in God.
I got angry Genea because you said that men who do not have work (and later changed it to men who do not want work) should not eat.
That's why I got angry. It has nothing to do with your faith. Something like that does not anger me. Faith of Christians convince me to learn more so I can convince you how wrong it is but I respect your practice of faith as long as it doesn't go against basic human rights and humane treatment.
Your statements broke my rule so I got angry and felt free to give you a a piece of my mind so I could make you realize how wrong your statement was.Hey, you went way back for that post
you were angry well before i said that! The bible says that men who will not work, should not eat. I agree with the bible at all times. You mad? Sorry. What should I do? Stop believing the bible because it upsets you? You did not make me. I am MUCH more concerned with pleasing God, than I am, upsetting you. It is what it is. We don't have to fight. I aint angry when you spit fire at God. That don't hurt. Why do you feel personally attacked???
Yes, I know, it's just another religious fantasy. But, that doesn't stop Christians from threatening us with it.
You feel threatened? Oh, no wonder!!! I thought that you understood what I, for one, was saying.
Feeling threatened and being threatened are two different things. Sane people don't feel threatened by myths and superstitions, even though they are being threatened by those who embrace them.
It is like you are in the conversation to "win". There is no contest. You implied that you had been threatned by Christians. I am a Christian "non" church-goer. We have been talking about a little bit of everything and I not once heard a threat. I just reiterated your point of having been threatened. You felt you had been threatened, it seemed from your comment. I heard nothing of the sort.
Genea you said "I know men who do not work are not entitled to food. So maybe their children have the same plight. Where are their dads?"
This is the cruelest statement I have heard. All humans have the right to eat. It's a basic right - it's a human right!
Don't you know that there are millions of street children because their parents do not have work? Do you know why they do not have work? Do you know how many children are orphaned because of wars?
I am sorry but you're statement have clearly infuriated me. That is just such a cruel statement.Oh, sorry, lazy men should not eat. A man's job is to provide for his family, children included. Sorry that bothers you but truth is paramount.
How Christian of you. We must have not read the same bible. I seem to remember Jesus healing, helping and feeding. You know the old the poor are the first to get into heaven.
No, we are not speaking of the same bible if you have not heard that before.
Oh, does you bible say "let the weak fend for themselves?"
No. The bible leaves the provision of children to fathers.
Would you make up your mind? Are you charitable or not. You'll let children starve because your bible say it's up their fathers to feed them? I don't think that was the message from Jesus. How greedy to let a child die. Not loving at all as a matter of fact we have laws against child endangerment.
Now you are adding your own flavor to my statements
Make up your mind. Are you charitable or not? Are you greedy or not? Where is the NT does it say Not to help the child of a lazy man, let them starve?
Then admit you are wrong Genea. You just said that the Bible says that lazy men should not eat and now you're saying nowhere does the bible says that?
Apologize then to all starving men and children and women of the world.
Are you speaking for the entire Christian community? Would you be so proud of your opinion that you are willing to say what you just said to the entire world?
You are wrong. You are the cruelest person in this forum - and you are a disgrace to the Christian community.
But, of course, not all Christians are like you Genea. I know a lot of them but they're not as cruel as you are.
By the way, just because people can't eat, they are already lazy. Some don't have jobs because they can't find work. Some can't eat because they've been forced so by war. Clearly, you are misguided on the facts of the world - you don't even know the reasons why people can't eat, why people are starving.
You are not only ignorant - you are clueless and heartless. You make conclusions and claims out of thin air.
Please, I beg you, go find a shrink.
Hey, everyone on this forum who are more reasonable and actually humane believers - look at Genea. Please help shower her with a little of your sense.I've been trying to show her how incredible hypercritical she is, but she can't see it.
I just can't believe that she would actually say those things. Just unbelievably heartless.
If only those in Africa or those in wartorn Middle East have heard her, I don't know how they would take it.The real problem is that she is not alone in her selflessness Christianity theology. It's what makes me scratch my head about the U.S. You have Christians on the far right who don't want to share and don't want universal health care. It seems to me to be the very thing Christians would want.
Well, it's because religion and selfish interests of those far right are brothers in faith.
Oh, you don't know.
There's no separation of church and state in reality - in a world where the 1% rules. Because both church and state wants the same - status quo; preservation of the oppressed system. So they are brothers in oppression.
And because they are brothers in oppression, they both agree in maintaining and spreading beliefs -such as yours - so people will continue to support the current system of oppression. So they both can survive in the ever-changing world of continuous and spreading struggles.That is what you are supposed to think. What's the point of salvation? You have conceded.
In other words, religion is the opiate of the masses?
Well, he was certainly into banging on people who didn't agree with him, that's for sure.
Christians should want to help other people. But the conundrum with your point is that if Christians were to bring it up before a vote in Congress, the law would immediately be challenged for violation of the Establishment Clause. In fact, if those who want to defeat it were to simply slap a Christian label on it, it would die quickly, I'd wager.
And it's not like everybody who's a conservative Christian wants to hoard everything for themselves and not share the wealth. Many Christian organizations that endeavor to help people in different ways from the 'right.'
I almost wish it were as simple as everybody tries to make out.
The bible already told the whole world... You think Im scared??? Lazy men who have no desire to work, should not eat!!!
i am not speaking of those who cant work. But I'll bet you knew that No one's saying you are scared Genaea. I definitely can see that you are not scared and that's what makes me really think that there is something wrong with you.
And you know, your reasoning have truly re-affirmed my belief that knowledge is an important thing.
Okay, believe in your Bible, campaign that it's okay for lazy men not to eat while I will continue to assert that all men must have something to eat - whoever they are and wherever they are.
And oh, by the way Genea, I am not a believer of God. And you are a believer of God who thinks that it's okay for a man not to eat because he is lazy. Ironic, right?
Hey, I have a suggestion, why don't you proclaim to the world this statement of yours and let's see how the other more reasonable Christians will react. Come on, it' s a challenge.
Prove how right you are. Launch a campaign regarding your statement and we'll see how the world reacts.Actually she thinks the kids should starve as well. That is the sick part.
Just point them to 2thessalonians 3:10. They may disagree if they like. I agree with the bible.
Excuse me, The Thessalonians was written After the Death of Christ. AD 50. So, that's not Jesus saying that. That's Apostle Paul saying that, it's not your God nor Jesus.
How come you don't even know your Bible?I said the bible said it. So what do you mean.? Paul is in the bible. He walked with Jesus. He knew the rules.
Thessalonians was not written about Jesus. They were written solely for the Thessalonica church members who refuse to work. It's own Apostle Paul's words and never in any way does it indicate that it's from Jesus.
Anyway, I've tried convincing you and explaining things to you -even went to the extent of explaining your Bible to you but still you won't listen. So maybe you are really hopeless.
I am just frustrated that someone can really have such lack of knowledge about things and couldn't understand words which are so simply put.Maybe your post is for me??? I understand your frustration. It is not for long though. Think about what I have said. You will see you twisted me on a few occasions. I know because usually when I speak to you, scripture is quoted. You as a non-bible person construe them to be my words. Since I know the quotes I use, I don't get it twisted. Easy. Biblical words work great in everyday conversation. Especially about Christianity. You have had to twist my words in order to come to the conclusion that I am crazy. Then you say I changed to win your argument? This life gets so funny. I am so sure of God and the bible because I have LIVED it my entire life. Miraculous stuff. Out of the blue stuff. Firmly reassuring stuff. I am not speaking from a fragile position. Been planted a long time.
You make me laugh. You're just unbelievable!
Additionally you may want to know why the Thessalonians Book 2 says that:
Here's why:
The church in Thessalonica still had some misconceptions about the Day of the Lord. They thought it had come already so they stopped with their work. They were being persecuted badly. Paul wrote to clear up misconceptions and to comfort them.
So, Apostle Paul was talking to his Thessalonica church members and he just said that to convince them to work. The message of Apostle Paul is exclusive to Thessalonica members of their time and not to the whole world.Thank you for your view. I think it is good practice. Men who do not want to work, are idle. Hmmm, not such a good thing. They will come up with something "else" to do.
It's not my view. It's what the Bible says, I am just explaining the content you mentioned from your Bible.
Why don't you just admit you are wrong? You are plainly wrong. You are basing an opinion to a quote which has nothing to do with world hunger or the world population.
You have truly scared me. I couldn't imagine for the life of me that someone who claims to be a Christian talks the way you are.
I've heard others say things and do things but you speak with such conviction, with such finality in your words - cruel words - in a way that you seem to be so convinced you are right. You seem to not even have the slightest regret for saying such inhumane statements.
You have the "red signs" of psychosis.
You are posting comments not because of your sincere faith. You just act in defense of your faith no matter what - you will say whatever just so to defend your claimed "faith" - which is actually outside Christian beliefs.
I respect people for their beliefs and I am willing to debate cleanly and respectfully with believers but you are a rarity in this forum. Your posts could anger even the most diplomatic. Most of the things you are saying are very un-Christian. It angers me.I can tell how angry you are. You are not my authority though. Nobody can make everyone happy at all times. Sorry u angry
i speak truth.No, you do not speak the truth. You speak heartlessness and cruelty.
I can't tell how much I love this post.
My forecast about the future of this post: And what will follow are the same excuses as ever. :-)
I am an atheist but assuming that there is a God in some place, my answer would be; it is all about the person who prays. The prayers are not for God. The prayers do it just to relieve theirselves. If there is a God, he definetely does not need our prayers. But if you refer to EZAN when you say 'many times on microphone' it is something completely different. It is not a real prayer. It is a call. In the past days, when there were no clocks in everybody' houses, it was a must. Today it is a tradition. But it has nothing to do with God directly.
Probably every single point raised can be anwered by the Bible. God does care about our prayers:
2 Chronicles 7:14
14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
James 5:16
16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.
1 Thessalonians 5:17
17 pray without ceasing;
Believers believe that God knows everything. Then why many believers pray to God loudly, shouting and many times on microphone?
Because
1.Believers are not knowing the future.
2.Believers are not ready to accept the things.Read the Bible, sir, and find why we pray laud. God bless.
Because you don't do what Jesus sed?
"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him"That was Jesus specifically telling us not to pray like the leaders of the Pharisees, who did things for show to be seen as pious. That does not mean there is not to be public prayer. Prayers in large groups or being lead by someone (even on a microphone) is not anti-Biblical. Yeah, there are some who do it for show, and their reward is here on Earth, they will not receive their reward in Heaven.
Yeah - I know you don't have to do what Jesus said. I got it. LOL at the microphones.
You arguin again???
Of course we should do as Jesus said. He said go in your closet and shut the door to pray (u in compliance? He made it clear though that the reason for that is because of the heart/sincerity. When we pray, the MOST IMPORTANT THING IS the heart's sincerity. The Lord listens to a sincere prayer in secret and in public. He knows the heart. When your heart is hard, it is unavailable for God; prayer or no prayer.Right - gotcha. You don't have to do what Jesus said because that is not quite what he meant. I know.
He never said "the MOST IMPORTANT THING IS the heart's sincerity" what he actually said was this:
"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him"
"Done in secret," seems to be the MOST IMPORTANT THING according to what he actually said.
No wonder your religion has caused 2,000 years of fighting.You are not reading his very FIRST statement. (Dont be like them...trying to be seen by men.) But, since God knows the heart and sees it clearly, we are covered even if we pray on a mic when our heart is in an acceptable condition. The 2000 years of fighting is about this petty arguing over words.
Even today, if you and I see, with our own eyes, a drive-by shooting; my account may be different from yours considerably. We will probably send unseasoned investigators in opposite directions. I saw Puerto Ricans, you saw, black dudes i saw a blue truck. You saw a black minivan. Interpretation is a mutha! We see it differently, probably 9:10. The most important thing is what matters. Jesus said that too. The heart is visible to the father. Our actions are visible to men, but we may see each other totally different. The heart, visible to only God (until you open your mouth) is the most important thing. In matters of prayer Gotcha - You don't have to do what Jesus said because that is not what he meant.
Interpretation? I am not doing that - I am just reading the words. My bad huh?Ha-ha!! You are quite the arguer
you are seeing the same account... differently but that don't matter. Open your heart, what do you see? I mean, what does God see???Left and right ventricles, right atrium, left coronary artery, aorta, that sort of thing...
I would be quite surprised if you saw anything different.Nope! Wrong, again
i see love, when I open mine. Love for God and total agreement with his every word. Sorry your heart is so empty "He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." Mark 15-18
Are you remembering that Jesus taught in parables? Thus opens some of his words for spiritual thought. I, personally, have "handled many snakes, and drank much poison." You too, maybe.
Oh, I see, you don't actually agree with the words, you substitute them for whatever suits the purpose.
In a sense. Rightfully devide. Try the spirit by the spirit. It is in the bible. Trust what suits you. That is ok...free will.
Yes, you have the free will to say something and then say the opposite. That is ok... contradiction and hypocrisy.
There is no truth in that. We can't say one thing and then say the opposite. Just like our laws here in America. It is against the law for children to skip vaccination. However, some are exempt. Black and white can sometimes turn to gray. Especially when we add personal thought into the mix. No one is exempt from God's law, he just deals with us where we are; according to our faith.
Santa does the same thing. Once we stop believing we don't get any more presents from him, so we lie for a few more years, but deep down inside we know the truth. I remember my parents asking "Radman (because that's what they called me) do you still believe in Santa? The answer was of course YES, but I knew and they knew. I believe it's much the same thing with the religious. Deep down they know, but are afraid and end up looking like the emperor with no cloths.
Well, for me, the Santa thing was different. Are you surprised? Once I knew who Santa, really was, my parents took up the slack. They gave me presents, from them. It was so, in my entire family network. I will never be able to feel as if my feelings on God will change. I am truly convinced. Religion is a little different. I am not religious, in my opinion. My "rites" occur everywhere, at any time. Therefore, I will be clothed forever.
I just saw the words. You are the one telling me it doesn't mean what it says. But - I understand why you don't want to do what Jesus said. Rather makes a joke of your religion, but - hey - maybe you understand why I reject your religion now?
Of course we have to do what Jesus said. But if you narrowcast His teachings according to one paragraph, you inevitably end of missing the point.
Mark, you quote the Bible so well, there is a possibility that you may become a Christian.
Why would you say that? The absolute best way to become an atheist is to read and understand the bible.
Most Christians don't bother.I believe in a creator which many call the God of Abraham; and that Jesus Christ is the Messiah spoken of in the OT. I also believe that ever sinse 326AD organized religions (including Islam) has been corrupting the faith.
The proof for this is that there are SOoooo many different variations.
BUT I see this kinda the same way a starving man would see a sack of cornmeal that when he opens it he sees weavles in it. I picked out the weavles and am currently eating cornbread.Yes - we know. Nothing will convince you other wise. You are immune to weevils and anything else that might not allow you to be righteous and live forever.
Facts? You want no truck with them - you already made that perfectly clear. Weevils? Bring 'em on. Rotting mouse carcasses? Pick those out. Diseased meal? No problem - you are hungry enough that ain't a problem either? That cornbread tastes like cardboard? No problem. You been trained to eat it no matter how bad it tastes. Probably even think it tastes OK after all these years of swallowing it - right?
After all - to notice it don't taste so good is to write off a lot a years of eating weevil infested, diseased cornbread. Shame to spoil that by eating a steak.I should have known you would twist that metaphort into the outerlimits of discussion.
The biggest thing wrong (the weavel) with the way religion is telling the story is that
Jesus Christ wasn't prophesying mysterously. He was saying exactly what he meant to say.
Jesus said; That generation that he was walking among shall not pass till all those things that he was speaking of in that conversation be fulfilled. Matthew 23 and 24 was basically ONE conversation.
When this is accepted all of the Mysteries about prophesy become clear. And when the prophesy becomes understandable Many other things do also. It becomes more clear as time goes by. SOoo when this weavel is removed, the cornmeal becomes more pure than than at any other time.
The steak that you reffered to comes from the cow eating the weavel infested corn meal
.I posted an answer to this earlier thad hasn't show up yet on this side so I'll try to remenber what it said.
You seem to have twisted my metaphore streight out into the twilight zone.
The weavel I was speaking of is false interpretations of the scriptures that religion says it is following. For now I'm not attempting to prove whether God exists or not but only what the scriptures say and what they do not say.
In my mind; weavels entered the cornmeal when everything Jesus is reported as saying in Matthew 23 & 24 was interpreted as meaning something other than what was clearly stated.
This causes the necessity for multitudes of other misinterpretations. The mountain of misinterpretations which sits upon a simple message causes much conflict.
If we can recognize that 99.99% of the prophesy written in the OT was fulfilled around 138 AD.
This paints a completely diffrent picture than the one presently being presented.
Then we can examine those prophesy mentioned in the NT from a different prospective.
Everything that has transpired in the last 2000 years was foretold and is clear to see once the weavles are removed.
Also; ...remember that the cow from which your steak comes from also eats the weavles in the corn.I didn't twist it - I enlarged upon it and showed you how it really ought to look.
I see you chose to completely ignore what I said in favor of defending your irrational belief system. Despite the poor taste of the cornbread.I see as usual, that you have avoided the context of my post and reverted to your tried and true method; "You are irrational and I'm not", arguement.
No - you completely avoided the point I made. But - yes believing something tastes good even when it doesn't is pretty irrational.
What if I taste something, and tell you how good it is?
No - you completely avoided the point I made .....
No - you completely avoided the point I made...
No - you completely avoided the point I made
No You did .....
huh uh .... you did ...
liar ,,,,
no ... you are ...
no you are ..
WELL ... your moma wears combat boots ...
well your sister is cross eyed
You better take that back
I won'tYeah - this would be why your religion causes so many conflicts.
Still - keep pushing it - no matter how bad it tastes.
I got your point - it was a defense of your beliefs - yes?
Did you get mine?
Hello. Alive and kicking, I see.
You are a real Missionaire, Mark.
Your Africa is HubPages.
hehehe
Why do people insist of believing in and worshiping a God who, according to the bible, is actually quite evil, sadistic and hostile? Should gay people really be stoned to death? According to the bible they should. Also, according to the bible if your brother dies then you should marry his wife and have offspring with her. Is this really what people are putting their faith into??
http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htmWhen did Jesus ever tell us to do these things? If Jesus had told us to do these things, you might have a point. But He didn't, unless you have some knowledge that others who actually study the Bible don't have.
What does this mean:
"I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."Oooh that scripture is in my next hub
You must think about what the scriptures say. You must seek to find. God is only confounding certain of us. If you knock, asking to be let in, the door will be opened. Jesus came to do what we could not; fulfill the law, perfectly. His example was perfect. His life and death, perfect! And his words...perfect. Believe, or don't. If you are of those who refuse, he is not talking to you. He wants your heart, but he does not command it.I get that one quoted back at me a lot, but the problem is that if you take that one and that one only then you literally have to throw out most of what Jesus said in other places. Do you understand who He was talking to and what He meant, or are you simply assuming something?
The bible is absolutely oozing with such information, I studied the bible when I was younger and it scared the living shit out of me. If the bible is anything to go by then God is evil.
That's a nice, safe, generic total dodge of my question.
Quote Jesus please.
It's the easiest thing in the world to quote the OT. Most people don't understand it, so it scares them. I asked specifically where Jesus told us to do these things.
Read the article. Talk about doing a Dawkins. No accounting for history, no accounting for other parts of the Bible, no accounting for when the Israelites lived and where they lived. Just lift out a few things you don't like and present them as the sum total of everything the Bible teaches. Not terribly scholarly, and not terribly well thought out.
A Dawkins? The God Delusion was absolutely spot on.
What about a Harris? As I recall, in the End of Faith, Sam Harris listed verses from the Koran that would simply strike everyone as evil in one chapter, which took two to three pages.
No, it's where your intelligence lies. The dependence on faith is which religion one is indoctrinated into.
So what about dependance or faith in whatever else you believe? Who put those ideas there? Surely you did not care about much of anything when you were small. However, soon you became interested. People who never heard of Jesus as a child, fully accept him. Therefore, are fully accepted. It does not require "indoctrination", only belief once you hear. So, the choice is still yours. On the other hand, some who have been "indoctrinated" turn away at some point. We get to decide what we believe. I just base my faith on all of God's words. You base yours on...uh,... I guess what YOU feel is right for you. See? No muss, no fuss
Unfortunately, your question is meaningless in light of those who don't hold beliefs, hence have no dependence on them, whatsoever.
Ideas are not "put there" - they are entertained for validity and credibility before being accepted or rejected.
Yes, that is called indoctrination.
Not really, the decision was made for you by your parents.
I don't base anything on the same "faith" in which you base your beliefs, not even remotely the same thing.No you don't. You already told us you pick and choose to "interpret" some of them so you don't have to follow them. Because of the parable thing.
So - your holier than thou, self righteousness is somewhat out of place.You are not adding thought to your words either. The parable thing was designed so that the people who were being addressed, understood perfectly what he was saying. Interpretation of the words takes more than ear, but heart also. Put ur ventricles in action
you can always find a reason not to believe if you want.I was more pointing out your hypocrisy. You claim to be basing your faith on god's word - but it turns out you get to decide what that is for yourself. Hence the misplaced holier than thou self righteousness you display.
I don't get to decide what God's word is. It is what it is. I must want to understand it, to understand. I cannot always understand why he says it. But obedience to what he said is paramount for me. Hypocrisy does not enter the picture. Faith in that that you din't understand is necessary. You don't understand Science in its entirety. But you believe what you believe based on the fact that "proof" is presented. But you don't understand that proof entirely. But he said he tested it is proof enough for you. That is the kind of unquestioning faith that God wants us to give to him. You give it to others.
You lost me. You were busy telling some one else that you placed your faith in god's word - now it turns out that you "interpret" this to mean whatever you want it to be, and now you don't understand.
Lack of understanding is the reason you believe in the first place. I understand many scientific proofs just fine thanks. Sorry - just because you don't understand does not mean that no one else does.
I am not going to go jump out a ten story building window simply because I don't fully understand gravity. I have seen the proof for myself. I can even show it to you if you want.I must interpret along certain lines. There are rules to interpreting God's word. It first takes acceptance. If you see a contradiction, faith compels you to search. When you seek, you find. It is easy to NOT believe God when you don't believe God. Hard for me to NOT believe because I have been SO convinced.
Gotcha - you get to say what god wants. I already know that. Hence the misplaced holier than thou, self righteousness I noticed.
Why don't you just say what God wants. You are obviously enthralled
No - you seem to be the one who is enthralled. I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of claiming the holier than thou self righteous position that you claim, when it turns out you make it up for yourself. This is why your religion causes so many conflict.
Ever ask your self why would God not want you to question him? What would the reasoning be? Let's look at what people would do.
The person telling the truth: I was at school today call the school if you like.
The person telling a lie: I was at school today, I really was, you don't have to call the school because they make errors in attendance all the time. Just trust me.
Seems to me that someone is lying to you and they are telling you to just have faith and don't question because it's bad to question.Awwww:( you think questions are bad? No. Ask away!!! But when you question God, you believe his answer. You don't need him to "validate". You believe what he says. Sometimes your answer will be beyond your realm of understanding. Don't believe then. Never! You don't give up on Science when you don't understand it. So easy to give up on God for some.
See you just made my point. Ask, But. There is always a BUT in the answer isn't there. "Ask, but believe his answer" Well if I have to believe his answer why would I ask the question? If God says be made everything then don't question it. See how that works?
That's an oversimplification at best. The fact is, God is questioned all the time by people of faith, even people of great faith. God works with that, because often their faith is deepened by the answers. Not always, and there are certainly famous (and famously vocal) examples of people who questioned God then turned away. But it would be disingenuous at best to say that people of faith never question God, and that God never answers them.
Chris, you missed the point. She said God is not to be questioned and that is the idea of blind faith. I maintain that is someone tells you not to question them they are most likely lying. Which person is telling the truth?
A) I did go to school, but don't call because they are wrong just trust me.
B) I did go to school, call the office or speak to my teachers.I never read that God should not be questioned. He should not be interrogated though, I did not read that either, I don't think. There is a point when a question becomes more than just that, but evolves into interrogation, because you don't believe the one being questioned in the first place.
The whole idea of a question is to get an answer. If one doesn't get the right answer are we not allowed to continue asking? You are saying ask, but accept the answer.
Again, which one is telling the truth?
A) I did go to school, but don't call because they are wrong just trust me.
B) I did go to school, call the office or speak to my teachers.
I agree. It is about the best case of arguing the evidence to fit the preconception I've ever heard of.
Thought Christians would appreciate Dawkins' brand of 'cherry-picking', considering how much they do it in the Bible.
It's true that some Christians do that.
At least you admit that Dawkins does it too!
The torah times were filled with THE WAGES OF SIN. Jesus brought liberty and mercy and a chance for abundant life. Sin is sin. When you walk with Jesus as your guide, you begin to take on his character. Sin is an inevitable part of living, as we are told. Since God's children believe his messages, their sin is blotted out. It takes a heart of faith that knows and agrees with truth. For example, if you are gay, you read the bible, you know, God don't like it. You take your faith to God, acknowledge the shortcoming you have and obtain his mercy until he is able to work it OUT or; since your heart now belongs to him and you have his heart because if it, you get mercy that never runs out. As our father, he knows us well. The heart and his place in yours is what matters most. He always hears one who is crying out to him. He always comes running. When you repent (turn your heart from your wickedness, cuz frankly, your body aint able sometimes) he is able to do the necessary work within you. Be honest because he reads the heart; you cannot hide it. He accepts you just as you are and will cover you just as he said. He is a great hiding place. The best.
those who say they have no sin are liars. He hides all his children.I dont know why he left the word for brothers marrying sisters-in-law, but I speculate that it may have been God's way to ensure the women and children were cared for in cases of the death of dad/husband. His thoughts surpass ours. He just has way more knowledge. We cannot understand it all about anything. Obedience...
Or, and more likely the case. People wrote the bible and those people were people 2000 or 3000 years ago who had no more knowledge then people at their time had.
See how it all makes sense now.Then you must explain why some of the same went in other directions. You believe Science???
More questions than you could ever accept from God, but someone you can see, told you that they did a formula that they "made -up" and it all sounds so good because they call it proof or fact??? its confusing and bizarre enough to spark intrigue.
The thing that I like about God and faith is that it NEVER changes. Never! What has always been true, is true today!!! We dont get a God update every few hundred years. He don't change he can be depended upon, rain or shine. This year, last year, two-thousand years ago, and all the years to come. This is not a Science blast. A lot of it does a lot of good. But we cant know enough to ensure we always have the RIGHT answer. We can play with our formulas til the cows come home. We will always speculate. God is much more stable. Easy yoke, light burdens. Science is heavy.Except of course, that one time, when God changed His word completely from the OT to the NT. And, of course, everything that was wrong never changed, either.
It's hilarious when believers constantly attack science especially when science got them out of their caves despite their religions trying to keep them in.God did not change anything. The things man changed, or got wrong; were corrected when Jesus came. I know I said that before, yet you want me to believe that you are working from the perspective of intelligence? You can't continue with the conversation, you stick with your comfort level. God is available, not required.
Uh, yes He did. There are a number of contradictions between the NT and OT, these have been under debate for a long time.
Notice that you did not offer an explanation as to those contradictions.I do not understand what contradictions. Wages of sin to mercy??? We needed that. The laws did not change. The penalty, for those who believe. Why is that so hard for you? I believe it is because you have decided not to believe, therefore, will not. I, on the other hand, believe, therefore, will. Get it?
Oh, yes you are making perfect sense now. All I have to do is want to believe and I'll believe. I'll try that. I want to believe... I want to believe... I want to believe in Santa. Hey this is working. I'll try the tooth fairy next.
I don't understand the first sentence. But, yes I BELIEVE science and yes it's always changing, but that's okay. Science has prolonged our life and allowed us to communicate in many ways over long distances. Do you not believe your computer works?
Science is heavy, but right. Just because you don't understand how your computer works doesn't mean it doesn't work it just means you don't understand.So now you understand the kingdom of God. You don't understand it. But it works. Thank you for that principle. I will use it.
I'm not sure what that has to do with your rejection of science as you type on a computer that communicates with the rest of the world. Let's see, there are people that can tell you how far every star is from us and what that star is made of from just looking at the light they give off. They can show proof with direct evidence. Some of those stars are billions os lightyears away. Meaning that there light has been traveling to us for billions of years, meaning the universe is billions of years old at the very least. What does the bible say about the age of the universe? A couple of thousand. You go with that while to type on your computer that you don't understand.
I don't reject Science. God made it. But he did not give us his formulas. We are guessing. You are guessing. And Science, guess what...is guessing. Take your guy for instance. He can tell that light has been traveling forhow many years??? Who owns that clock??? He can tell what a star is made of based on the lights??? You believe that??? You done any tests of your own? Or are you BELIEVING someone else who says that THEY know??? Faith is belief w/o seeing. What proof have you seen before your very eyes?
You believe that???Yes, of course I've done experiments with light. Why haven't you? Triangulation, the colour spectrum and prisms. Do you wear glasses? How do they work?
Nope! No glasses. I menstruate every month though. Science tells me how/why. But it cannot feed my pituitary. It just happens. You call it science. I call it a miracle.
Got two kids. I needed no pills. Just automatic miraculous Son and Daughter born 12 years apart. Had a dream about the second, two years before her arrival. Science could NEVER do that. Only God can.
Ha ha ha. So you had a dream about a baby two years before she was born and that dream came from God. You should look into the psychology of dreams. Dreams are inside your own mind and have no connection to anything on the outside.
Depends on what you believe. I know that I had a dream about this talkative and happy little girl who was delivered to me two years later. Psychology usually advocates for dreams as you say, but prophetic dreams are of a different order. A dream about something not even in the works is different, right. REM dreams are pulled from psyche. But psychology does not explain dreams about something you are not even thinking about, occurring years later. That is spiritual in nature.
I understand the dream part. I didn't have one, but my wife did. Actually not a dream, she heard the Holy Spirit tell her "you have conceived" when she did conceive our firstborn, before he was big enough to be detected.
It's comments like this that show why religion should be kept as far away from education as humanly possible.
Rad Man. the science is good and beneficial. But cannot explain origin of life and should stay away, what not understand. The faith and God is not in scientific territory.
God and Faith is in spiritual realm, science in physical one.Thanks for that, but I understand the difference from reality and fiction. You see the fiction writers are trying to prove that reality is not as it seems. You are also right in that science should no try to understand faith. And guess what? Science doesn't care about faith, but for some reason faith get in the way of science. The proof in you statement that science should stay away from explaining the origin of life. You see that is what science does, it tries to understand stuff. Science starting to get an understanding of the origin of life on this planet. Do you think because it is written that God created it we can't find out ourselves?
Faith does not get in the way of Science. It seems that science TRIES to prove the bible wrong at times but there is no real way to do that. The bible stands. The bible dies not tell us how old the earth is. 1000 years is as a day to God. Did it take him 7000 yrs to create the earth? Does it matter?
Science is not interested in proving the bible wrong. Science is interesting in finding answers to difficult questions like how and when life on earth began. If you really think faith doesn't try to interfere have a look at the middle ages in Europe or stem cell research or the Intelligent Design movement and museums.
Not really, because the fact is that the Bible was showing people how to be less barbaric than the people of the time were being. Had it merely been written by people who truly didn't know any more than anyone else at the time, we actually wouldn't have seen most of what is in the Bible. There'd be more human sacrifice, for one thing.
More than Jesus sacrificing himself? That's pretty much what the NT was about.
Yes, but the point of discussion always, okay usually, seems to be the 'barbaric' OT.
Well it appears the NT is barbaric as well, ending with human sacrifice.
Sacrifice is a good choice of words, because NOBODY needs to be the sacrifice, it's a choice.
God already provided the sacrifice for all humanity, if they choose to accept Him.I don't think Jesus was given a choice, his Dad just watched.
Sure he was, in the Garden, he decided 'Nevertheless, not my will but yours" that was Him choosing to do the deed for all of us.
To say that the NT is all about 'human sacrifice' is to completely miss the point.
I know what the point of the stories of Jesus are. But what was the ending?
The ending was that He died and rose again to fulfill the prophecies and save us from our sin, giving us a free gift. Part two, the ultimate end, is that He will come back and defeat the devil once and for all.
Those who believe in God have their own opinions and ways to practice their beliefs. That's their way.
I've been reading this thread along with some of the other religion/atheist threads and I've decided some things are pretty clear:
1) If you believe in God/Jesus/Mohammad et al good for you; worship at home or in your church. That is your right.
2) There is not enough proof (see failure to answer the question about the Exodus/slavery issue; also FAITH is a huge foundation of the religion - in other words you don't have proof; you just have a feeling about something) for Christianity et al to have any force or relevance in public issues (government; schools - except for study of the religions themselves as long as you study all of them equaly). Our laws and rights are derived from the Constitution and the cumulative weight of law over the years (or what could possibly be described as the consensus of reasonable people from all walks of life).
In addition to the proof issues I always wondered about how a person born in Afghanistan could avoid being brainwashed about Islam anymore than a person born in the US could avoid being brainwashed about Christianity (obviously we have some on here who are not brainwashed). The place of your birth and the cumulative effect of the messages you receive from your parents and community are overwhelming to a child and we don't realize how much our biases are locked in. That "feeling" we have inside about God may just be the same as that "feeling" you have about your home or a friend from long ago. It's familiar and comforting so you think it's a relationship with an unseen entity.Well I appreciate the analysis, you care; but way off base. Each of us are exposed to just about everything. I am no longer in agreement with Godly life as I was "reared". I found that a lot of it was watered down, deleted, or "hammered-in". I have come to have a relationship with God myself. He has revealed himself to me. Probably as clearly or clearer than your starlight-timer has revealed himself to you. I have no doubt about the things I say. You, however, must keep "open" for the next discovery.
We are not exposed to just about everything; you cannot possibly equate a heavy Christian culture that most of us grew up in (I was born in 1958 in the deep south) to reading a few things about Islam. It's not even comparable.
The phrase, "I grew up in the church is very common." It takes a VERY powerful mind or possibly a traumatic event to cast aside this kind of saturated exposure and become a truly unbiased thinker who can give EQUAL weight to all the major relgions and to an outright rejection of the idea of a Creator in order to decide what it is you believe.
I've been in Christian churches all my life; the Word of God is presented to children as fact and they hear it every week and every year from their parents and from the pulpit. They are not given an alternative belief system to ponder.Again, i was taught many things about how Christianity goes. I don't practice most of it. I now have my own ideas. Mist of the ideas "given" to me, have been rejected because of my own study. I was not given my beliefs by those who raised me. Does that shoot down your theory?
You are still a Christian (albeit one who has apparently turned the meal into a la carte). What is the likelihood that you would have scrapped everything you learned and started from scratch and spent years being exposed only to say the Koran before you made your decision about your beliefs? It is possible that you would return to Christianity as your basis but you would be forced to over-ride things that you learned as a child. Certainly there are expceptions and if you are one the good for you.
And you didn't shoot it down at all. There is no disputing the mass exposure to one belief system that our children are being exposed to. It's indisputable.We are not in total disagreement. Immersion is a great predictor. However, the other religions are available at the same time. I have heard enough about each of the religions to know that they don't speak to me. I am glad to say that I have chosen. I was able to gather my own info and decide. I had a choice. Also, people who are not raised this way believe the message. We all may choose. I chose. You chose. And all others, have chosen.
I've not chosen; I have a sense of a creator but I do not know why. It may be an emotional need on my part. I am not prepared to be as sure about a big bang from nothing (?) like Mark Knowles and the others believe (they may not exactly believe it as I just stated but it's either a creator lit the fuse or it lit itself). I am a very strong agnostic but I found myself bothered at first by Mark's comments but after I continued to read I understand exactly why he objects. It is very clear on a purely logical level.
A little too logical. He does not realize the things he blindly accepts because "everybody else" said so. He puts "his mind" to it. And tests??? No. He says, well, sounds logical enough, they tested it.
Please stop making false statements about me. You don't know me or what I accept at all and I say no such thing. I thought bearing false witness was a sin? Apparently, this is another of god's words that you have rewritten to please yourself.
To find out the things you accept only takes an open hear. Do you not believe that out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks, simply because the bible says it? You tell what you believe when you open your mouth. I know what you think. False witness? No. My witness of you has been true.
And yes, elementary school presents to you scientific fact. In the eighties, they called theory, educated guesses. Has that changed? Is science now more than tested theory? We are exposed to just about everything. We choose from there.
If there is some doubt they say it; if there is none they say that too... do you have any doubts about gravity? I don't... Do you have any doubts about photosynthesis? I don't. Do you have any doubts that CO2 is a by-product of the burning of fossil fuels? I don't. There is a long long long long list of scientific facts; there are none about Jesus. It is a story that may or may not be true... and if you believe I'm ok with that. I understand how compelling his words are; but this type of belief belongs in private settings and not in the public sector which is where EVERYONE ELSE exists. That is what enrages atheists in my view; they have to be forced fed what you believe and why is that? Far too many Christians wish for a story with no proof to be accepted on the same level as the laws of gravity. The difference is pretty clear to me.
I am so glad you said all that!
Gravity and photosynthesis exists! But them darn formulas and when to add and multiply or how to come up with the formulas or how to tell how much/little exists...heavy stuff! I still don't know a lot of it; have taken many classes that included it dumb??? Not by a long-shot!!!
God is for everyone. He will not be quiet because you don't feel his presence comfortably. Tell me your ways all you want. But, I will then tell you mine. Atheists make the decision to visit conversations about God! There are no REQUIRED READING signs or MUST PARTICIPATE warnings. Why do they come??? The best question ever! I know the answer. You probably do tooHey I'm like you; I couldn't sit here and explain it like a scientist could but at one time I could when I learned it and I had no need to memorize those kind of details. So don't feel dumb. We as humans tend to settle in on what we need to know to get by and if the plants keep growing (with some pruning and watering from us) then that's all you need to do. But the existence of the knowledge is the scientific fact that we ALL accept regardless of spiritual beliefs. As for God being quiet that's not what I ask. I wish he would be loud and obvious. It would settle a lot of problems. People do not handle this kind of subtlety very well at all. But if the faith is all you need then again, good for you... but it's not fact and it's not a basis to reject other beliefs.
You cannot explain science as a scientist, yet you believe. And you want to be able to explain Christianity as Christ; in order to believe. dis you notice that? blind faith works both ways. Well, you can explain as Christ, if you listen to him. Only the faithful listen. Only the faithful care to.
There is that holier than thou self righteousness again.
I have never been able to explain Christ and cannot do so today; and the three scientific areas that I mentioned are not blind faith. I learned Geometry in high school and now am forced to accept postulates on blind faith because I don't use geometry any more. But at one time I knew it and now I don't need to know it; but I'm quite sure that it is still valid.
I could get a book and explain scientific fact to you with a bit of study and I bet I could do it without dissent from a Christian, a Muslim, a Jew, a Buddhist or an Atheist. But I don't bother with knowing hte facts of photosynthesis because it doesn't really matter in my daily living. But far too many Christians insult others with their beliefs yet they have no way of explaining those beliefs like I could scientific fact.What about that inside pull? There is a creator. What is he doing now? Is that not more important? If not, why be bothered by the Christian? If his message is futile, why not dismiss it as I do the Boogie Man??? Disproving him does not take any thought or argument. No such thing.
Nobody (and let me repeat that, NOBODY) gives little children multiple belief systems to ponder. That would be neither educational nor enlightened, it would be cruel. To take young minds that are searching for meaning in the most concrete ways and cast them adrift in a sea of relativism would be to raise a generation of nihilists, at best. And thanks, we already have that.
Everybody gives their children something that they know is true and right. Christians (and Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, many atheists) try to teach their children right and wrong. People understand that young children are unable to form these opinions completely on their own and need something objective to use for reference.
Although some powerful intellects have, indeed, 'cast off' their teachings of youth, some equally or even more powerful intellects have found reason to hold on to their teaching, or even to switch from what they were actually taught to Christianity. And some of those intellects who 'cast off' were, if you look at them, never really part of the Christian group anyway. They were always rebelling, they just waited until they were of age before they made it public.And many of us rebelled in our teens and early 20s but later when back to the faith that we were taught.
Rubbish. Right or wrong, good or right has nothing to do with religious drivel. I know MANY people who give their children multiple belief systems to ponder.
I think you need to separate religious drivel out as a "belief system," and "moral teachings that we think are right and true" as something completely different - Otherwise you appear to be being dishonest. Your religion does not teach right from wrong. It teaches bind obedience. As you rightly say - intellectuals and educated people tend to cast this religion off as they grow older. But - they were probably never much on stoning adulteresses in the first place - always rebelling - you know.being intelligent and or educated can be as much of a disadvantage as an advantage depending on whether the intelligent/educated person in question directs their gratitude to God for everything they were given that allowed them to succeed.
Blind obedience helps you. It is not to hold you back. The laws protect and cover, if you listen. God knows right from wrong. Obey for your own good, not God's.
But I think human sacrifice is wrong, but God tells me he needs it so I'll prove to him that I love him by giving him my son. Does that work for you.
No, God does not require your son as saxrifice. He wants us/you to sacrifice yourself. Get that. Now are you going to add a dumb suicide comment??? Surely you know what I mean.
In Exodus 13:2 the Lord said "Consecrate to me every first-born that opens the womb among Israelites, both man and beast, for it belongs to me."
You're correct, that makes it worse because it's a sacrifice for God.
Oh, you're not understanding.
In Exodus 13:2 the Lord said "Consecrate to me every first-born that opens the womb among Israelites, both man and beast, for it belongs to me."
In this case God is demanding human sacrifice. He is killing the first born and making the act sacred. Consecrate mean to make sacred.Oh...YOU are not understanding. Consecrate means dedicate. The firsts were set aside for special purpose as a special dedication to God. Live dedication, not dead. Clear enough???
Have no fear, God has it covered....
Isaiah 35:5
Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.lo and the thinkers were lobotomized.........
Spreading the Love I see.Yeah - whether it is painful and they reject it or not. Still gonna give it to 'em huh? Christian love.
"It's for your own good," sorta love?You know you like it Mark
you just keep returning like a lovesick teen-ager. Cant get enough of me Mark? i have a fantastic opportunity for you. Stay away if you reject. One way to never have to see or hear me again. See my pic, the conversation can be avoided. I like talking to you though. Would be sad to see you go. Im wearin you down!!! just kiddingNo - I will continue to call you on your nonsense. Sorry.
I am not going anywhere. Trust me - you post nonsense, I will be there to point it out. Because I love you.
Love thy neighbour, but if your neighbour is a lazy man let him and his children parish. Don't you see the hypocrisy?
dedicate, to make sacred. Same thing. He is taking the first borns as a sacrifice. What do you think he doing with them? Putting them in kindergarden? Come on.
He uses them, if he wants. The charge was to ensure that all were on one accord, I guess. Ask God. The ones set aside probably ended up priests or something. He did not say what his purpose was for the sacred ones, he just said set em aside.
Are you completely clueless? It's clearly human sacrifice that you said doesn't exist in the bible. You are either clueless or a lier.
genaea - I think your heart is in the right place but what you just said is music to the ears of people like David Koresh.
With all due respect, Mark (and I do respect you, Mark,) if what you got from my writing that was simply a push for 'religion' in general or 'my religion' specifically then you pretty well missed what I was saying.
@Chris - I was referring to a belief system about the origins of life, the prospects of an afterlife and a particular version of the history of mankind (i.e. the Christian version? The Jewish version? The Hindu version? The Atheist version (science?)? The Islamic version?). In America there is one belief system that dominates the landscape and we know which one that is and we know that the miracles attributed to that belief system are presented as fact to children and they hear it every week.
Implicit in my comments are a common belief system that all children are exposed to relative to what I would term as "right" behavior (i.e. right and wrong as defined by a civilized society that respected the rights of ALL it's citizens). This common belief system is about behavior and not about the origins of life and the prospects of an after-life. You do not have to know the truth about beginnings/endings to know about "right" behavior on earth.
In other words I was either vague or you just missed my point.I assume you mean Christianity and as a Christian I can only say I wish that were true. In one sense, Christianity does dominate the landscape but it is increasingly not so.
You should perhaps give children more credit. Being honest is the key. Using words like "I think" is a better way then "I know". Indoctrinating them at a young age is unfair and cruel.
At the risk of being argumentative, if I know there is a God (which I do,) then the real cruelty is to let them 'make up their own minds.'
And people who are 'indoctrinated' turn away, and people who never were turn to God. I think the people who constantly cite 'indoctrination' and the 'difficulty of people overcoming' are the ones who don't give people enough credit. Or too much, depending on the circumstance.
I think...At the risk of being uncivil I consider your conclustion that is cruel to allow children to make up their own minds to be a sign of mental illness. I am not proposing that we all them to make up their own minds about "right behavior" (i.e. not lying, cheating, stealing etc). I am talking about how the universe was created, whether a God performed miracles on Earth and whether there is an after-life. if you think that it is cruel NOT to tell the Bible is literally true then I would say that I would never allow you to speak to my children.
Which is why you're not in charge.
Seriously, although you are neither the first nor will you be the last to accuse me of psychosis or delusion because of my religion (the best ones take great pains to point out the difference before accusing me of both, it's quite educational) you are certainly one of the most draconian.
Little children CAN'T make up their minds about these things. They always look to someone they respect for what to think.
I am emphasizing LITTLE children, not teenagers.
And just as I teach my children about the Bible, I expect that those with different thoughts than mine teach their children according to their beliefs. Which I would not interfere with, not even for you.In charge of what? Public schools? No Chris, that is why YOU are not in charge because you would tell the children what's what when it comes to Christianity and let the other kids who don't believe suffer as outsiders. That is what is cruel.
You said if there is a God then it would be cruel to let them make up their own minds. Talk about draconian. I explained that I was referring to right and wrong which does not require a Bible to articulate. The fact is nobody knows if there is a God. You have no idea but if you have faith then that's your private affair. I'm not going to brain-wash them about God. They can decide that for themselves.But do you take the time to educate them about what the bible tells us God is about?
We teach our children both sides of the equation, I tell them what I have found to be true, but I also tell them about the 42 years when I thought as a secularist, and try to show them that they need to decide for themselves. My wife likewise can relate her experiences of her abused childhood and younger years before she came to faith.
As a Christian church leader I refused my son permission to be baptised when he was 12 years old, because I knew he did not have the right knowledge or relationship with God to make the sort of commitment that baptism requires. I told him to wait until puberty had passed before he decided to make that commitment. I dare say most Christian parents would have leapt for joy that their son wanted to be baptised, but for me it would have been putting him in a position where he would have probably been compromised as he grew older.
He was.... we allowed him to be sent away to a secular boarding school, where they taught him how to smoke dope, cigarettes and drink alcohol, plus of course chase girls. I don't think they taught him much else, but for the average 15 year old, it seemed sufficient education at the time, and he enjoyed the corruption.
But we had also taught him to know God and Christ, in the prescribed manner, which is letting him see that OUR life was guided by Christ and the Holy Spirit, that we were not perfect, but that we were aware that we had rights and responsibilities in our relationship with Christ.
Children should be shown a living bible, their parents behaviour and life should show them God.
Our son went off the rails for a few years, during which time I have no real idea what he did, for he moved away, then one day he wanted to come back to live with us, and we said great, and accepted that as a 17 year old he was allowed to smoke and drink in his room, play violent video games and stay out when he wanted to. He even grew a couple of dope plants in our garden!
But tolerance combined with our Holy Spirit led lifestyle seems to have worked, and without any prompting from us, he came to faith aged 18, was then baptised, and now works full time ministering to kids who have, shall we say: dysfunctional families in Harlem, NYC, where he has been the last three years.
You don't teach your children only one side of the coin, you teach them to make considered decision, based upon not what you say, but what you do.I'm talking in an academic/theoretical manner. My children have gone to church since they were very young. They have no idea of anyother religion except Christianity; their mother speaks to me as if a burning bush is in the room when it comes to her beliefs. I'm a bit distressed that my eight year old is brainwashed but my teenager is actually showing signs of rebellion towards the belief because his mother talks to him in a very zealous manner. My son (15 years old) is fully aware that I am agnostic.
Sounds like a healthy mix!
Rebellion is natural (literally) and I think we all need to go through it.
Some never stop rebelling, I continued until I was 42 years old!
I would advise any parent to keep a level playing field with children, by all means express your faith to them, but never try to shoehorn them into it.
All parents fear for their children's safety, so it's natural for a believing parent to be concerned that their children may not come to faith, and suffer whatever consequences their brand of belief tells them may transpire.
But the truth is that NOBODY is born a believer, God has no grandchildren, every believer must make their own decision, in their own time.
Thanks for the civil reply!
PS: Teach them about all religions also, if they choose another route, well that's what they should do anyway, there is nothing more guaranteed to turn people away from God than being raised just one way, especially if the church and parents have a 'my way or the highway' approach!I prefer civility. When I say my children have no idea of any other religion I mean to the level of Christianity. You know how it is in Church every Sunday along with bible study; there is no dissenting opinion or alternative made available; there are no Mark Knowles armed and ready with what he knows which is a very convincing case for Atheism.
That's not completely true, but:
Church is not a forum for discussion any more than public school is. The point is, you go to church because you already believe in God or are searching. If you go there just to be a loud debater, then your aim is really nothing more than to cause trouble. There are many, many places (such as forums like this one) where people can debate what is true and what truth is. I, as a believing Christian, would not just up and go to a meeting of atheists simply to debate them there. I assume that they hold such meetings to discuss what they believe and why.
That is amazing. What is his name and which charity does he work for? I will look him up next time I am there.
There is (of course) a hub about him on my site!
But his name is James Harper (of course) and he works for Metro Ministries, who care for 20,000 kids in NYC.
TOS stops me posting the url, but the hub about his is called: A letter to my son Jaime...
http://www.metroministries.org/about-us … or-pastor/
His division is Harlem, which I guess is a tough location!
My son is the one on the right in the green t shirt!
I'm sure he would be delighted to show you around 'his' neighbourhood (they live on site!)
Let me know when you are next there and I will send you his phone number....
Thanks Mark
Is that a come-back because it means nothing.
You say no one can know if there's a God. That's not true. I do know there's a God and I do know that Jesus is His son. I may not be able to convince you of that, but I do know it for a fact. Just as Mark Knowles is convinced there is no God.
That changes everything.This is not the same as "knowing," - this is what you believe. I don't believe you. I think you are deluded although I have certainly been convinced that the God you propose cannot exist - yes.
You can say you know but it's interesting that you have elevated Mark's "knowing" to the same level as yours; meaning he has equal standing so you just put yourself on the shelf like any other book with a theory. Yet Christians want a higher status.
And you do not know if Jesus is his son. If you think you have been told then you are saying you are the equal of Paul. You have no proof. All you have is what your mind needs to believe.
Everyone has a basis on which they teach morals and values. Children shouldn't be brainwashed but parents are responsible for teaching them values. Example: You shouldn't hate people. You shouldn't be jealous of others. Kids will ask "why?" What do you tell them?
They respect me and hear the conviction in my voice. I also discuss how it would feel if they were the one who was hated. I encourage them to be their best; we talk about the types of problems that occur as a result of wrongful behavior. For instance I've talked about slavery and and told them it was a horrible time in the history of our country. I challenged them to imagine being enslaved just because of the color of their skin. They listen and understand. I believe that the use of empathy along with a passionate delivery is a very effective way to teach them right and wrong. And you know what? They can't turn a page in my heart and find a passage that appears to sanction violence or stoning homosexuals. There is no confusion in my words.
Thank you diane... I'm glad you asked me that quesiton... it was a good question and I'd never really thought about it in depth. I put the power of my own self-confidence into my children so that they have the courage to be who they are. I'm not saying they don't have their moments because they're kids; but I think they know exactly how I feel and I think they actually like the directness because conviction animates beliefs.
Genaea, I was just having devotion and I thought about this last group of comments. My thoughts were similar to yours. Today's Daily Bread included: "Heavenly Father, may we not see obedience as aburden but as a privilege."
Suburban I thought of you and your children's obedience. Have they made it into their teens yet? If they are still obedient, without question in their teens, you are a godly-father!Except that my children were obedient (without question) in their teens, and I raised them as atheists.
If you raised them in the USA and they were no problem, you are to be commended!
Comment on teach them about all religions: It's not possible teach accurately about something you don't know about. How many religions are there?
I was a Christian for a long time, so I taught them about Christianity first, but, yes, I taught them about all religions.
Chasuk, may I ask what you mean when you say you were a Christian? Does than mean you were raised in a Christian environment? Did something happen?
Proverbs 22:6
Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.
Just saying....I taught them about Christianity in a secular, academic sense, as one of the three (major) Abrahamic religions. I didn't inculcate them in it. I also took them to Hare Krishna ashrams and Hindu temples. However, the underpinnings were, "Do that which increases human well-being; avoid that which decreases it."
Well nothing you just said did anything to change the quote I presented...
Proverbs 22:6
Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.
Pretty simple, just happens to come from the bible, the same one you trained your children to be good people from.
My local Hindus and Buddhists are equally nice people, they just place their faith in different quarters to me.I understand your point; my point was only that I _didn't _ train my children to be good people from the Bible. If I taught them to be good people from any particular philosophy, I taught them from secular humanism.
You didn't misread. You made a reasonable inference based on the limited information that I provided. I had rejected Christianity by the time that my children were old enough for any overt "religious" instruction.
But the statement still stands... you 'infected' your children with Gods word before you rejected what God had shown you.
Conception is much the same way, once the 'seed' has been successfully implanted, it will grow to maturity unless someone rips it out of the womb.You wrote, "My local Hindus and Buddhists are equally nice people, they just place their faith in different quarters to me."
This indicates, to me, that you understand that morality doesn't depend on the inculcation of Christianity. Yet you simultaneously seem to be arguing with me that I inculcated my children in the Christian faith.
Why?Not quite... what I indicate is that (IMO) they have placed their trust and faith in the wrong god.
But I will agree that morality is not conditional upon a certain faith, for there are as many immoral Christians as there are immoral people in other faiths.
My point was simply that you did raised your children with Christian understanding, and I am delighted that they now seek to obey your wishes, respect your will and discuss their needs with you, because that is exactly the relationship that God desires with His children also.
Well - since I Came to Reason, and discovered that my head had been filled with lies such as you propagate - I rather resent the wasted time I spent in fear. Not all can drop the shackles Christianity attempts to hold a person with and it is a struggle to get those thoughts that were placed by adults when I was a child out of my head. Fortunately, I grew to be strong as an adult and was able to learn to think rationally.
So instead of being a good teacher, you teach your kids one religion, yours. That's called indoctrination.
I don't know whether the adjective "special" applies, or if you intended it sarcastically, but my children trusted and respected me enough to accept my guidance into adulthood. Gratifyingly, they still ask me for advice.
It is a special thing for a child to obey w/o question. You have a perfect example of the love my father wants from they that belong to him. We as his children TRUST w/o question (well, most of the time). Obeying his standard is darn near humanly impossible, but he understands that
I'm sure she didn't mean it sarcastically. I certainly didn't read it that way. I go through meanings of one word with my students. When I was growing up, we said "bad" when we meant good. Kids say something is "sick" when they mean it is "good." They call people they don't like "ratchets." I tell them they hijacked the name of a tool.
Awww come on!!!
he does not want to be considered Godly. Godly??? Why Godly??? Just so you know, I aint fussin' I was just so...taken aback (for lack...)
Remember Mommy Dearest? She was obeyed. God hadn't much to do with it. No comparison, just example.
Because jealousy hurts people and makes people do bad things.
Which is an endlessly better explanation than "because God says so" #1 because it makes sense #2 because every kid's next question will be "but why does god say so?" and to answer that one biblicaly you have to get into the book of Job which frankly is pretty dark and confusing content for a kid.I tell them because we are all created in God's image and we are all special. Then I find in the Bible where it talks about such things and go through it with them.
Teaching kids about the existence of God and what the Bible actually says is not brainwashing. If it is, teaching them the opposite is then also brainwashing.
Fair, but you say you KNOW there is a God and I say I KNOW there is no God. The Muslims say Jesus was not God, but a prophet and the Jews say Jesus was just a guy. All are convinced because they have been convinced. That being said my kids are in a Catholic school and they mostly preach love, so I'm good with that because I teach them to think for themselves and question everything. That is the most important thing one can teach their children. Never mind the specific rules of a specific branch of some religion.
As I've said before, people do question God. I've questioned God. I have nothing against that. But usually (usually, not always,) people who are teaching kids to truly 'question everything' are in fact teaching a form of moral relativism that is functionally no different from nihilism. It's good to ask questions and wonder why. But you wind up believing something eventually, whether you want to or not.
There are organized Christian groups that are politically active and wish to create laws based upon the Bible and there is no question that the Christian culture is dominant in America. Why don't you ask some American born Muslims how comfortable they are living in America right now?
Uh...America was built a Christian nation??? With laws based in Christianity??? At least recognized as "One Nation Under God" at one time??? One of the greatest nations ever! Built under Godly influence???
Check the Bill of Rights. I'm talking about separation of Church and State. Not all the founders were Christians and some were extremely wary of a central power of religion. But that is a long discussion and what you wish to say is in major dispute.
Not all the founders were Christians, yet they conceded to being called One Nation Under God??? Aint that something? Sounds powerful to me:) Anyway, debate or no, the facts were taught to me in elementary school. America sent "missionaries" to "scoop" boatloads
The founders were Christians. At least the decision-makers.You're wrong on every point:
"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion..." ~John Adams
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."~Thomas Jefferson
"American people which declared that their 'legislature' should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State" ~Thomas Jefferson
The founding fathers didn't "conceded" (you meant "consent" here by the way) to be called One Nation under God. "In God We Trust" was made the national motto in 1956 in response to the spread of Communism, the founders used the motto "E Pluribus Unum" (out of many, one) although it was never "official".
The words "under God" weren't in the pledge of allegiance for the first 64 years, not until 1954 when Congress added them.The principles of American law were biblically based. The pilgrims were Christians. The missionaries taught Christianity to the "nomads" they overpowered and even the slavery of the people they took was biblically justified. Separation of church and state, a formality. We are able to believe and practice what we want and I believe that even that liberty was biblically based. Read your history books again. Not the new ones, the old ones.
This is why you can't have a rational discussion with most believers,..
I honestly have no idea what in the deep blue hell you're talking about?
The principals of American law are not "biblically" based, no matter which misguided source you're getting your information from; the source of the "principals of American Law" is the Constitution. On a related note, guess who's not mentioned once, anywhere in the Constitution... God.
I'm not exactly sure what "missionaries" or "nomads" you're referring to, but the pilgrims didn't "overpower" anyone, in fact they barely survived.
As for slavery being "biblically" justified, you're right, but I hardly see how that helps your point.
As for freedom of religion being biblically based, are you serious? The bible doesn't advocate religious freedom, it advocates adherence to Christianity.
History doesn't change by the way, just because you read a different book, and if it does, you need to throw that book away, ASAP.That last statement is exactly what I was saying to you. Someone is trying to rewrite our, yes our, History! It has already been written already
This "no God" thing is the NEW notion. Bible based! Not bible. It was not fair to say God, not everyone believed, I guess. But the principles behind American laws are biblical. Now I don't know what "blue hell" books you are reading. But America started out "God" country. Make no mistake about it. Your books are the broken ones. I always liked history. No, the papers don't say "God" but his principles were definitely considered throughout. Money took over. And everyone knows...you can't serve God and mammon. We now love it, and hate God. But oh, the loser is evident to me. This here body will always be "God country" I don't give a darn what America does I'm sorry genaea but it's not Christianity that founded a nation - or any nation for that matter.
The people are always of the founder of a nation - the creator of history. And, of course, there are many books written about history - but books are unreliable. They may not always say the truth. So, go out there, read different books so you may find out more. But, books don't say it all - experience of the people are more reliable than books.
I respect your belief, but it won't be totally wrong to assert your belief in the context of a nation's history. Before there was Christianity, people believed in a powerful being but not in Jesus or God. People were pagans then. So, not every nation is founded on Christian belief.
Also, it should not be concluded that just because a Constitution resembles the teachings of the Christians - it is already founded on Christianity. It may simply be founded on the humanity of man. Meaning, not all those who have the good traits of man are called Christians. Many men are of good hearts but they don't believe in God and they are not Christians.
We should not always connect humanity with Christianity. Its teachings - I hope I don't offend you - are not only sources of goodness or greatness.I never said that Christianity founded anything. I said, again, that the founders if this nation were christian. I am so amused that now the conversation is now about the founders of this nation. I read my history books. I read many. I know what I am talking about. Your side always hates the books that I choose
I have researched history for essays. Got good grades on them too. Christian principles started the law of this country. That will never change. Ignore it if you must. Why would they justify slavery with another's precepts? The forefathers used their own bibles to justify their slavery. They taught their Christianity to their slaves. They used their bibles to come up with their laws. God blessed their endeavors tremendously!!! I can't force belief. I can only believe myself. And I do.Please read Historical Materialism, Dialectical Materialism. Also, add Origin of the Family so you may understand more about the formation of nations and societies.
During the Slavery Society (next to Primitive Communal), there was no Christianity yet. So, I don't know how could the lords have taught Christianity to slaves.And, oh by the way, the formation of the Constitutions of many nations were founded on class struggles. Class struggles are the reason behind society development - you know, the birth of "private property (this started during the Slavery society)" which gave birth to nations (in order to properly indicate territories essential to economic gains?). Read about the division of the world during the "empire colonizations" of Portugal and Spain (which is one of the colonizers who used Christianity to invade nations) and you may understand more.
Wait a second, Dialectical Materialism...
Should have caught that one before. May I presume you are a Marxist?
Seems like history is being rewritten. I know what I read about history. I wrote about it lots. Soon, you will try to remove God from the bible, in addition to America.
Funny Genea I can't reply to your post.
Anyway, history is not being re-written. You just refuse to read books that don't share your views or what you think are contradictory to your opinions.
You need as much books as you can read to find out more about history. Do not refuse to keep on reading history. The more you know, the better.Are you and genaea talking about the same thing? She is talking specifically about the founding of America, you seem to be talking the formations of primitive societies.
It's certainly true that there were many sources of templates for documents written by the Founding Fathers. And compared to many people of today they were generally men of broad learning who were acquainted with thought systems different from their own. That doesn't change the fact that the majority of them were deeply Christian and the things they wrote into those documents came from a Christian framework.Chris Neal I am not talking about formation of primitive societies.
I just used the primitive society transformation as an example so Genea can have a full context of how nations are founded including the founding of America.
In case you don't know, primitive societies were the first stage of society without state or without the concept of nation - when primitive communal was replaced by the "concept of private ownership through the slavery society - the concept of nation was introduced.
Anyway, as I've said just because the US Constitution have so much about words and concepts that may be similar to the Christian belief, it is already founded on Christian belief.
A nation is founded - including the Constitution - to ensure the territory and the people of a nation to benefit from its full resources (in principle). That's the context of a constitution. It is for economic protection and gains and other important aspects in order to make a nation work the way it should..
Not all people who do things - just because they're Christians - make it a point to create something out of their Christian beliefs. Say, a Christian kill a person - does he do that out of his Christian beliefs? Not necessarily yes.
The Constitution was created in the context of nation building and not Christian promotion.
But, it would be important to note that religion is a tool to protect the status quo of those who are in power - who makes the nation works so that no matter how bad they go about their jobs, they can always quote God and hope to get away with it.
Clearly, it is (Christianity) not a basis of the formulation of a Constitution. Christianity is just a means to provide excuses when contents of the Constitutions are broken.
-
"Of the 55 delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention, 49 were Protestants, and two were Roman Catholics (D. Carroll, and Fitzsimons). Among the Protestant delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 28 were Church of England (or Episcopalian, after the American Revolutionary War was won), eight were Presbyterians, seven were Congregationalists, two were Lutherans, two were Dutch Reformed, and two were Methodists.
A few prominent Founding Fathers were anti-clerical Christians, such as Thomas Jefferson (who created the so-called "Jefferson Bible") and Benjamin Franklin. Others (most notably Thomas Paine) were deists, or at least held beliefs very similar to those of deists.
Historian Gregg L. Frazer argues that the leading Founders (Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Wilson, Morris, Madison, Hamilton, and Washington) were neither Christians nor Deists, but rather supporters of a hybrid "theistic rationalism"." ~~ WikiYou're proving my point for me again? I love that!
Wiki is not the be all and end all. Anyone can write something for it. And whether the analysis stands or falls tends to depend on who is 'editing' it. Egregious errors notwithstanding (like the stupidity about Paul Revere from a few years ago.)
If you really think that there is no Christian language in the Constitution, or the Declaration of Independence, then either you haven't read them, or you have but you're determined that since the words 'God' and 'Jesus' don't appear there, they must not be Christian. The Founding Fathers were almost to a man deeply Christian, many were pastors in churches. Phrases like "all men are created equal" are Christian. Many of the most cherished American ideals were planted by preachers and theologians who found them in the Bible and translated them into American law.
If you don't believe it, that's your choice. But THAT is why you "can't have a rational discussion with believers..."Chris - your ignorance of history is showing once again. That phrase is no where in the bible - sorry. Do you just make this stuff up as you go along? Far as I cam tell - the founding fathers despised your religion to a man.
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."
Thomas JeffersonI bet he made that statement for the "why this Godstuff" whiners. Mustve been election time
Is google broken for you?
https://www.google.com/search?q=Christi … hannel=rcs
No links for the bible one - sorry. Pretty certain that phrase is not in it though. Plenty of stuff about slavery and murdering the heathens. Is that why America started out by murdering the heathens and importing slaves by the boatload? Because they were Christian?
You have heard of the Jefferson bible - right?You're right that the phrase "all men are created equal" does not appear per se or verbatum in the Bible. But the idea that all mean are created equal appears in many places. Probably the best known is when Paul said that "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:28. That's pretty explicit.
And America did not start out by importing slaves by the boatload. And when Americans did, it was not in all places in America. In fact, the majority of colonies (and later states) were specifically anti-slavery and wrote laws codifying same. But the original colonies did not import slaves. Nor did they start out 'murdering the heathens.' Might want to read the history a little more carefully. I'm not denying Manifest Destiny, the Trail of Tears, or any of that. What I'm saying is that turning this into a sweeping generalization of all Americans at all times in all places is the opposite of historical accuracy. As well as fairness and scholarly work.
And yes, I've heard of the Jefferson Bible. What do you think you know about it?
I'll check out the link.
- just beautiful!!!
It's Tuesday, I haven't forgotten. It seems to me that the "all men are created equal" was in referring to the founders own equality with the King of England. As for the rest of mankind it was clear that this statement of equality did not extend to women, slaves or the indigenous tribes of America. The reality of the matter is that their notion of equality meant for equality for their private club.
The word created specifically denotes a belief in God, the Creator.
You're right that their ideas of equality didn't extend universally the way we aspire to today, but they were more wide-reaching than other systems of the day. Many of the Founding Fathers were anti-slavery.
Always makes me laugh when someone says to read the history books again, BUT only this particular book. History books are an interesting piece of propaganda. It's investing to note the differences between the American and Canadian history of the war of 1812. Somehow both sides won.
Hey, only 2% in the beginning were Catholics and about 1% Jewish. Rest were all Christians. They pray together in congress.
Rad it is true, but most are only formal. I wanted point out how many were non Catholics and Catholics. Catholics that time did not read Bible but Protestants did.
I can see that a lot of people on here are worried about religion fading and faith being lost. They are wondering...why is our country losing its religion? I can tell you why? Its because of Obama and the liberals. They want to get rid of religion. They even tried taking about "God" from our pledge. Obama is not for religion. I am Cuban and I have experienced communism and socialism. Obama is a spitting image. He says spread the wealth.... Cuba spread the wealth... now everyone is equally poor. Obama wants to add more Welfare programs because it causes more dependency on government and makes less people want to start making money because then they wont have all the free handouts the government gives. He supressed freedom of speech in front of any agents which is rading the constitution. and come one... Obamacare? really? Cuba also got rid of religion so that the country could worship Fidel as their God. Spread the wealth, no religion, restricted freedom of speech, messing with the constituion? ALL SIGNS OF SOCIALISM!!!! DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS MAN WHO HAS TIES WITH ALL OUR ENEMIES AND TERRORISTS!!! He even stated that Capitalism does not work!!! What kind of president is this? Oh and not letting the soldiers vote early when eveyone else can? how is that fair? He has put us more in debt and weakened our country's faith, ROMNEY RYAN 2012 all the way!!! Its the smart choice!
Communists and socialists are not terrorists. Please search more carefully about what these words mean before making conclusions.
And I can assure you that Obama is not siding with the Socialist. Clearly, he is siding with the 1% capitalist. Everything that he is saying now is just to get the votes he need to win the election. And where and when did he "say" that capitalism no longer works? I haven't heard about this statement from him. But, well, I can say that yes - capitalism really no longer works. Capitalism wants monopoly and when there is monopoly of the wealth, there is poverty and less social services.I agree. Capitalism is not the answer. It promotes greed. It was bank greed under Bush that started the financial meltdown. Unfortunately what is needed is better government regulation. A case in point, the Canadian banks were unharmed during that melt down because of government regulations prevents them from taking advantage of people. Without regulations corporations at their very nature are psychopathic.
same with people without commandments to follow from god, they descend into psychopathology
Really, where did you hear that? Do you have stats that show non-believers are immoral. 12% of Americans are Atheists, but less then 1.2% end up in jail.
75% of Amaricans are Christian and 75% of the prison system are Christians.
I'm not sure why you attacked me like that, I was referring to corporations by there nature are psychopathic. They have to be that way because there only interest is to the shareholders, so they make money at any cost. How many large American Corporation use manufactures in China? Why would they do that when they are putting Americans out of work? MONEY AT ANY COST.dove777, of course you are aware that what you just stated is just meant to attack Rad Man and have no basis whatsoever.
Psychopathology or Mental illness is not a by-product of non-belief in God. Medical books explain carefully why people develop mental illnesses. First, genes and second, environment.
Actually, I am pretty confident to tell you that believers can be more prone to triggers of psychopathology tendencies because they are always force-fed with dogma and they are forced to practice their dogma and their faith and with the lack of knowledge of most believers - they tend to be loaded with too much information so that their minds usually give up and they tend to develop signs of mental illnesses.
Faith introduces belief in something that's non existent - illusions, that is. Illusions can become delusions and delusions can lead to psychosis. Of course, this happens when a person already has psyschopathology genes and with religion's force-feeding of wrong information, the mind-stress could trigger those genes to work actively and could start mental illness to develop.
The question is then, what is the alternative? I'm not arguing in favor of unbridled Capitalism, I'm asking a serious question.
Unbridled Capitalism clearly breeds 'winners and losers' and helps perpetuate the myth that anyone who is not a 'winner' is too lazy to support themselves. I'm not in favor. But the opposite side of the political-economic spectrum (Communism) has had the ironic tendency to breed, well, lazy people. Their jobs are secure, they get paid no matter what work they do or don't do, and the system stinks anyway because only (again, ironically) those who play the game best (also known as 'winners') get the good house and the actual working car.While I am not a communist it is worth pointing out that while the capitalist problems are ingrained in that system the communist ones can be fixed through proper management, for example, quotas and incentives can provide worker motivation.
In my opinion the correct balance lies a little more centrally than communism in a species of moderate socialism.Living, as I do, in a socialist society, I tend to agree that a little more socialism is not a bad thing. But I disagree that communism can be fixed. It's a fundamentally flawed system. I'm not saying that capitalism isn't, but then again if communism could be tweaked then so could capitalism.
Why does it have to be one or the other? Clearly both have problems.
I'm not saying it has to be one or the other. I agree that both have clear problems. I'm just trying to sound out the views of the person I was responding to.
Well, when Socialist nations make mistakes - clearly, there will be problems. Any system of government is not infallible. Look at what happened to China and Russia which were both doing good when they were true to socialist theories but when they started to have wrong analysis and have wrong understanding of socialist theories, they both turned to capitalist systems.
So, for socialist nations to really work right, it has to be really cautious and make sure that it remains true to socialist theories. Otherwise, there will always be more China and Russia.So you're saying that mass starvation, mass repressions, basic economic failures and massacre of dissidents is a system that's working?
I've heard of those and they were found out to be untrue based on what I read. But, if you can give me the source of those news (in case they're different from what I already know) and let's see if I can explain it to you.
If you are referring to the Long March, yes admittedly, that was a mistake and the CPC as far as my research went gave Mao a disciplinary action for that and took full responsibility of what happened. It was a mistake.
Okay, but that's just one example. What about Stalin's program? It resulted in millions of people starving. And dissidents were tossed in the Gulag. The lucky ones were simply shot.
Stalin was a dictator and killed anyone and everyone whom he thought were a threat. He made a mockery of religion as he did atheism using violence to attain his means. Stalin cared very little about communism, religion, atheism or the people. Stalin only cared about Stalin.
And, it's pretty much the same with all the other dictators and despots throughout history.I completely agree.
The point I was arguing with was that somehow Russia simply needed to tweak their socialism and everything would have been a literal workers paradise. The person I was debating said that there weren't these mass killings and starvations in Russian and Chinese history under communism.
Russia and China can't be called communist states. They were socialist states. Please go up for my definition of communism.
There were killings but as a result of mistakes. The starvation are a product of mistakes. These mistakes were clearly admitted and the people responsible were given disciplinary actions and judged deeply by history.
The issues against Stalin are mere black propaganda. The only mistake of Stalin is that he was not able to realize that in a socialist state, there are still classes. The bourgeois class triumphed over the proletariat so after Stalin died, more mistakes happened and everyone that came after Stalin literally did not implement the socialist principles - they became the modern revisionists and so Russia went back to capitalism.
But, let me also tell you that capitalism are also killing people and are also causing mass starvation. And they are greater in number. Do you know how many women and children have already died because of the war in Iraq, Afganistan and other countries which US government chose to launch a war against? It's been 10 years since your troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan, did the US government ever stopped for a moment to think of the lives lost in a war that have caused your country nothing but your taxes and your young men who could have done better for your country if they did not have to die in a war? Your troops are still there and more are dying everyday.
Do you know how Cuba is suffering because your government's economic blockade?
Capitalism is cruel. It does not apologize, it does not accept mistakes. And since when Americans have been asking the government to stop the war? Until now, your government choose to kill and let your young and brave men die for a war that does not really serve the interest of the American people.
Socialism wants equality. Capitalism wants monopoly of capital. Just looking at the aim of these two systems, you already know what's headed to better things.
Do not use the mistakes of former socialist nations to close your doors on socialism. Learn about the how socialism works without the mistakes you are talking about and there can be great things happening. And also, do not just believe the black propaganda from US,anti-socialist media or media controlled by the government or people or books. Read about the other books too and independent media or ask the people who are actually from the countries you are talking about. They might be able to tell you just how things are then in a more truthful manner.
So, be objective Sir. Subjectivity is never going to help you learn more.
I could enumerate others. And you know what's sad? No regrets, no admission of mistakes - that's capitalism or at its present state, imperialism.
As I've said Russia and China were once socialist nations but they made mistakes and clearly, the things you are saying are just hearsay and you could not really present concrete proofs.
I told you, give me your sources. Give me the links where you find your claimed data and I can specifically give you an explanation.Communist Russia and China labeled themselves as communist. You can get as pedantic as you want about definitions and labels. Russia said it was communist and practiced communism, therefor I will call Russia during its communist phase a communist state.
That...pretty much says it all right there. It makes anything you say against capitalism disingenuous at the very, very best. No Soviet spokesman ever put it more eloquently.
I never said that capitalism is perfect. In fact, I've said exactly the opposite. America has done many things wrong, and although I may not be as quick to label some things as atrocities as other people, I don't say that anything said against America is "black propaganda" and then shift the argument to the faults of someone else.
Which puts me one up on you.
If you were born in America (which I don't know if you were or not) you have all the same sources as I do. ABC, NBC, BBC, declassified Russian files, history books, PBS, the list goes on. They're not hidden. And you probably know them better than I do.Yes, the party members are communists.
But the government can't be called communist. Hahahahaha.
Example: Union Soviet Socialist Republics or USSR.And, oh I didn't say that you said capitalism is perfect. And I am not also putting the blame on someone else because the blame on capitalism have been there before I ever mentioned them to you.
And, oh sorry, if it didn't settle well with you that I mentioned the ills of capitalism. At least, you've been reminded and educated about it, right?
Alright, to clear up things:
Socialism: To each according to his work done. The class struggle is just between the bourgeois and the proletariat so there are still class - there's still a need to ensure dictatorship of the proletariat - meaning it is to make sure that the bourgeois don't regain power to lead the government. We have seen socialist nations. Many broke down because they have turned back to capitalism or have adopted capitalism - look at China and Russia.
Socialism ensures that the government is managed by the proletariat and oppressed classes - example the bourgeois is the 1% and the proletariat is the 99% if we refer to the current class structure percentage of the American society.
Communism: To each according to his needs. This will only happen when all nations of the world have adopted advanced socialist structures. No government structures. It's still a long way to reach this most advanced society stage and it's not yet been reached so things are still conceptual.
According to Historical Materialism - it's the most advanced theory on the history of the development of world societies. It states that the society is composed of stages (and whatever happens it will take these stages up to the most advanced - it is something that will ultimately happen because advancement can only be hindered within time but will happen eventually)
first stage - primitive communal
2nd stage - slavery
3rd stage - feudalism
4th stage - capitalism (this is where US is - it's at the last stage of imperialism, which means, when it's already near breakdown)
5th stage - socialism
highest stage - communism.
These stages of society is what binds mankind. Societies develop into the higher stage every time a class wins (i.e in feudalism - the struggle was between landlords and tenants. tenants won so capitalism was born. for a perfect example - read on france history). So, once the working class wins, a capitalist nation will start to go for socialism.
So, to answer your question, the best alternative is the highest stage but that can't happen yet. So for capitalist or feudal/semi-feudal societies - the next aim is socialism. It's the next best alternative that could be realized in much a nearer future.The obvious question is why socialist societies that have 'turned back toward capitalism' weren't working when they were still 'advanced' and instead regressed to capitalism?
And why does America not exist as a true capitalist society? In fact, it's been at least a century since it could really and truly be called that. Even during periods under Reagan and Bush 43, it was still a socialist-leaning government.
I may not be a poly-sci whiz, but the analysis seems like a stacked deck with a definite preference. America is not a perfect place by any means, but it still seems, on the whole, to be working better than other places. More people come in than leave.Because they made mistakes Chris Neal. That's what happened. If they would not have made mistakes and have truthfully implemented socialist theories then they would not have gone back to capitalism.
And no, sorry to inform you - US was never left-leaning - not under Reagan and definitely not under Bush. Where are you getting your data? What are your proofs?
Ahm, read more on the different theories and world history so you don't conclude that what you already know is enough to make a conclusion. Just because you don't understand or you don't get it means what I'm telling you is wrong.
If more people are leaving, then give me data. Exact data. Because I will tell you that more people remains in their country (the ones I mentioned) than those who leave). Unless you are saying that Cuba has now less people compared to those who left? Get your data straight, Sir.What I said was that more people come in to the United States than leave it. I wasn't talking about Cuba, or Nicaragua, or Viet Nam. It's the "ten foot wall" theory. Put a ten-foot wall around every country in the world and see which ones people try to enter and which ones people try to leave. With some rare and short-lived exceptions, the US has so far been the main one people try to get into. It may, indeed, be purely economic, the same way that South Africa and Australia become magnets for people trying to make a better life. But it's not a mistake. That's a pretty assumptive statement.
And the idea that China and Russia simply needed to 'fully implement' socialism, to me, only answers my one question in the affirmative. If people are taught that they are nothing more than cogs in the machine, expendable and easily replaced, then things will be fine.
I didn't say America was 'left-leaning' (although as long as I've been alive, you'd have to be pretty far to the left not to say that America has never been that way, but that's neither here nor there,) what I said was that government has had socialist policies, even during more conservative, free-market oriented eras. Hence the references to Reagan and Bush 43. And don't forget that GW Bush got Medicare Part D passed, which is socialist no matter how you slice it. Whether you agree with the policies, think they should be abolished, think they don't go far enough, the fact is that many programs like Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Social Security, are socialist programs.MEdicare, Medicaid, Food stamps, social security are called Social services. Social services are the responsibility of any government.
Please read your Constitution. Read Universal declaration of human rights.
You don't know what you are talking about. The ridiculousness of what you just said has caused my brain to freeze.
How can someone not know that these things are social services?
Thank you.
Cine reviewer....Obviously its harder to leave a country... especially cuba. But i bet if everyone had the choice to leave Cuba or stay.. there would definitely be more people who leave than stay. other countries don't leave because of language barriers, but compare to how many people leave... More people from those people leave their countries than people in the USA leave their country. Why? because America is the country that is better off... YES with CAPITALISM. Cuba started out socialist as well now look at Cuba..
No, Cuba started out with a dictator who was supported by the US.
I kinda wish we'd stop doing that too; it always seems to bite us in the ass in the end.
On a related note, I do wish the US would get rid of that ridiculous embargo; it's a bitch living in Florida (90 miles from Cuba) and having to go to Toronto to get a decent cigar with out paying a small fortune.I live in Toronto and don't like cigars. Ha. Cuba is clever. One of my sons had a friend in school who was Cuban. The Dad is an import and exporter. Importing from the U.S. and exporting to Cuba.
Socialism-patterned programs has done great things for Cuba. It invented the Anti Cervix cancer vaccine. It has the best medical schools in the world. americans go at cuban medical schools to study. It is the only country which has no polio cases. it has one of the highest literacy rate in the world.
If the economic blockade imposed by US will be lifted, Cuba can really soar higher in terms of feeding its people and other economic developments.
You may want to know that one of the reasons why Cuba is really hard up is because the US government won't lift the economic blockade. The UN has already passed a resolution to lift the economic blockade but the US won't budge.
So, if people are starving in Cuba, US has a part in it. Just because it's a nation against imperialism (Cuba is not a socialist nation, by the way. It's just an anti-imperialist country), US issued the economic blockade. Heartless government, right?Actually, that's the belief that US is the land of honey and gold. But, that's not entirely true.
I really think that It's the exchange rate that makes US seem more well-off. A dollar would mean how much in another country? Asians go to US because a dollar with mean 40 to 50 times more in their own countries. That's why this whole exchange rate baffles me why it was ever created.
And of course, the jobs available to foreigners are really the kinds of jobs that are not necessarily attractive or things they dream of having - they just wanted to earn more.
Actually, more are going to Europe where a Euro dollar for Asians would mean around 50-60+ times more in their countries.
But, US is not necessarily well-off. US is in big trouble - it has the most debt records in world history.
Based on my studies on how Socialist Russia and China worked - they have launched "remolding campaigns to change the bourgeois culture". China had the Cultural Revolutions which taught them to change ways.
China launched sanitation campaigns, appreciation of china culture, of adopting revolutionary attitudes and the others so that people will become better individuals and adopt proletariat thinking and attitudes - disciplined, advanced, scientific and with great initiative.
That's what Socialism needs to do - prepare its people to become proletariats.
When all people have become proletariats (which would also mean advanced socialist structures), then communism will already be possible - there will be no more need for a government since all individuals will live the proletariat way. Of course, communism is not yet reached so there's no way to gauge the concrete implementation of this society but looking at its concept - it's great but it is surely going to take more than a lifetime to reach this.I get it. If you teach people not to be human beings, but only to be cogs in the machine, expendable and replaceable, then they are good proles and the system is ready for the next great starvation, er, leap forward.
Police states good, and if you thinkcrime that things are too ungood remember that war is peace and some animals are more equal than others.
Because that's where China and Russia were, any actual small improvements in the daily life of the average person notwithstanding, before they 'went backward.'
And it would take a pair of rose-colored glasses, indeed, to say that Socialist Russia was not engaged in imperialism.
I don't know how much longer America has, it won't be dominant forever. But what will replace it will not be what was said to be tried in Russia or China.i advise you to read the post again. you are not getting it.
tell me where are you getting your data and maybe I can help clarify things for you which you do not understand.
And I don't get some of your statements. I think some of it need periods and commas. Also, your last statement is baseless. But, they're your opinions so I will leave you to it but if you are interested to be clarified, I can clarify it for you. Otherwise, it ends here.Genaea...Thats what I was thinking. Lol. He criticizes the other guy for missing a few periods and commas but he does it too. Everyone does...why? Because this is not an essay that we are writing..
I get data from history books and the news.
Cine. I am sad you have incorrect information. I lived in two systems and was educated in both. The basic first article of communism is distribution of wealth. But it is not taking money and property from rich but from all. The reason is control plus loving money they do not belong to them. It is typical for materialism. There are more points but not having time to list them. In socialism where we lived all lost everything and money was changed. My dad was a carpenter and has some saving for old age, education of wedding. He lost everything. We become poor and dependable. Everything belonged to system. There was control, no freedom even joking, freedom to travel abroad or from city to city without permission and registration in police. See we do not have yet socialism (communism) here but mixture of capitalism and socialism. Socialism is quite restricted and obscure. If wealthy would loose money they will be quickly spend and there will be no money for support even family. We lived on potatoes mostly and bread. The meat was only Sunday. Still we had to stay in line for meat or coal for heating and cooking. There was shortage for everything. I was physician and lived on less than $ 2 a day. Nobody can understand how could be. Now before full socialism (communism) was implemented we have Slovak saying: When they try to catch the bird they nicely sing to him. But when someone will try to fully control, then will make many unhappy. We love freedom and we did not see anything what mean "control."
Vladimir I am not wrong I am pretty confident that my knowledge regarding the development of society in different nations are extensive. I have read and extensively studied Marxism, Lenninism, Maoism and the history and/or downfall of socialist nations.
I am pretty aware of what I am saying. I am sorry to say that most of those who contradict socialism are those who have benefited from the old system - whether feudal, capitalist or semi-feudal. That is why, they resent the new system because their benefits are gone and they have to be rationed just like everyone else - of course, this should be a temporary situation - as most socialist nations go through a process of industry building until they can improve on their economic systems - look at Russia; it was able to build in 10 years what US had to in decades (Cold War, space race). The important thing to note Vladimir is that in your country when the situation used to be - those who have so much to eat, who have enough to eat and those who have nothing to eat are no longer present. Everyone can eat now - isn't that something to be happy about that everyone in your country can eat now as compared to the situation before where there was abundance in some but hunger in most?
But, of course, as I've said, this kind of socialization of services does not appeal to those who were cradled in the old society with enough or more than enough. That's the reason why rich or well-off families in Cuba fled Cuba, rich or well-off Nepalese left Nepal especially before and after the establishment of the transition government and the same way that well-off and rich Koreans fled North Korea and have chosen to stay in other Asian countries.There we go, that answers my question. Yes, I may presume you are a Marxist.
I believe you are quite aware of what you are saying. I believe you have studied extensively. I also think Vladimir has a certain perspective that you don't. I could be wrong, and if I am I apologize, but you seem to be the kind of person who has studied about but never lived in a 'socialist' country like Russia or China (or North Korea.) I find people who've never lived in a communist country trying to tell people who have lived there what it's like as amusing as people who tell me what it's like to live in New York City when they've maybe been through there for a few minutes.
But if I'm wrong, if you actually have lived in one of those countries for an extended period of time, then I apologize.
cine reviewer....Look it up. Its all over the media. And I never said socialism has anything to do with terrorism....I said Obama has ties with the terrorists...which he does...look that up too. Also, Obama sides with capitalism....no he definitely sides with socialism but just wait and see if he gets elected again, i guess that is the only way you will see it.
Well, you did so tell it in your post that he has ties with socialism.
And your last statement just contradicted your first statement. Make up your mind. Try to make make me understand.
And really if he sides with socialism, he would have been applauded by socialist nations? Are there any socialist nations applauding him? None that I know of. They hate his policies - the policies of the US government. The US government overseas policies have done nothing but hurt people all over the world.
I can see that a lot of people on here are worried about religion fading and faith being lost. They are wondering...why is our country losing its religion? I can tell you why? Its because of Obama and the liberals. They want to get rid of religion. They even tried taking about "God" from our pledge. Obama is not for religion. I am Cuban and I have experienced communism and socialism. Obama is a spitting image. He says spread the wealth.... Cuba spread the wealth... now everyone is equally poor. Obama wants to add more Welfare programs because it causes more dependency on government and makes less people want to start making money because then they wont have all the free handouts the government gives. He supressed freedom of speech in front of any agents which is rading the constitution. and come one... Obamacare? really? Cuba also got rid of religion so that the country could worship Fidel as their God. Spread the wealth, no religion, restricted freedom of speech, messing with the constituion? ALL SIGNS OF SOCIALISM!!!! DO NOT VOTE FOR THIS MAN WHO HAS TIES WITH ALL OUR ENEMIES AND TERRORISTS!!! He even stated that Capitalism does not work!!! What kind of president is this? Oh and not letting the soldiers vote early when eveyone else can? how is that fair? He has put us more in debt and weakened our country's faith, ROMNEY RYAN 2012 all the way!!! Its the smart choice!
Mandy7. U said it right. I had the same experience in Czechoslovakia. Identical. *** Let me say this: The feet in Nabuchodnozor dream (Bible) are from clay and iron. It is exactly so. Iron is mixture of Communism (Stalin remember his name?) and pagan religion. In the long ran it will not stay together. Cannot mix.
I thought you'd like this, it seems to fit the direction the conversation has taken...
Good FB pic, I agree, you Americans should return the land to the original occupants... are you up for that?
Plus, as you previously pointed out, the first settlers needed the locals help to survive, it was the (Godless?) US Cavalry that did the killing....
Religion has plenty to answer for, but Christ does not, it's how men abused His commandments (and chose to ignore them) that caused and causes the damage.The problem is the bible is too conflicting. People get whatever they want out of it. For example the televangelists flying around in the private jets taking advantage of the weak, the old and the sick. I'm pretty sure the bible says Jesus asks his followers to stay poor and help others, not get rich and take advantage of others. The problem is not with the message of Jesus it's with the bible.
I agree, it's with the way folk USE the bible to do what THEY want, which of course is a complete opposite of what it's supposed to be.
The problem is with the greed of the men. Not the bible.
Wasn't it you who just said that a man without a job doesn't deserve to feed his family? That's greed. Now your saying people are to greedy. Sure they are, but when you tell them share with the less fortunates the Christian Republicans say NO. Ask for universal health care and they say NO. Not very Christ like are they?
No. A lazy man should not eat. He is not providing, he is sleeping. A man who tries, should be assisted.
Perhaps a lazy man should be given help. Should a lazy man's children go hungry?
A lazy man's children, WILL go hungry. Unless mother is doing his job for him.
Or his country has social assistance and universal health care.
You have the viewpoint of the 1%.
It's no wonder - the 1% or the old-rich were behind the creation of religion so they can keep people from changing the world and instead of working in order to end oppression - they would rather pray and refer to the Beatitudes.
Yes, I'm sorry Genea - it might not appear right to you but it's the truth - religion or the concept of God was created to make you not choose to change the world and still just hope for a happy after-life.
That's the reason why as the world experience more economic crisis - the more that people cling to religion. The more religious sects are created because there is increasing world poverty.
When you seem to run out of reasons to solve your problems - because you can't deal with them scientifically and your knowledge is not yet enough to find the right solutions or answers to your questions - religion teaches you to hang on to something infinite, something all-powerful because it makes you feel better - it makes you almost feel euphoric. That's religion - it's a escapist creation by the old 1% (and of which the current 1% protects and propagates) so people will stop complaining and stop analyzing why there is poverty and why things are happening in the world.
In short, religion is a weapon of the 1%. It's their way to make people think that there is no injustice in the way that some men drink champagne on corporate planes and have food triple that they can actually eat while American people have to line up for food stubs.
Religion talks about oppression but teaches people not to fight and change it; it merely says, pray and hope for a better life - do not take action. And that's precisely what the 1% want - no action, no resistance so they can maintain the status quo.
And unless people will understand and realize this - religion will stay.
But, because humans have rights and that they are entitled to to practice and choose a religion - we should respect their beliefs as we try to teach them to understand what religion/faith in God really is.
But, it's just frustrating sometimes, it's just so hard when people defend their faith blindly and unreasonably that it becomes extremely hard to explain and convince and to teach.I am not defending anything. I am simply spreading knowledge and hoping to sprinkle at least some additional intelligence, err, knowledge to you.
You sure need it.
Are you aware that social services are a government responsibility and it is the people's right?
So, are you saying that God then is against human right?God himself creates human,how can he be against human right?
Well, that's what I want to ask Genea because she said that people who do not have work should not eat including children because "where are their dads?"
Unbelievable, right? And, oh, by the way, Genea claims she is a Christian and that she believes in God.Hahahahaha!!! You are still quoting me wrong! Now, I think purposefully;) MEN WHO DO NOT "WANT" TO WORK, SHOULD NOT EAT. He takes up space and does not do what he is put here to do.
I am not quoting you wrong. No matter a person works or not, he has the right to eat. It's a human right. Lecturing a person who do not work is reasonable but to deprive him of food is not only heartless but cruel.
Nothing of what you just said is right.
I am not quoting you wrong. You are just thinking wrong.Well, the bible says, if he dont want to work...
I know what the Bible says and believe the Bible. The question is, do the people want to work or not? I've been in plenty of situations where I want to work but can't find any and God has provided through the kindness of others (both friends and through the government.) I don't think it unBiblical for the government to run charity programs. I think Paul was saying that a lazy man doesn't deserve things for free, but Jesus said we should give without questioning. That's a simplification, but both sides of this discussion seem to be stuck in ruts. I don't think you, genaea, are taking some kind of Rush Limbaugh-esque view that anybody who doesn't have a job doesn't want one, are you?
And both from my own experience and from people I've known, I can tell you that the dole ain't easy. It's work!You know that the words and thoughts of the "idiot Christian" are always stretched
of course I am NOT saying no job, no food. I said, as the bible, if you don't WANT to work, you should not eat. Men are providers. It came about during the "argument" about ATMs starving children, that God "allows" to die everyday. I said one, "their fathers are charged with their care, where are their fathers?" And we hit the ground running in yet another direction. They pluck at it and pluck at it until they "corner" you with the resulting "confusion" that arguing over words usually brings.
And wow you could laugh and be so proud of what you think that "men who do not want to work should not eat".
That's really something.
I'm a bit hesitant to speak for genaea, but I think she's taking the verse "For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." (2 Thessalonian 3:10) and applying it literally. But I don't know for sure. I'm stepping into the middle of this conversation and I don't want to misrepresent either side.
That was the script. I never said that children should not eat. I said that it is their father's responsibility to care for them. When the "starving children" were discussed, I asked where their dads were. And no, I don't think men who refuse to work should eat. Yes, it being scripture adds a bit of "lemon".
Giving a man a fish one day is fine. Teach him to fish so he can eat every day.
God GAVE human right. Governments align the people by their laws. Social services are for women widows and children, the "helpless" biblically. Men are biblically providers. They are built for it, and they are charged with it. Men provide and protect.
The assignment of man as the sole provider is a patriarchal belief - it is not only outdated but a product of an oppressive society.
No, God did not give human right. A little history lesson. Human rights was coined and created only when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was signed by nations of the world. Nope, sorry to inform you, the word human right was not yet in the dictionary during the supposed lifetime of Jesus.
And to inform you more, the UDHR was a result of the nationalist struggles of many nations before and after the World War II.I didnt say sole. Today, it is almost impossible for him.
You just said.
"Men are biblically providers. They are built for it, and they are charged with it. Men provide and protect."
You did not say the word "sole" but that's the synonym of the words you used in the sentence above.
Funny, when you are cornered you turn back on your words. Hmm, interesting, now you are cornered. Do you now realize you are promoting a wrong belief and claiming it "Christian" and "Faith in God"?
Oh, of course you wont. You "(I) speak the truth", eh?Cornered??? No such luck for you. You jest
what man does not "have" to work??? Such a silly misquote. I did not change. You read what you WANT to read. (snicker here)I said that men even if they don't work should be able to eat. And maybe, you a Christian - who claims so - can just help those who do not work - in case there are really those people who do not want work - to convince them to work or much better provide them work so they can eat.
And I do not misquote. My intelligence is of the level where it is impossible to misquote you, I assure you.
She didn't say 'sole' because she didn't mean it. Biblically speaking, men are supposed to provide and protect, but women are charged with being helpmates. They work and provide and protect too, but they do it differently.
To say that the word is a synonym in your understanding and therefore your interpretation is the only correct one and therefore she is dodging the question (did you manage to follow that? ) is, pardon my language, a bit presumptuous.I knew I was seeing that right! But I thought it was a bit, something other than presumptuous
It's not an interpretation Chris Neal. Obviously, it is what it means.
But, if you refuse to recognize that the statement is what does obviously means, then that's your opinion.
So, simple words are not really to be interpreted. They're just to be taken as they are. And I took them as they are. I don't think I would be told that the word I used and the Genea's words are completely different. Except by you, of course and other people who share Genea's opinions.You have got to wake up before you start typing. I would love to respond here, but it seems you coded Your comment. May I have the answer key?
Wow! I like you! You are an amazing example. If all I wanted was to have fun, you would be the easiest, most pedantic and humorless target yet. I bet I could get you worked into a total frenzy if that was all I wanted!
Keep plugging!
And then you asked to separate church and state?
Separation of church and state (and not to be cliche`, but that phrase is not in the Constitution of the United States) is more complicated than a lot of people want to make it. It would be great if the Establishment clause existed the way most people want to say it, without the Abridgement Clause.
The Bible is about man's (or woman's, or child's, the point being it's singular) relationship with God. Corporately, yeah, if we follow Jesus we should be on the same page with other believers, but the germane thing is that it's about you, yourself, and your relationship with God. Jesus did not propose theocracy. So yeah, it's great if government does Christian things like feed the poor, clothe the naked, house the homeless. But government is not supposed to be theocratic. And there are two sides to theocracies (or whatever term you want to call a government that is specifically atheist.) One is that if you happen to believe in the god of that government, they make it possible for you to do a lot. But if you differ with the government, even in small little details, they come in and interfere like crazy.
Yeah, there's plenty of examples in the US (I don't know about Canada) where the government interfered with the rights of those who aren't Christian, or aren't a certain kind of Christian, to practice their religion. Now it's swinging the other way, and it's not hyperbole to say that if current trends continue, churches that practice what the Bible actually teaches will be shut down.Awww. If only these Christians were as you describe them. You know - feeding the poor, housing the homeless etc. Sadly - this is not the case.
Let's hope the current trend continues and the self righteous money grubbers that make up the bulk of the churches are actually shut down - yes?
What the bible actually teaches? Slavery, no divorce, polygamy, murdering witches. etc.Actually, yes it is. Most just do it in small, under the radar programs.
I would love to see them shut down. Then the ones who really teach what Jesus said could be heard better.
Someone as intelligent as you should not need me to point out the difference between recording actions and endorsing actions. Nowhere in the Bible is slavery or polygamy endorsed. They were tolerated by God, but if you read the Bible you see that it always ends badly. And Jesus never told us to stone anybody (I know you know the quote, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.")
And as a child of divorce myself and someone who's watched the effects that the 'freedom' of no-fault divorce has had on this country, you'd have a difficult time convincing me that 'no divorce' would be such a bad policy. Yes, there are abusive people and that's different. Most marriages don't end because of abusiveness. Maybe more people would actually think about what marriage means before getting into it. And maybe more of them would think about what it actually means before playing married without the paper.Please stop insulting my intelligence. Thank you. By far the majority do not. There is a what? 80% claim to be Christians in the USA?
By your reckoning - there would be no homeless or poor. Small, under the radar sounds about right. So small it has no effect.No who's insulting who's intelligence? I've been through the '80% claim' thing in one way or another in forums and in hubs. If you don't know my answer to that one by now, it's not because I haven't made the statements.
Sorry - I forgot - none of those are real Christians.
So - how many we got - 3?Ah yes, oversimplification. That's easily the most effective weapon of people (on any given side of an argument) who don't want to deal with information.
What information is that? You make baseless claims and expect them to be taken as true?
Come on - how many real Christians? 5?
Seriously - if the majority of Christians were as you described - we would not even be having this conversation. Would we?That depends, Mark. I find it hard to believe that you lack the imagination to think that maybe the people who actually follow what Jesus said are flying under the radar. An exact number is not important, and you know it. The fact is that Jesus Himself said that many people who thought of themselves as His followers will be very surprised. Yeah, 80 percent of America claims to be Christian.
The majority of Christians attend small, sometimes tiny, churches and try to get by and live the way God wants them to the best they can. They aren't rich but they do share. These people don't make headlines. Joel Osteen (who I would be surprised if you can't find his telly program in France) attracts 600,000 people to his church every week telling people that God wants them to be rich and successful right now. But the Bible doesn't say that. Still, it's Osteen who people know.
When God tells you what the rules are for owning and being a slave he is endorsing slavery.
No, He is telling humanity that IF they insist on doing their own will, and disregarding His word, then He makes some rules to protect those enslaved.
By the 1913 Acts approved in your country, American 'citizens' are all slaves anyway, and all your goods and everything you believe you own is actually pledged to the Banksters, your birth certificate is actually a bill of sale to your owners.
With God, the slavers lose all rights over us, without God, you are owned by the Princes of Darkness that rule your world.
Galatians 3:27-29
Amplified Bible (AMP)
For as many [of you] as were baptized into Christ [into a spiritual union and communion with Christ, the Anointed One, the Messiah] have put on (clothed yourselves with) Christ.
There is [now no distinction] neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is not male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
And if you belong to Christ [are in Him Who is Abraham’s Seed], then you are Abraham’s offspring and [spiritual] heirs according to promise.More lies, God tells people to do lots of things, remember his commandments. The bible does't say anything against slavery only the rules for it. So telling me that we have free will and he can't stop us in a lie. He tells us not to kill, not to steal, not to swear using his name and all kinds of other good stuff, but says nothing about slavery.
You've got my country wrong.Odd - you would have thought he would have put that bit in the book instead of having to have you tell us.
Prolly would have been easier if He had said, "No slavery," huh?
Agreed on the banks. Not much we do agree on, so we should make the most of that one. The sooner we go back to salt or gold as a medium of exchange the better.
Really? Then why does He allow the situation to end so badly? And what if it's not slavery as you know it? What if society were (gasp) actually very very different three thousand years ago than it is now? What if the situation weren't a hundred percent black and white, reducible by anybody with an ax to grind to a few simple sentences?
Sorry, I know I go on a bit. It just frustrates me that so many smart people do these things.Chris, just because you don't want the bible to condone slavery doesn't mean it condemns slavery. It's just one of the many ethical problems with the bible. Would you like me to point out where it describes just how to beat a slave close to death?
Didn't you already do that in your hub?
That argument is valid but it's easily turned. Just because you don't want the Bible to condemn slavery doesn't mean it condones it. And you've read my hubs about it so you know that, whether you agree with me or not, I have ready answers for these points. If my points are wrong I will admit it but simply reiterating the things I've already spoken to is not the same as proving me wrong.Yes, we've beaten this one well enough. If you can show me where the bible condemns slavery specifically, I'll shut up and apologies. It should say something like. Pay or free your slaves.
Luke 4:17-19
King James Version (KJV)
And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
Christ speaking....
Isaiah 61:1-3
King James Version (KJV)
[i]The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;[/j]
...and in the Old Testament also...It says everybody is equal in Christ. The implication is that if the master is really no better than his slave (and all slavery involves someone who thinks that they are entitled to own someone else because of some kind of superiority) then the master should start treating the slave better, more like an equal. And this leads to believing that slaves should be free. Which is why America was originally anti-slavery.
That is your implication. You have to imply. I'm not sure why, you should not steal, you should not kill... where is the you should not keep a slave?
I don't find slavery funny. It's not hard for most to figure out what I meant by that.
If he didn't I sure will. The bible should have a condemnation of slavery not support for it. The bible should not tell you to murder people for being gay, or having sex before marriage let alone by stoning to death which is one of the worst deaths one can experience. The bible has the deaths of millions of innocents on it's pages for some of these comments and they should not be there in any text that purports to be a moral guide.
Simple as that.And who died to make you the moral police???
The bible says that homosexuality/fornication/adultery are wrong. The penalty for the practices is death, for all. When Jesus came, he brought with him, mercy for those with faith in his death/resurrection. We must agree with truth first and be humble in where we fall short. This creates a heart that does not judge others. A heart that is ready for change. A HEART that is ready for change. Now, he is able to "walk you through it". And he will for the rest if your days. There will always be a place you fall short. Since I know that. I KNOW that I need his spirit to walk with me.Yes, those are exactly the kind of moral lessons believers learn, that two people of the same sex who love each while hurting absolutely no one in the process should be murdered. It is appalling barbaric behavior and we know it is simply a snapshot of the way believers behaved back then.
Mankind no longer needs to burden itself with such behaviors, but instead seek to understand real crimes, those against humanity.
Unfortunately, societies are enslaved into a world born, nurtured and ruled by those barbaric religious teachings and behaviors. And, they want us to respect that.Still bad practices according to the bible. If you don't agree, well, don't agree. We would all be doomed if God allowed you to make the rules. It is what it is. We all fall short. Find where it is, go to God with it and acknowledge him in all you do. Or don't.
It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing. It just shows believers have learned a barbaric reward/punishment system in favor of invisible super beings rather than people.
But, we do make the rules, they are called laws and they don't allow you to carry out your God's will by wanting to murder innocent people. It is your gods rules that would've had us doomed.
I wouldn't acknowledge your maniacal god, He has no morals or ethics whatsoever.
Well actually millions of people died to make us the moral police when we attest that slavery, murder, and execution for things like homosexuality are plain evil which is why we ban them in moral society yet they are advocated in the bible. Now in the context of a desert tribe attempting to create rules it makes complete sense, in the context of an all loving all knowing eternal God it makes no sense and is evil.
presuming then that the Bible is God inspired then yes I am more that willing to say it should not have those passages which are so bathed in blood.Yes, God wants to show us how EVIL sin really is. Once he sent his son, all the blood went away. Jesus shed his blood and overshadowed the need for payment. Jesus paid. Now, when we fall; he picks us up, dusts us off, gives us a kiss that reminds us where we went wrong, and sends us back to the playground. He is a great father
Unless you don't believe. Then he burns you for eternity.
What a Super Daddy! You still preaching against what god sed? Wimmin be not preechin.
Save me a seat by the fire.Really? Great Father or absentee father? I don't see him. My Father made sure I was educated can feed. Taught me right and wrong and shows my family love and respect. I don't see the father you are talking about. Never got one check to help with my education.
Oh, I could go on and on and on about how many ways God touches your life daily. But it still would take faith to believe me.
As I've explained before, someone asking to believed on faith is most likely lying.
I am gonna need you to repeat that. Slowly this time.
Okay, for the third time.
A child comes home from school and says
1. I did go to school, just call the office or my teacher she will confirm I was there.
2. I did go to school, just trust me, they don't know what their doing.
Which child is telling the truth?
I most certainly did. Slavery is ethically immoral. The bible should have condemned slavery just as it did murder. I personally would put slavery in the same sin factor as murder.
The "bible" knows the truth. I know that I am about to open myself up to the stoning of the century when I say that: America, for one, would not be the country that it is without it. Not many white backs could have withstood the Georgia sun to accomplish the necessary tasks. It would have made many sick. Possibly devastating their pools of chromosomes forever. The inhumane treatment was evil, but God definitely condemned that practice. People do what they WANT to do. Maybe the bible did not condemn slavery for reasons such as those. I don't know for sure. But to question why is it like that? Is like the thirteen yr old asking, why do I have to have a curfew? Mom and dad know the dangers, they have a broader picture. The kid does not have an idea of why it is that way, and you can argue til the cows come home, until you just gotta say, BECAUSE I SAID SO
we will NEVER understand it all.So whites can't survive the cotton fields, so God supplied and abundance of blacks for free? How nice of him. Whites do just fine working cotton fields and your God seems cruel. I'm not sure why you are supporting slavery and I'm saying it's immoral and equivalent to murder?
Well, I know it is a sad shame to disagree with you but my example was just that. I don't know the reason for the condone of slavery for sure but I do know that black skin is suited for many hours of sunlight tilling without much protection. Different for much lighter skin.
Right so God supported slavery because it was better for everyone
no wonder the Christian faith is disappearing.
If that is the case then God is evil no two ways about it and loses any moral authority, no one who advocates and allows slavery has any right or ethical pillar on which to dictate any actions as moral or not, he has already proven he does not know right from wrong.Just when you think you've heard it all she goes and say God planed slavery to support America because the whites were to weak to work the cotton fields. Jaw dropping.
Context, context. You are running in the wrong direction. I speculated. Nothing more. But it seems plausible to me.
Yes, context. Genaea, I'm replying to your comment, but this is not directed at you. I'm addressing the 'congregation' here.
If this is ever going to be a real conversation, aiming for real results, then true context in each perspective must be given due consideration. For those who see the bible as the product of really imaginative and prolific writers of fiction from the Bronze age, and not the product of writers under the influence of divine inspiration, they'll speak on the topic as such. But when speaking from the opposing perspective, only the most superficial consideration is given to proper context.
For example, in the case of slavery in the Old Testament, it seems to be discussed as if it were something happening in a world as we know it now. Comments about how they should have been freed and paid speak volumes to the total lack of consideration given to the climate in which these stories are set in.
If you're going to argue against the idea that these stories were written through divine inspiration of an all-knowing God then frame your arguments in that context. That's how the texts are written, as if this God they're speaking of truly existed and in some cases truly interceded. The texts also describe the violence that was prevalent in the region, like attacks while out in the open being common like the Amalekites attacking the Israelites, or the apparently very real possibility of travelers being gang-raped by the men of Lot's town.
I doubt anyone here could truly imagine what that must have been like. Before civilization spread and there were large gaps between those civilized lands of utter lawlessness. Slavery in the context of Old Testament times was not nearly the plight it's being made out to be here. It was very much common place. Slavery in those days meant protection, shelter, and food. Your alternative was fending for yourself in the open landscape.
For tens of thousands of years that wasn't a problem. But, again, context is key. Genesis describes the first beings with truly free will being introduced into an already populated world. Where before there was no sense of individuality, no pride in being better than one another, no prizing or hoarding of possessions, no class or sexual inequality, after the introduction of free will this was a whole different story.
Archaeological evidence supports this idea in pre-historic homo sapien tribal cultures, studies of indigenous primal cultures of the past couple of centuries supports this idea, and every culture from Genesis, to the Greeks and Romans, to Hindu/Indian Mythology, to Chinese Mythology, all agree that in the ancient past there was a golden age before heightened self-awareness where people lived according to the will of nature rather than a will of their own.
This is the context in which the stories of the Old Testament should be considered. A new element had been introduced by the God of the bible into the world and was running rampant. If you're going to criticize, at least criticize it in the correct context. Then maybe these conversations can really reach some sort of meaningful conclusion. Maybe.This conversation will never come to a meaningful conclusion until after the time is at hand. We disagree. Many disagree. I cannot prove to you or anyone else who refuses to believe as I. No one can prove to me, what I CHOOSE to disbelieve. I will not come to the conclusion that God is not real or that he hasn't walked with me since I was conceived. How shall WE reason together??? We are not going in the same direction. Now, we could agree to disagree, but aint that cheatin'? We will have a much better time just harmonizing with those with whom we agree. However, i have not come up with the person that makes me unable to be cordial. We can talk all day, or two weeks, we will still be headed in different directions. The longer we walk, the less we are able to hear eachother. That's logical, right?
Yeah, I understand what you're saying. But I think this only really applies where the personal/spiritual journey of life and finding God is concerned. However, we live in a very unique time where we can actually apply scientific methods to reconstruct the past and really begin to figure it all out. If the bible is true, and the stories it tells about God's actions really happened, then those actions played a pivotal role in our history. Right now we tend to look at the data from a strictly material way because that is how scientific understanding works best, but doing so leaves some significant gaps in the story that haven't yet been figured out.
It's those same gaps that are directly described in Genesis as being the actions of God. So, I believe there really can be a meaningful conclusion reached where understanding human history is concerned. I've seen it for myself. And like I imagine Galileo must have felt frustrated with the 'old' ways of thinking that were still prevalent after having seen with his own eyes through his telescope the phases of Venus that confirmed for certain that the earth was not at the center of our planetary system, I too feel frustrated reading these pointless discussions that never go anywhere.
Real results can be achieved, but just like is usually the case, it's our own 'human-ness' that continues to get in the way.Actually - that is not what he claims. LOL
This is what he claims:
Vladimir Uhri escaped from communistic Czechoslovakia by swimming across the Adriatic sea from Yugoslavia to Italy. Later he entered free America. His hobbies are writing, publishing, music and phography. He is the author of 43 books, over 400 articles and pamphlets. He was publishing Letters of Victory newsletter. He is an avid downhill skier and enjoys studying Hebrew. He is speaking English, Slovak, Czech, Russian.
He received doctorate degree in medicine and was in research in experimental pathophysiology in Brno, Czech Republic, the crib of genetics where father of genetics Mendel did his research.
He was married to Carol who moved to heaven. They had together three children.
In his earlier life, during communistic persecution he was a leader (overseer) and Bible teacher of Underground Church in Slovakia.
Now he is the pastor of New Creation Fellowship for more than 25 years. He is tither and declined any salary by the Fellowship.
Still - you defend his lies all you want. How odd that you never bothered checking them at all.
But - yeah - I see what you mean. It is an atheist conspiracy to hide the true healing majik of Christ.
Little wonder your religion causes so many fights.I find it fascinating that they believe him without one question. And appear upset that you don't. Someone they never met that claims to be an MD but heals himself with prayer. Fascinating.
Mark, Please don't be mean to Vlad. I'm not going to take you off my prayer list. You will just move up on the list.
Vlad I know you can take care of yourself but I was hurt to see Mark attempt to belittle you. I haven't communicated with you for a while. God bless and encourage you.
You give us the details of his life because...??? It is still a wonderful miracle that his body received. And he speaks well enough for me to understand. You are made by God. No wonder you start so many fights with Christians.
I am not starting any fights. I know that lying about others is a big part of your religious beliefs, but I would appreciate it if you stopped.
You are the one on the Atheism and Agnosticism forum - and you are the one that keeps interrupting me when I am speaking to others.
This is why your religion causes so many fights.
I think it is wonderful that you don't care if the doctors in your country can speak English properly. How very tolerant of you.Fight, fight, fight... All the time, fight. No problem for me. I did not consider myself to be out of place. I am on a forum with questions of God. Not a&a, I am Just now seeing that after all this time. Funny.
I am no one to "tolerate". Neither are you. We equal here in the U.S.
Perhaps you missed her point. She said that perhaps God allowed the slavery of the Africans in America because he wanted to make America strong and the white were to weak to pick cotton. That's some way to rationalize slavery.
Look the God of the bible said Do not Murder, Do not lie... He did not say Do not keep slaves. According to you that was because of the times they were in, But he did give them other rules, most less sinful than slavery. So it had nothing to do with the times. It simply wasn't a problem for the writers of the bible.I did see that, but my comment was meant more to address the overall 'slavery' discussion and general mindset. Just like anything else, context should be a priority of anything under discussion.
I'm curious how exactly you would define what sin is, or by what reasoning you deem one thing more or less sinful than something else. I think in the full context of the bible the answer is obvious. The laws you are referring to, the Mitzvah laws, were given to that one specific group living in that one specific situation. The commandments do not address these things and neither do the Noahtide laws for Gentiles who lived in Jewish governed regions.
When you examine them all together it's pretty clear that the Mitzvah laws were to serve a particular purpose. This was the line that the savior was to be born of. These laws were primarily for the purpose of not diluting the bloodline and to maintain purity. Homosexuality, for example, while I have no issue with it and while it is not forbidden according to the commandments or the Noahtide laws, from the standpoint of being deemed an abomination by our creator I can certainly understand. Sex is for the purpose of procreation, which of course isn't possible, and because it isn't, the body can't evolve to protect against disease and infection like that of vaginal intercourse.
Slavery in this context also did not pose a problem. It was a common practice that even the Israelites endured. It did not have an impact on the bigger picture. It was the willful act of humans, just as was rape. God condoned neither, but did give specific commands on how to address when someone's willful actions involved either.Wow, I don't know where to start. Let's see... You have nothing against homosexuality, but because they can't make babies they are not protected against deceases and infections so you understand why you God made it an abomination. Would it be an abomination to have sex with my wife if she could no longer have babies? There would be no reason for the sex according to you and your God? So the God you follow hates any having sex other than to have babies, but doesn't mind the occasional rape? And this loving God thinks it was Okay for the Israelites to enslave (to take away all hope) of others. And in the case we were talking about here genaea suggested that God planed the slavery of Africans in America to make America a stronger country. You guys need to rethink this, stand back and see yourselves.
Death to homosexuals applied to all Jews not only those who were the ascendants of Jesus therefore that argument that about preserving Jesus' bloodline is not applicable. Homosexuals can't taint Jesus' bloodline because they can't procreate.
If God makes His will known in the OT by threats, etc, then why did He not say anything against murder of homosexuals?True, they can't procreate. I think that was part of the problem. Each homosexual tie removed two men from the gene pool. God was protecting this bloodline like a gardener, making sure it grew. He was establishing them in a region they could hold and defend. He gave them commands that forbid them from breeding outside of their own people, very specific commands regarding how to not breed too close, as well as commands that said they must breed. He gave commands that regarded how and what they were to eat and how to prepare the food properly.
I see the whole interaction between God and the Israelites throughout that portion of the bible as a very nuanced, complex thing that can't get boiled down to such generalities. Genesis describes the humans created in Genesis 1 as following God's commands to the letter; be fruitful/multiply, populate/subdue the earth, establish dominance in the animal kingdom. This describes homo sapien history over the past 100,000 years to the letter. But then Genesis 2 describes Adam as being inherently capable of disobeying. As well as Eve and Cain. They were all capable of something the humans that populated the landscape were not. Free will. And this mirrors human history from roughly 5000 BC forward. Those first civilizations in that region were built by humans quite different from the homo sapiens that had already populated the planet. Our modern world as we know it is the result.
I see the interplay between God and the Israelites throughout the time of Moses as a study on the nature of free will. Whether God was learning Himself, or whether it was for the purpose of teaching, God tried many approaches to ensure His will was done where the Israelites were concerned. He was like a parent. He tried everything from providing water from rocks and mana from heaven to striking down people in site of everyone in His efforts to control this rampant free-willed behavior.
Before, everything in creation, animate or inanimate, just responded to whatever He commanded. He commanded it and it became. Life grew lungs and legs just to comply to God's command to "Come forth from the waters". Adam was the introduction of something else. God gave us free will. We are each in a sense creators. Able to create actions and decisions and inventions that are not of God's will, but of our own. So from that point on He had to become persuasive. He had to take action in different ways to ensure a particular outcome.
Like the whole thing with Abraham and Isaac and the 'test'. I see that as God actually testing Abraham's faith because He really didn't know. God created a situation that forced Abraham to make a decision. To see what Abraham would actually choose of his own free will. It's God working within the confines of free will that truly defines the Old Testament to me, and makes it difficult to address these kinds of topics with anything brief and general.But homosexuality cannot be removed from the gene pool if they cannot procreate. They cannot pass their genes to children. What would make more sense from the Jewish law point of view was to kill the parents of homosexuals because obviously their genes are "faulty".
Genesis is derived from a pagan story. It is not from the Jews. All murder sanctioned by God can not be boiled down preserving the gene pool. Children will killed. If God made man perfect, how did Adam and Eve get the ability to be tempted? The angels in heaven cannot be tempted. God Himself cannot be tempted. You could argue that God created imperfect beings.
We also have to consider that natural evolution of people is not true. Pagan texts indicate that extra-terrestrials bred with humans and that humans were genetically manipulated. This is not natural evolution. It would explain the missing link.
Did you know that the Torah at least is a very different story when it is translated literally? It says Moses obeyed extra-terrestrials and not God. There have been people linked to NATO that say that aliens roam the corridors of the Pentagon. Extra-terrestrials have this insatiable appetite to go to war. One of the reasons is to keep the human population down. The Sumerian Text say that the Annunaki, these extra-terrestrial gods, sent a flood to drastically reduce the population because they were multiplying too fast.
Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4MXLB6S … CJxw1wDtoq
If I was Abraham, I'd think that the request to murder his own son was Satan masquerading as God. Why would God ask Abraham to break His own commandment? God does not test us like that. This is most likely another pagan story because pagans performed human sacrifices all the time. The Elohim demanded it.Claire, if you dismiss this story what do you do with God sacrificing his only son? Seems like a similar story to me. Claiming God wouldn't ask someone to sacrifice his son and then believing God sacrificed Jesus,
God did not ask people to put Jesus on an altar and slit His throat as a form of testing faith. By witnessing for the truth, Jesus was bound to be put to death. If Jesus had not publicly died, then how many people who have believed in the resurrection? The sacrifice was dying for our sins and to take on death so that we can have life.
There is no greater love than laying down one's life for another. As Jesus was God incarnate, the Holy Father also laid down His life for us. He endured the pain as well.
BTW, how do you quote so that my quote is shown as well as my response? I'm sure you have noticed that there are missing quotes in people's comments.Above where you are commenting there should be blue text saying import and edit quote. Click on that and follow instructions. I hope this is what you're asking?
I do import and edit but I divide the comment when I want to quote a sentence for example like:
So in order to just quote that sentence, I cut and past "quote" and put it behind the end of the sentence. Then when I want to quote the second sentence. I cut and paste your name...
Then I leave the quote because it's there already.
Do you understand what I'm saying? It's not serious but it's annoying.Claire Evans - Hubpages has messed with the way the forum works and quotes are no longer showing properly.
As far as I can tell, you had quoted properly but it is broken.
If everyone had loved their neighbors as themselves as God wanted there would have been no slavery. Who is my neighbor? Consider the parable of The Good Samaritan.
Mark 12:31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[g] There is no commandment greater than these.”
Ephesians 6:9 Masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Don't threaten them; remember, you both have the same Master in heaven, and he has no favorites.Good point! There is so much truth there. If love was the key witheveryone, every house would be fed plenty. There are enough resources for everyone. Some hoard much because money answerth all things; some have made "little altars" where they pray to their riches. But if you catch thevright theif, on the right day, it can sll be gone in an instant. Then what??? Sadly, for some, a gun in the mouth. Nothing else to live for.
To bad it doesn't say to pay your slaves and set them free. Imagine just for a second being a slave. No hope, no freedom to say I quite, no freedom to say I'm tired, no freedom to pick a mate, no sexual freedom. no money, no dreams, no dreams for you children. Essentially it murder.
Woooowww!!! Did I just read, most, less sinful than slavery??? You have got to be kidding me. AmIoncandidcamera?
now that one is Golden!!! Now we have the sin police! LOL I am floored!
...ok, I'm better now.
Um, I forgot who I am writing to, so this must be for you all.
On slavery, to clear things up, I said that black skin is MUCH more tolerant of the hot Georgia sun. Remember? There may have been (emphasis on may) a plan for why black African backs were chosen for doing all the outside work in America. I speculate on this subject a lot! Lord why? An entire race of people enslaved, beaten, whipped, stolen, separated from loved ones and without much of an identity. As I pondered, I realized that the very same thing happened to, the chosen ones!!! Egyptians (aint Egypt in Africa???) were able to taunt those people too for a long time. They were spit on, and shunned too. But today... From what I understand, a very wealthy, business-conscious bunch the Lord ALWAYS knows what is best.
Yes, whites were "servants" as well. But probably not outside. And definitely not stolen.
THIS IS NOW, A GREAT NATION! Built from cotton exports and African riches, etc.
And God "delivered" us too
Call it what you want. That is my opinion. There MAY have been a plan for it all.You must have missed the thread where we now understand that there was no such enslavement in Egypt. Your bible is based on a falsehood. There was no spitting and shunning either - did you make that bit up yourself?
You must have missed the bit where the Irish and the Chinese built the railroads and the Italians and the Irish built the skyscrapers, and the English indentured servants did all the work in the first wave of colonials.
Great that you have managed to justify the slavery of your people though. This is what the Christian religion is best at. Persuading the downtrodden to accept their lowly lot in life. As I mentioned to the other black lady pushing this religion - it always comes as a shock to see people so completely cowed when it is so obvious a deception.
Slavery - MAY have been a plan. OK then. Probably all right then. The Lord ALWAYS knows best and now the US is a A GREAT NATION. Sad to see you say such things.
Arguably the theft of the Native American lands and subsequent genocide had more of an IMPACT on making the US a GREAT NATION. Fantastic god that you worship. He ALWAYS has a plan and wiping out the Native Americans to make a GREAT NATION seems a small price to pay?Who was Moses? Falsehood? You for real??? No pharoh with plenty slaves?
Nope - all false. No Moses, no wandering in the desert, no Pharaoh enslaving the Hebrews - none of it is true. Even the Israeli government accept it was a myth based in no reality. All archeologists also concur. No basis in fact whatsoever.
How do you feel now you know your bible is a falsehood?
To better your nation God enslaved Africans for generations because of their dark skin? I'm going to let you in on a little secret. The skin damage that people with light skin would receive form the sun would not cause a problem until much later in life. Some may eventually die of skin cancer, but not until their good days are behind them. The were whites that worked along side the slaves in the south, the difference was the whites got paid and could leave whenever they liked. We are all humans and should be able to feel others pain.
There is a lot of evil that goes on in this world. God does not direct it but He doesn't stop it. Slavery, murder, abortion, sexual abuse, pedofilia, elder abuse, corporate raiding, racial hatred (regardless of race).
These things happen because of the depraved nature of humans who act on their own free will. God loves everyone and wants everyone to love all. If we operate under love and value others more than ourselves, none of this would take place.But I thought you said God answers prayers? Are you saying your God has absolutely no powers? Do you see the conundrum? God is all powerful, God answers prayers, God loves praise, God does not stop slavery, murder, abortion, sexual abuse, cancer or any other terrible thing. His is powerful and powerless and certainly can't answer prayers because he gave us free will. Does any of this make sense?
Hi Rad, I don't remember saying "God answers prayer." but if you say so. Billy Graham's wife said, "Thank God He doesn't answer all prayers. I would have married the wrong man 7 times." She would have made 7 bad choices before marrying Billy Graham.
Okay, good I must have confused you with someone else. Sorry.
Doesn't the bible say "ask and you shall receive" or something to that effect? Some here claim that God heals cancers just by asking. I guess that wasn't you.There are companion Scriptures that go along with that. In addition, God's answer to prayer is not necessarily what we want but ALWAYS for our good.
From an online commentary: Every one that asketh receiveth - That is, every one that asks aright; that prays in faith, and in submission to the will of God. He does not always give the very thing which we ask, but he gives what would be better. A parent will not always confer the "very thing" which a child asks, but he will seek the welfare of the child, and give what he thinks will be most for its good. Paul asked that the thorn from his flesh might be removed. God did not "literally" grant the request, but told him that his "grace" should be "sufficient" for him. See the notes at 2 Corinthians 12:7-9.
Not really, in fact there is a very small percentage of people who do "evil" if you wish to use that word. And, the amount of acts of kindness and compassion greatly overwhelm that small percentage.
Pure nonsense, human nature is not depraved, that is just garbage written in a holy book and is far removed from the reality of our true nature, which is compassion and altruistic.
It doesn't take place as you have described, that is just religious indoctrination talking.Troubled man, I didn't suggest a number of people that are evil. I referred to evil actions. Evil actions are not isolated to so-called "evil" people. Some governments are evil because they oppress and kill their people. The governments are evil because of the selfish motives of those in power. At one time or another, we all do something that is evil. Some do more than others but evil is still evil.
When I was a teenager I made very unwise choices. I hurt people and would like to apologize now. I'm prayerful about how to proceed.
When reply comes up, I'm no longer able to see what I'm responding to so I can't address the other comments.I have no idea what point you're trying to make, but you're certainly contradicting yourself here.
No, we don't all do evil things. Some of us actually have self control.My original comment was about a "lot of evil in the world." You responded about only "a few" being evil. I did not contradict myself because people are not evil. The things that they do are evil. Some do more evil than others. I don't understand why you thing that is a contradiction.
Would you say Hitler wasn't evil? People who do evil to the degree Hitler did evil and don't repent are evil.
Yeah, Claire. I would say that he was pretty evil. However, there have been people that have done other things that were evil. Cooperate raiders betray investors with no concern about the impact. I hate to give examples because it would take all year. If I omit something I don't want it to be thought of as not evil. In 3rd grade, my fellow students and I were jealous because another girl had long straight hair. I would put her coat on the floor in the trash. That was evil. I wanted to cut her hair off. That was evil.
We all sin but there are various degrees of evil. Some may steal because they are a kleptomaniac but that doesn't mean they are evil. They have done evil things but aren't evil. I think we can use our discretion about that. We can sin but still have good in us.
As in the case of Hitler, he showed no remorse. That made him an evil man.
However, life is not mostly black and white. There are shades of grey. Hitler was snared by his ego. He was told he was the German messiah. From that moment onwards, he participated in horrific occult practices that led to him being demonically possessed. As a possessed individual, he was not capable of repentance. If I became possessed I can do the most horrific evil and not repent.
Another example is those who are subject to mind control from childhood normally done by trauma. The trauma is so horrific that their minds compartmentalize and are conscious is completely dulled. So when we come across someone who is evil like a world leader, we tend to think they must go to hell. However, it is not their fault they were groomed to be evil by trauma-based mind control.
This is why judgment of a person is reserved for God for only he knows the heart and soul and full circumstances of the evil.Claire, that is the whole point. God is the judge. I think of the doctrine of clean hands when going to court.
I doesn't matter if Hitler repented or not. Call for and plan the genocide of a group of people then say I'm Sorry? He'd be even more evil if he said sorry before he died.
Saying sorry and truly repenting are completely different things. For Hitler to get to the stage of true repentance means he will go through hell being tormented by knowing what suffering he caused. Sometimes that may be too much for people because they are incapable of repenting. Revelation says that there will be some who will refuse to repent.
Yes those are my words. I don't understand the contracdiction. Those are things/events that happen.
You've got to be joking.
First, you go on about those things/events happening as if the entire world's population are engaged in murder, slavery, racism, etc. and state emphatically that humans are depraved; ie. corrupt, perverted, morally evil. Ridiculous.
Then, you claim we we all do something evil. Again, ridiculous.
These are the lies and contradictions your religion have taught you.
To top it all off, you then state people are not evil. Hilarious.
And, you call yourself a teacher?I realize why we are not communicating. I call evil "sin." Sin is the reason Jesus came into the world. Sin (evil) can be forgiven. Jerry Sandusky did a whole lot of evil over the years. If he asks the Lord's forgiveness and asks him to come into his heart, He will. Chuck Colson, imprisoned attorney/advisor of Richard Nixon, became a powerful leader in prison ministries. He did a 180 ... contradiction. What you do is not what you are? You can't change who you are but you can change what you do. Yes I am an excellent teacher.
Chuck Colson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Colson
John DeLorean (Delorean car) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_DeLorean
You may not agree but I hope you understand what I'm saying.Yes, you have swallowed false beliefs about our world from your religion. Sin is irrelevant within it.
I can only assume then that what you teach doesn't rely on logic and reason.
I did not see the world's population is involved in murder, etc. The world's population does sin (evil). What I call sin, you might not: pride, disrespect, not valuing other people are included. When you disrespect and not value people, that is a step in the direction of violating them in other ways.
I value you and attempt to communicate. Notice, I don't use an insulting tone or make comments about anyone.Again, you're just projecting your false religious beliefs over the worlds population and ignoring true human nature in favor of those beliefs. It is this false projection that will never allow a person to develop beyond their own self-deluded paranoia.
Then, you are living proof of your own false projections.
Trouble, if you have never said anything unkind to anyone or never lied for personal gain, etc., and you are not lying to yourself, congratulations!
Maybe you should run for the position of Heavenly Father; you obviously would be more "kind". But I will vote for God.
I mentioned the church and state thing because genaea brought it up. She going on about how lazy families should perish and then said something about wanting separate the arguments.
What a convenient little religion Christianity is: anything positive, no matter how pedestrian or ubiquitous, is a "testament to God's power", or the "blessings of Jesus"; yet when millions of people are slaughtered in God's name, or people protest soldiers funerals, or blow up abortion clinics, well then all of a sudden "those people aren't real Christians".
You say that "Religion has plenty to answer for, but Christ does not": you're certainly entitled to your point of view, but I could not possibly disagree more. Saying that Christ is not responsible for the actions of his followers is as ridiculous as saying that Hitler wasn't responsible for the actions of the Nazi party, or that the mafia isn't responsible for the crimes of it's members.
Either God's in charge with His "greater plan" or He's not; you don't get to have it both ways. Either He's responsible for the good and the bad, or He's not responsible for any of it.Hitler is not responsible for his many soldiers who were kind and hid the refugees or freed them. Surely, he is responsible for those who followed his commands. As is Jesus. Jesus is responsible for the actions if those who do what he said. Thank you! That worked out perfectly
Show me in the NT where Christ commands or even allows ANYONE of His followers to kill folk?
McDonald's print HOT COFFEE on their cups because IF it is possible to abuse anything people will do it.
Hitler is called a Christian, even he called himself a Christian, but by his actions he was not, in truth he was a Satanist, and guess what Satanists lie, they are permitted to do so, just like Muslims are permitted to lie when convenient, to progress their cause.
Christians are not allowed to lie (that's not to say that some don't) but there is a clear warning that ALL liars will miss eternity with God.
You may as well blame Westinghouse for the deaths that follow when idiots put kittens or babies in their dryers.Ahh the good ol' Christian double-standard, you never disappoint. Once again it's the "disavow" anyone who makes us look bad" argument.
As for your "McDonald's Coffee" argument, it's true that McDonald's isn't responsible for people being stupid, however there is a major flaw in your theory:
No one is forced to drink McDonald's coffee.
No one fights wars over coffee (although there are mornings I've considered it)
McDonald's coffee doesn't try to influence public policy
McDonald's coffee doesn't attempt to manipulate education
Drinking McDonald's coffee doesn't prevent two people from getting married
McDonald's doesn't say you'll spend eternity in Hell for drinking Starbucks Coffee (although it might be an effective marketing strategy)
You're still just sticking with the same story over and over again; you're clinging to this quasi-delusional double standard:
Either God exists and He simply chooses to allow all of this to happen; which would make Him the most malevolent, sadistic deity in history, or He doesn't exist. It's not like we're talking advanced calculus here, this is all pretty basic stuff.
Believers make these outrageous claims about life, morality, and the nature of the Universe and then when you press them for evidence of those claims, all they have to offer is "faith". Then, they have the audacity to get offended when people question their nonsense, or dismiss it altogether.Just the two options huh?
No possible chance that it's people who make the choice to do wrong, after all we humans are prone to error in our decision making, that's why we are in the mess we are in?
God gave humanity a free choice, follow His instructions and live in a better world, or follow their own self will and make what has been made.
Like all secularists, you attempt to put God into a box of your own construction.
Doesn't work that way, God is God, whether people approve or not, our choices make the world what it is, choose to obey God, the world improves, choose to obey our own ego and self will and it turns out bad.Dear aguasilver,you are absolutely right. if all people obeyed God, we would live in an amicable world now. most obey their ego,the result is visible.
Except He didn't give humanity a "free choice", he said (to paraphrase the point): "Obey me or burn in torment for all eternity".
As for putting "God in a box of my own construction", I hate to tell you this, but I didn't build the box... you did.
Believers claim that there is an "all-powerful", "all-knowing" God that created everything that is, was, or will be. The problem with that theory is that it's simply not possible; to make it possible, you have to start trying to create all sorts of Clintonian re-definitions.
Simple logic aside (which is more than enough to deal with the concept of a God), there's also the problem with God & sin. If God hates sin so much, if it's really such a horrible thing, then why did He create it? Why did your "all powerful" God go to such extreme efforts to "save us" from something He could have just as easily never created in the first place?
Again, this goes back to my point in the previous post: if there really is a God, then He's a twisted, sadistic deity, seeing as all of this is His fault.
You claim that humanity "created" it's own mess- on that point, you and I are in total agreement, we simply disagree on the source: you think it's the flawed, disobedient nature of humanity that has corrupted the teachings of God and Christ. I think the problem exists because of humanities desire to still cling to the fairy tale of "God" and to refuse to "grow up" and cast off the ignorance and oppression of religion.
Both are totally acceptable, and valid points of view; the difference is one of them is based on faith, which is by very definition "strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof" (2012 Oxford English Dictionary).
The other is based on observation of the world around us; on facts and evidence. It's based on asking questions and then looking for answers, not simply being content to go through life believing in the mythology of the ancient world.So, what is wrong with you doing you, and letting me do me? No harm, no foul. You believe what you want, and I believe as I want. Cool???
Quiet you,
I'm having an intelligent conversation, one that you are woefully unqualified to join. Go back to trolling the other two with your nonsense.
That is a free choice..... just saying.... and if someone really doesn't believe in God, well it's not a problem is it?
I must have answered this a hundred times, certainly have covered it substantially in my hubs, but the short version is that we are made in His image (spiritual) and placed here in physical form to see whether our 'hearts' (spiritual being) is rebellious against God, or want to be with Him eternally.
In order to achieve that we are given free choice to either rule our own lives, or elect that we will pass that authority to God (in this instance to Christ, who has been awarded all authority until the end arrives), and allow His Holy Spirit to guide them. In other words accept that He (being God) does know best for our lives.
God created a perfect environment for us to live in, we ruined it by our free will choice to follow OUR ways, not Gods.
We all live with the consequences, we all choose (even if only by default) which 'path' we desire, with God or in rebellion against Him.
We can disagree on the source, that IS your choice to make, and your choice is something that God holds very seriously to be maintained and protected.
After all the choices we make show God whether we want to be with Him or not for eternity.
If you are content that you have made the correct choice, that God is just "mythology of the ancient world" why are you so concerned?I'm concerned because religion tries to force itself upon society.
If religion was content to practice it's beliefs and not try to impose its values on others, then I wouldn't have any problem with religion, and I don't think any other rational person would either, but when religion tries to say that "evolution shouldn't be taught in schools because it goes against the 'truth of the bible'" or that lesbians and homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry because it violates their Christian morals; that's when I get concerned.I think society is trying to force itself on Christianity. Hey, just my opinion. But, everybody's got one.
So, it's now Christianity vs. the whole society.
Clap. Clap. Clap. Such thinking. Not even the rain has such small hands, says e e cummings. How right he is.
I could not possibly scoop the tiniest of your intelligence. It's way outside any available measurement systems.
Hey, just my opinion by the way.
Unfortunately, depending on your point of view, the alternatives seem to be that either religion rules (and again, that depends on your point of view) or religion is shut out.
Public education cannot teach all sides of any story because inevitably someone will come along and say that the school is 'promoting a religion.' Even if everyone and their mother can see that it is not (excepting for the one or two people who initiated the suit,) the school will back down because lawsuits are expensive.
Schools should be able to teach both Creation and Evolution. Both are theories, neither are proven and neither are provable to most people. Certainly, among all the people who have yelled at me and denigrated me for not taking Evolution 'at face value,' no one has ever bothered to actually tell me why Evolution is a done deal and Creation therefore cannot be true. Even the people who have been fairly nice about it (and there have been a few) can't show me why I should toss my Bible out and embrace Evolutionary Theory, Darwinian or post-Darwinian.
How can anything be said beyond that? I am sure they find something.
I agree with you.
I have always respected my friends who are Christians. They believe in God and practice their religion and they're really humane and reasonable people unlike some of the believers here who seem to promote hate, persecution and discrimination.
But, reading the believers arguments here have made me realized that there are actually Christians who use the "Christian", "faith" in order to advance twisted, inhumane and the most ridiculous reasoning in the world which they coin the world "faith".
These believers who claim to be Christians (but say and act otherwise based on my dealings with really good Christians) put Christianity in super bad light.I read your Bible. It's not my Bible, by the way. But my insatiable thirst for knowledge and for wanting to help educate the likes of you makes me read on items on your Bible to make clarifications.
You miss important nuggets of wisdom when you read for "investigation's" sake. You need to ask for the knowledge that you have axknowledged that you need, in order to receive the maximum benefit. God reveals himself to a willing heart who is thirsty for him. He does not give it to you to "use" against his children. You find what you seek to find.
There is no double standard. God has one. You are making it difficult by trying to "know everything" only God knows all. If we follow him, we don't go wrong.
Which brings up the old question, are you then saying that it would have been better for God to create us as robots, incapable of choice? Because that's the only way, according to your argument, that He could be 'good' and 'not let this happen.' Which is itself a double standard because the same people who usually call God 'malevolent' for allowing people to be, you know, people are the first to call Him 'evil' if they think they can pin on Him a stripping of our humanity.
I think that he was merely presenting his arguments based on what you believers saying that there is a God.
What he meant was "If there really is a God, why is this happening?" ( In other words, "No there is no God because this would not happen if there is one")
Also, what meant, too was "If there is a God which is good and great, why is he letting all these happen?" ( In other words: No, if there is a God, then he is cruel and unloving. So No, it's not possible that there is a God.)Funny,... you knew exactly what he was thinking.
God is there. The world is screwed up because he has not created robots and people do what they want to do. Simple enough? He can stop it and will stop it. His timing, not yours. He knows what is best.Only if you live in a simplistic, black and white world (which, granted, is what the vast majority of people long for.)
God would still be both good and great if He created us to do good but allowed us to make our own decisions. Our evil does not reflect on Him. Unless your position is that a truly good God would only create truly good people. But reality is that He gave us the ability to choose to do good or bad, to love or to not love, including whether we do or don't love Him. He is still good, He is still in control, but He doesn't micromanage like some big Lyndon Johnson in the sky.
You're missing the point of the discussion. Let me break it down for anyone who doesn't want to have to go backtracking trough posts:
Believers claim that:
1:There is an all-powerful, all-knowing God that created the Universe and everything in it.
2:That God hates sin, hates it so much that he wiped out all of humanity, except for Noah and his family.
3:That God sent His only Son to Earth to be persecuted, tortured, and murdered in order to "save us" from our sin
Now it's that first one that causes all of your trouble; it's the one that basically kills the rest of your argument.
If God truly does exist, and He truly is all-powerful and all-knowing, then he is, without a doubt sadistic and malevolent. He wasn't forced to create humanity, He chose to. He chose to create us knowing full well what we would become; knowing ahead of time about all of the atrocities and suffering that would occur because of His creation- is this the act of a benevolent being?
As for the "free will" argument, that's another flaw with your story. You can't have a God that is all-knowing, a God that already knows what's going to happen, and then claim to have free will. If He know's what's going to happen then that means, at some level, the choice has already been made; if that's the case then free will has nothing to do with it, it was predestined.
My main point however was that there is no "God"; He's a creation of humanity; a "security blanket" that served a purpose back in a time when we didn't know anything about the world around us. We believed in God because it was comforting, the same way kids believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny now. We believed because we didn't know any better.
ShellyPhish.You need to read too much in religions, the God has clarified to you the two paths one of them lead to eternal life and happiness in the Paradise and the other leads to eternal life in the hell pending His mercy .He gave you the mind and the free will to choose and told you which acts lead you to each path.Why you come then and blame Him ? It is already mentioned in the Holy Books that some people who followed the path of hell would come and complain but God said no one would hear them and their place would be the Hell.The reason is that in their life they were thinking that they understand more than Him and they disobeyed Him and so should be punished.The God said also that if a person was following the path of hell and decided to change to the path of paradise even one day only before his death he would get His mercy and enter His paradise.What justice you wish more than this generosity !?
Nice share. Just like what Spain did to its colonized countries during its old-world race against Portugal. The cross and the spade/guns.
Genaea,
It doesn't matter what you believe. That's your right. But you cannot say that what you believe is fact because it is not. The miracles cannot be proven. The laws of nature (walking on water for instance; virgin birth as another) have been stated as having been transcended in the Bible. We know for a fact that you can't do these things. So if you wish to believe them then that is your private affair. But any attempt to have these things taught in public schools to children as fact should be resisted. That's my view.not so fast Cine...".For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." 2 Thessalonians 3:10 If you are too lazy to help gather the crop, you shouldn't expect to eat.
But, that's Paul speaking to the members of the Thessalonica church in AD 51 when they refuse to work because they thought that the new coming has happened.
It's not Jesus words. And the quote is not for the current world, not referring to the citizens of the whole word in any point of history; they're just for the Thessalonica members.
I do not know what you are pointing out by re-posting this post from Genea. Ive already answered and explain what the Thessalonians Book 2 is for and why Paul uttered those.God did not intend for man to sit on his asspirations. Men should be productive. Low productivity usually leads to high b/s output. It is reasonably not a good practice for men to be idle. That makes common sense to me. I don't really have to put the bible into the mix.
@Cine I guess I didn't understand the discussion you guys had; however, all letters to the churches in the NT were written for instruction. Laziness is a sin.
1 Thessalonians chapter 4 (GWT)
11 Make it your goal to live quietly, do your work, and earn your own living, as we ordered you.
12 Then your way of life will win respect from those outside [the church], and you won't have to depend on anyone else for what you need.
Proverbs chapter 14 (TEV)
23 Work and you will earn a living; if you sit around talking you will be poor.
Proverbs chapter 21 (TEV)
25 Lazy people who refuse to work are only killing themselves; 26 all they do is think about what they would like to have. The righteous, however, can give, and give generously.
Proverbs chapter 28 (TEV)
19 A hard-working farmer has plenty to eat. People who waste time will always be poor.
not so fast Cine...".For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." 2 Thessalonians 3:10 If you are too lazy to help gather the crop, you shouldn't expect to eat.
To: ShellyPhish. Many talk appears logical, but we must seek for truth.
I believe in Pre-Adamic race. Everything was destroyed. The reason was sin of rebellion, beings on the earth then Satan and 1/3 of angels, Satan did control. The Satan name was Lucifer before. God already had the Son. The reason is multiply, replenish the earth and especially love. One human knows the baby will not necessary being perfect but still has desire to have children. Yes God knew everything. But to recreate best state He can was His dream. God had the plan and it means redemption of man by man who sin. Since first Adam failed Last Adam came and defeated Satan. Defeated Satan will put away in right time. There will be no tears or pain.
God created entire universe for man. It would be pity to waste it.
Conclusion: 1 God provided plan of salvation for the man
2. Man who sin defeated Satan
Satan is now in jail but soon will be put away.That is quite a tale. Let's see, you got God and Satan and a bunch of angels. Where exactly are they? We can't see them or detect them, we have stories of how powerful they used to be, but they seem to be nowhere these days. So unless you can show me where or how they exist, I'll have to assume it's just a story.
OK.
Can you see microbes without microscope? Then how powerful they can be? Let say Ebola v. Can you see deep space without telescope? Can you see your brain? But don't ask me to order MRI. There are tools for everything.But with the right tools we can see them and even without seeing them their effects are provable.
Not so with for example angels which are about as observable as leprechauns.Thanks for making my point. I can see all those things with tools. Still can't find God.
But at some point in time, before science had discovered the 'tool's someone would have been able to say the same about all those things.....?
If you were time transposed back to the 1700's and tried to explain that right then, is (say) 1750 radio waves were all around people and that they could use them to speak to people on the other side of the globe.... you would have been ridiculed, and probably killed as a 'witch'.
In fact until 1888, you would have been 'preaching' to the unconvinced!
Can we suppose that God will allow Himself to be revealed to science when it suits Him?
Meanwhile He communicates with His people daily, but some cannot find Him, so they deny He exists, just as the folk back in the 1750's would have doneWeird. Radio waves actually exist. Gotta say - I do find it funny when - on the one hand you are claiming that only those who want to find the majikal invisible Super Being will find him - yet on the other hand - it is the same as science finding radio waves.
See the contradiction? This is the usual self righteousness showing. The artificial division you create between you and "them who will not see."
This is why your religion causes so many conflicts.Heinrich Hertz was actually TRYING to find what he discovered, if he had been trying to avoid finding radio waves, I guess he would have had a different result.
Proverbs 26:20-22
Amplified Bible (AMP)
For lack of wood the fire goes out, and where there is no whisperer, contention ceases. As coals are to hot embers and as wood to fire, so is a quarrelsome man to inflame strife. The words of a whisperer or slanderer are like dainty morsels or words of sport [to some, but to others are like deadly wounds]; and they go down into the innermost parts of the body [or of the victim’s nature].So determined to NOT hear the Godstuff that you miss the point.
In 1750, you could not prove to the masses, the "waves" that would allow such communication, they were real and always there, right? Just as today, you can't see God as he has yet to reveal himself to all. We know he is there. You are still guessing; and cannot fathom the God that I know. Are you concerned about that? If an unequivocal no is your response...why spend so much time with Christians???No - I got it just fine. You are the one missing the point.
Radio waves actually exist.
Why spend my time trying to educate Christians? Because your religion is a blight on our society and causes unnecessary conflicts....and they existed before 1888 when they were 'discovered'... would you have been one of those who ridiculed somebody who spoke of radio waves before they were discovered?
It is not rational to say that you will only believe in what has been proven, when most everything that 'we' have discovered had existed since time began, way before mere men were capable of discovering what God had provided for all to use, at a given time in history.
But it is of course your right to hold those views.This is a rather silly argument.I don't claim any such thing.
Which is it - do you need faith to see this majikal Super Being or is it just a case of we have not scientifically proven it yet? I mean - you keep telling me it speaks stuff into your head telling you to behave this way - now it seems this being that you claim exists outside of reality actually just needs the correct scientific tool to prove it?
This is why your religion causes so many conflicts.
Tell Moses, and Abraham, and Socrates, and King James, and Plato. Would you be able to prove that to them?
Sorry - did you not understand? Radio waves actually exist.
Given the proper equipment we could have shown them to exist at any point in time.
I thought you needed to have faith to believe in your Invisible Super Being. Whether you have faith or not - radio waves are there.Again, since you obviously don't get it, God exists. Maybe next year we will have the equipment. During those eras, you did NOT have the equipment to prove your radio wave claim. Then, it was impossible to fathom. See???
No - sorry - god does not exist. Radio waves do. lol
But - you now claim this god thing does exist in reality? It is not outside of reality? I thought it spoke to you by majik and only those in denial could not hear it - yes?
But - next year we might have the equipment.
You don't even understand that this is a perfect argument against this god thing existing. Proof denies faith. Without faith - what value your beliefs?Ok, the reasoning is a bit different. You deny God. Ok.
And you're funny.No - god does not exist. Why did you not answer my questions?
Your question seems a bit nonsensical to me. God has revealed himself to me in spirit. Soon, he will reveal himself in person. You have not seen it yet because you don't have the tools. Faith is what we need now. Once you see him as he is, faith is no longer needed.
That is not what I asked. You have been arguing that this god thing is the same as radio waves and it is just a question of finding the correct scientific tool to prove it. And because we didn't know about radio waves once, this is not a good reason to not believe.
Now we are back to faith in majik. Which means your radio waves argument was nothing.
Knowles doesn't deny the existence of God; to deny the existence of X implies the irrefutable existence of X, an X which one party in a debate refuses to admit the existence of. Knowles -- and myself -- merely lack belief in God. Or maybe I'm misstating Knowles's position. However, I'm certainly not misstating my own. :-)
No - I don't deny the existence of. This is just believer double speak to dismiss any other viewpoint.
I simply don't believe.Which of course is the right and privilege we all have, to believe or not.
Right and privilege? How is this a right and privilege? Not believing in fairy tales is simple common sense. Rights and privileges can be taken away. Go ahead and take these away.
Since Coming to Reason I have noticed that many believers make a lot of statements that are simply hidden attacks on Reason and an underhanded way of dismissing other's viewpoints. Which is what both you and geneaa have just done with your statements. No wonder your religion causes so many conflicts.I would not dream of taking them away, but there have been and still are many places in the world where they have been taken away.
You can just as easily be imprisoned or killed for believing or not believing in quiet a few places...
Why must you always be so contentious?How does that affect what I believe exactly? I can believe whatever I like - you will never be able to take that away. What I say is another matter.
I was not being contentious. I was being honest. Why must you always couch your statements in a way that completely dismisses any opposing view?Then you say....
Not believing in fairy tales is simple common sense. seems to be trying to make a statement that "completely dismisses any opposing view".... just saying?
I make "statements in a way that completely dismisses any opposing view" because I am assured that I am correct, otherwise I would preface it with (IMO) or 'I think' or 'my belief'....I was not being contentious. I was being honest. Yes - I deliberately dismiss your view. Why? Because - you deliberately dismiss any opposing view in the first place.
And - as you are a good Christian - I know you are simply acting towards others in the way to which you wish to be act towards–yes?
See how this always causes conflicts?
At least I'm honest about it–I'm not trying to pretend otherwise as you are.
To deny x implies the existence of x???
Did you think at all about that statement?My statement is not correctly represented by your excerpt.
I didn't write the words, "To deny x implies the existence of x" in isolation. Rather, they were in a larger context, and it is only with this context intact that my statement is honestly reproduced. If it isn't honestly reproduced, then it can't be accurately comprehended.Oh!!! So you must think about the context of words that are used??? Good info. Let's try that for scripture.
Which, in and of itself, is neither correct nor incorrect. And a commonality many elements of Theos encompass. Belief/disbelief cannot refute nor prove X. Neither position is designed to, nor can they claim achievement based on their respected parameters of decision.
I do not think many believers/disbelievers understand this, or undertake the chasm of that impasse. Rather they dispute the decision of as flavor for their lack of or excessive belief {the rope-a-dope bridge attempting to connect both sides. {if that made any sense....lol}. X is. No 'Reason' to believe or disbelieve. X cannot be changed by it, nor can X change decisions regarding belief or disbelief.
James.I am not being ornery here, James, but I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
You write, "Which, in and of itself, is neither correct nor incorrect." Which aspect of my (nearly tangential) response to Genaea is neither correct nor incorrect, in and of itself?
You write, "And a commonality many elements of Theos encompass." In what way is the unspecified aspect of my response to Genaea a commonality of many elements which Theos encompasses? And did I interpret your sentence correctly?Well sheep! Because if you were ornery, you'd be me.
You did.
James
Genea, you made me laugh with that "next year, we might have the equipment".
You know, these kinds of statements are really the kinds that are just said to defend anything and everything about your religion.
Haha. But, you made me laugh.
PS. You won't be able to create equipments- you'll need science to do that and you don't agree with science so... Hehe.Rubbish!!! God spoke; there was a bang, and then light. Evolution and Creationism agree. hehe
Mark, man of five physical senses cannot communicate with God.
Please stop claiming that you have abilities I lack. I know it makes you feel good to claim to be superior - but - it just causes conflict and ill will.
This is why your religion has caused 2,000 years of fights.
A few hundred years ago the church would have me beheaded for suggesting that other planets have their own moons. That's a fact.
With all due respect and with a light heart. If you are hearing voices in your head other than your own you may want to get that check out, because God doesn't communicate directly to anyone.Jeremiah 1 4:10 would seem to disagree with you.....
Then the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,
Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
Then said I, Ah, Lord God! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child.
But the Lord said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak.
Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the Lord.
Then the Lord put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the Lord said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth.
See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant.
God has been speaking to His people throughout history, but of course one has to have the ability...
Matthew 13:14-16
King James Version (KJV)
And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.I feel like someone is trying to sell me a gently used car. If you are hearing voices in your head go get it checked out. There are pills to help you. Yes there are gullible people who you can convince that you speak directly to God, but I'm not one of them. A year or so ago in central Canada a passenger on a greyhound bus beheaded a kid next to him because he claimed God told him to and if God tells you to do something you do it. A few months later on medication he was apologizing. The voices had gone. If you are truly hearing voice go get it checked out, please. If you just say that to lie and manipulate people, stop it, it may be the Christian thing to do, but it's not Christ like.
I think we covered this months ago, when the incident you refer to happened, so I will simply repeat what was said them (more or less).
God always confirms His words via witnesses:
The Holy Spirit
The Word of God
Nowhere in the New Covenant will anyone find instructions to chop of anyone's head, so ANY 'instruction' to do so would clearly be from the enemy, and can be disregarded instantly.
Our instructions are clearly defined:
Ephesians 6:12
King James Version (KJV)
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
As for it not being Christ like to receive spiritual words directly into your head:
John 14:25-27
King James Version (KJV)
These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
That was spoken by Christ.That's all nice, but he doesn't say to lie and deceive. He did say when on meds that he knows now that God wouldn't ask him to do such things, but that he recognized on meds. If you are truly hearing voices get help. Auditory hallucinations can be serious. If it's you own voice you hear thinking that's okay. If your lying for Jesus to manipulate others stop it.
You clearly have no idea how God communicates.
Glad you are not in America, presumably not in the UK either, which is just as enslaved to the Banksters.
No 'auditory hallucinations' so OK there!
But 'hearing' God daily for 20 years, so OK there also!
I do not manipulate others, just tell them what scripture states, and where it illustrates their confusion or error.
It's totally their choice if they wish to stay in confusion and error.
Christ judges humanity, not me or any other believer, if they do, they are wrong.Not European either.
I'll bite, all I ask is proof you communicate with God. That's all. If you are correct and not lying God should help you convince me. The proof part is easy. Just ask God for information about me that you could not possible know. I'll wait here because clearly you can't figure out where I am and I've mentioned it many times in these forums. No copout please."Just ask God for information about me that you could not possible know."
Actually, we don't do psychic sideshows or fortune telling!
I won't even try to find out who you are or where you reside, i.e. I will not visit your profile, because if God wants me to tell you something I don't know, you will find it in what I write, maybe to you, maybe to others, and it would come as a word of knowledge.
When I defected from the enemy team, I had to drop the divination and consulting with 'spirits' as it's not advisable to do such things when you are under Gods authority.
Thankfully God gave me the gifts of discernment and words of knowledge.
The weird thing about that is that God will tell you something to say, and you have no idea WHY you say it, but then the person spoken to will come back and say (later) "What you said really helped me with ..... (whatever they had a as problem) and you sit there thinking, well that's nice, but I have no idea what it's about!
God tells you what you need to tell others, but never discloses what others are thinking or having inside, the enemy will tell you what they are thinking in order for you to manipulate them into where you want them to jump into.
So maybe you will hear something from me that will strike a chord, but I doubt I would know which chord it was striking, nor why.
But rest assured that if God tells me specifically something I should tell you, I will.That's exactly what I thought you'd say. You got nothing.
Now how could I have known that would be your reaction!
Ask God yourself, He will answer you.See what happens when you run into a sceptic? Sure, you can continue to take advantage of the gullible, but I'll call you out. It's actually a very clever marketing plan, tele-vangalists do it all the time.
You are selling Jesus. I have no idea if you making money doing so.
I can assure you that I am not selling Christ, nor have I ever made money from being a believer, indeed, I have never charged any other believer for anything I do for them, God pays my way in this world, I don't charge folk for what I do for them in faith, I trust God, and God has always provided my needs.
I tell folk about Christ, if they want assistance, I will try to help them free themselves from the world system and enter the kingdom.
I work these forums in order to reach those who are reading, but not participating, and could otherwise be misled by the secularist attacks we see here.
I have been in ministry for nearly 20 years, I have never been a pastor or paid minister.
You would think that after 'hearing' God talk every day for 20 years, you'd have come up with some valid arguments for His existence by now.
I have all the valid arguments I need, the fact that folk are unwilling to listen is not my problem!
Folks are listening and finding your arguments have no validity, that's what they're saying to you. Pretending you hear God every day does little to validate any of them. However, if you can get your God to talk with us, too, then we'll start believing you. Until then, it's just voices in the head, and there are medications for that.
I don't _think_ that Aquasilver is claiming actual auditory hallucinations; I think that he probably means that God speaks to him in the “still, small voice" sense, such as Elijah heard.
Thank you Chasuk, you still remember how it happens....
Crikey - I see where your confusion is coming from. You can create internal dialogues to your heart's content with a little imagination - I often assign Leonardo to mine when I am trying to do something creative. I am not daft enough to think it is an actual voice.
Otherwise I would be claiming a personal relationship with Leonardo Da Vinci.
It is a very useful tool for accessing one's subconscious. Assuming one is self aware enough to do so.
Oh for a Holodeck.......
Elijah did not hear "Gods Whispers" every day for 20 years.
You may want to re-read a few of his posts. It's a little confusing. He's making lots of claims.
I don't think three secularists being obtrusive really counts to be honest, and in any case whether anyone finds my arguments valid is of no issue, they are valid to those who seek God.
That's all that really matters, the rest is just banter between hubbers.And yet, we find believers arguing amongst themselves as to what's valid and what is not. They no more agree with you then they do with me.
You yourself can get God to talk to you. Try this: Ask in secret; whatever you like. Give it some time, it won't be longer than a week. You will hear the answer probably from a child. Not sure why the child part entered in, but if you try it; you will get your answer. Try to make it something you don't ask often. You need a distinction from what you have already heard many times. He always confirms what he told you, so you may hear it (your answer) from two different sources. Put a mustard seed of faith forward. It will reap a great harvest. You may just never ever be able to deny again.
So, within a week of asking God to talk to me, some child is going to come up to me within a week and give me my answer.
Gibberish.- As if it hasn't been tried and failed miserably time and again. Yes, we know you're just making this stuff up based on your irrational beliefs.
He's got some great arguments for the existence of God, haven't you been listening? Maybe not.
Nowhere in the New Covenant will anyone find instructions to chop of anyone's head, so ANY 'instruction' to do so would clearly be from the enemy, and can be disregarded instantly.
So, meaning all those hearing voices to chop anyone are being told by 'enemies?'
Are you suggesting that mental illness (hearing voices) doesn't exist? But just a product of 'enemies' talking to people?Yes, I guess I am to a degree.
Listening to the enemy (and he is always seeking to infiltrate our thinking) will produce what you call a mental illness for sure, it will lead to the victim suffering, and often cause suffering to others.
The simple answer of course is to stop listening the the enemy and start listening to God, but by the time folk get 'sick' they are also normally stuffed full of chemicals by the 'experts' and then find it difficult to hear anything except what the enemy tells them, so take more meds and get more confused.
Vicious circle, and then hard to escape from, convinced that the suffered is suffering a mental illness, the drugs just keep flowing and the condition ends up with the suffered being in a semi conscious state of almost oblivion to God.I consider it a form of mental illness when you begin "trading" on faith. You can pray for a cure or something that you know is beyond your power but when you make decisions that involve money or anything else because you think God told you what to do then you have lost it in my opinion. And I know people who do excatly that. It is a form ot tempting God and when it then causes others in your circle to come to the rescue then you have exceeded your boundries in my book and it is happening to me right now in my own family.
Don't tell me they aren't Christians or whaever because they sound JUST LIKE THE REST OF YOU ON HERE. WORD FOR WORD. The use terms like "the enemy" all the time.First, I know next to nothing about you, just read your profile, that tells me what you want the world to know.
If we were seated together, I would get more input about you, and yes, God would possibly put words in my mouth, and yes it seems they have had relevance to the people I have ministered to, even if I have no idea what or why I am saying what I do.
It's called 'words of knowledge' and God will provide them when needed.
I cannot comment on your family business, speaking personally I have been guided financially by God on many occasions, successfully, but as for offering financial advice to others, my own financial background will normally get in the way, and therefore my advice would be as relevant as yours, and yours (being a CPA) will probably be a more secure advice for them to take.
I have always been a maverick businessman, rich a few times, poor a few times also, and learned to enjoy both ends of the see saw.
I will and have told folk when what they are doing financially is in error according to scripture, after that it's their choice, and in the end, it's always our own choice unless we are willing to submit our financial investment to others.
As a CPA, you must have people trusting your advice daily, so I am surprised that you baulk at people deciding to trust God rather than man?
So you are also suggesting that those who are diagnosed as mentally ill should not avail the medicines recommended by the experts?
Using your logic Christians won't suffer from mental illness and a good dose of prayer will heal schizophrenia? I'll wait for proof that you communicate with God.
By the good loving Christians of that era, you might add.
Undoubtedly, me also probably, because I would surely have been a heretic in those days.
I think it's because the term "Christian" is used very liberally to begin with. Jews are born Jews so when they they they are Jews, they are correct. People are not born Christians. Many people say they are Christians and use the word Christianity as a convenience.
Many people are indoctrinated into one of the many thousands of denominations of Christianity, hence they have their twisted perceptions while other Christians have theirs. Everyone believes their version is right.
Rad, you don't see God since you do not have tool. One must have right tool. Let say you cannot fix death engine with tires fixing tools in the car. The same is that chick give life to chicks and caw to calf. But 0+0=0. Result is zero and not one or ten.
What tools do you use to see God?
If you really have a tool to see God, then why don't you share it to the whole world and let everyone see God (if there really is a God and if there really is a tool)?Cine... Well, one cannot see sound with the eyes. Other cannot hear colors of subject. When I teach faith I am accused I am preaching. Just do an experiment. Start to talk to God. Tell Him to help you with your unbelief. Thank Him, He found you but you cannot find Him. The faith is "hand" to receive. You know what? Two years ago I was diagnosed with cancer with three metastases to bones. Two in spine and one in head/face bone. I came home never talk about this except my family and one-two friends. I was completely free of worry. I said to God: Lord, You know my needs and thank You for healing. Year later bone scan was repeated. Metastases vanished. Glory to God. No symptoms. *** 30 years ago I diagnose problem with my colon. I was on medical conference in Miami. The same think, I recited Biblical verses concerning haling. In both cases no chemo, no radiation. *** Three days later, in Miami, still on conference I expelled bloody tumor size ping-pong ball. Are you telling me God did not hear me?
Yes, because you really can't see sounds but you can hear them. Anyone who see sounds and hear colors must be using drugs or must have something wrong in his head.
I was taught that for things to exist, they must be felt by the our senses - sense of touch, sense of smell, sense of sight, sense of hearing and sense of taste.
If you can't feel a "matter" with one of these senses, then it doesn't exist. And for one to exist, it must not only be "sensed" by one person but by everyone.
That's how the mind works Vladimir - you sense a "matter" first before your mind realize that it exists. It does not work the other way around - you can't think a "matter" exist then it could just appear - that would be hallucination.
Anyway, I am glad that your recovered from your illnesses. That's great news. Though, since you did not consult with other doctors to confirm those findings and relied with a single doctor- there is also a great chance that you were diagnosed incorrectly.Twice, forsooth!
Like to bet there were zero doctors involved and this was a self-diagnosis.Let's see...
"Two years ago I was diagnosed with cancer with three metastases to bones."
"Year later bone scan was repeated."
" I was on medical conference in Miami."
Yeah, that sure sounds like someone who self diagnoses... you are clutching at straws Mark, to avoid data that you cannot allow to be true.
OK, good job your thinking did not exist 200 years ago, or we would never have had television, radio, and any number of other things which 'did not exist' by your definition.
I see fine, exactly how his illness was healed. Faith is the tool. Diagnosed incorrectly is not the answer. God stepped in to show the faithful that he was not alone and that he is the victor over cancer. Sounds simple enough to me. Since your faith in God is "broken" you cannot see the miracles he performs. You are quick to "figure" it another way. But for God's children, he gets the glory for all he has done, we cannot pass his glory to "happenstance". You don't like it, but so...??? Pleasing you will always be irrelevant, you haven't the keys to the kingdom.
Turning a deaf ear (heart) is not an option for kids of the King. (And I don't mean Elvis)I used logic when I said he could have been diagnosed wrong - since he consulted a single doctor.
I don't have a broken faith and I live a great life, thanks to not having faith.
And, Genea, why are you so pissed off now? Just because you can't logically explain your faith? That's okay, I understand why. No matter what you say, it will never be logical.
You will never agree with what I say because you believe it is against your faith - so that must be the reason behind the
Pleasing you will always be irrelevant, you haven't the keys to the kingdom.
Of course, logic for you is irrelevant -that's why you have faith. And, I sure don't have the keys to your God's kingdom. Everybody's got faith in something. You take a LOT and run with it, as long as God is not involved. Pissed??? Come on...
you could not do that to me on a bad day. I know what I know. Those that mind, don't matter. This is my life we are talking about. I will not place it in the hands of KNOWLEDGE. Though I have plenty, I will never have enough. The Lord is my shepherd. You pissed?
OkThis is my life we are talking about. I will not place it in the hands of KNOWLEDGE. Though I have plenty, I will never have enough
Knowledge of an illogical faith, yes, you have plenty. Other than that, I don't know. Not sure she has even that. Like all good christians - she has "interpreted," the bits she doesn't like to mean something else so she does not need to follow the rules.
Right now, the tool is the sincere heart. After he returns, some will see him via fire
The heart can't be a tool to prove the existence of a "matter". The heart only pumps blood and other actions according to the instructions of your brain.
You speak of the physical heart. The spiritual heart is soul-like. It is the center of you and all the unseen stuff you think and feel that distinguishes you from the next man. Everybody has a heart. Only you have your heart.
Sorry, that's called a brian. Your brain does all the thinking and feeling. We have no souls, just a brain that can be shut down and when it is shut down we have no consciousness. No soul. Sorry.
Ok, everyone has a brain. I got a brsin;) but you don't think like me. You don't feel like me. What makes us different? From what I hear, scientists can assemble a brain, but they cannot call life into it. No life...they must throw their matters away or put them under the microscope again. The soul distinguishes one brain from another. Not the brain
Not at all, brains are physically different and head and brain transplants have been performed on a variety of animals, the same procedure can be done on people but is not for ethical reasons. The brain is all that forms personality and "life" one can cut away at it and remove piece by piece the parts that perform certain actions and create certain emotions and the affected individual will cease to display those characteristics.
A dog with another dog's brain will behave as the first dog did and get that personality. There is no soul just the brain and what it dictates.Can you provide the references you're discussing here? Not that I'm arguing or disagreeing with you. I'd just love to read about the tests done in a controlled experiment that determines whether or not Dog B has or has not in fact taken on the personality traits of Dog A. That sounds incredibly entertaining.
Yeah absolutely, the research is little disturbing but absolutely fascinating I have a book on it but the two main figures are Vladimir Demikhov and Robert White the first on dogs and the latter on monkeys, I am sure some of their papers would be available online.
It appears that White transplanted monkey heads, but the monkeys didn't survive long as they were paralyzed from the neck down from the surgery.
Why, do you think there is something other then our brains that direct our actions? Do you think thought comes from somewhere other then the brian?
There was nothing more to my request than what I stated. I think it would be interesting, and probably also entertaining, to see how exactly someone determines with absolute certainty that one dog has taken on the personality of the previous brain owner.
But I do have to say I find it hard to understand how organic matter can generate a will. All living things are driven by a will to live that we do not yet understand, and humans beyond that also demonstrate an individual will that we hold each other accountable for though by all accounts scientifically it's nothing more than a manifestation of a physical brain. Maybe you could explain that to me? How does organic matter generate a will?
All brains are different. That is apparent. See, we still differ. The soul is apparent to me as well. So... What do we do now???
Soul, what soul? You think, talk, remember and move your body with your brain. You have no soul. When your brain shuts down you loose consciousness, no apparent brain.
Awww man... You just want to argue.
I have already given you my truth. Your truth is totally different. You cant handle the truth! (In my Best Nicholson) lol
So, you stick with what is comfortable for you, YOUR own thinking, heavily spiced with others. Good luck with that.
The indoctrinated brain does not develop with any critical thinking skills, logic or reason, it only accepts doctrine uncritically. So, it's not really a matter of thinking differently, it's a matter of the indoctrinated brain is unable to think, it only believes.
We already talked about that. Some people who are "indoctrinated" come to your thinking. How can it be that the indoctrinated can't think their own thoughts?
The indoctrinated believe and base all their "thinking" on accepting doctrine uncritically, which means they don't think about it, they just accept it.
Your posts here are primary examples.I'm wondering if it's indoctrination or a character flaw that allows for easy indoctrination. The gullible. Notice how many believed the guy who says he was a doctor and healed himself of cancer twice by just praying. Does the indoctrination produce gullibility or does gullibility produce the easily indoctrinated?
I agree that indoctrination can cause a blind spot where critical thinking dare not tread depending on the topic, but to say that everyone indoctrinated with a specific belief is simply incapable of critical thinking, or that critical thinking in general is never developed, is a bit of an overstep. I've known plenty of believers who were otherwise incredibly intelligent insightful people who were at the same time completely unwilling to apply that same logic and reason where facts and beliefs seemed to intersect.
And yet, it is observed, hence, not an overstep, but indeed, a reality.
Oh yes, when it comes to other facets of their lives, believers actually do consider reality for what it is. They know they can't flap their arms and fly because of gravity, for example.
However, that's about the extent of their thinking processes. On the flip side, because they accept irrational beliefs without thinking, they believe in all sorts of other ridiculous concepts, too numerous to list here.
Atheists = secular vultures I suppose?
As a doctor - you would be too scared to prove the majik huh? Odd how scared you believers are. Considering the reward awaiting you.
Clutching at straws?
How about - I don't believe what this person is claiming?
600,000 people died from cancer in the USA last year. 80% of them went pleading with god to fix it.
I think you believers who will swallow any lie are the ones clutching at straws.Evidence?
Especially about the 80% who you apparently can prove asked God rather than trust medical science?
How do you equate that number Mark, or is it just convenient to cover your error.
You KNOW that another hubber is lying?
Care to define HOW you know that?Cancer has no boundaries. If you were correct and prayer and faith heals then you would see no (real) christians in the cancer wards. Sadly this doesn't work at healing, it does however do a fine job of making the sick feel guilt. Because people like you will tell the dieting that they didn't have enough faith.
Healing is a matter of faith. But God always has the last decision. He sees the bigger picture. A biblical man asked God for more years and came, I'm sure, to wish he hadn't. God knows best. Sometimes the answer is no. Do we jump up and down and stomp our feet? Depends on our faith.
And there is your out. The bible says pray and you will receive everything you ask for. You know that doesn't work so you just say it's up to God.
So...? :p
I know that God is in control. You will get everything you are asking for for sure! It just may not come in the "wrapping" that you picked out in your head. God knows how to answer prayer right! He's been doing it, at least, for the past 39 years. HA!
I simply don't trust him. Or he is delusional - considering the garbage he claims to believe, I think that is also a reasonable deduction.
Really? he is a medical doctor that can barely speak English? Yet he was cured from cancer by majik Twice!.
Yes - you heard it - Twice!
A Bona fide medical doctor and he didn't bother documenting these majikal occurrences?
I have made no error. If there was proof of cancer being cured by majik - I think that would be news - don't you? And I think he would have shared his findings with everyone. Seeing as his mission in life is to heal the sick.
So - no. Sorry, I think not accepting this as genuine is a reasonable course of action. You of course - accept any such nonsense without evidence. LOL Right........................
600,000 people died of cancer. The USA claims to be 80% Christian. You do the math.
No wonder your religion causes so many fights.Most Americans can't speak "good" English, you are so majikly unbelievable!!! Now you throw something else into the pot! Confusion is becoming apparent. A potluck of insults and Jesus-bashing. You are so crying out for help... No wonder you start so many fights with Christians!!!
Odd - I did not direct that at you. His English is particularly bad. So bad that I doubt that he gained 3 medical degrees as he claimed.
I understand your confusion and totally understand why you need to hide yourself behind a fake user name and avatar. Like wot Jeebus sed.
I didn't "start" anything. I just "finish" it.Thanks for not directing that statement toward me; I might have taken it personally. You are so determined to "win" the argument that you switch to the personal. Not necessary. The degrees could have come from his own country. Or he can read English well. The connection you made is not there. You choose to stick-n-move but, God is still a healer. And I rejoice in the fact that I just heard the testimony about it. God constantly reminds me why I follow him.
Actually Vlad was born in Russia, so I guess he speaks better English than you do Russian, and your scorn is unbecoming.
Ahhh, there you have it, but you cannot see, because as a 'bona fide' Doctor, IF he reported a miracle healing attributable to God, his scientific secular fellow Doctors would report him, he would be hounded for what he sad, by the medical professions version of the inquisition, who you sound very much like.
See above.
Every report there ever is made of disease being cured by faith and prayer is automatically pounced on by the secular vultures and denounced as either 'spontaneous remission' or 'wrong diagnosis' because you guys are soooo very afraid of anything which may show your lack of belief to be the error it is.
If I were a doctor, I would think twice before I announced my faith cures to the world, I have a Christian Doctor friend who is a leading cancer specialist in alternative cures, with a very good success rate for CURE not life prolonging for five years, he never advertises what he does, if he did, he would need to move to a country where the medical Gestapo could not hound him out of existence.
I would imagine that the reason Vlad keeps quiet about his faith and healing is because he wants to CONTINUE healing people, not be hounded by folk like you who cannot stand to hear of faith being effective.
So, you have no factual basis for that accusation either, because you are assuming that because 80% of Americans profess faith in Christ, then automatically 80% of the people who suffer from cancer MUST be Christians... poor methodology Mark, considering that Christians, are less liable to drink or smoke, and tend to lead healthier lives than their secular counterparts.
"ScienceDaily (Nov. 20, 2008) — A study published by researchers at Yeshiva University and its medical school, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, strongly suggests that regular attendance at religious services reduces the risk of death by approximately 20 percent."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … 174230.htm
http://paa2009.princeton.edu/papers/91183
The Health and Retirement Study (HRS), is a longitudinal panel study of older Americans. The HRS is representative of the population over age 50. Risks of developing chronic disease and of dying start to increase after age 50, making the HRS particularly useful for analyzing how religion affects mortality. Using HRS data, I find differences in life expectancy at age 55 by religious affiliation as large as 4.5 years, with mainline Protestants having the lowest mortality of any religious group. This gap is comparable to the difference between males and females (5.1 years) (National Center for Health Statistics 2007), Black and White males (6.2 years) (National Center for Health Statistics 2007), and educational subgroups (4.5 years) (Hayward et al. 2008).
Many mechanisms may link mortality and religions. The differences in mortality may be due to the socio-demographic composition of each religion or could be attributable to specific characteristics of different religions. For example, the rules or norms of a religion may forbid deleterious behaviors such as drinking or smoking and thus have strong effects on health. Being part of a religious community may provide social support, which can in turn affect health. I document mortality differentials across Catholic, Jewish, three Protestant groups (Mainline, Evangelical, and Black), and those with no religious preference and examine the impact of socio-demographic composition, health behaviors, and psychosocial support to see how much these mechanisms explain differences in mortality.
This tag line is getting REALLY tiresome, worn out in fact, especially as YOU are the one who takes great relish in ATTACKING anything which disturbs your personal beliefs and world view.
Wow, the stuff you make up as you go along just gets more bizarre.
I do not believe in the existence of a spiritual heart so don't mention that to me. I don't believe in what you say.
Does that mean you will exit the conversation about all this that you do not believe?
No, I intend to participate in the conversation as long as your posts makes me laugh. I didn't know that what "faith" can do to people can end up this laughable.
Yes, Rad Man, you are not "special" so you can't see God. Only "special" people with "special" tool can.
Hilarious.Hi, Troubled Man. Who laughs at the end is best. My life is miraclulous since I was born. At my birth my folks believed I will not make one day. My mom had heart condition. They postponed my birthday from Jan 17 to 18. Not sure why. It was long time ago. As politically incorrect in communist country I should not receive any education. But Holy Spirit was hovering over me. I have Dr. degree with two specialty. Glory to God!
Those are not miracles.
You're a doctor?
But I do have a special tool. It puts a smile on my face, but I've never used it to see God. Perhaps I'll try.
To take a break and jump off topic for a brief moment, I know that there are a lot of authors here and I just wanted to take a sec and let you all know that Google has updated their Webmaster Guidelines.
Hopefully this can help clear up some of the recent confusion about the erratic pageviews that have been occurring since the last algorithm update.
Here's the link for the updated version: http://support.google.com/webmasters/bi … swer=35769
We now return to our regularly scheduled bickeringYour kids are blessed to have you. I teach school and have heartbreaking cases of kids with no parents or abusive parents. Many, many parents are failing their kids.
What I'm reading here are some of the biggest egomaniacs that I have ever encountered to have the gall to say God is speaking to you and that you get it. The fact is all you are doing is reading the Bible back to the rest of us. That is not getting it. That is reading it. You have proven nothing but you have declared victory. You would have been laughed out of court if this was a trial because you have no evidence other than to say that "I KNOW."
Ironically, it's knowing Christ that will get us out of the 'court' when we are standing before God, so you have spoken the truth, albeit unintentionally.
If that is what you believe then good for you; but the point here is that you and the others have said nothing new.... there are no physical facts to be presented. I've seen Christians fail every time when Knowles challenges them on the facts. Everytime. I read because I hope someone is actually up to the challenge but none of you are. So that is why Christianity should be a private belief. It has as much evidence to support itself as does Islam. You know that right? It's just your feeling and belief that you are special and have powers that others do not. In fact that makes you a little scary to me.
We are speaking of our lives with God. Scripture backs us up.
i just used the word gall, that's funny.Someone wrote in a book that a supernatural being created the world. Someone also wrote in the same book that a certain group of people were chosen. Guess who wrote that part? The chosen people. Then someone else wrote that a virgin had a baby that later was resurrected from the dead. It cannot be proven. Neither can the creation part. So what "backs you up" is something that has no support or reference anywhere else. So you are assuming that you have a connection with this supernatural being and that it has revealed itself to you. That is delusion.
I say that the proof of the resurrection is in the accounts of the ones who were there. They told me what happened. I believe them...alas, our difference. You have no faith in what they say. I do. It was proven to me, because someone, who was THERE, said that that they saw it. Saw him.
The people who "saw him" did not write the books unless I am mistaken on that point.
I'm not really sure either. Ok, so they were reporters, who walked with Jesus and believed the accounts of the ones who saw it. It takes faith to believe. My last hub spoke about this sort of thing. When you allow a mess of different opinions about the same thing to play around in your head, you become not really sure about anything. This is plausible, that is possible, maybe this, maybe that. I have taken one view. You, well I guess it just depends on what you are studying that day. You did say you dabble in all if it, right?
You are mistaken. John and Matthew did claim to be eyewitnesses. Mark was probably an eyewitness as he was a known associate of Peter and, if I remember, a relative of John (though I might be wrong on that one.) Peter, who didn't write a gospel though he did write epistles and the Gospel of Mark is widely believed to be his story, was also an eyewitness.
That's open for much speculation. Just because someone writes as if they were there doesn't mean they were.
Those people walked alongside Jesus during his ministry. I think that they would know a little better than you. You see it if you believe. If you don't believe, you can't see it because everything else just makes more sense. We must go with what we believe. God reveals himself to the faithful all the time.
From what I've read there are no direct witnesses to the resurrection of Christ. It is said he revealed himself to 12 people (give or take). The first gospel was written 30 years after the supposed death of Jesus and the last 70 years later. If you have some proof of the contrary I'll certainly listen.
Well you sure are the info buff. However, do you know how long the writing was held before being published? Do you know how long after the sighting that the writing started?
Published? 2000 years ago. ha ha ha ha he he eheahhahahah
You did not answer my question. You, as a writer, know that we sometimes sit on a story for years before doing anything with it. You mentioned the 30-50yr gap. When you are done laughing, please consider
Yeah, but as far as I know. Only fiction writers and novelists sit on their stories for years to be able to write well-put together stories.
Rad Man wrote
The first gospel was written 30 years after the supposed death of Jesus and the last 70 years later. If you have some proof of the contrary I'll certainly listen.
--------------====
To be more accurate to say, the earliest gospel which was accepted into the canon was written 30 years later. We do not know how many other scriptures which were written earlier was not accepted into the canon. It seems as though the church collected and/or destroyed all others.
Are you going with what you want to believe or with what you do believe?
So we are doing this by eyewitness accounts huh? How about the hundreds of recorded witnesses that Dionysious the god of debauchery and wine walked across the bay of Thermos, how about the Greek accounts of the battles of the Peloponnesian War where Athena herself wept in he midst of the battlefield.
I don't usually like to insert myself here, but I've got to ask, what people claimed eyewitness to those events? I'm not disbelieving you, I'm just asking.
Xenophon writes about Athena crying in the battlefield and records the claims of many soldiers there that this occurred in the Hellenica.
The claims of Dionysus or Bacchus walking across the bay of Thermon are part of the religious histories of the Dionysian cult.
Depends on where your faith lies. Those instances are not ringing a bell.
Not to overly defend Genaea's position, but you are making very broad stroked assumptions regarding literature. I am the antecedence of many things, but literature is not one of them. In fact, none of us can be. We are all after-the-fact, after the event observers.
Think for a moment: Every book -every one, be it on stone tablets, cave walls, papyrus, electronic, etc, is then also equally delusional. Why? Because we assume, by those references, x-things happened, can happen or make sense. We can even apply "eye witness accounts/testimonies" to those events, maybe even certain bias considerations, using still other books or literary references.
Regardless of whether of not they are accurate does not immediately dismiss the claims those pages make or do not. Nor the connection made to the author(s) of those words, nor the implication/relevance to the reader.
Regarding Hebrew history, because that is primarily the gist of the "Old Testimony", nearly all of it can be paralleled to other documents or events. Still, it makes one wonder why write such radical and hugely diverse text, which -for the record- no one was ever supposed to see. Most were private memoirs. Where in one breath beauty is everywhere, perfection abounds, then in another only chaos and division, side by side with poetry, love songs, strong warnings and the trials/tribulations of a people. They were not chosen as the end all people to model ourselves after. In fact, their own text explains this. They were chosen to be the mules of ego -the all the elements it brought. And they did quite a good Job at it -pun intended...
The only certain proof of any literary claim, be it cuneiform, Sanskrit, Yì Jing, Shakespeare, L Ron Hubbard, is to apply the conditions of search without limit, bias or preconceived facts.
Everything else is, as you said, deluge and the product of deluge being delusion. Standing in a garbage dump saying you do not smell or the items around you do not either is equally nonsensical//delusional, yes?
James.We can question many things from long ago. I understand that I take on faith the "facts" of much of history. But we are talking about super-natural evants and science and discussing it with people who wish to view these super-natural events as fact just like the fact that you and I exist today. They make claims of God having revealed himself to them and many of them wish for their belief to be prominant in schools and the like. That is why this particular set of claims from the past is given extra levels of scrutiny.
But did you notice that just now, we are having many problems with God, especially in schools. God is not a "new" notion. Neither is trying to deny him.
Well, if fairness and unbiased education matter, then the issue is moot.
Theos -the collective expression of Reason, being Equation AND Sensation- should have equal time.
Teaching history -scientific or otherwise- in my opinion, at the primary or secondary level is very manipulative. A child of 3 to 13 cannot properly discern what is valuable information and what is not. Both then should be left for the collegiate level. Scientific and sensational literature exists everywhere -overlapping or individual. The Old Testament is proof of that, as is the Big Bang theory. Did dinosaurs live 50 million years ago; did it take six rotations of the planet around the sun to create everything? No and no. This is simply humans grappling with their existence until they let go of ego or end up like their historical references, dead.
As for people expressing their belief/disbelief, in historical literature, as fact or fiction, I highly doubt there is a single drop of faith anywhere to be found, as that would completely dismiss the necessity for the literary handicap, and impose the aforementioned search without limit.
James
For Genea & Diane,
There was a question the other day about raising children and talking about morals without the use of God or the Bible. Well I've been thinking about that and this morning I tried something with my kids. I started singing, "Say it loud, I'm black and proud!" I sang it over a couple of times and they quickly became interested (15 year old boy/ 8 year old girl). So I then told them that it was a song by James Brown from back in the 60's. Then I asked them, "Why do you think he would sing something like that?" They muttered a couple of things but I then I reminded them of how black people were treated (slavery, Jim Crow laws, back of the bus, separate but equal, separate water fountains etc). They were very quiet as I spoke. And I reminded them that blacks in America were treated very badly and made to feel they were not human or equal. I said, "That is why he wrote that song and he sings it very powerfully; and he was loved for that song because black people needed to feel it." Then I told them about a famous concert in Boston just after the MLK assassination and how James Brown calmed the audience down. So what I used in this conversation was empathy to make them feel what would drive a man to sing a song like that. My son asked me what I thought MLK would think of gansta rap. I said, "I can't be sure but I think he would understand where they were coming from because there were angry blacks way back when, but that MLK used the non-violent form of protest and expressed himself differently. But there was a man by the name of Malcolm X who said, "by any means necessary." Then I asked my son, "what do you think that means?" And he said, "I know...."Oh no! You didn't finish. I know????? Personally I think Dr. Rev. MLK would have condemned gangsta rap because it denigrates black women and glorifies violence. I ask my student, "If you were to be judged by the content of your character and not the color of your skin, what would people say?"
I tell my students we should not make ourself perpetual victims. They need to get educated and do positive things.
I think to remind other people of remembering the creator.
T spread the world of God.
RegardsPeople who are ignorant of God always try to put Him in the human scale of prejudice.
So oftentimes they will have always wrong perception about Him.
And, your perception is correct? How do you know that?
The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them.
In general I find it painful that you claim a privileged position and try to defend it by two walls of pride, an external one as a man and an internal one as a Jew. As a man you claim, so to speak, a dispensation from causality otherwise accepted, as a Jew the priviliege of monotheism. But a limited causality is no longer a causality at all, as our wonderful Spinoza recognized with all incision, probably as the first one. And the animistic interpretations of the religions of nature are in principle not annulled by monopolisation. With such walls we can only attain a certain self-deception, but our moral efforts are not furthered by them. On the contrary.
Now that I have quite openly stated our differences in intellectual convictions it is still clear to me that we are quite close to each other in essential things, ie in our evalutations of human behaviour. What separates us are only intellectual 'props' and `rationalisation' in Freud's language. Therefore I think that we would understand each other quite well if we talked about concrete things.
With friendly thanks and best wishes
Yours, A. Einstein.Mark Knowles, religion does more than cause conflicts - it poisons everything it comes into contact with.
HeadlyvonNoggin, your last wordy comment was the greatest piece of white noise, nonesense I have read on this forum in sometime. The story of God testing Abraham is one of the most immoral and evil stories of the Bible. Only a mind of questionable morality would find value in that tale. Secondly, you speak of Adam as if he existed when there is not one shred of evidence to support his existence. There is as much evidence to support a unicorn once living upon earth as there is that childish myth about Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden. Blabbering nonesense!Mark Knowles wrote
Yeah - this would be why your religion causes so many conflicts.
Still - keep pushing it - no matter how bad it tastes.
I got your point - it was a defense of your beliefs - yes?
Did you get mine?
===================================
Yes I did get your point. Did you get my point of my last post.
Thing is ??? I agree with a large portion of what you are usually saying. But I don't agree with your delivery of it. But generally; .. I think that you over postulate the evidence which you present.
I agree that there are what apears to be contradictions in each of the various translations and interpretations of the numerous different religions.
I just don't believe that there is enough evidence to prove or disprove that there was or wasn't "A" source from which our physical existence sprang.
You have faith that all things sprang from the "BIG BANG"
I have faith that all things "Physical" sprang from the big bang.
You believe that the Physical is all that there is; I don't.I think the most important thing I said was ignored. We all have the right to believe whatever we choose. The danger is valuing yourself and what you believe over others. That leads to disrespect. At the point of disrespect, some go on to try to personal attacks.
Rather one had a religion or not, it is unkind to attempt to insult others because they don't agree with you.When you say "insult," what do you mean exactly? Not sure why you think I should respect your beliefs either.
Great that you do not value Christianity as any more worth than any and all other belief systems. Yes? Christianity ha no more value than Paganism - right?Mark, you were not the one that said I must not be a good Teacher. I was specifically responded to A Troubled Man. You and I have had nothing but civil exchanges. I appreciate that.
However, you will notice I never insinuate that someone who does not believe what I believe is an idiot, stupid, etc. One thing that everyone should learn in school is how to communicate with people you disagree with. Communication is the purpose of Hubpages.By the way Mark, I still pray for you. We haven't communicated in a couple of days. You must have missed me!
Keep praying away if it makes you feel better.
What are you praying for? That I get a lobotomy?No Mark. No lobotomy for you ... maybe a new body!
Mark I know I responded to this. Maybe it wasn't approve. I was trying to be funny. I said, "No lobotomy." I am praying for a NEW body!
And I told you you need to pray harder.
I continue to pray for Mark. Trouble Man, now you are in for it. I'm adding you to my list. The fervent prayers of the righteous availeth much.
Making money is the purpose of hubpages.
So - your bible does not say that anyone who does not believe is a fool?
Your bible does not say that there is only one way?
Your bible does not say that "anyone who is not for me is against me."?
Have you changed the bible somehow? Taken these out?Yes, Mark, it says all of those things. They should be read in context.
If you don't believe any of it, it shouldn't be a problem ... right? I'm glad you are asking questions. You are keeping me sharp. Off to women's Bible study. Mark, when I get back, I'd like to know what your philosophy is on spiritual life and how to raise kids. I have no kids but help everyone else with theirs.We teach kids about all religions, we never send them to be indoctrinated into a religion because that is child abuse.
Trouble Man, there is no way you can teach about ALL (not shouting - for emphasis) religions because only God knows how many religions there are. I think I will Google it.
Psalms 14:1
The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.”
I apologize if what I wrote appeared as a personal attack, it was merely meant as a point of reference in that I found it very hard to understand how a teacher can teach students based on logic and reason while that same logic and reason is tossed out in favor of what you want to believe.
Of course, the issue here is usually the fact that the vast majority of believers never chose their religions in the first place, but instead their religions were chosen for them.I was raised in a home where mom was baptist and dad was methodist. We alternated - baptist church one Sunday and methodist the next. AND I went to Catholic elementary school. I made a decision to accept Christ at 27.
Your religion was decided for you by your mom and dad, not you.
From the age of 17 to 27 I lived a sinful, carefree life. I was exposed to a whole lot when I left hom and went to college. Late 60s/70s brought a radical change in values.
Trouble Man, no problem! You are way more civil than some.
Yeah, right. We call that talkin' outa both sides a yore mouth around here.
Imagine me kissing you on your forehead; not to betray you but to thank you for saying that....
Suburban, I must be missing a lot of stuff. I see you, Mark, and Trouble Man made these comments six days ago. I wasn't trying to ignore you. Thank you!
Backwater, I love those comebacks!
Awesome stuff. Do you throw them into a lake of burning fire, or just throw acid in their faces when you kick them out for not obeying you? And - I assume you have some self righteous condescending preachers to let the kids know what you expect of them - right?
Gosh - on reflection, this comparing god to reality thing is simply not working.Mark we have children's church because we know they need their own environment.
My comments are regarding my school where kids put a low priority on education and are basically a lost generation with low test scores, high sex drive, high illiteracy rate, live in foster homes or with terrible parents.
Would you like to come to mentor some of these kids?If these kids have little educated and are mostly illiterate then they are perfect subjects for religious figures to indoctrinate them. Hopefully they can get away before its too late!
Well Brian, I hope you are doing what you can to teach uneducated and illiterate children. They are the future.
No - you were comparing yourself to god and the need to obey what god sed in order to get into heaven.
Why the need to be dishonest about your bringing up the need to obey your rules or get out of your classroom and comparing that to god wanting obedience form people or not letting them into heaven? Now it is self righteous saving of the children who are lost.
Sorry your society does not look after it's offspring properly, but I suspect I am too far away to do much good.What does that mean? What is "their own environment" and who decides that?
That would certainly not facilitate any need for indoctrinating them in church. That will just make matters much worse.Children's church is set up by age groups. We have a cry room for babies. toddlers, kindergarteners, elementary, middle, and high school. They do age appropriate, singing, reading Bible stories, discussing age-related dilemmas and what to do, etc.
Inner city youth need all the mentoring and encouragement they can get. You would be surprised at things they go through and how low their ambitions and expectations are.... talking about being sent to hell if they don't accept Jesus, being killed by their parents if they talk back, murdering anyone who works on Sunday... those kind of Bible stories?
No they don't talk about being sent to hell. Actually they have fun studying about the parables, miracles, and reward of doing the right thing (no fighting, no stealing, no bullying, be kind to others, love thy neighbor as theyself) This coming weekend we are having extreme fall weekend. We're have Extreme Fall Weekend next week, giving away 5,000 pumpkins, pet zoo, water slides, bands, etc.
You don't get "sent" to hell. It is purely voluntary.
It is absolutely a personal choice. God gave us all free will.
God, if he did exist, does not give us free will. He is the awful dictator in the sky who knows our every thought and every move. An absolute tyrrant who destroys our very integrity as human beings. Hell was not invented until Christ mentions it in the New Testament as a threat to non-subservient people. An absoutle evil doctrine!
The word "hell" occurs 31 times in the Old Testament. All 31 of those times, the word translated "hell" is the Hebrew word "sheol." While the English word "hell" has connotations as a place of punishment for the condemned, sheol does not have such connotations. Sheol simply refers to the abode of the dead in general, not particularly the place of the punishment for the wicked. In fact, sheol was divided into two compartments, one for the righteous dead and one for the wicked dead. And, more specifically, the Jewish concept of sheol was the "underworld," or in other words, a place within the earth, underneath the surface world.
http://www.biblestudying.net/cosmo-5.htmlSo where is the lake of fire where the unbelievers get their comeuppance?
You'll find out soon enough. You'll wish it was a lake of fire . . . it is a vision. The real thing will be worse than you can imagine.
Then, it all comes down to a battle of imaginations.
You lose, cuz you ain't got one. Wuts up with the smiley face? Are you from 1988?
Do you enjoy threatening others or is it something that your religion requires?
Why would they study miracles when there is no such thing as a miracle, at least not anything that can't be explained by any terrestrial means?
It is not logical to teach children to do the right thing with a reward/punishment system, it doesn't work.
It is not logical to teach children to love people who they actually don't love. Children need to be taught about respect, not love.
That's nice, but what they are being taught is not logical and will not produce long term positive results.Trouble Man, there is no teaching involved. People come to get their pumpkins and go home if they want to. If they want to get food or watch entertainment, they can. Christmas, a couple of years ago, we gave away 5000 pairs of shoes. People stood in line, got the shoes, and went their separate ways.
This all sounds terribly self-righteous.
Congrats.I think you mean either "horrible," or "incorrigible."
Sounds like the beginning of a rap song!
Just realized I misspelled "incorrigible." I had a long night. We had a talent show and I didn't get home until after 10 pm. I read to quickly. Well it just adds to the rap song! horrible, corrible, incorrigible yea! yea! yea!
Mark, have you seen the long lines of people at Thanksgiving, Christmas, or Easter that are being feed. There are people who are homeless and hungry for whatever reason. If a man asks you for food, would you not feed him.
Consider this economy. We have a storehouse. Members donate clothes, toys, food, and whatever things might have use to someone else. A person going on a job interview should be dressed appropriately. They can get clothing appropriate for their interview from the storehouse.
Those who request it get help with immigration status.
The attitude in giving could be perceived as righteous. But why not perceive it as compassion, mercy, kindness.Because you are bragging about it? I said "self righteous," not "righteous."
Very well done.Because NO ONE is asking or requesting to hear about Jesus, or Hell or anything else regarding Christianity.
That is simply untrue.
Perhaps you are not asking to hear about Jesus, but others may be. However, the fact that you participate in these forum threads regularly shows that you do in fact want to hear about Jesus. If you did not, you would not frequent the religious threads now would you?
As for everybody else, you cannot speak for them. Try googling about the people trying to acquire Bibles in the 53 countries where it is illegal. Read up what they are willing to go through to hear a little bit more about Jesus, about Christianity and about Hell.
You may take evangelism to be arrogant and frustrating in countries where it is legal to talk about Christianity. But count yourself privileged to hear about it. It means you are living in a country where you are allowed to hear about all the alternatives. Where your religion, your rank, your place, your options are not all decided for you. Where you can actually make the choice that so many believe God gave you, instead of having somebody make it for you with a threat over your life.
Voice of the Martyrs. Check it out.More self righteous nonsense. How come you are not out evangelizing in one of those 53 countries where Christians are so obnoxious their religion has been made illegal?. Sorry - not that you are trying to convince anyone of anything.
Speaking personally - I am not interested in hearing about Jesus - most of you will lie about him in any case. A lot of you lie and say there is lots of contemporary evidence outside the bible, when there is not any at all.
I am more interested in educating people like yourself to understand their religious beliefs are damaging. Your martyr complex is rather disturbing as well, but I can see why uneducated poor peasants in Pakistan might want to subscribe to it. Christianity has always flourished amongst the uneducated poor.Mark I hope you realize how you come across. I am not going to get into this with you, your comment was just dripping of ignorance.
The problem is that far too many Christians want Christianity to be accepted as fact when it is not. It is faith which is fine in your own home or in church. Outside of that it is just opinion....
Dripping of ignorance? How so? You were self righteously going on about these 53 countries that made the bible illegal while evangelizing on an Internet forum thread. Why aren't you there spreading teh Word instead of doing it from the comfort of your computer?
Show me the contemporary evidence you say exists.I don't evangelize on here! lol I am just doing the same thing you claim to be doing. Trying to help people realize when they make ignorant comments because honestly it annoys me. I respond to ridiculous statements and to questions. I do not try to initiate the sharing of the Gospel on here.
I talk to people in person when I want to evangelize.
This is just interesting banter that gets me views. It is not evangelism.
As for spreading the word, how do you know what I am doing during the large blocks of time I am offline? I only post in the mornings and evenings for a reason, that being that I am nowhere near the computer the rest of the day.
You are really funny Mark. When I first started talking to you, you were very put together. You should go over the course of our conversations. We went from your "well" thought out arguments to nothing but ad hominids.
Are you sure you don't want to hear about Jesus? I keep rejecting conversation with you, but you pursue it. That is a curious behavior for somebody who doesn't want to hear what I have to say.
Furthermore Mark that comment was not directed towards you. I was talking about a troubled man not you, I really care why you are on the forums. I have already taken some great advice about pearls.
Ah - a personal attack hidden by bible "wisdom." I'm a swine and you have pearls to offer.
How very Christian of you. Passive-aggressive to a fault.
Ya do know pearls are just shiny turds - right?
Are you being persecuted for your beliefs yet?Doesn't matter if I am.
How would you say that is not very Christian of me? I what ways? I don't think that I was being passive aggressive, I think I was being flat out aggressive. It was very obvious what I was insinuating, and within the context Jesus used the parable.
It was an honest observation Mark. It wasn't nice, I am not a fan of nice, but it was honest. It was loving. It was blunt. Now using what we know about the early Christians and Christ tell me how what I said was unchristian. I am quite interested to know what your idea of how a Christian ought to behave is.Please take the trouble to read what I wrote in future. I said it was very Christian of you to attack and insult me while hiding behind the bible as a shield.
Loving? How is lying about me loving? Oh - Christian "I know what is best for you and I don't care how much it hurts," sort of love?
You did not cast any pearls - please stop saying you did. You lied at me and then accused me of ignoring the information that you did not offer.
Little wonder your religion has caused so many conflicts.Sorry Mark I took that "how very Christian" remark as sarcasm. My mistake.
As for the rest of your comment it did not make sense. At least not to me.Attacking people while hiding behind the bible as having said it is very Christian. This is why your religion causes so many conflicts. Claim to love when attacking and insulting. Very Christian.
What did you not understand? That you did not cast any pearls before me? How difficult is that to understand?
Not off evangelizing in Pakistan today?I am not hiding behind anything. I am definitely not in Pakistan. Doesn't mean anything though. I did not attack you. I stated my opinion based off of my observation. Not an attack.
Aggressive does not mean attack. They are different you know.
Aggressive: Pursuing one's aims and interests forcefully, sometimes unduly so: "an aggressive businessman".
Attack:
Take action against (a place or enemy forces) with weapons or armed force: "in December, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor". (I would add that you can verbally attack somebody but that was not in the definition I found)
I was aggressive in my point. I did not take a passive role, nor was I defending myself. I was putting out an opinion in a forceful, and aggressive manner.
Not in any way attacking your person, character, or any other aspect of your portrayed persona.
Pleases stop lying at me. Clearly you are engaging me in conversation (if only to try and spread more fabrications).
Who exactly is asking? Christians don't need to ask because each one of them has their own version of Christianity which they'll only be to happy to tell you about. Muslims and Jews aren't asking as they already have their own sets of irrational beliefs. Atheists aren't asking as they know more about Christianity than Christians do.
So, who is asking?
Sorry, but that logic doesn't follow.
What does that have to do with Evangelism? http://www.persecution.com/
If Christianity is illegal in those countries (which it is not) then how does spreading the word in other places that aren't "illegal" have anything to do with it?
LOL! I should be privileged to be told I'm evil, a sinner and will burn in a lake of fire for all eternity. Seriously, dude. That's hilarious.
The only alternative Christianity offers is an alternative reality, which in essence is pure fantasy.
So instead, I am forced to having somebody make threats for me from their position of Christianity. No one is threatening our lives because we live in a secular society, hence we need not hear about Jesus.Nobody should be threatening you on behalf of Christ. That isn't the job he gave his followers. He said to spread the Good news. GOOD news. Not threats, not bad news.
However people threaten anyways. What are you going to do? Complain on the internet about it, or maybe use the book they believe in to point out the issue? That is what I like to do, even before I was Christian. I did my research so that I could debate with evangelicals.
You just said there was... "they have fun studying about the parables, miracles, and reward of doing the right thing"
Funny how you believers continuously change your stories.Tell me, what do you think about Islam? They are believers.
Oh you are back to kids church. I thought you meant the Extreme Weekend, 5000 shoe give away, etc. I meant people are not bribed to come get anything. Yes students go to church to learn about God. People go to a movie to watch it. People go to a restaurant to eat.
Yes, instead of learning about religions, they are being indoctrinated into one religion.
That is not what should be happening, and in many (I would like to say most but I do not actually know the numbers) churches that is not at all happening!
Really? Which churches teach about all religions and not just one religion?
Many, many churches. How would you go about teaching tolerance? By only teaching about one culture, one religion, one belief? No, by teaching about them all. By all means tell children what you believe and why you believe it. But I do not think anybody can lovingly only teach their own belief set to a child. You want them to know there are options, that there are choices. To teach children about God is to teach them about free choice.
To be a Christian does not mean to be brainwashed into thinking Christ is the only way. It is about choosing to have faith in Christ. It is about choosing to be his follower. If somebody tries to make that choice for you then there is a good chance you will reject Christ later, because you did not choose him for yourself.
Jesus said believe, repent and then be baptized. In that order although I am paraphrasing. It is a personal choice, not a parental choice.
We have what many believe is the God given gift of choice, and the rational mind to utilize it.
Trouble Man can you tell me some of the things you think they should teach? Serious question.
I wasn't ignoring you Troubled Man. I have to read back through the last couple of days to find out when some responds to my posts. Your parents didn't teach you wrong from right? Is there one book that teaches about all religions? If your ears were burning earlier, it is because I was praying for you and Mark.
Yes, with reason, explanation and understanding, not a Bible.
That would be convenient and maybe there is, but I don't know for sure.If you are still preying for me - what are you preying for exactly? I know it is not a lobotomy for me.
Mark, I am praying God will fill you with joy and blessing beyond the measure.
Mark has two Christian friends if no other: Vlad and me!
Weird. I am already full of that. And it didn't take majik.
Now what u gonna do?I will just be your online friend who will pray for you without ceasing. If you don't need it, don't worry about it. Just relax!
Whatever makes you feel better. What are you praying for exactly?
That you will continue to be inquisitive about my faith. That the Holy Spirit will lead you into all truth and give you the peac that passes understanding. I thank him for your civil and cordial discourse. You don't respond angrily and you seem light hearted but sincere. Be blessed Mark!
I am not inquisitive about your faith - sorry. Whatever gave you that idea? I would not respond angrily to you. To a degree - I feel sorry for you. It is a shame to waste yourself in this fashion.
But - keep praying if it makes you feel better.Thank you for feeling sorry for me Mark. That is a sign of compassion. At least you are not ignoring me. We are both pretty likable people.
That the Holy Spirit will lead you into all truth and give you the peac that passes understanding. I thank him for your civil and cordial discourse Be blessed Mark!
my keyboard is skipping. I really meant "peace." Thank you for quoting me TM.
Make sure not to let this one around the kids, no telling what might happen.
Backwater, you seem like a lot of fun. Troubled man, why did you choose that moniker?
So, you think he's fun because he insults people personally? Is that the kind of behavior you believers support on these forums? How very sad.
Oh come on, everyone enjoys a good joke. Here's one . . . how many HubPage trolls does it take to change a lightbulb?
Now, now Trouble Man! Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. You put a few nuggets out there from time to time. But if I offended you I am truly sorry. Backwater, I take it back. Be nice to Trouble Man!
A crying baby is like the will of the Lord. It should be carried out!
lol! Thank you for reading and commenting Backwater.
It is a pleasure to know you. I am discerning of spirits. I can feel the love!
My devotion is done in my office. It's a crow with the four of us: Father, Son, Holy Spirit and me!
Not me silly! God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirt. I know you were trying to get me to say that. 4 days ago? How did I miss this. Just in time for my devotion. Have a good night!
I was talking to the troll who keeps getting banned. Not you.
Been gone for a while. And this thread is still roaring with debate. I just watched My Name is Khan. I'm trying to look for a movie with a Christian protagonist that can move me that much with realism but, I haven't found one yet.
Don't go on, talking so proudly, spouting arrogance from your mouth, because the Lord is the God who knows, and He weighs every act. 1 Samuel 2:3
For your hair to start growing again, what else?
How's it going Mark?Yes, fine. Having a few enforced days off for Eid al Adha. Nice to stop working for a while
Ah - I have moved away from my Muslim cousins so tend to forget when it is time for me to be extra noisy during the day.
haven't read all the posts, but just wanted to say............
After being brought up to believe in god all my life, and sometimes standing out as different because of my faith is really hard for me, as i like to kinda fit in.
There is absolute no doubt in my mind, that Satan is the ruler of this system, and that god is going to step in soon, and sort this mess out. It does not belong to man to direct his own steps, we need god in our lives.What difference does it make?
God is "going to step in to sort this mess out," any day soon.
Mark, the Bible certainly talks about all the other things people turned into Gods and condemned them. Solemn married 700 when and had 300 concubines. These woman had their own Gods and it turned Solemn away from the one true living God. There was a major consequence for that.
Mark what would anyone do with 700 wives and 300 concubines???Own them?
Not sure what your point is? I don't need convincing the bible is nonsense.I just cannot imagine a man handling that many women. The concept of sharing is way beyond me.
Related Discussions
- 37
If god is all-knowing, why do you pray?
by nightwork4 12 years ago
If god is all-knowing, why do you pray?according to religious people, their god knows all, what they think, what they are going to do etc. so why do people pray to it if it already knows what they are thinking?
- 57
If God knows everything
by Rabgix 13 years ago
He knew EXACTLY what would come to pass even before he created the Universe or humanity.So why do it?boredom?
- 7
How can people have free will if God knows everything?
by Education Answer 12 years ago
How can people have free will if God knows everything?
- 681
How do you explain unanswered prayer?
by Baileybear 14 years ago
eg the the people that didn't get healed when you prayed for them? Not enough faith? Hidden sin? God doesn't care? Answered prayers are really just luck anyway?
- 17
Is our destiny in God's hands or do we actually have free will, being that God k
by LAURENS WRIGHT 11 years ago
Is our destiny in God's hands or do we actually have free will, being that God knows all?
- 44
How To Pray A Powerful Prayer That Opens Closed Doors?
by ngureco 7 years ago
How To Pray A Powerful Prayer That Opens Closed Doors?