End Time Prophesy
Define Armageddon.
If war, starvation, natural disasters, etc. then yes.
If the end of the world, Gabrielle trumpeting, folks floating into the air, certainly not. There is no reason to actually believe the biblical tale of Armageddon.As long as I am looking up to it - no. Every year passess and every year is a disappointment. In case you get bored waiting - start a family.
Hold on I've got to channel into the spirit world…..
Ummmmmummmmmummmm.
Some time in the future humans will no longer exist.Sometime in the future...it will no longer be 2013...
On the way home from work, I will encounter a traffic accident.
In the future...we will all be older.
I know this, because I'm a time traveler. I travel forwards in time at a rate of 1 second per second.I'm going to go out on a limb here an make a prediction.
I will buy pizza for dinner tonight. Then later (this part is still a bit fuzzy) I'll have heart burn and attempt to wash it back with large amount of beer. So let it be written, so let it be done.
Oh, and I won't be getting lucky, I'll try but nothing doing.Me too! How weird! What an amazing coincidence
The Future NEVER arrives. It is the sacred, theoretical tool of these industries:
Religion; Journalism; Insurance; Preventative Medicine; Marketing; and numerous others you might wish to add here. They all depend on yours and my Fear to get us buying their wares.
Opt out of the fear and worry. Then apply your mental energy to remembering your mistakes of the past. Then work out strategies to avoid a repeat and plan for better moments of now in the future.
No one knows when that time will be, not even Christ himself. Only our Father in Heaven knows. Mark 13: 32..."But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."
Just be ready... (in spirit, in good deeds, be prayerful, read the scriptures, smile a lot, be happy, and love lots and lots).You must believe in multiple Gods then if you feel the Son does't know what the Father knows?
I suppose if you believe in one god who happens to suffer from Multiple Personality Disorder, you could potentially believe in a god that doesn't know something that it should know because it's omniscient...
...but that would be silly, wouldn't it?not necessarily. Maybe the Bible god is schizophrenic. He was all slavery, genocide and anger in the Old Testament and sweet and cuddly in the new - Ironically (or not so much) as soon as his people were exposed to Babylonian mythology which emphasized resurrection, hell and salvation.
But wouldn't a mentally ill god not be perfect, as is often claimed by Christians?
Not under divine command theory, which says that anything God commands (slavery, genocide etc) is automatically good and above question.
Not to mention, a lot of god botherers claim that god is immaterial, meaning he doesn't have a brain--so how could we even begin to diagnose a mental disorder in something that doesn't have a brain? lol
(Also, divine command theory sounds like a trip wire landing them right in the Euthyphro Dilemma.)God botherers??? Lol...
We cannot diagnose God. He doesn't think like we do (scripture)... how could he with no brain and all...?
There is no evidence that there is thought without a brain.
So how can you make any claim about how a god thinks if that god is without the faculty which allows thought? That's like saying that 60-foot tall invisible purple slugs without hands shake hands differently than we do--there's no evidence of said slugs, and said slugs also have no hands. It's a meaningless statement.
The bible said, "My thoughts are not your thoughts; nor my ways your ways" that was God speaking.
I cannot fathom the face feet hands nor brain of God. But I believe in faith.No, that wasn't god speaking, that was someone claiming that was what god said. If you can't understand the way your god thinks or operates, then you cannot make any claims about, say, the goodness of that god, or whether just believing will please it at all--for all you know, your god could be a trickster god who sends people who believe with blind faith to hell, and because you just admitted that you cannot begin to understand it, how can you make a categorical judgement to the contrary of what I just proposed?
But you must realize that in the last days the times will be full of danger. Men will become utterly self-centered, greedy for money, full of big words. They will be proud and contemptuous, without any regard for what their parents taught them. They will be utterly lacking in gratitude, purity and normal human affections. They will be men of unscrupulous speech and have no control of themselves. They will be passionate and unprincipled, treacherous, self-willed and conceited, loving all the time what gives them pleasure instead of loving God. They will maintain a facade of “religion”, but their conduct will deny its validity. You must keep clear of people like this.
6-9 From their number come those creatures who worm their way into people’s houses, and find easy prey in silly women with an exaggerated sense of sin and morbid cravings—who are always learning and yet never able to grasp the truth. These men are as much enemies to the truth as Jannes and Jambres were to Moses. Their minds are distorted, and they are traitors to the faith. But in the long run they won’t get far. Their folly will become as obvious to everybody as did that of Moses’ opponents. 2 Tim 2:1-5
Looks like there are quite a few out here...
That would certainly contradict the behavior you exhibited in the post I just responded to where you called us idiots and morons. Is that the kind of love your "Father in Heaven" teaches?
There is no way that this Armageddon will happen, it has been written to frighten people into submission and believe what they were being told to believe at that time. Anyhow it would be better that we do not believe in everything it is said in Revelation; otherwise God would be a very violent God and not a loving God. So forget about the end of the world the way it is written in the Bible
Violence may come from even loving human beings. How much more may the creator of the earth be violent? We have read about the ways he deals with sin which he calls worthy of death in the OT.
A creator? Just any old creator? Say, violent enough to send a dinosaur killer asteroid to modern earth.
We DO expect a little more restraint from a perfect god/creator that loves all mankind, though.Doesn't matter what we expect if we are not in line with his will. He says via biblical scripts that sin=death and faith=life and Jesus will bust through clouds in a flash and calamity will ensue because the earth will shake from its foundation and the moon will change color the dead in Christ shall rise and we will be changed in a moment and we shall ALL behold him at the same time and every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord...or something like that.
He says, via the writings of a pack of ignorant liars, many things. Why we would be expected to shut down our god given brain and believe them is unknown.
Which God knows very well - we can conclude that either He doesn't want us to know His past, present or future, doesn't care one way or the other and thus won't make the effort to communicate His wants or simply isn't there.Ya know...we WILL find out who the pack of ignorant liars are for sure.
God has communicated all that he wants us to know about how he wants us to live and we have a choice to take it or leave it. But I will not stand before him on that day with sorrow but glee. I believe he will return. I will be ready to meet him when he comes.Oh, we already have found out. We already know that most of the outlandish tales have no connection to reality.
Well, His communication was kind of the point - He has made none. Without guidance (not lies, guidance) we cannot know what He wants and He knows that quite well. It will be very interesting to find out what His goals/objective actually is - for certain it is not to create a race of inferior creatures to keep Him company and worship Him as Christians claim.You do not believe yourself inferior to God??? Oh! No wonder you do not want the guidance he has provided. You should write him a stern letter. That "faith" may get you some results. You may have to duck though
but as his equal you should have nooooo problem there.?? It is not possible to get any idea of whether I consider myself God's equal or not from that statement. Are you trying to lay false paths to avoid discussion of the knowledge base of biblical authors? To change the subject to something else? Comedy (this one is over my head, unfortunately)?
What are you trying to say?- for certain it is not to create a race of inferior creatures to keep Him company and worship Him as Christians claim.
This was my reason for obviously wrongfully assuming that you didn't feel inferior to God. Forgive my error.
The biblical authors were dead on as far as I'm concerned. The petty argument over this word or that word is smoke puffs for the sake of cloudiness.
As you know, I am saying that we have the bible for instruction. We may pick at it until we ride our pigs over the moon; but if not the bible... what???
We need a God that shows us how to be good by being good himself and in Revelation he is even more violent than in the OT, so, if one follows what you believe is right, then one can only assume that we are all rebels. For the betterment of all humanity, we need an example from God how to be good and this is not only our God Yahweh but also the god of our brothers Allah, which seems even more violent than Yahweh; well at least this is how we humans say our God is like? Here I would like to add that I would not be surprised, if it turns out that God is more loving that the ways we describe Him.
There are no words to describe just how loving he is. I don't believe it to be quite humanly fathomable. We get a glimpse via his son Jesus. Allah is the God of Ishmael Abraham's son. And Isa (my Jesus) is also depicted in his story. Same God. More vicious and more loving than any of us can imagine. Jesus is our example of how to be good.
God gave instruction. He followed with warning.
Adam and Eve didn't listen. Their action changed their world immediately. Death to them and their children, until...
Today we have instruction and warning.
No, I don't. I think who ever rewrote that book, just put that in there to make people fear. Fear is not of God. God is only love, as people discover, after they have passed on.
God doesn't do anything horrible to anyone. People do horrible things to themselves. God would not be God if he had vengeance in His heart. The Bible is flawed with lies that make people fear. And, as already said, fear is NOT of God. It's only meant to keep people in line, by other people who want power.
If we could all see that, then the "truths" in the Bible would be obvious.Depending on what you mean by Armageddon, and depending on the level of God's patience with humanity (which seems to me to be super ultra oober patient, beyond all I can believe considering all things looking back over history till now), maybe so.
Have you heard of the term, Moral Velocitization? It is kind of what we are observing in the world, I think, currently. If I understand it correctly, things are going downhill quickly (morally) , like a snowball effect. The quicker the decline, the quicker the moral collapse.
At some point, the level of depravity will get so bad, and the hatred of all things good and true will grow, that there will be no turning back and the bible says God will give people over to their desires at some point. It will be like a moral decline that I think will get so bad, that there will be no room in the hearts and souls of mankind to even care about a possible God and what he requires from his creation. Evil will have to be answered, and a good God will oblige....
Hopefully, that degree of things will be far off. It depends on how much humanity sits back (like they are currently) and lets evil run rampant. For now, I think there are enough praying people left that care, that much evil is being held at bay. When the light leaves, when the people praying are gone for whatever reason or stop, I think the darkness will envelop crazy fast. Evil, darkness without the light to keep it at bay, is a very dark thing indeed. Ok, off my soapbox, lol, and interesting question!Oh, and one more thing, the biggest thing I notice in the world today that really makes me question in a bigger sense what is going on with humans, is that they are self sabotaging and willing to lose their freedoms like never before. At a time in history when humans can see what has worked well for freedom for humanity, and what kills the same freedoms, it makes NO sense that we are voting and living in ways and supporting things that will kill our own possible freedoms!
It is like humans are embracing things that are ludicrous and futile even if they know it will hurt them. It makes no sense. I am quickly losing faith in humanity when I simply turn on the news, and see the sides people are taking the reasoning given for doing so. It is actually mind boggling to me.If you are speaking of morality, in relation to the failings we are experiencing today, then I feel the lead needs to come from the population of the United States of America. Out of your country comes some of the most blatant immoral activity you could ever imagine. And I am not referring to anything relating to sexuality.
My attention is drawn to gross excess in various areas of everyday life, e.g., Eating to excess, bordering on gluttony; running business, large and small, with complete disregard for the needs of the poorer members of society, as if the "little people" of the world are only there by their own fault; manufacturing rubbish and passing it off as good wholesome food; lying about your life, painting it as moral when it clearly ain't; remaining ignorant of other parts of the world, as though your own country is the most, if not the only, important consideration. Also, in many cases a complete disregard for the needs of "Mother Earth," when millions of tons of artificial fertilisers are put in the ground to poison it and everything that lives therein/thereon. I could go on. Much of the examples stated above are perpetrated by respected, upstanding members of society. Here's the crunch:
Maybe the worst aspect is being unable to see, let alone admit, your faults. If there is anything clearly required of the christian ethic, it is being honest. Try it, you might find some enlightenment.
Forget Armageddon. We don't need it, just a return to down-to-earth good sense.
Good question pamij, As you surely now know, asking or stating anything Christian will bring all the anti-Christian kooks out of the woodwork to attack your beliefs or you personally. You are a brave individual to do so.
I do believe in the Bible prophecies of God, as the one who does know the beginning and end of all things! Many of these prophecies have already been fulfilled, such as Daniel's explicit prophecies of the world powers and most of the ones concerning Jesus' first coming. We probably will see Armageddon in our lifetimes, if we live through the tribulations coming on the world, as we see the beginning of those things being fulfilled now.
Things such as the world war against the state of Israel by a coalition of radical Arab nations as depicted in Psalm 83. Persecution of Jews and Christians by radical Muslims and others is gaining momentum, as Christians are now the most persecuted minority in the world. The stage is set for a world wide plague, war, famine, NWO dictatorship and the mark of the beast.
Personally, I don't believe that a "pre-tribulation rapture" is scriptural and would point to Matt. 24 and Rev. 19 to back up this belief. If Christians are already gone, what Christians are being killed by the anti-Christ?
As for all the nay sayers and atheists, they can believe whatever they want, but they should keep their opinions to themselves since they have no understanding of the things to come. When they are reading the Bible, they don't understand it because they are reading someone else's mail, thus the loss at understanding. May God's face shine upon you and bless you, as well as those unbelievers that are stirred up enough by this to honestly seek the truth.Good thing this forum is full of loving Christians who would never dream of personally attacking "anti-Christian kooks".
Good thing this forum has no Christian kooks to stir up the unbelievers.Good thoughts. But I want to ask about the pre trib rapture. I have considered it feasible because there will be some people left here who are getting a final chance to do things right. More persecution and blood running through the streets and destruction all around as some form of payment (for lack of a better term) for not getting it the first time. The absence of the mark makes things exponentially worse.
Not that attitudes on this matter will make or break a follower; I just want to know what you think if not too much of a imposition. Maybe I should've read your scriptures first but, ok I'm going to do that in a sec
I believe that the Second Coming of Christ, and all the events and things associated with it (the 3rd Temple, the Tribulation, the Rapture, Armageddon, etc.) is something we shall see in our lifetime...say within the next 5 to 20 years.
In every context of the word, Armageddon translates to mean New Beginning, not the destruction of the world. It has been mistranslated for centuries. As with every generation, since the first resurrection (note Rev 20.5b) men will continue to exist and die because they are scared to accept their true nature -as exemplified by Joshua Ben Joseph, aka Moshiach- and experience complete regeneration and fluidity with Creator. Until then, they will live and die by the sword of Reason, based on their scientific or sensational beliefs...
There is no 2nd coming prophecy, as there is no longer anything to prophecy, for he fulfilled both the rules of law and the prophecies. He was the last of all prophets. There is no great tribulation noted to occur, nor Rapture. The third temple is the resurrected body " where [he] has his dwelling place forever." The new heaven-earth is the regenerated human, in body brain and spirit.I think only those who have rejected God, and not the concept of God like accepts, will witness Armageddon. When I mean rejected, I mean purposely spurning his holiness. I also don't think those who are left behind will always have their free will. It is possible that then man will be merged with machine. It's called transhumanism. It's very possible that it could happen in our life-time.
I shiver in my shoes, not from the thought of retribution but that now we have two illogical proponents here in the forum.
I don't reject "god's holiness." Why? Because I do not know what that is supposed to be. I am still waiting for those who preach/teach such theoretical mind control to show me, in their own lives, what is meant by "holiness."
Don't tell me. Show me.I didn't say you rejected God's holiness. You just don't know so how can you reject Him? You've rejected the concept of God. That is not the same as rejecting God knowing He exists and therefore His holiness.
No one can prove their personal experiences to anyone else. If you are looking for empirical evidence, you will not find it.I'm not certain anyone rejects the concept of God. Especially not Johnny. I think most reject ideas presented by others. God is a big word with as many variations as there have been people born throughout history.
From what I've observed those who argue against God appear to have accepted a definition they find abhorrent and reject that definition. They are either unwilling or unable to envision other ideas. Whose fault then is it when they shut themselves off from open discussion? Who, ultimately, bears the blame?
If the idea disappears from our collective psyche it will be the fault of the religious who dogmatically argue in defense of stands which throw a negative light on the subject. Those who insist we see God as a trickster. A maleficent. An entity whose sole purpose appears to be to create discord on this level of existence.As I have several times, I reject the concept of a judgmental god of the sort put forward by religious people. He, She or It has no semblance of holiness as far as I can see.
Jumping in here...
I personally am thankful for a God that will one day judge. I am equally thankful for a society where there are (generally good) judges so people don't get away with harming others continually. It would be a horrible society to live in, otherwise. The God of the Bible is the most perfect kind of judge there could ever be, as he is all knowing. That he added in a way to be pardoned and took the penalty to do it, is just a kind and loving extra thing to do. An all knowing God that knows the heart of every person, is neither too lenient nor too harsh, and no human judge can say the same.
Just giving the view of even a judgmental God from the Bible...from the view of Jesus who clarified some of the areas of disagreement. Good judges that societies need to live in peace and freedom, still have some of the biggest enemies, but the reasons for that are explained by something else usually. Just interchanging the ideas of earthly courts and a more eternal/cosmic (for lack of better words) to show that we don't sometimes dislike what we are thinking we dislike, if that makes any sense.It's the other way round, your God is far too harsh compared with a human judge. No human judge would send someone to burn for an eternity just because they didn't worship him.
Sounds like the mind of a human "judge" to me...
On further thought it must be boring judging people when he knows the future and knows happens before people are even born.
Yes, he knows. He don't orchestrate it. He just knows how we will DECIDE (the operative word) to orchestrate. See???
Then why judge if the future is predetermined?
How the heck is predetermined a term for how we orchestrate? You believe yourself to be a puppet???
Of course; if everything you think or do is predetermined then you are nothing but a puppet for the fingers and strings of time. That time is inanimate and without intelligence does not preclude it being a puppet master, pulling your strings every moment.
We decide our own actions and reactions. Life deals good and bad to all. How we react makes the difference.
Sure we do but the fact that you think God already knows what we do negates a different decision.
Did you ever play Make Me Laugh?
If so, do your opponents make you laugh because they know you will not be able to resist? Or were you good at the game?Duh...what's your response??? Do they MAKE you laugh because they just know that you will? Or do you choose (good at the game)?
I don't even know what game you are talking about. You go from a serious conversation to meaningless chatter in two seconds.
Meaningless??? Well I never...!!!
Ok, real life...
See oceansnsunsets response. You do not make someone commit a crime simply because you know it will happen. If that were the case, Bait Car would never get airtime or Cops, or hooker stings. You just know some fool will come along and...You can in fact be charged with accessory to a crime if you don't attempt to prevent it.
Well that lets God off your hook. He tries everyday to prevent...
He tries to prevent murder and yet there is murder, so he fails often.
Proof positive that he is no puppet master.
thank you. Our will for our lives outweighs his will. He allows us to choose.Again, you make no sense at all. This is why I pay you no attention.
YET GOD.....BEING OMNISCIENT.....KNOWS THE EXACT CHOICE WE ARE GOING TO MAKE.
What's the sense in allowing us to choose, when God already knows what choice we are going to make? Prove to us that your logic is not absurd.
How ridiculous. LOL. An OMNISCIENT, OMNIPOTENT God who has to TRY. Do you ever think about just how utterly absurd that would be?
If it is as you say and God knows the future then the future is predetermined. It's as simple as that.
Predestination. At birth your every action and thought is predestined, and that most certainly includes your ultimate destiny. Whether you sign with angels or burn with demons is set even before birth. You cannot change it.
So...might as well be merry and have fun, eh? Nothing matters anyway - the end result of an omniscient god.We're here for a good time, not a long time, so have a good time the sun can't shine everyday.
Predetermined by who? Please don't say the flying spaghetti monster.
Do you mean predetermined by the one true God?Predetermined by anything. By anyone. By a god, by nature.
It makes zero difference who or what did the predetermining; if your life is predetermined then you cannot make any choices, by definition.
Doesn't it sound different than saying, "he predicts" not predetermines? There is a difference. I bet MW will tell us.
You can only orchestrate according to a set of predetermined odjectives. You cannot have one without the other!
Or being controlled by a really mean figment of imagination???
Well what are you waiting on. Jump on under the blanket!
Would you just jump under the blankets with a woman, just to experiment?
For me to experiment with someone just to see if I liked it would be, for me, the height of immorality. It would involve using another person for my own ends. I know my desires, what attracts me. I do not indulge that fantasy if there is no mutual attraction. I prefer to tread the moral ground and settle for friendship as the sustainable and beautiful alternative. This should be the goal for heterosexual people too. So you see, to talk about promiscuity here is right out of place and irrelevant.
I refuse to experiment in something which is against my nature.I meant the blanket of protection that Jesus provided.
And uh experimental sex is not what I am suggesting. I mean that since God made us and he knows us well, he already knows our struggle. He wants us to know it too. He knows what we like. He takes homosexuals (and they who are promiscuous). He wants to hear your heart say what he says. Truth is paramount. It frees us.
Judging people that break laws isn't about curing boredom, and if it was, many judges would stop doing it. I imagine people are often bored to tears in courtrooms across the world, at times. My point is, it isn't about being boring for God or not.
Having a God that isn't all knowing wouldn't really be any God at all. He doesn't use his all knowing ways against us. Think on this for a minute. Say you heard and others heard about a crime that was going to happen. Does it in any way mean you are at fault when the person chooses to carry it out? That wouldn't make sense. It wouldn't make sense to take away their free will either to commit crimes or do good deeds. The knowing of it doesn't implicate, and the suggestion of taking away free will wouldn't be a good thing either. The criminal chooses to commit crime almost 100% of the time, and if he was forced, then there is a responsibility on more than the criminal. A good judge, judging crimes, is still a better thing than not. If we are honest, none of us would want to really live in a society that was any other way.Notice that in most societies we are not judged by the bibles standards. If we were we would be killing homosexual and women found to not be a virgin on their wedding day. A person stealing a bag of chips would have the same judgement as a murderer.
If I am aware a crime will take place and don't act to prevent it I'm as guilty as the person committing the crime and can be charged accordingly. The description you give to your God has knowledge but doesn't prevent the crime making him guilty as well.You so often give blatant disregard to the teaching of Jesus about how we are to treat each other. Do you "glaze over" while reading my comments?
Yes because you are impossible to have a serious conversation with. Some of are here to learn from each other, but you are not one of those people. You have no understanding of those that don't believe nor do you wish to understand.
The bible tells me all about people who do not believe. I can usually spot them from miles away. I understand them fine. However none of them may understand me. It is written.
Is that predetermined? Hellllll no. We have to decide; and as you and many others here know, we can always just change our minds...
I am not talking about particular societies, and noticed you pulled out the most evil kind you could, lol. I am talking about societies that have rules, so there is freedom for all, and judges to put away criminals. I am asking people to consider why we like good judges for societies on the one hand, but don't on the other hand. That doesn't make sense.
If you heard about a bank robbery about to go down, or heard about a news story that a ransom was happening and the threat was carried out, you would not be guilty when it happened. Not for just having the foreknowledge of it. That wouldn't even make sense. Think of on a bigger scale, news stories. We hear about things about to happen all the time. You would never accuse the people of knowing of it, of being guilty for the crimes. My point is to point out these inconsistencies in our thinking, when it happens to be with an authority we disagree with. This is nothing new.
In fairness, with your argument about God being guilty as well, you are seeming to support an idea of a God that does not allow for free will. It would have to be the case for your argument to stand. I disagree with the idea that there is a creator that ought to have created us to be robots, so we don't have to answer for our crimes or wrongdoings. So we disagree.
One last point, in a greater and cosmic sense, we do have to answer to whatever is the reason for our being here and actually LIVE in their world with their rules. Just another way to think about it.Sure like judges who would cast someone to burn in hell for eternity for being born gay.
A person can be charged with accessory to a crime by simply failing to report the crime to proper authority. If you know someone will murder someone the right thing to do would be to report the crime to the proper authority to prevent a murder for the sake the person about to be murdered and so as not to be charged with accessory to the murder.
Would that be your defence for watching a murder take place and not attempting to prevent it, you didn't want to take the murderers free will from them? You'd be charged with accessory to the murder and rightly so.
What do you think that reason is?I was born a liar.
but one day...I realized how tiring the remembering and the planning and the execution and the guilty feeling...
The vow to myself for the sake of my stress level was to be honest.
Don't ever forget: we are born into sin. It takes a renewing of mind; a shedding of self; an agreement with what is right to ever hope to transform into the will of God inside the fortress.You assume I want and think as you do. I know right from wrong already, I don't need what you need to be good.
Prove it. Or better yet, provide me with some evidence please.
The proof is that almost EVERYTHING that you have said here, and other forums....is not backed up by any FACTS. And almost none of your assertions are based on HONEST objective reality.
LIE: 1. To present false information with the intention of deceiving.
2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
v. lied, ly·ing (lng), liesUm...you were supposed to provide evidence of my lie; not definitions again.
Exhibit A: This forum provides enough evidence to support dishonesty on a most egregious level. In fact, it's hard to find any evidence of truth in any of your posts.
More dishonesty. Your assertions have been proven to contradict the laws of nature. And are direct contradictions to the most basic of logic that you and I have to use, on a daily basis, to survive.
You have a choice to be a liar or not. I have no choice not to be homosexual. For me this not a sin and you would make the world's worst judge.
That's why I do no judging.
I had a choice to become/ not become homosexual once. Now maybe i'm not fair to compare against; when the opportunity struck, my desire for the girlies was nil. So, I had to work on promiscuity. Now that, I liked. But God walked me through it with mercy and compassion.Being a homosexual is not the same as just choosing to experiment.
So, then, it wasn't a choice. You did not come from a neutral standpoint. You were already hetero.
Yep. The same God who raped and impregnated a virgin, who just happened to already be married. Just the kind of morals we need to help us through immorality.Choosing not to be homosexual is the thing. I can imagine that it is hard for some and in some cases extremely; but God knows that. The bible listed it as wrong in the Lord's eyes (not mine). Have it my way...well you know...
but sex has guidelines. Not because I say so. Everyone has an issue with something. Truth is what makes us free. We cannot dodge God or ignore what he said; his truth stands. He has enough grace for us all. But truth is important enough to align to. If only mentally at first. The shame drove me crazy. Until I understood him. It took me about a year to finally get out of "bed" and dry out. I gave him an entire year with a decision to sit out and focus. It was a simple process after all. The agony was short-lived. He did what I could not.Cgenaea, you have absolutely no knowledge of this matter. Everything you have written so far has been your suppositions determined by your religious background, and your beliefs. So I suggest you go and educate yourself thoroughly (Like reading "The Bonobo and the Atheist," or read the Hub by Hanavee),
You have said you don't judge people, so that's ok. You will therefore allow me and others similar to myself to go about our lives unjudged. Thank you. And since you are not "god" you will have no power over our lives. That is such a relief.
PS - You said earlier that you were born a liar. Are you absolutely sure you have made a significant change? It must be virtually impossible if you were born that way.Oh, I never meant to stress you. Just truth. I had to realize for myself; lying is wrong; and stressful. Promiscuity is the same stressful. Once I thought about it correctly, all stress was gone. The burden lifted.
You and others like you will always remain UNjudged by me. I am too busy with my own stuff. But the truth is only right. Some of my very dearly beloved are gay.Sure, tell him you don't judge him and the judge him. Do you think we can't see through that? Hiding homophobia behind the bible is still homophobia. Did jonny say be needed a burden lifted?
Where is the me judging him statement located. As far as my burden being lifted; that was my testimony not for jonny but for me. If he does not feel burdened by homosexuality then he has no burden. I wont give him one.
Here is the latest one. Notice the BUT…
You are judging when you tell him the truth is only right. It was an I don't judge but...Cgenaea consistently does not understand the truth of her statements. She cannot see the contradictions.
(Must be off to bed now, it's almost 1000pm. I am going to India on Thursday, might not connect with the forum so often for a couple of weeks.There are no contradictions jonny. For me, the bible is what's right. And that is not true for everyone. Even some Christians find it shady so I'm learning. Though I have sins that I currently deal with, I will not deny the truth of scripture even if to soothe my own conscience. Anyone that goes against it to tell you a soothing lie is in danger. Now if you do not subscribe to the teaching of the bible but of man...do what thou wilt. No argument from me. I speak bible.
You speak bible? In other words you speak Bronze Age goat herder.
Since the Bible was also written by MEN, it makes absolutely no sense to separate its teachings from the teachings of MAN. But, of course, you will refute that....because it is a FACT. You can't stand facts.And you see nothing outside of the bible can contradict it? Not even good sensible reasoning? Your posts are often full of reasoning which is far from sensible.
You usually revert to this bible stance whenever you are unable to offer more logical and rational answers.I'm logical; and rational; I do not have have a problem with sensible (on Tuesday nights
)
Lots of things attempt to contradict it. Man mainly. But I have lived this way for years. And it's better. So much better. Now I know it does not work for you. Are you ok with that? I am. This life just does not suit everyone.
Then why would He make people homosexual? That's like breaking someone's leg than telling them they walk funny....and that they need to walk straight. Unconscionable!
Correction: A crazy book, written by ignorant ancient goat herders, listed it as wrong. You are merely an indoctrinated person, who has nothing but fear, therefore you will agree with anything they wrote. How frightening!
But because ignorant primitives set guidelines, and pretended it to be straight from the mouth of the Creator of the universe. Yep. You are definitely on the right track.
Yet science has disproven many of these "TRUTHS" and freed us from the tyranny of this ignorant backward concept that is your God.
As with any addiction, it was you who beat the addiction, not an imaginary character in a 2000 year old fairy tale. Sorry you feel the need to insert yourself into a childish fairy tale in order to triumph over an obsession.Sure we can. Once you understand that no God exist you stop judging other and calling them sinners and hiding behind the bible. telling someone to stop being gay is like telling someone to stop being straight. Grow up.
That's grace to you? Telling someone to change not only their sexual practices but their orientation?Sex is worth little. It seems like such a little thing to step away from God for.
...in all thy ways, acknowledge him; and he will direct thy path.
Did you hear'em say all???You don't have to step away from God so that you can do what you want guilt free. I've been faithfully married for almost 25 years with no help or threats from any God. You can simply keep your opinions to yourself regarding homophobia or understand that judging others and telling them how to live their lives is wrong.
In addition, while I am blissfully married and wouldn't cheat on my husband for the world -religion or not- I will say that I am still bi-sexual. Being in an exclusive relationship with a man has not made me NOT bi-sexual. If I never touched another woman for the rest of my life, I would die being bi-sexual.
Abstinence does not cure homosexuality.
Don't worry about it, there are plenty of seats by the fire for you to join us when God judges that transgression.
Actually, it appears with the number of Christians violating God's will by passing judgement, that will be standing room only.
What's funny is that according to God's law there are two types of sins, "moral sins" (second tablet of the commandment types of sins) that are sins against others and sins against God (first tablet types of sins). Judging others is a sin against God. Homosexuality is a moral sin (if it is a sin at all-which is a matter of debate for those who actually study the Bible and understand it). Guess which one God dislikes more?The abomination, of course. All trees and their fruits are apparent to all. God's children are taught to spot the nots for safety reasons. We must be able to know who to ask.
What sin is is judged by biblical text. Not the reporter of said TEXT. The reporter of what God says is blessed. The reporter of what feels good to sin is not.Not me. It comes from the bible.
we must give credit where due.2Ti_4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
James 1:26
If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless.A very timely, and fitting one too. A great reminder. I like the surrounding ones here too for more context.
19 Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; 20 for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God. 21 Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.
22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. 23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. 24 For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. 25 But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.
26 If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless. 27 Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.Yes, I love the whole passage. My faith is strongly defined by it. My faith, again, is largely works based... so a gentle reminder to shut up, get off your butt and do something useful is always appreciated.
Whew! I'm floored. (Grateful to always be supplied with the true message at the right time) Amazing stuff.
You people (you know who you are) are really good at that proper dividing stuff.
Perfect timing as usual.
Yes!!!!! I KNEW you'd come around!!!
I didn't even know you knew that one at all.
Here is a little more context too, It is interesting. 2 Timothy 4:1-5
I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: 2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. 3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound[a] teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, 4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. 5 As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.Spoken to a group people how many hundreds of years ago? In what circumstances? In what cultural context?
When you have sorted out every shortcoming in your own life then you might have some cause to worry about others.
Your bible-bashing does not benefit anyone.Spoken to God's children for all generations. His word never changes. We may be sure that it is accurate always.
And aint nobody worrying about your life. Just reporting; regurgitating; remembering what thus says the Lord. He is magnificent. He always carries the heavy of our woes. He understands everything about us. He knows how we operate. We may take him all our cares. He carries them well.
I will save that seat for someone else. Blessed assurance.
I prefer to observe a Code of Practice in relation to sexual relationships.
If either of the two parties involved is in any way, and to the slightest degree, unhappy about "doing it," DON'T DO IT! If either one of you does not feel comfortable and it goes ahead, then the entire experience will just not be worth it. You will regret it, because it did not turn out as you expected.
Worse, you will probably find the friendship that was there in the first place begins to break down. Your relationship will have changed. Where there was once fun and joy at being together, now it will have lost its life and beauty.
This I suggest applies to whatever intimate relationship you like to imagine. It is not based on any kind of religiously biased premise. Just down-to-earth practical sense. You might care to teach your children this. It is based upon being aware of the "other person's" needs as well as your own, and it is part of living in successful community.
Maybe this is related to the Discussion Title: The End of Time Prophesy. No sure how, think it through for yourself.I agree whole heartedly and have explained that to my children. Usually when to people get married who haven't yet had sex they should be looking forward to it and not much time passes before the encounter happens. I know this first hand.
And of course they will experiment..... I understand that. There will be mutual agreement to experiment, hopefully. Yet still the principle remains..... don't "use or abuse" the other person for your own satisfaction only.
I guess you need the "SPIRIT" then it makes perfect sense.
Here is the SPIRIT:
Now pretend this Bloody Mary is a Virgin Mary.That is so wrong... on so many levels.
Really, so many levels.Mel, can you and I have a few words on the quiet? Just to get it right about these two boys? (Sorry, two people!)
*grins* I've been trying to sneak you away in private for years.
In that vein, do you facebook?I did try Facebook some time back, but it frightens me..... worried that I will press wrong buttons or inadvertently allow too much information to become public knowledge.
Some people find it suits them, but not me.... sorry, Mel.Oh, it's not for everybody. The privacy thing never really bothered me because 1. I don't do anything in my life that anyone would care about and 2. No one would ever want to steal my identity, trust me, they'd give it back.
But your reasons are valid.
There is some confusion about that. Mary and Joseph were betrothed-not yet married. When it speaks of Joseph divorcing her quietly, it speaks to them breaking the engagement without a big to do-since an official betrothal would have been a done deal in their community.
if that makes sense.... ....not wishing to appear rude, but to me it doesn't, because I see humans taking on that role of judge in the name of an imaginary god that suits their preconceived ideas.
I am not sure how the ideas I presented don't make sense, as I am speaking of ideas here about judges and and overall final judge (need not be the Christian God or a god at all, just an ultimate judge.) I don't see how humans can take on that role of judge of a God like that. If you are inserting your own worldview (assume you are because you say imaginary God that suits their preconceived ideas..) then of course it wouldn't make sense. I was not talking about that though. You were originally talking about the God of the bible and I was running with that.
If nothing else, I would have to ask about one final thing based on what you said. If there is no God, then no problem being judged by him ultimately, and no human can judge you like that either. Even if people had preconceived ideas about a god that suits them, that doesn't apply here with what I was saying. I was pointing out the ideas themselves and the inconsistencies when we apply what we all know and agree with to one judge over the universe. I shouldn't have put that last in, LOL. It distracted from my points. I don't think humans can judge like that, and certainly ought to not try to. We can't do such things, like judge souls and punish or give pardon or forgiveness on that level that I am speaking about. So no worries there.
You are unable to answer that question yourself?!!
The imaginary one espoused by Cgenaea, presumably your self and many other people of like mind. The one you want me to "believe in," a peculiar christian term.
Such a god seems to have nothing connected to an awesome, beautiful, sometimes frightening and mysterious physical world that you choose to ignore and abuse/neglect. - PS - in favour of creating fear and emotional bullying.It's a leading question, Johnny. I want to know what your idea of a judgmental God is. How does God create fear and emotional bullying?
There is no god that is judgmental! Humans do it using the god they believe in to back up their phobia and ignorance.
Of course there is. The god you have created in your mind may not be - it may be kind, loving, generous, caring and all the other traits we admire, but the one created by most Christians is not.
That god is a liar, cruel, vicious, childish, murderous, hateful and yes, judgmental. The bigger question is why anyone would create such a creature to worship?No phobias here. I have a very blunted sense of fear. Comes from walking with a king who has slayed a many of dragons right before my eyes.
I love gay people. I love divorcees, I love liars (seems I've REALLY loved liars), I love gossips, I love strippers, I love murderers...etc. They are all just like me!
The bible tells us what is right. If we do not at the very least agree with what is right, there is no hope of living this life.The bible did tell people a few thousand years ago what the rules were. And you are still living by those rules rather than using your own brain.
What do you think is judgmental in what Christians believe is God?
Nothing. He just mad that they say exactly what the bible says. And it hurts a little.
I just noticed that the people who have turned away from a foundation in the church are gay. Wtf??? I guess I don't really have to ask why. For some, it IS better to deny it all rather than deal with guilty feelings all day every day. The other admittedly gay have found very creative ways to include themselves into Gods kingdom guilt free. Change the meaning of some things and switch some other things around a bit. But it's a trick. God does not change. What was wrong 2000 years or so ago is wrong today. Changing God is strictly forbidden.
The church did mess the babies up jonny. "This man stands on the corner downtown Chicago with a microphone preaching and yellIng to passersby, "Ya goin' na hell fa smokin' dem ciga-ritz!!!" He stops whatever his sermon is for the day to inform the smokers of their demise. I was furious! Not only was I smoking a cigarette; I had heard him stop to say that to about three people within a 5min span. They use the clean temple scripture to justify that statement. But your temple is not located in your lungs, fyi... the body is the temple and should remain unspoilt by filthy and or carnal thinking. From the way I understand it; God does not live in flesh. To dust it shall return.
The church and their rules and their shunning has really catapulted a falling away of God's people. And yes, it is holy pride; against God in every way.
To be gay may not necessarily be sin for some per se... (let the cannonballs fire ) The Lord handles us according to our own faith. He looks at the heart. He has enough grace. He loves like a dad. He WILL NOT turn you away or EVER leave you because you struggle in an area. I think homosexual activity is spotlighted because it is a lifestyle practiced daily. But so is infidelity, fornication, idolatry and the like.
Spirit and TRUTH. We must know the truth to be made free. Wrong is wrong but we ALL have some somewhere. God can handle all our issues.
Lets talk...Yes.....And then there is actually the REAL world.
Reality??? That's all u got???
Ok ok ok! Can you help us understand what REAL actually is? If it's not God making the rules who is??? You??? Me??? Emile??? Which one of us decides what REAL is?Are you serious? Reality decides what is real, not any particular individual, group or religion.
Take your fist and hit yourself upside the head, that would be something that is real.
The Bible is just a book of words, and although the book and the words written there are real, what the words describe are not.A choice we all must make. I believe it; so it is real to me. But it's not real to you. See? We have different realities.
No, you do NOT have different realities. You both live in the same reality, as do I and everyone else in the world.
What you DO have is a different perception of what reality is. You with imagination, creativity and a strong desire to live forever under the arms of a father figure, I with a need for truth and fact. You make up your perception to match what you wish it were, I try my best to figure out what is regardless of whether I'm happy with the result or not.Truth and fact??? How do you know what truth is? "FACTS" change all the time. Our perceptions differ at different times of the month. It does not matter one iota WHAT is real to others. What is REAL in your OWN eyes is what sticks, Sir. What is REALLY real? What can be COUNTED upon??? Your "FACTS" are sometimes real for a minute or two. You have errors factored into your "FACTS" Sir. It's constantly changing and rearranging and mistaking fact for fiction at a regular pace. Now, when you ask me, the really old book that is tried and approved by many; that does not change (shut up different translations, adders, and subtractors
) and gives a message like no other (shut up you know who you are ) It's a keeper. ALL ELSE is simply false. Now, it is MY reality! And I'm sticking to it.
Translate it however you want. God looks at tthe heart. Buttered naked! Lol...Now this is applied to everything you have ever quoted on this forum, so we can discount your opinions totally. Never again tell me, or anyone else, what "the Bible says" to be "true." You have dug your own grave of credibility.
Ah...the play of words. Let us not forget that we have different definitions.
Or, more precisely, you make up definitions when it suits you.
Few, in any others do. Most of what you write is gibberish.
I already understand the cryptic nature oftgthe words I speak. I thought I told you. Sorry.
You may not understand what I am saying SIMPLY because you decide not to. You have the majick slippers in your pocket Dorothy.
No, we share the same reality. No gods have ever been shown in our reality. If you believe you are living in another reality, that would be the one you've created for yourself which you alone reside.
Your indoctrination is so rigid that it causes you to assume too many pre-suppositions. Try getting rid of all the pre-suppositions, FIRST, then, ask yourself these same questions. Please don't just blow this off. Try it. You will see that you have imposed concepts, upon your psyche, that are irrelevant in discerning an objective answer.
Your psyche is irrelevant!!!
You may heckle all you want. My position is firm. Yours??? Do you have a position?What kind of reply is that? I simply asked you to do a simple task, and you get DEFENSIVE!!! Did I disturb your illusion? Are you afraid that if you follow through with the exercise....you won't be able to handle the cognitive dissonance? You assert that your position is firm, yet you get angry when the foundation is being ripped from it. That's because the foundation supporting your position is an outright fraud, and it's frightening to face that glaring fact. You have proven that.
Don't you know ANY nice words???
The dissonance is maddening, I know. But I am not the sufferer.
I will never try anything you suggest. No offense I just know that you cannot help me.Jas 1:2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
Jas 1:3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
Jas 1:4 But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.Further on down in verse 10 of James 1 it says,
"Blessed is the one who perseveres under trial because, having stood the test, that person will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him."
Even for the longest of lives lived on this beautiful planet, I have learned that those are really so fast. It comes and goes So fast. Pure Gold and Diamonds.... they don't just get like that. Lots of fire, purifying, and pressure, over and over, lol.Just to clarify, that is verse 12 of James chapter 1.
Yes, you are correct. My eyes are playing tricks on me tonight, thanks for the correction.
Yesssss... he tries us right? He allows us to walk into fire. And he goes with us. Magnificence beyond compare. I am greatly indebted. I mean gratefully so
He is...
A fair point. A relativistic morality where everyone makes their own rules isn't logical. Yet we all have morals, and we know truth exists. We can certainly at least know that there are some rules that are not grounded in the fact that we make them up. Those wouldn't be rules or real morals, but preferences and opinions which can also change.
Even if we push the ideas we want that aren't good ideas or logical, we will see a break down eventually, kind of like we are seeing in our world and the US.Yet, that is exactly how our societies have formed, through people making their own rules, it's called 'secularism' and you most likely live in that society.
Our societies are not breaking down because of secularism, quite the opposite.I don't think you two are saying the same thing. The relativistic morality oceansnsunsets referred to would be more of an anarchy. In a very real and strict sense, we do not make our own rules. Whether you are more inclined to agree with modern rules or more antiquated ones, the fact is that societies adapt but few "make their own rules."
Most societies DO make their own rules (I can only think of one or two examples where they wouldn't). Most individuals within the society do not. Those rules tend to be social norm based. If most people think something is wrong, it is then made "illegal" if most people think something is right, it is legal.
Almost all societies work on public opinion, whether they are democracies or not. Those with laws that go against societal norms don't last long.Yeah, tell me about it. They only gave Jesus a few years.
But he did make clear that his ways were not based in the sway of popular opinion; but the will of his father. Not too many people "liked" that truth. You know what happens next.Yep, thousands of years of rules based on the norms of societies composed mainly of Christians.
Not really. It's actually a pretty good indicator of what the majority of Christians accept/believe. It kind of has to be. So unless you are judging that most Christians aren't real Christians, then Scotsman doesn't matter.
If you are judging that most Christians aren't real Christians but you are, then that tends to reflect more on your position than theirs. After all, you would be the odd man out and therefore it would likely be you that wasn't the real Christian.But the bible says that the Christian IS usually the odd man out. Are you familiar?
Out of society, which at the time was true, not out of Christianity. Jesus was quite clear on that, Christians are a family, brothers and sisters, there is no odd man out. Those who try to make there be one are making a judgement that no one but God has the ability to make.
Then there would be no reason for allowing the "kid" to know, "You aint no better than me. They persecuted me; they'll persecute you." No need to say, "many are called, bit few chosen"
Or, "narrow is the gate "kid"
Godly thinking is an acquired taste. It's a lil bitter at first. But gets sweeter.I don't understand. Could you rephrase your answer please?
Who is the Kid?
Oh, and I've never found Jesus' words bitter. I'm not exactly sure why anyone would.I understand...
The kid in my scenario was the one who goes to God, as such. He was being given revelation by Jesus himself. Why would he say those things if most people would agree with what he said?The Bible was written at a time where most people weren't Christians. Most people still aren't. I'm not saying not REAL Christians, I'm saying other faiths or none. Jews were the predominate religion in the area, which was two faiths believing in the same God in different ways.
It wasn't written as a division against those within the same faith. It was written to show a minority that they are on the right track.So the bible isn't living? And speaking to all generations at all times til the end of the earth as we know it. Well what do we have to ensure we are on track? Our own understanding?
The bible is indeed speaking to all generations... Not everyone is a Christian are they? That gate is still narrow. That gate, of course, being Christ.
To be Christian is to have found that gate... so how could it be meaning Christians? Jesus never said that one Christian was better than another. I'm curious as to how you have reached your interpretation. Do you have any supporting scripture that is directly related?
As an aside, to get some deeper insight to who that passage was directed it, would it help you to know that the Jewish were very particular about their road building. Their roads were indeed very wide and the gates were exceedingly narrow. It was a curiosity of architecture particular to them. No other of the known civilizations constructed roadways like that.Not everyone who claims Christ staus is even remotely concerned about him or what he said. They want to make it mystical and broad. Jesus was not giving a layout of the city he lived in. He knew that they would understand what he meant if he gave them a practical example. The spirit of God knows exactly what gate he was referring to; and there is no mistaking I am the way... very small opening. Remember what I said, he said. Tell it to all.
When we give to others the impression that MANY people, WHATEVER their mindset are part of God's kingdom, we err. Christ was a servant, yes. But he was not passive. He spoke truth only. He requires that of us. "Come to me my way" he said.I still don't see Bible verses to back that up Cgenaea.
I do know that Isiah 35 also talks about the road to heaven. It says that it is for followers of Christ. He says that not even a fool could err once they are on it.
Could you tell me how you think that contrasts with Matthew 7:13-14?
I mean I understand what you are saying, I just don't know where you are pulling it from Biblically? I've never seen any verses that I would interpret as one Christian being more of a Christian than another.
Whenever the Bible mentions a path or road, and it happens several times in the Bible, it is always a road that Christians are on but those of other faiths aren't. It never says that some Christians won't be on that road, just those who aren't Christian.
I didn't think that an architectural layout was being given btw, it was reference to the Jews about something uniquely Jewish. It wasn't admonishing those already faithful, the statement was trying to convert those who were not.Strengthen the feeble hands, steady the knees that give way; 4 say to those with fearful hearts, “Be strong, do not fear; your God will come, he will come with vengeance; with divine retribution he will come to save you.”And a highway will be there; it will be called the Way of Holiness; it will be for those who walk on that Way. The unclean will not journey on it; wicked fools will not go about on it. 9 No lion will be there, nor any ravenous beast; they will not be found there. But only the redeemed will walk there, 10 and those the Lord has rescued will return.
This scripture seems to be speaking in terms of being spiritual healing for those who are sin-sick in their souls. Not band-aids and gauze; but "bread".
The scripture then speaks about those who are and are not on that road. It says he came to rescue (seems like that "kid" is in trouble. Possibly that persecution Jesus spoke about.) So it stands to reason that that "kid" is not at "happy" hour with good friends, good music, and drinks all around.
13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
This scripture speaks about the way to life eternally. The way Jesus taught. Not many people choose this way because people laugh at you and growl at you when you speak like Jesus did. He said they would. He was right. Not many choose God's way. They like the broad road (where anything goes as long as you're happy, everyone's belly is full, and you visit some people). Jesus had a standard. "This is the way, follow me." He knows that not everything works towards Godly thinking. It's not on the road that is huge with people having a grand ole time. It's focus on him. "If you love me, keep my commands."
Humility is important too. People here really brag about what they do, who they are, what they've learned. They place high value in self. Jesus gave his life for those who were dying, spiritually. He taught them the truth. Those who believe him are safe. He had one way; one mind. Few people trust it.I'm sorry, I still don't see anything there about one Christian being more Christian than another. I see lots of stuff about not being a Christian at all.
Nothing about full bellies or levels of education or friends, music or drink. It's just not there. I'm sorry. The scripture doesn't say anything about it.
The KJV says:
"And a highway shall be there, and a way, and it shall be called The way of holiness; the unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for others: the wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein."
As long as you follow God, you are on that path. No matter what kind of fool you are, you cannot leave that path. You cannot lose your way.
That seems to put us all pretty much on the same footing.
And of course, Christ is also the gate. Which makes sense and aligns perfectly.
I've also got to ask, just out of curiosity, which version of the Bible you are using, because no version I could find had the same wording as yours. There is quite a bit of difference in the meaning of your version and what the ones I'm finding are saying.
KJV cites the passage as:
4Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you.
5Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.
6Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert.
7And the parched ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water: in the habitation of dragons, where each lay, shall be grass with reeds and rushes.
8And an highway shall be there, and a way, and it shall be called The way of holiness; the unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for those: the wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein.
9No lion shall be there, nor any ravenous beast shall go up thereon, it shall not be found there; but the redeemed shall walk there:
10And the ransomed of the LORD shall return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.Ok, we may try to reason this out.
I'd really like to start at the idea that we seem to be using different materials and that could lead to ambiguity. So using the KJV, I will interpret using all that I know about the entire book.
For further clarity, the statement concerning what "stands to reason" was interpretation. The person in this scripture is being rescued. So again, it does not seem as if he/she is having a marvelous time eating, drinking, and being merry on this narrow road. In light of Jesus' s warning that one will be persecuted (along his narrow path) just like him. "They" didn't want to hear his message. Most did not join him. And since we have already established that the bible speaks to all generations; we know that the statement is true today.
Most will turn away from the true message in an effort to feel "prideful" for all that they do FOR Jesus. One thing Jesus was not is prideful. Though he knew his own position as king, he came in rags. And he borrowed a donkey to ride in on.
He depended solely on God for all his provisions. He did not do his work unaided. He did not bolster himself; but God. People on his path do as he did.
He also said, "Let those children come to me; the kingdom of heaven is made up of people like them." Not the smart know-it-all with everything already figured already. The prideful stand in God's face with a bill. "Ha ha ha Lord, I'm better than them, and I see it, i hope you're taking note of all my ACTIONS, cuz I'm DOIN' it right!!!" (This is scripture)
Jesus implies (to all generations) that God prefers the one who comes in humility; head bowed down and in need of mercy and help. The prideful "deserve" his provisions. The humble know better. But as I am sure you feel, in light of your views, that it is somewhat beneath you to be on the meek and humble "road" begging and pleading some "god" that wants you to stand up and be proud (of what, I do not know) and smart.
God said, "where were you when I put it all together?" (and PREDETERMINED what you need to do to be mine). Parentheses mine to make another biblical point. The road is narrow. The way is the way of Jesus. He rebukes washing out the outside of the glass while the inside needs washing.
It's not what you look like on the outside. It's has to do with the health and right mind toward the things of God.
I hope this helps.
Oh! As for the not being able to err... even a fool (walking THIS road) will do well. But he must first be walking the one narrow path that Jesus laid out that not many people like.Well, I still am not seeing verses to back that up. Could I see those please? Because every single verse I've read those roads are Christianity vs. other religions. They are calls to bring people to the faith that are outside the faith. I'm just not seeing verses that imply otherwise. If you show me a verse that says that some that have faith in Christ and do his works haven't found that gate, I'll concede, of course. But I've read the Bible several times and I've never found a verse like that.
Just as an aside, when you say that you are sure what my views are and how I feel, that's being judgmental... Unless you can also provide me with verses that say what my views and feelings are, I'm not sure how you can claim that's biblical. Can you explain how it is, biblical I mean? I'd hate to accuse you of being judgmental mistakenly.
But I'm glad that we agree that only the prideful say they are better Christians than others. That was the main point of contention. I've said all along that claiming that one is a true Christian while another is not is against Christ's teachings. It's cool that we've finally reached an agreement on that.Good foundation we've laid. Pride is against God. We agree. I thought I remembered you saying that there is no need to "slither around on your belly begging and pleading" it seemed as if your basic point was that our "pitiful" display of "nothingness" was just pitiful and God would never expect that from such wonderful creatures he made. Jesus (I think, or somebody else) spoke a parable about a prideful man (with seemingly the same prideful idea) who prayed a prayer about "gratefully" being one who just knows he is IN because he DID all the right stuff. Then there was a lowly man who prayed with sorrow and fear. Luke 18:9 Guess whose prayer was more acceptable.
As for your other point, we may not bring anyone to the faith if we have no idea what the faith is all about. Visiting and volunteering are godly, but only one form of godliness (Google form of godliness). It LOOKS good on paper, but it's just action. As I have already biblically proven ACTS alone are not the faith. That is why there will be people on that last day who will say, "But Lord, didn't we DO all manner of DEEDS for you???" And he will say, "Depart from me, I knew you not..." this proves that some "who DO his WORKS" (or so they think) have NOT found the gate. The bible also states that not all who cry Lord are his.
It is the bible that judges; not I. I am still learning and being humble and realizing I have a long way to go for perfection. The Lord allows me to stay mindful of that. I speak what the bible speaks; not me. I still fall short. But I know truth. Truth is important. We MUST know where the line was drawn.
"Train up a child in the way that he should go. And when he is old, he will not depart from it." Please allow me to say with that; it means that he will not forget it. He may go WAAAAAYYY away from it (as we have seen) but he will not forget. Ask GIR...Oh, OK. I see the problem... which is not biblical at all. You believe that humble means debasing and humiliating. I'm also not familiar with any verses that say that.
As a matter of fact, you aren't providing any verses at all. I'm slightly vexed at that. You say you speak Bible, but I see none forthcoming.
I also don't understand why you keep bringing up that it requires both faith and works. Most Christians do both. I know I do. I just don't understand why you are so down on doing works. Is there a verse for that?
Again, I'm still looking for the verses that say what you are saying. I'm not finding them.
To make it easier...
Which verse says that one Christian is better than another?
Which verse says that we have to debase ourselves for Christ to accept us? (Humility means something different that believing that we are insects)
Which verse says that you don't need to feed the hungry and cloth the poor? I seem to remember Jesus saying specifically that we DO need to do that.
Which verse, again, says what I think and what my views are?
Which verse says that it is OK to judge another Christian's beliefs as incorrect?
You say you speak the bible only, yet I can't find any of this in the Bible, in any version. I don't mean to doubt your word that it's in there, just asking for the verses so I can also read it.Did you totally disregard Luke 18:9???
"Train up a child..."???
The bible does say that it's not work alone. Did you totally disregard, "Depart from me..." ??? He said that to the "workers" but he called their works something else.
Don't be vexed at my biblical response. Just read...Oh, Luke 18:9. That's the one where Pharisee is rebuked because he believed that by showing over-devoutness to ritual he was more holy than publican. That is an example of one Christian (Well Jew actually) believing he was a "true Christian (Jew)" because of his overt and over-theatrical piousness and being rebuked for it. To me, that would be proof that it ISN'T OK to judge another Christian's beliefs as incorrect. Are you sure that was the verse that you were looking for?
I'm not sure what Proverbs 22:6 has to do with the conversation. Please explain.
I am aware that the Bible says that BOTH works and faith are needed. I'm not understanding where you are finding that it says that both aren't needed. I have read passages that have said that one without the other is useless. I'm not quite understanding where the ones that say you don't need to do works are? Please point it out.
I'm not vexed about seeing biblical responses, I'm vexed about not seeing them. Biblical responses would include verses that back up what you are saying. To be honest, I'm seeing you say that some Christians are better than others, that you don't need to do works to follow Jesus and that you know the views and opinions of another Christian and know that they are wrong, and that it's OK to judge that.
I would be interested in seeing the verses to back that up, because those statements seem directly in opposition to everything I've ever read in the Bible. So, again, please give those verses.Prideful is wrong. That is my point. When I heard you refer to humility as "slithering on your belly" not being required by God; it sort of threw me. My point for bringing up Luke 18:9 was that the "prideful" man's prayer was not as acceptable to God. He said Lord I do and I do and I do, that man does NOTHING but slither around waiting for you while I'm DOING.
Christ was not about "doing" he wanted freedom for the people to know what wasright Iinstead of listening to the doers who were busy "working" themselves into heaven the WRONG way.
The proverbs scripture was about another thing I HEARD you say that goes against biblical teaching.Not really, I'm sorry you misunderstood. I referred to someone saying that we are insects as slithering around on one's belly. That's not humility. The publican was not displaying insect behavior. And yes, there was pride, pride of considering one's self more devout than another. Again, this verse seems to say that believing oneself true in faith but another less so is prideful. Again, are you SURE this was the verse you were looking for?
I'm not sure I ever made a statement concerning Proverbs 22:6. Perhaps you can show me the one you judged to be unbiblical?
I'm also not sure where in the Bible that Christ wasn't about "doing". It seems like he spent quite a bit of time feeding the hungry and healing the sick. Could you provide the verses where it says he doesn't want Christians to do such?
I keep asking for verses, yet I'm not getting them. I have to wonder why.
LOL Yeah, we make our own rules. That deserves a "duh"
Yeah, I've imagined you make that sound a lot, only it gets drawn out a lot longer.
A society that chooses rules to govern the people within it are one thing. The way CGenaea was using the term was in a different way, or else I wouldn't have answered it the way I did at all. She meant it in the way it was being used in its context, of people, each of us, making up our own rules. You answered that post in a way that was if a different point was being discussed.
I guess slavery wasn't wrong 2000 years ago, so it's not wrong today. Neither was wife beating, and wife/daughter/child murder, etc. And that's just for minor offenses like not being a virgin on wedding day, or cursing parents.
Correction: If we didn't change "God" we would still be burning innocent women alive, stoning homosexuals, and adulterers, and believing that the Earth was flat.
I guess it's perfectly ok for you to interpret the Bible just to suit your own needs. How hypocritical.
There is no way to define how a dad loves, as different dads love differently, and some don't love their kids at all, therefore it is whimsical wishful thinking, brought on by daddy issues. Ergo...your version, according to your desires/needs.
Right and wrong is not for you, and certainly not for any ancient holy book, to spout... as it is clear that you are using the wrong source to discern anything.Now that was a mouthful GIR...
You definitely will NOT believe anything I say. no problem...
I am solidly stuck in the thing you so adamantly label sickness. And I am starting to believe we are having mutual feelings on the matter. I hope you don't mind.I'm just sorry to see what this disease has done to you. That's why I adamantly believe that religious indoctrination should be forbidden, before a child can grasp the concept of critical thinking. Being a minister's son, I was probably exposed to a lot more of the virus than you were. Fortunately for me, I have a very strong immune system.....against bulls---!
I wish there was something better than this life, and that it lasts forever, as we are all inherently apprehensive of death . But I would want to have REAL salvation....not false hope....from a God that is a complete and unbearable monster. One that we have to trick ourselves into "interpreting" as GOOD...when we can clearly see the monstrosity! No one would really want to spend eternity with something like that. I don't want to pretend that I do....just because of fear. I believe in reason, not fear. Thus, I am free to actually think INTELLIGENTLY and REASONABLY, instead of the abject nonsense that SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS to extort me(by fear and empty hope) to think.Yep. Don't bother to respect the debate. Just make up your own rules.
This is not a debate. It's clarity. You understand me. And I understand you. Well, you never did say what was Solid in your mind. Now, you may scream REALITY until your face gets stuck like that... but that tells me NOT what you consider real.
Is it Spidey for real??? I thought I was just joking.
Jesus was no monster. He ought to be the one all ideas are passed through. It gives a clearer picture. Anyone can take things that happened in the OT during times of war, sometimes commanded by God for those particular people and time, and make them think that to follow God you have to support such things. Look at the example of Jesus though, he clarifies many misconceptions, and showed in some of his own responses the personality and nature of God. He wasn't at odd with his Father. Looking at all sides and angles seems an intelligent thing to do. And reasonable.
Maybe he clarifies some things and maybe he fogs them over in an attempt to hide the evil of his father. Certainly the personality and nature of the god of the OT was not show in the person of Jesus.
My point really was to point out how easy it would be to judge God by the way he instructed the Israelites in times of battle (the stories often lamented about), over how he shows himself to be through his actual revelation of himself through Jesus. Jesus came later, we are closer to those events and those that witnessed them and carried the teachings on, where the Old Testament is a history and descriptive of their times so often.
If one were to say, "want" God to be a moral monster for some other personal reason, it would be easy to do but not fair. For example, I could say, "I could never worship a God that commanded them to kill & plunder sometimes after conquering a city!" When the truth really is that God is never ever commanding any of us to do that to any city, and Jesus showed quite the opposite in dealing with our actual enemies encountered in day to day living. I am suggesting its a trick to make people feel like they are morally superior somehow to God by NOT following him. It would be the very same God that gave them life, gave morality, revealed himself and gives the means of pardoning so we don't have to continue to die forever. He leaves it up to us to choose what is most reasonable considering all things. You have to be careful to who you listen to anymore, AND consider even a best friends reasoning or lack of reasoning in their arguments.Just like I stated before: God is a complete and unbearable monster. One that we have to trick ourselves into "interpreting" as GOOD....thereby, confirming rigid INDOCTRINATION. This post here is exhibit-A.
Or we have to trick ourselves into seeing God as BAD and harrassing his bodyparts everyday.
Confirming nothing.And the irrelevant absurdities just keep rolling. But I'm just laughing WITH you.
Actually, what I observe here in the forums does confirm something to me. No other worldview makes sense of it but one, and that would be Christianity. I know what you meant though, confirming nothing by going through the exercise, to the person doing it. I think it is meant to be a clue of its own to people that would see it.... would even want to see it. So an evidence, just another one to me.
I meant to add on the possible cover up of Jesus for his possibly "evil father". First of all, if it was a matter of just covering up, the writers could have written history as many winners of history do and cover up the "bad stuff", including the PR cover up for a supposedly evil God. They left it, purposefully... and the NT writers and recorders/transcribers also didn't take out stuff. On to Jesus... well he had some rather harsh messages of his own, and wasn't afraid to talk about the hereafter. He didn't suggest doing away with the past, but meant to be the fulfillment of the point of it all. He might have been about a cover up, but then he would be evil and to what end? Does it make sense he would go to the cros for his "evil" Father who came up with a plan to restore a lost humanity to himself and to have relationship, and showed the means to do so? This doesn't sound like an evil God that is about restoring life by dealing with the sin that takes life... The crimes are against him, he judges in his court, and comes up with a plan that he didn't have to, to save that which was lost.
Doesn't sound evil, yet there is evil and we all see or hear about it every day. True evil would likely have this idea distorted to the point people felt like they were better for the rejecting of it. Someone said that would happen too...Really, every day? Odd, I don't hear evil every day. And, when I do hear about something that has happened where it appears someone did something evil, it is usually a rare event, considering there are billions of people on the planet doing all kinds of things. In other words, evil appears to not be consistent everywhere all the time, but instead an extremely tiny occurrence.
Yeah, I do, that was the point I was making.
Ok, so you are saying that you do not see or hear about evil everyday???
Nickelodeon news? Have you ever heard of Romper Room? It was a show when I was a kid.No, I don't. And, when I do, it is few and far between when compared to the billions of people doing many things every day.
Yes, there are is very serious evil happening every day, and its hard for me to believe that this was the point out of all that I made in that post to respond to and have an issue with. The point was, that we know there is evil, it exists. Evil can make people that normally champion ideas like reason, reasonableness, and morality side against the same. We see the idea play out in movies and books all the time. Sometimes people are just downright sociopaths, or something similar. The saddest tragedies almost are the ones that carried out evil that thought they were doing good, only to find out and uncover the truth later. Or something finally opens their eyes to it. They often wouldn't have done what they did if they had known. You know this can happen, and that was the idea. The topic of evil was to point out it indeed exists and is powerful to destroy lives as we see every day.
An extremely tiny occurrence? I totally disagree. If you could only watch the individual news stories playing out on all the local stations across the planet, or in their newspapers. Add to that all the unknowns that happen behind closed doors or that don't make the news? Maybe you misunderstood what I was saying?Movies and books are not usually reality, they are often fictionalized entertainment. For example, we can take Star Wars and Lord of the Rings as showing great evil existing such that the entire galaxy (or Middle Earth) were in jeopardy. of being ruled by evil.
Are you trying to compare this to our world? Not even remotely close, right?
Sure, sometime some people are downright sociopaths, but is that because they have some mental disorders they can't control? There are plenty of studies coming out linking these disorders to high states of religiosity and we see people doing bad thing in the name of their gods.
Again, powerful evil? Every day? Not likely.
Okay, let's look at that. First of all, there are around 7 billion people on the planet and each day they do a lot of things. Some of them, as you say, do evil things. How many are there doing evil things that are powerful and destroying lives? A billion? A million? Maybe a hundred thousand? One thousand? One hundred?
We could probably count these events as being less than one hundred a day, yes? When compared with 7 billion people doing many things every day, that is indeed a very tiny minority, wouldn't you agree?
What about the FLOOD?
Sorry, but you can interpret anything that you want to, it's still just dishonesty, The reality is that you believe this nonsense, simply because you WANT to.....out of blind obedience. REASONABLE?!!! This is downright insulting to people's intelligence.Hey...! You gotta let the people decide what's downright insulting to their own darn intelligence!!
lolrotfnstuff...
NOW you are showing your true colours, Cgenaea. Keep going, don't stop. Show us your real reason for being here.
All this time you have been hiding behind a facade of a nice, clean, clear-headed, spiritual person. Yet we now see you as an arrogant, ugly-minded person that is anything but christ-like in your attitude.
You have never made me angry.
But you have a sick mind and that makes me sad and worried..... about the lives of others you try to change when you have no moral right to change them.
You have had 2500 posts here on this discussion, giving you lots of stage-time to spout your nonsense......and it has prooved nothing except that you are not worth having a serious, kindly discussion with.
I really suspect that all this time you have really been a wolf in sheep's clothingNow you know...
First of all, I have played like no NOTHIN! I have often told you of my shortcomings jonny. You heard "change" and not once did I try to change anything or anyone. Just laying facts as I seeyum.
You heard change... did I say that???And yet clearly, from the attitude you convey when you write, you would have me "change" from what I am.
You cannot face your own truths.This is about truth. Nothing else. Truth is hard to face when you are afraid of it.
But then Jesus came... He let onevin even though he knew one was gay. He asked for your heart despite your flaws (because that aint the only one). Truth. Humility. Faith. Hey! It's a formula that adds up to salvation.
My flaws are way fn worse . He knows that I can never do it without Him. He wants me to know too.
Maybe you should drop whatever worldview you have like a bad habit and consider Cgenaea's?
No thanks.... her world view is anything but encompassing of the awe and wonder of our world and, from my view, it is steeped in stubborn narrow-mindedness.
I have listened to what she has to say, but find it empty in many cases, contradictory in others and argumentative quite often.
If you find her points of view interesting and similar to your own, I respect that. Your choice, your journey.
However, I regard your assessment of my "world view" as a "bad habit" slightly insulting. But then again, it is your right to hold that opinion.You find the term "bad habit" insulting? Yet you wrote
jonnycomelately wrote
you as an arrogant, ugly-minded person " .."you have a sick mindYes, if it was taken as insulting, so be it.... she/you must be able to look into what I said and consider if it is true, just as I have to consider if what you say is true. And for me, what was slightly insulting I can take happily. I don't retract it, either.
Oh stop...! Aint nobody trying to scare you.
I told you that if you have faith, you can run right up to the Lord and get all that he has for you (love, joy, peace...) no matter what the church deacon says; it is not that that goes into a man that makes him unclean. It's the JUNK coming out. If your output considers God, you are clean. Even when you mess up. Your heart must lean toward him. He knows when it does.
No one has it mastered jonny. We all fall short. But we cannot proudly wave it in his face. He does not like gay "pride" just like he does not like lie pride or murderous pride or whore pride. Humility is key. Faith enough to say, "ok, it's getting too hard. I got this issue; and I know it is not pleasing to you. Please help" and just like that...the cover surrounds you and you become protected because of the faith to hand him your issues. His correction may hurt a little from time to time; but he never turns away from any of his own. He WILL leave the 99 to tend to the one caught in a ditch. I know.Yes, more of the same bs. Notice she always talks about he and him? Never mentions the female. God must be male of her own design.
It suggests you have other gremlins in that closet of yours, Cgenaea.Maybe I am doing the same.... ok. I will remove that post if Cgenaea will lay off the offensive opinions regarding homosexual orientation.
jonny-knowing Rad the way I do, I'm fairly certain he meant to support your comment and was speaking in regard to some of the things Genaea was saying.
I have NEVER known you to express a single, solitary cowardly ANYTHING!Thanks Mo, I guessed that but was not sure. Also I am driven by Cgenaea's state of mind..... she is often not speaking totally rational. Sometimes I feel there is a deliberate attempt to stir the pot of argument, just for the fun of it.
Then at other times she seems to be writing as though it's a serious, but erroneous, opinion.
so, on the one hand I warm to her needs, on the other I stand to correct her most strongly.I find myself at a loss with Cgenaea. I can be accused of many things, but not of a lack of compassion. I find myself often at odds with her, though, because I believe that her words do not speak the story she actually wants to tell. She dislikes me and my approach, and I don't care for the way she "uses" scripture. We try periodically to find common ground, but other than both believing in God, we aren't usually successful.
Sometimes, I believe that her heart is in the right place, but not well anchored.
Someone in HP obviously does not like the way I write or what I say, because they have dropped me from 5 to 4. Nice to know I'm making a splash!
Sorry Jonny, that was not directed at you at all. You are extremely brave and honest in my opinion. She in my opinion is offensive and attempt to hide it behind her bible which is cowardly.
Forgive me. I have no opinion about same-sex accept the one given by the bible. I don't care who $ who. Got my own worries. But in conversation such as the dreaded homosexuality debate; the bible says it's wrong. Abominable even. That's true in its truest form. The bible says it's wrong. No amount of feeling about it may change that. But it will not send you to hell if your heart belongs to God. First thing's first...faith in him and what HE said.
It Does Not! Period.
It is human beings who want to say it is wrong who read into the bible what they want it to say...
That is not a christ-like thing to do, it is lying.I will not read nor read into it for you. You must. If it does not say that to you then do what thou wilt. You are accountable to God alone. Again, I haven't heaven nor hell. God sees your heart. He knows what you know and more. I feel that the bible says he don't like it in a couple of places. But hey...
Don't you see that the problem is that...despite your superior moral reasoning....YOU STILL AGREE WITH THE BULLY? Out of sheer blind fear. You have to challenge the bully, and that takes courage. Something that fearful followers don't have.
Have you ever considered that the bible is wrong and was written to control people much like a constitution. It was written durning a time that people thought women were barely human and most of the laws only apply to men. You are doing nothing but spreading hatred based on the thoughts of people thousands of years ago.
Have you considered that perhaps if there is a God he included misleading information to test the morals of people? To see if they would know right from wrong there selves.You would be able to make a stronger argument if you will willing to consider other points of view. Otherwise all you are left with is: I am right because I never even considered any other possibility. Which is essentially rampant egotism.
I consider Sir Dent and a few others all the time. Whatsoever do you mean??? I haven't "considered" the Atheistic points of view??? Oh, well I already explained. I need certain counselors. Ones who know what Jesus meant.
I am not concerning myself about a consensus or agreement. We cannot agree with worldly thinking; it's frowned upon. We have to think spiritually.
Aint no female God. And yes I do have gremlins in the closet. Maybe you'll meet the others one day. I think you would like one of them VERY much.
I have no heaven or hell; just the truth of the biblical scriptures. Truth makes us free when we know it.I always assume the gender in referring to God is a semantic convenience. Why would a god need a penis and a Y chromosome?
I'm with you. It's all about language. We refer to God as HE, IMO, because (for Christians at least) his incarnation was as a man, who referred to him as Father. Otherwise, even a bible believer has to recognize that if both male and female are made in his image, then God must be both-all. We just don't have a suitable single pronoun to refer to someone who embodies all gender characteristics.
Just my take on it.Of course we have such a term - hermaphrodite. Is god then a hermaphrodite?
But I would have thought Eve, considering the source, would have been made in Adam's image. With a few minor changes, of course...Hermaphrodite isn't a pronoun. Do you call a hermaphrodite he or she? Those of us who believe that Jesus was God in human form recognize that Jesus was male. Jesus referred to God as Father. We, in turn, do likewise.
Genesis two accounts of the creation of Adam and Eve say that we are created in his image. One says taken from Adam's rib, the other simply states created them male and female.
Is it so strange that a God who created us-male, female, androgynous, hermaphroditic would be all of those things? Maybe as a way of showing how LOVE is about so much more than just body parts that "fit" together sexually?
Not a popular opinion, especially among many of my fellow believers, but the only one that has ever made sense to me.Considering the differences in not only male/female physical characteristics but mental/emotional as well, I would have to say that God was Jesus's "mother", not father.
It should be obvious that neither term fits well at all (both take another being), but "mother" fits better than "father" if there is but one human-type parent. Which, to my way of thinking, goes along with your androgynous love. Rather a personal opinion/definition, I'm afraid.Very much so...a personal opinion I mean. I see what you mean, though. Getting back to societal norms, though, it wasn't possible for a man to bear a child then-so Jesus had a human mother, which was why I assume he and others thus referred to God as Father.
I'm fairly certain that given until almost two millennia later, we didn't know how the gender of a child was determined, we probably didn't know much about human reproduction then. I mean, it would be nice to be able to tell Henry VIII now that those women he beheaded for not giving him male heirs weren't at fault for that.
I was listening to an interview a while back with a professor of Jewish studies who was talking about just that and said they didn't and we still don't have the language to explain God properly. I suspect however that we use father because at the time it was a very strong patriarchal society that didn't think much of women.
It reminded me of something I thought was very strange. When both of my wife's grandfathers past away everything they had (money and property) was immediately handed down to their children despite the fact that their wives were still alive.
He has neither. But man he made in his image. Woman he made for man. It seems wierd now that I think of it. Gender? What does the bible say?
Societies that have healthy cultural religious beliefs normally include the female equally with the male. They are seen as complete and all part of the Creation. They see no need to emphasis one more than the other.
Judeo/christian religion seems to have cast out the female in favour of the male.
And if you don't run right up to the Lord, he will send you to a special place he has made for you. And you pretend that you are not trying to scare us. Did you not say that you had stopped being dishonest earlier?
Yep....this is pure GARBAGE!
Some people say they are proud to be American. Does God hate that too?
Sounds like daddy issues...definitely?It certainly sounds like it, or something very similar.
@Cgenaea said: "ok, it's getting too hard. I got this issue; and I know it is not pleasing to you. Please help..." if this is an appeal to "god out there somewhere," it could be seen as a 'daddy issue.' But I have experienced during Noble Silence, when practiced as part of Vipassana meditation, that when one cannot ask someone else to rescue me, the only course then open to me is going "inside" and facing all the issues there, really honestly, and out of this comes the answer(s), usually. Sometimes the answers are not complete or totally understandable at the time.... they still need more work and assessment, given time if you like.
If this is equivalent to "asking God to sort it out," then I can recommend it. When Daddy has been removed from my choices and decisions, they can be much more authentic and relevant to my deeper needs.Since there is no evidence of any Gods, it is ultimately the mind that comes up with an answer. But the motivation behind the question, and the psychological make up of the individual, effects the issue...it seems.
Ha-ha-ha!!! My daddy issues are still working themselves out.
I feel nothing behind it. However, truth is painful sometimes. The best of friends tell you what you NEED to hear and not just what they think will scratch an ear...
I'm no enemy; and soon you'll know.
The stand is not in judgment; but in the word of God.
I keep saying that. Maybe it will sink in using your dialect. Lol
Let's see.
Hi ClaireI personally reject the concept of any God. I think there would be concrete evidence of it's existence and like Jonny certainly reject the judgmental Gods as described by religion. Without the concept of God cluttering your mind the universe and life becomes much clearer and we begin to see how descriptive the concept of a God is. With God we've attempted to explain things we didn't understand and when the understanding eventual came it was rejected because it conflicts with the concept of God.
No I do not think so, but we are making a very good job of speeding it up with destroying the environment.
one person's Armageddon depiction
may simply be another person's idea
of an economic failure or catastrophe
the world is experiencing catastrophe
through lack of righteousness
and growth of evil
Armageddon is just around the corner
if the nations do not eliminate the evil
history has shown that as the number
of corrupt politicians with radical agendas rise
the destruction of society and its members
soon follows.I really do. 'Critical times hard to deal with' are here. 1 Tim 3. Matthew 24.14
Given the level of evil sin currently growing steadily in the multi-cultural societies of the earth, it is certainly possible.
The Roman Empire and other societies were destroyed for the very same reason.
Today many nations have WMDs that could bring the END.Sometimes it seems like it but I'm not sure. But I hope not in my lifetime, nor that of my children. It's just scary, but as the Bible says, no one really knows when it will happen.
You can hop on a plane to Israel, and go to Mediggo and 'see Armageddon'. As for an apocalyptic clash between supernatural beings...my money is on 'nope', and will always be on 'nope'.
Then what do Revelation chapter sixteen mean to you in the holy scriptures???
No sir GOD is good and he loves you more than you could ever imagine.
That would contradict the chapter you referred. A loving God would never do such things, or is your definition of love opposite of the one in the dictionary?
No sir!!! GOD is not doing this to us, His desire is that we have life and have it more abundtantly. John 10:10 10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
But God created evil, after all. Isaiah 45:7. Besides that, in revelation, God is supposedly doing a lot of the killing. Not the adversary. Satan is responsible for 10 deaths in the Bible - jobs children - with God's express permission. God ordered to be killed or himself killed over a million.
Let me ask you something. Are you concerned over all of the other apocalyptic prophecy found in other religions? Probably not, because you don't believe they are true. I just believe in one less apocalypse than you do.You should probably read Revelations 16 to see that God is doing that to us.
Sorry about the peanut gallery, Pamij. I think Armageddon comes and goes periodically. I do believe another one will happen eventually… not sure when; maybe sometime during this century.
Do you feel his love? Do you sense it in any way?
They mean nothing to me beyond any other piece of literature or poetry. Some fantastic imagery, but no different than the descriptions of Ragnarok, or of the clashes described in the Kojiki.
Rev 16 was prophecy fulfilled already. Long before your great decedents were born.
Then none of us was present. Can you be sure that this prophecy was fulfilled?
At least as sure as we can be that there was a world wide flood, that an ark filled with all the animals of the world rode it out, that there was an Eden, that all mankind is descended from one couple, that an angel killed all the firstborn of Egypt in one night, etc. etc.
And doubly so as Revelation is obviously metaphor and we are allowed to make any meaning we wish for the words there.Cgenaea, are you not attaching your own meanings to Revelations?
My question addressed the assertion that the prophecy was fulfilled. We know the information you present is written biblically. You have some of it in a bias box so no need to address.
Do you know the prophecy to have been fulfilled???
It is found in the book itself, How can you not see it? The temple was still built, In Rev 1, it says "soon to happen", not 2000 years later. I found this book very confusing when I understood it as you do, but when I have come to the understanding that it was written before the great siege of Jerusalem with the day of the great slaughter, it all started to make sense. Yes I am very sure that this prophecy has been fulfilled. to you understanding Cgenaea, what is this great harlot that John versioned? It is very simple.
When "one day" equals 10 Billion years (Genesis), "soon to happen" would likely refer to the end of the universe, when it dies and all stars gutter out many Billions of years from now.
I have no revelations on the book of Revelations.
I really haven't tried much. However, soon biblically is very vague. The temple built torn down and rebuilt torn down to be rebuilt from my scant understanding of it. I just thought you had an inside track on the subject. The harlot??? Please tell me.The temple was built by Solomon I believe. I was later destroyed around 480bc, along with the Jewish religion, but temporary. It was later built again and then destroyed AD70 at the hands of Syrian Romans as prophesized by John in Matt 3:10 and in the parable of the rich man and laserus in Luke 16. Christ spoke about the coming horrendous event in Matt 24 and in 25. The temple's destruction a second time was a vision John had and he called it the second death. As for what the great harlot is, it is none other than the city of Jerusalem. The third temple will not be a physical nor supernatural temple. We the believers in YAHUSHUA ha MASHIACH are the temple.
So John saw something that already happened. So what do you say we may expect for end times? I was pretty sure that Rev. was end times prophecy. Being so abstract and metaphorical that book is a bit beyond my full comprehension. I don't really sweat it because I really haven't felt I needed the information. The strive to understand it has not been a priority.
That is not true. John did not see something that already happened, he saw what was soon to pass. The book was written in the early AD60s, not AD96. There will be no end times as the church believes it. When the great harvest of tabernacle begins, the completion of God's plan for all mankind will begin.
No end to life as we know it; to golden streets??? End is end. Does it matter how the END to life as we know it occurs to what the bible says will be, for eternity???
Do you believe that Time exists in heaven?
I know this wasn't for me, but from what I understand of time, it is the passing of events. If "things" are happening one after the other, then time is passing. It will be time without end, without death, or eternal life. That is not without time, from what I understand.
Some were talking about "void" before, and there would be no time in complete, black, void. Just as an example.
Some say God exists outside of time, but they mean (I think) that he can see it all from beginning to end, and isn't subject to it, or something like that. Being an eternal being, things definitely were happening, time was passing as he put things into motion. Just my thoughts.Steven Hawking said something like a God could not have created the universe because he would have needed time to create it.
I wonder why he would say that about a God that could create the universe?
@Cgenaea, then why do you believe in everlasting life?
No John made it up. Look at the four living creatures: one man, one lion, one ox, one eagle. Now look at the stars or an astrological chart; you will see on opposites sides, one man (Aquarius), one ox (Taurus), one lion (Leo), and one scorpion, or as the Babylonians interpreted, an eagle (Scorpio). John was looking at the stars and following Babylonian astrology fancied he was seeing god type creatures. I'm amazed Christians are so blind to Johns rip off of astrology.
Not only that but the church argued for 300 years about including Revelation . Anyway, and thus John and Revelation have lost all credibility.Very interesting, Disappearinghead. I once read that Revelations was never meant to be in the NT because it was written as the end to the author's world, not ours. Intriguing.
There are all sorts of astrological extrapolations which can be made regarding the Bible--Abraham is given a ram (Aries) to sacrifice to Yahweh instead of Isaac, Moses is angry at the Hebrews for making a golden calf idol (Taurus--the astrological age BEFORE Aries, and thus a reversal rather than an advance), Jesus has a lot of fish imagery (Pisces) and was said to usher in a new age...
Given how vitally important astrology was to ancient peoples, this should be surprising to no one. It shouldn't even surprise hardcore god botherers who scream about astrology being of the devil. Many stories in the Old Testament--Genesis in particular--parallel ancient Babylonian myths (even before the Babylonian captivity), and to deny the impact of the Babylonians on the ancient world because your god is bigger than their god is willful ignorance--which is the only shameful kind of ignorance.Ok so let me get this right... katie, and all the disbelievers here. You all do what you do because you're just here on earth and you just follow the laws of the land to avoid jail time... but if you can get away with doing something bad for your own good then you would still do it. So basically we have a conscience placed in there because we don't believe on anything? lolz haha. very solid foundation of beliefs you got. We do what is right and evil because it is inborn... where did we get that from? of course ... who else our Father in Heaven. duh. common it's not rocket science idiots! (don't say you got that from your biological parents... or the apes... we got that from the first people here on earth). packing morons!
I don't go around killing people because I have absolutely no desire to do so. I value human life, and I don't need a cosmic scoreboard to make me value life or do good things--I do good for goodness's sake. When people do bad things to me, I feel bad--and because I have empathy for others, I don't want to do bad things to others because I don't want them to feel bad. This isn't contingent on the supernatural. I see bad things in the world, and I see good. That does not require that I then believe in a god or gods.
Disbelieving isn't hard for me. There is nothing compelling enough to make me believe, so disbelief is really quite easy--just like it's easy for me to disbelieve people who claim they were abducted by aliens, or were rescued from a burning building by Bigfoot.So who were the first parents or mortals here on earth? who would teach them what is right and wrong? why did they pass on the values of morals, character, good, and evil? Why does the constitution have "In God we trust." ... common so if people don't believe in God, then they shouldn't believe in the laws of the land... period
The Constitution doesn't say 'In God We Trust'. It doesn't mention God at all. And gods are not necessary for laws.
Human beings are a social species, and something we call 'morality' emerges in social species in order to ensure the survival of the group. If this is something that you are genuinely curious about, you should look into the evolution of morality. But moral laws predate the Old Testament (Hammurabi's Code of Laws, for instance), so Yahweh can't be the origin of laws like 'don't kill or steal'.Ok, yah i stand corrected on the US constitution. my bad. But the pre-amble to the constitution referred to God as "Almighty of the Universe". The framers of the constitution avoided mentioning God (and Satan) in the constitution to exercise freedom of religion. The pledge of allegiance has the words "under God...". The US coin had the word "In God We Trust".
Ok so we may all have different beliefs. So you believe that there is no God (like Buddhists and other people do)... and I can respect that. But I can respect those who do also if it motivates them to do good towards others and their family members. Just remember... we have an engineer of these earths, planets, galaxies... in due time we will know who they are. but for the meantime, continue to do good and love. coz it feels right...The Preamble to the Constitution of the United States doesn't reference God, the Almighty, or even Providence. The pledge of allegiance had the words 'under God' added in 1954 in response to the 'menace' of communism (and it was originally recited while performing the Bellamy Salute--which bears an unfortunate resemblance to the Nazi salute, and was abandoned in favor of placing one's hand over their heart in 1942). US currency has 'In God We Trust' on it because in the aftermath of the Civil War, some Christian members of the Treasury snuck it in, and then appeared on paper money in the 60's, also in response to the 'threat of communism' (which is also how 'In God We Trust' ended up as our national motto--fear of the godless commies). I think 'E pluribus unum' is a much better national motto, which more accurately reflects the idea of the United States of America, but sadly, I don't get to call the shots, and there are more immediate issues that deserve my attention than getting the national motto changed.
Yes, it feels right, that is the point. Unlike believers, who are told to do good things for others so they can get their rewards in heaven, non-believers do good things for others because it is the right thing to do, and they do those things without expecting any rewards, in heaven or anywhere else. That is a huge difference.
Truth. The benefit I get out of doing good for someone else is purely seeing them happy, which makes me happy. I'm not doing it with a big cosmic gun pointed at my head, playing Russian Roulette with my every choice. We're all free to act in any way we choose, and even without some eternal Big Brother watching over us, I think most people would choose to do good. We non-believers do good because we're not antisocial, and I think everyone who is not antisocial would also do good if they were non-believers.
Ah, you edited your post. Cute.
No, I don't avoid doing bad things because I want to avoid jail--I have no desire to do those things. I have a purely secular morality. I make decisions based on a consideration for the outcome of my actions, and judge those outcomes based on various criteria (e.g. Life is generally preferable to death, pleasure is generally preferable to pain, health is generally preferable to sickness, etc.). I don't have somebody else declare what is right or wrong to me and then follow that 'moral law' blindly, even if it means I have to sacrifice my firstborn child to that 'moral lawgiver', or have to go and slaughter people in battle and then take the virgin girls as my slaves because my 'moral lawgiver' said it was what it wanted.yah sorry, had to edit. my english is poor. i'm not a native english speaker. I understand... we all have freedom of choice since when we were born (some have lots and some have limited). but at any rate, i understand where you come from. at the end what matters is we put all our differences aside and love each other. :-)
Your English is fine--but your edited post is considerably more confrontational. lol
oh ok. my bad. if you were here... i'd treat u for coffee.
There is plenty of evidence that Atheists don't need the fear of God to be good. I know I personally don't. You must have been taught that you need the fear of God to be good, that's one of the limitations that Religion puts on it's people. It prevents them from ethical maturity.
The US prison system is made up of less then 0.5% Atheists.
Care to guess what percent are Christians?If there were no laws for any particular act you wish to imagine that somehow benefited me but made a direct negative impact on someone else, I still wouldn't do it, because I know that doing that act will have a negative impact on that person and I wouldn't want that to happen to me. I don't need anyone to tell me that, let alone some ancient book, I can figure that our for myself. Why can't you?
From our own minds, using reason, to think things through to their ultimate ends, to understand that any acts we commit may have negative consequences for others.
Have you noticed that your insults are not well thought out, that you didn't use your mind to reason out why you shouldn't call us idiots and morons, that even the belief in your "Father in Heaven" didn't stop you from writing them here? Maybe it is the apes who are moral?
Lets look at Revelation 16 : We see GOD's wrath. Why is he so angry with humanity? 6 For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.
7 And I heard another out of the altar say, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments.
8 ¶ And the fourth angel poured out his vial upon the sun; and power was given unto him to scorch men with fire.
9 And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory.
10 ¶ And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; Ex. 10.21 and they gnawed their tongues for pain,
11 and blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.
After all the deeds that humanity did above GOD in his mercy continues to give them a chance to repent. Do you not see that??? His love does not stop there, rather you guys believe in him or not he still loves you and want you to turn to him.
GOD does not care what you done, if today you will repent and turn away from your sin this is what he say, "18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. GOD does not want to kill you, he loves you for you was created in his image.We all own, or at least have access to the Bible.
Just sayin' you don't have to reproduce it in large chunks for us.And here I thought the OP was asking if we thought we'd see Armageddon in our lifetime....instead, lecture and preaching....fiddlesticks!
Seems like ancient poetry to me--filled with fantastic imagery which cannot possibly be taken literally, and is NOT taken literally when it comes to you from Odin or Zeus or Indra. But when this particular storm god says it, that makes it fact?
But, you just finished saying this:
So, now you agree with us after actually reading the passages.
Just trying to show you GOD'S love, but you know what GOD gives us all a choice, he does not force anyone to worship him. We all have free will. However we must think back to the days of Noah when he kept telling the people it was going to rain and they laughed and scorned then the rain came and what happened to the people???
Everybody here knows the stories.
Again, just sayin'You mean this love…
Exodus 21:20-21 NLT
If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished. But if the slave recovers within a day or two, then the owner shall not be punished, since the slave is his property.
or this love?
Leviticus 21:9 NLT
If a priest’s daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she also defiles her father’s holiness, and she must be burned to death.
Oh the compassion.Oh yes that is lovely isn't it?
17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
Kinda gives me the warm tingles. Anyone ever notice it's always one guy that says he talks to God, but no one else hears it? You'd think an all everything God would and could speak to the masses. Oh well.1 Samuel 15:3
It's my favorite example of love EVER.
God drowned them all, which is mass murder. Very evil guy.
It is strange how people can twist the bible into something negative and refuse to see GOD's love for humanity such as:
I.The Deliverance of the children of Israel out of Egypt
II.Adding fifteen years to King Hezekiah's life when he deserved death
III. Feeding the Prophet Elijah during a famine and hiding him when his life was sought
IV. Raining manna from heaven
V. Delivering the 3 Hebrew boys out of the furnace
I can go on and on showing GOD's mercyNobody is twisting anything, the words are there for all to read.
It would seem that YOU are the one who is twisting the words.one would think that if you have to redefine words, make up excuses and try to make the text say something that it doesn't say, it may not be a good idea to bring it up. Apologetics is nothing but the study of spin doctoring, word smithing and making excuses for a supposedly all-powerful deity. It's pitiful.
Yahweh was a thunder/war god, in the same tradition as Thor and Indra. Examples of him ordering the Israelites to go and slaughter people are far more common in the OT than examples of him being touchy-feely. You'll notice that every single one of those items that you listed was an act of 'mercy' delivered solely to the Hebrews--and only if he rolled out of bed that morning and liked them. If their God is so merciful, why allow the Holocaust? Or the practice of secretly baptizing Jewish children and then having the Inquisition kidnap them during the 19th century--like what happened to Edgardo Mortara? If the Abrahamic god is 'love and mercy', then he's had a funny way of showing it for the last 3,500 years--especially toward his Chosen People.
It is strange how people can twist the bible into something negative and refuse to see GOD's love for humanity such as:
I.The Deliverance of the children of Israel out of Egypt
II.Adding fifteen years to King Hezekiah's life when he deserved death
III. Feeding the Prophet Elijah during a famine and hiding him when his life was sought
IV. Raining manna from heaven
V. Delivering the 3 Hebrew boys out of the furnace
I can go on and on showing GOD's mercyYou mean in the same story where God slaughters millions of Egyptians, primarily children?
So he extended one guy's lifespan by a few years. Whoo-hoo. Didn't stop him from killing children.
Was that before or after Elijah summoned bears to chase down and kill children for calling him bald?
Because clearly being petty and forcing your chosen people to live off of stale bread is more merciful and loving than simply guiding them to the Promised Land. Clearly petulance is a desirable quality in a deity.
Was that before or after the guys who threw them in died from exposure to the heat? Why didn't God save them? Eh, I guess his mercy and love is...selective at best.
Yes. His selective, bafflingly counterintuitive mercy.GOD always extends warning before judgment, rather you chose to believe or disbeleive is on you. We are all governed by free will.
Can you give us ANY good reason to believe in any god - let alone yours?
Fluffy would love it if you worshiped Tiamat. Is bonding with your pet a good reason to worship a God, or Goddess in this case?
Hey! Dionysus is a fun guy! I can think of LOTS of reasons to worship him.
Hey, I've seen the Emperor of Japan with my own two eyes--he's TOTES real! (And he has a genus of gobies named after him!)
Fluffy probably would, you're right. I'm waiting for him to roast my chestnuts so I can get in the holiday spirit
After 5 weeks of argumentative non-sense dominated by mostly empty yet faithful contributions from Cgenae, this thread (approaching 1700 posts) amounts to nothing useful except Melissa' s comment about her cat!
Do you also have a god- sorry, I mean dog - at home Melissa?
So why doesn't God come down and reveal himself unambiguously to everyone in the world? If such an experience was good enough for Paul, why can't God reveal himself to me and everyone else on Earth that way?
Katie Paul's experience qualified him for his future position as an Apostle. We may not all see GOD while in the natural realm. However if we seek GOD with our whole heart we will have a supernatural experience. Acts 2:17. In the last days GOD is going to pour out his spirit up all flesh. GOD often time reveals himself in dreams and visions.
You didn't answer my question, though. Why can't we all have such an experience if god really, truly wants us to know he is real and ought to be worshipped? You can't qualify it with 'You just have to try with all your heart', because if I try and DON'T have a supernatural experience, you can just say that I didn't do it right. It's a cop-out. Besides, what about people who have such experiences regarding other gods?
It all depends on whose message you take in. Belief in God is NOT a "favor" to God. It helps the believer. We HAVE ample evidence to make a yea or nay decision. Just as Adam and Eve. No, they could not have fully grasped death. They knew NOTHING about it. They had NO experience with it. They took in and believed the WRONG message and brought death into the world. God created immortals. Free will destroyed immortality for a while. BUT...He WILL have his way. A WHOLE world of people who trust him ALONE will live with him forever.
Adam and Eve didn't know that they were making the wrong choice, because they were made completely ignorant and trusting--it's an ancient story about stranger danger, not history.
But heck, I'll bite--what's the ample evidence that we have? I see no evidence to convince me that the Abrahamic god, or any other god, for that matter, exists and has supernatural powers which it exercises. (This is an important distinction, because I've seen various other 'gods', such as mummified pharaohs, the Emperor of Japan, the river Ganges, communion wafers, etc. but not a single one has any supernatural abilities which would distinguish them from otherwise identical non-gods.)They were given instruction. Had they listened and trusted as they were made to do they would still be here!
and the bible calls it history.
The evidence is all the mouths that proclaim; the pages of the bible; the holy spirit; and faith which brings God "to your service"They didn't know they couldn't trust talking snakes. And what was god doing putting something he didn't want humans touching in a place where they could touch it, while simultaneously allowing a serpent which he knew would tell the humans to do the exact thing he told them not to do and, because they're perfectly naive and trusting, they end up doing something horrible? Not a god of great wisdom.
Y'know what else claims to be history? The Silmarillion. That is not a good reason to believe in Manwë and Morgoth, or that Frodo Baggins is the savior of Middle Earth--no matter how many nerds speak Elvish. That's not evidence. That's argumentum ad populum, and would also be 'evidence' for Lord Krishna, Allah (who has no son, and Muhammad is his prophet), Buddha, and Xenu's existence.One who judges God is quite funny. Don't people know how short their arms are??? He said DON'T TOUCH IT. they believed ANOTHER message.
They had conflicting messages, and they didn't KNOW which to believe--according to the story, they didn't know that disobedience was wrong, because they had no knowledge of right and wrong, good or evil, anything. It's just a 'stranger danger', obey your parents or you will be punished story which contradicts the creation story told in the chapter immediately before it.
See??? Determination NOT to believe is as dangerous as that stranger in Eden. The bible has no contradictions. He said don't touch it or you gon die. The stranger said "Hawg-wawsh!" They believed the stranger instead. They didn't know that they were totally ignorant, they THOUGHT more highly of their own ignorant intelligence than they ought and decided to follow themselves not knowing that they didn't know better. Crazy right???
The Bible certainly has contradictions. The Bible describes two COMPLETELY different lineages for Joseph. One creation story says animals came before humans, and the very next story says that humans came before animals. Matthew, Luke and John each record different last words for Jesus. There are differing descriptions of the death of Judas. There are contradictory claims in 2 Samuel regarding how many children Saul's daughter had (either she had no children, or she had five). If you google 'List of contradictions in the Bible', you get results. If there were no contradictions in the Bible, that would bear out, but there are very clear contradictions.
Nothing in Genesis bears out your interpretation. But here's what it does show: it shows that Yahweh is not omnipresent, or omniscient, or omnipotent, or else none of that would have happened. But you've established that you don't care if what you believe is true, so why should I listen to a word you have to say regarding what you believe?We are not locked in. You are free to believe however you desire.
Then, why are you here trying to change our beliefs?
I cannot change your belief. I may only give you the truth of the matter. God is way beyond our judgment. We cannot fathom a big man with no brain who made a being that is capable of automatic bandaids (scab) and taking a kajillion needed breaths and giving an automatic mechanism capable of processing blood and pumping it through tiny fragile tubes.
and multiplying...oh! I could go on and on and on and on...
You must believe as you wish. God can see your intent. He knows what trust in him truly looks like. I cannot give you trust. I may only relay. Now YOU have the baton... RUN!!! Or stand still asking questions that will not quench the desperate thirst.Truth? You wouldn't know anything about truth.
I'm sure you could. It still wouldn't make any sense, though.
Still trying to push your beliefs on me. Sorry, your version of Christianity isn't one I'd be interesting in, thanks.
But I only want to believe in things which are TRUE, and if something which I accepted as true turns out to be false, guess what? I'll stop "believing" in it!
Also, are you conceding the point that there are contradictions in the Bible?
You really are convinced by a literal Adam and Eve, why? Did you know that the Jews wrote, rewrote, and edited the Torah during the exile to give a comforting account to a disposed and downtrodden people? How do you know what is real and what is fiction? Were you there debating with them about what to include?
Yeah! I sat next to you don't you remember me??? You were early. You got more of the editing done. Did you take notes? We were trying to vote on a cute and cuddly puppy in place of the snake, remember?
If you have a "supernatural" experience, how do you identify where it came from? Do you check gods id? I mean, seriously. Thousands of people from all over the world claim to have divine experience, but they attribute those experiences to different Gods. How do you know they're from God at all?
Furthermore, what qualified paul to be an apostle. He never met Jesus, was never on a list of apostles, and was never called an apostle by anyone but himselfFaith IDs God. He told Thomas, "blessed are they..." well I know it is already known what he told Thomas.
We have enough.
If God swung from the chandelier of our livingroom, we ask for ID. Right??? He gave us enough. It is now up to us to decide. Those with faith in God WILL NOT be ashamed or embarrassed on THAT day.I wasn't asking you. Perhaps you should illuminate to your christian counterparts here that you think Allah of Islam is the same god that you as a Christian worship.
I will wait for the person I was actually speaking to for an answer. I'm not playing any more games with you, your insults and your assumptions against those who have actually studied these things.
Dreaming about anything doesn't make it real, including God. If I dream of Thor, does that make him real?
Yeah, I dream all sorts of crazy stuff. Last night, I dreamed that the weather was nice outside--but then I went outside and saw that dreaming it didn't make it so.
I dreamed I was a dragon and flew away when I got stuck in traffic and incinerated the car that cut me off with a fire ball blast from my nostrils. Good times.
Your dream was better than mine, lol.
But wait--are you now actually a dragon that breathes fire from your nostrils? Did dreaming it make it reality? Inquiring minds want to know!
I sought God with my whole heart for over 20 years but never once had the supernatural experience that you claim I should have had.
I don't feel that everyone receives the "supernatural experience" as supernatural is commonly understood. The problem is that we lay out parameters for the way God should do things for us. We forget that it is we who are small in comparison. He is the parameter layer. He is not subjected to OUR will. We are the subjects when we truly follow him. His will; not ours.
I personally have been waiting for him to do just one thing for years!!! But I dare not thumb my nose because he is sooooo slooooow. I wait. I beg sometimes; but still, I will wait. Loving and trusting him with my best interest still.I never laid out any parameters whatsoever, or made any conditions. I have simply had no supernatural experience yet pamlj above said I will have a supernatural experience. Is he/she not a true Christian?
You say you've been waiting for God for years to do something for you and as you have not said otherwise I'm assuming he hasn't spoken to you about it either. Would you behave like this to your children? Blanking them in their time of need without a word.My dad did it all the time. Especially with money. I'd wait for a no response for days.
memories...
Patience is important. People actually give him ultimatums. Fancy that...So your image of God is informed by the image you have of your father?
My image of God is formed by my image of Jesus. That was a practical response for how we must be patient and still be able to accept no if that just so happens to be the case. So many people drop God based solely on what they didn't get??? But how does that look??? Are you married? Does a wife divorce her husband each time he forgets an anniversary or leaves his socks in the middle of the floor? Hell, these days women accept all sorts of BS to report that they do not sleep alone. But God is faithful and we make demands. What kind of love is that?
People don't drop God based upon inconsequential events analogous to leaving socks on the floor, you know that. People drop God because perhaps after years of observation they see no evidence of his intervention in life; theirs, friends, families, or those living in the Philippines when a monsoon strikes for example. Not only, but after they have dropped God, they look at their lives and see little or nothing has changed.
People come to God with a list of particulars. They expect their list to be checked and checked again. God cannot be told what to do. His will is ultimate. The things we pray for are fleeting at best. He is not Santa.
He's not Santa? Doesn't he have a list? I'm certain he's checked it twice. Does he not know who's naughty and nice? Ok. He's probably not coming to town so maybe therein lies your confusion.
I didn't "drop god" on the basis of "what I didn't get," -- get from "god," at least.
I was looking for love and compassion from human beings who said, or implied, that they got their goodness from their god. In many cases I found none of that compassion; they were up themselves. They were all talk.
Some people who consider themselves christian are compassionate and caring. Many who are not christian display equal compassion and caring. I do not see the christianism as relevant. It's a smoke screen, used by people to make themselves appear superior.
I "dropped god" because of the people who use god as the carrot behind that smoke screen. You, Cgenaea, seem to me like one of the people. I might be wrong, only you can answer truthfully when you look into your own objectives and motives. If I am not wrong, you are one of those people that cause me to "drop god." Thank you, I am the better for it.I appreciate your honesty. Let me ask you this... if your brother was mean to you, would that make you to disown your dad??? Would it make you to blot your name from his will denying his provision for you???
My God is not an enemy. He is all that hischildren can never be. Jesus is the one we look to. His standard and motivation are pure.
What happens when you have waited for 30,40 years - a lifetime and still don't have that one thing?
Will you decide that because you got something similar that He actually DID give it to you? Will you decide that His answer is "No"? Will you pretend that you never asked after all? Will you give in and put forth the effort to get it all by yourself, then saying He gave it to you?
Will you question the other things you have received and ascribed to His work - that they were either coincidence or from your own efforts? What will you do/think/feel when you realize that God has never given you one single thing all your life, although you have assigned many things to His generosity?Haven't we learned something from the story of the Emperor's new cloths?
It is difficult for some to learn. I suspect that if this question is answered truthfully it will be to the effect that one should remain faithful, always maintaining the mistaken belief that God is involved in their personal lives and answers prayers. A lifetime of failing to answer is irrelevant; faith must be maintained.
Maybe that's why no one actually keeps track and records these things; much easier to forget and/or ignore if not written down.Ehh, I think the point would be if you want something pray for help with the skills/personality traits needed to get it.
That actually works, believe it or not. To one extent or the other. But you have to actually get off your lazy arse to do it. Which I guess is what they mean by God helping those who help themselves.A little different. There's science but it's too early and my coffee hasn't started working yet. Google it yourself. It's about self-affirmations and stuff. Think it, live it, be it and that such.
It doesn't seem to matter whether it's self-affirmation or prayers statistically. I guess it matters individually though. It does for me anyway.No. The bible helps those who realize they CANNOT help themselves. People came up with that other phrase. Ask Job
. People kill me with their ideas that they self-suffice. I guess that's what GOD meant when he said lean NOT unto your own understanding. We just don't have ALL the info... Ask Adam and his wife .We don't have all the information, but then it is still far more than the bible has. Modern civilized morals are considerably superior to those in the bible, and of course knowledge of the world around us is incomparably better.
As far as Adam - he had the information, just didn't use it. Just as some people don't use the information/knowledge in the golden rule and continue to insist others believe and behave as they do.Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. I do that fully. The bible is my guidance so I use it. I respond to it. I am not wrong. I want only BIBLICAL correction. It is all I give.
I realized that a question I asked about Jesus following unbelievers to love them into belief... got NOTHING! But dismissed. I can handle dismissal. Jesus showed me how. C ya later Nicodemus... I got work to doAdam heard don't touch and he touched. He didn't have all the information. He did not know about death. He had no idea how his world would respond to his disobedience. God knew. Now, we do...
God knew and yet he set up his experiment anyway. In this story God doesn't want people to have any knowledge. Is this where you get your philosophy for life?
God is not looking for zombies. He wants us to realize that he knows the way. He wants us to trust that we will not fall if we do things as he says. He wants us to know that when we err he will forgive as long as we remain truthful along HIS lines. Our lines don't work. Ask Adam.
Right, you think he doesn't want us to think for ourselves, like zombies.
Is that what you got from what I said??? I now see the problem with words.
That's what I got from what you said because that's what you said.
According to you he wants us to just trust him and not think, just like zombies.
I actually don't doubt that praying in that manner will help some people get what they want.
But there is no reason to think God has anything to do with it. Far more likely is that the people are now convinced that they will accomplish their goal, which always helps in actually doing so. As you say, "get off your lazy arse and do it" - it's actually quite effective and no god required.It has to do with role models and praying to have the same qualities. Within the pagan faith some pick a token God/Goddess with those traits and pray to them. The difference is many will move from God to God as the different traits are needed. In Christianity, they roll all the traits up into one with three aspects, something like the maiden/mother/crone triplicate.
Anyway, it's realization through affirmation. Which is new age for fake it til you make it, approximately. It's more than convincing yourself that you will accomplish your goal, it's more like changing yourself to have the qualities to accomplish your goals... which is a little deeper.
So, for some (myself included) having a strong picture of Christ to aim for is quite helpful... So yes, it does have something to do with Christ, even if it is just leading by example... I guess is the best phrase.
So in that, there is a God required for some people.
But yes, getting off your lazy arse is required in all steps.Hmm. Pretty much what I meant, even if I didn't put it quite so well.
Thinking that you will achieve a goal means you will put out the effort to do so. And that often means (depending on the goal) becoming a slightly different person or changing somehow to encourage others to help you. In your words, "changing yourself to have the qualities to accomplish your goals" whether that be education, morals or skills.
As far as your needing a Christ (god); you have your picture of Him to work from and that's all that is necessary. No actual god required, just a picture of what you think He is, and that picture may or may not have any correlation to reality. It doesn't need any; it just needs to be be something "superior" to you.I get what you're saying. I really do, and in the grand scheme of things for everybody, you're likely right. However on a personal basis, the Bible does give that picture of Jesus. By my standards of proof, it's likely an accurate picture... or at least the burden of proof has been met for me. God really doesn't enter the picture but then again, I'm not Trinitarian. But yes, the picture does have to have a connection to reality-to me-and I believe it does.
This is the outcome of SELF sufficiency. I wonder if they see how they just caused the statement by using man's ideas. God is.
much easier to forget and/or ignore if not written down
Seems as if God had that same opinion.
I will do/think/feel as you do. But please!!! Don't hold your breath on that one!
I didn't believe that one for even a millisecond.
I don't think you are capable anymore of actually analyzing a problem without resorting to built in, predefined opinions of what god wants. That is far more important to you than truth and any conclusion will conform to those beliefs.
So no, you will not question your old beliefs.
I totally agree. God is good. We are insignificant. Yet He showers His love on us every day, He allows us to live on his good earth which He created and He creates food for us to eat and sun to smile on us and warm our hearts. God is good. And thankfully for us, He is all-knowing, all-powerful and He is in charge of us little caterpillars who think we know so much. We have a lot to learn and HE WILL TEACH US, be it the hard way since we're so hard-headed, we will learn. He is in control and we should be very thankful for that. He is wise and we are the dummies, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
PRAISE BE ALWAYS TO GOD THE CREATOR!!!!Wow. That's some pretty low self-esteem.
To each their own... I saw it kind of opposite of low self esteem, though maybe with some humility still. The tone of the whole post is upbeat and not seeming to be sounding like someone with low self esteem. She seemed amazed and happy, not someone expressing from a point of view of low self esteem. It could just be the way they used words.... because truth is, that compared to a mountain, ocean, the planet, or the universe, we are indeed next to "nothing" in size, but compare all that to God, and he is even more huge and magnificent to have created the whole universe.
Then to realize he paid the price for our sins, to help us have a way to Him if he wanted it. We could have low self esteem, but to realize what he has done....wow. I could be wrong in how I saw it, but wanted to share my thoughts in case it was an encouragement instead.I just never understood the process of comparing ourselves with insects and calling ourselves insignificant to prove our piousness. There's a difference between humility and humbleness and self-abasement.
I am fine admitting I am less than perfect, that Jesus is an inspiration and that compared to him I am lacking... however I don't think God put so much work into us to have us believe we are insects and insignificant.
Humility is one thing, I don't think I'll be crawling on my belly anytime soon.Oh, I didn't realize you were taking her comparison to an actual caterpillar to such a literal degree, and I saw it as just one word among many others. They may have meant it like "crawling on your belly, etc" like you said, but I didn't take it like that at all. Oh well, and thanks for your clarification on how you took her comment to be so negative.
It may be a cultural thing. In this particular area, in my experience, it begins to be almost like a competition of who can profess themselves lowest to prove their love for God. The immediate assumption is that it's fine to tell others that they are "worms" and "snakes" that are unworthy to stand before God.
After a while, comparing yourself and others to low creatures works into the mind. You believe you are unworthy in general, and see others the same way.
It's just, to me, a negative representation of theatrics that works against having open, honest, faith. That's not meant to be insulting, just a problem I've ran across.Ok... thanks for explaining your point of view.
The nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance: behold, he takes up the isles as a very little thing. Isa 40:15
...I will just say that God counts the nations as a drop of a bucket, so where does that put each individual compared to God?
Yet we are created with a wonderful potential and will eventually be the masterpiece of God's creative work!Very interesting, thanks Bluebird! I like I Corinthians 2:9. We can imagine quite a bit as humans, but we have no idea really what is yet to come.
I think you are right, and we are so small compared to such an amazing God. Yet he has chosen to extend his mercy, grace and love to those that believe in his Son.... We are so small and seemingly insignificant but then on the other hand not at all. The reason is because of what he has done for us. He wouldn't do that for something he cared nothing about.
His eye on is on even the sparrow.....
Amazing
people one of the worst things we can do is disrespect out creator. So I take your answers to be that you doubt there will even be an Armageddon??
"Doubt" is too weak when considering the biblical Armageddon.
I doubt there will be an Armageddon and I'm a Christian.
Good luck convincing the atheists.
Let me know how that works out for you.Yes, I very much doubt that there will be a Biblically prophesied battle between Jesus and Satan.
What I don't doubt is that there are people out there who VERY much believe that it will happen, and are VERY interested in making sure that the events in Revelation happen within their lifetimes--and that scares the hell out of me, because those people have political power. Those people make political decisions based on their fervent belief that Jesus will come back for them before they die, so there is no reason for them to be concerned about the future. They try to pass legislation that they think will please God, because they don't expect that their grandchildren will have to live with the consequences of their actions (the restriction of women's rights, ignoring environmental concerns, stalling peace talks, building up our military and keeping their fingers on the big red button, etc.).
That's why I have such a problem with Premillenialism and Christian Dominionism.@ Katie: I agree on your note. Do you believe that there is any church perhaps that comes close to truth or have the fullness of the gospel?
I disagree--and I now understand where your claim about aliens comes from.
Right, the bigots and the ones with the secret hand shakes with Smith sitting beside God are the closest religion to the Gospels?
As a Christian myself, I would think that our God in his omnipotence and omniscience already knows who will continue to disbelieve and disrespect and who disrespect him now but will change once he is revealed. And in his grace will still accept those who choose him and allow those who don't to take whatever path they choose.
I shudder to think that our God needs little old us to defend him . That is very limiting to his power. Just a thoughtBut a very good thought. I like it, it should catch on.
Per usual Deepes, valuable and sensible insight. Can you send this out in a memo?
If you friend him on FB, you get daily status updates filled with Deepes wisdom and insight.
Two a day if you're luckyDeepes wisdom on the daily?! Will my mind be able to cope with all the sensibleness going on? Ha ha! Thanks for the tip!
Don't listen to Melissa. She has poor taste in reading material...lol
Wisdom and insight? I always thought they were the semi-coherent(barely) ramblings of a man that is full of hot air that spends a lot of time in his own mind
I tried, but not everyone wants the memo on some things that are in the bible (that they believe in) as far as how big God truly is as well as how to act, or so I've been told. Go figure.. But I digress
Well, it's their loss, truly. Trying is all you can do. Some do not care enough to do even that or do so for the wrong purpose or reasons. Their idea of trying to help is force-feeding dogma as all that matters. I've not seen that actually work out yet and actually, as we all know, often has the opposite effect. Why do they not get this? Rhetorical question, of course.
One of the worse things we can do is to think that a fictitious character in an ancient silly fairy tale is our creator. Frightening!
THE SKY IS FALLING!!!Prayerfully, you don't really deem JESUS~GOD as an ancient fairy tale? However we are all entitled to our own beliefs. Oh yes, without GOD the sky would(will) fall. GOD is neither a pipe dream, nor a fairy tale. Prayerfully you will have an unforgettable experience with our creator.
Most people in the world don't believe that Jesus was god. Even early Christians didn't believe it. And, let me clarify...do you think the sky is an actual physical thing that can fall, or are you just being poetic about it?
Exactly, and that is one of the primary reasons why God doesn't exist.
There are far more worse things we can do than disrespect a being whose only existence is based entirely on words in a book. The problem with believing such a thing is that we then place how we treat human beings on a much lesser plane of ethics and morals, which would account for how badly many people are treated in the world.
Both the Vatican and Uganda come to mind.Yeah, the worst possible thing you can do is disrespect You-Know-Who, especially if you're a Muggle or are Muggleborn. We should all live in abject fear of him, because at any point, he could send Bellatrix Lestrange to torture us to death.
There are actual human beings I'm more worried about--coincidentally, many of them live in the Vatican and Uganda, lol.
Katie Paul's experience qualified him for his future position as an Apostle. We may not all see GOD while in the natural realm. However if we seek GOD with our whole heart we will have a supernatural experience. Acts 2:17. In the last days GOD is going to pour out his spirit upon all flesh. GOD often time reveals himself in dreams and visions.
According to the bible, Jesus walked around and actually interacted with people after he was resurrected, and according to the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna revealed his cosmic body of Lord Vishnu to Arjuna, both in broad daylight--why shouldn't such things happen in modern times, now that we all have HD cameras in our back pocket with direct links to Facebook and YouTube?
The bible says, "how can they call on him if they don't believe?" And "how can they hear unless someone tells them?" YES!!! We NEED to "defend" the word of Christ.
As for Armageddon; the antichrist is with us daily. Good Vs evil is now a daily concern. People laugh and scoff and speak foolishness concerning the message of Christ to their own peril. But the one who retells his message is not at fault. Beautiful are his feet. (scripture)
The final battle is a little ways away from my understanding of what is to happen first. But it could be within the next minute that all lines up according to scripture. We just don't know. Thanks Pamij for telling it... nice "shoes" you wearMuah!!!
Been on "lock down" for a whole week!!!What are you talking about you been on lock down???? Lock down from what????? If someone is holding you hostage I urge you to call your local authorities.
She means that she's been banned from the forums for a week for insulting atheists and other Christians.
Well, some of the people here are very sensitive when it comes to scripture. They spit vile things from their lips and they deny all that is God.
For some reason (well I do know why) they get angry when their silly argument comes against TRUTH and they all of a sudden FEEL PERSONALLY ATTACKED
it is soooooo funny. They attack. But NEVER appreciate the echo. Banned for an ENTIRE WEEK.
They will not win this argument though. It was WON thousands of years ago.
I watched. God is with you.
A few days ago, I read about Paul. He gave a personal account of the brother of Jesus. An "out of the way" James comment is important in determining his authenticity. It is viewed by most historians as an important piece. Paul seemed to be acquainted, from what I recall. And there is no doubt among them that Paul definitely wrote Galatians.
We have enough...And half of the other letters attributed to Paul are widely known to be forgeries...and anyone who knows anything about lying knows that throwing in extraneous details makes a lie more believable.
Of course, Jesus could have been real, and Paul might have really met Jesus's brother--but that doesn't make a single one of the supernatural claims true, any more than L. Ron Hubbard existing means that he was telling the truth about Xenu.Right. Faith. We do or we don't. Paul knew God and his son. OR... Paul was crazy and spoke from his own head. Which report do you believe? Simple
Those aren't the only two choices. Paul could have been mistaken. Or he could have been deliberately manipulating the early church. But of your two choices, I'm more inclined to believe the latter--in past times, people who were epileptic, schizophrenic, had multiple personalities, etc. were considered shamans, prophets, etc. who were connected with spirits and gods. Who is to say Paul wasn't epileptic AND mistaken?
We would probably know if Paul had epilepsy.
his message is one anong MANY. We believe that the tongues and eyeballs burn out while people stand on their feet (like the BIBLE said) or we don't. We don't have to make bones about it. If one is content in disbelief, que será será.How? How would you know if Paul had epilepsy? Of the hundreds of people mentioned in the bible, not one had epilepsy, or diabetes, or leukemia or any of a hundred different diseases. It seems reasonable that people either didn't recognize the disease or didn't bother to mention it; probably the latter is it could be (and would be) taken as a sign of the devil. Which it often was just a few centuries later.
Lots of biblical leprosy broke out. And we heard about that. Why would Paul not mention his seizures in any of his letters?
Because having seizures was considered spirit possession, and if he couldn't 'cast out demons', he wasn't 'truly working in the name of Jesus', perhaps? And if he was instead schizophrenic, then his account of his conversion on Damascus would be him mentioning one of his episodes, would it not? (Not to mention about half of the letters attributed to Paul weren't written by Paul, lol)
Peep this... How do you know that Paul did not sit down and pen each and every one of his letters???
You got faith???Because I can examine evidence that suggests that the letters were forged, and there is a consensus among biblical scholars that the pastoral letters, Ephesians, Colossians, Romans, etc. are inconsistent with the writing style found in the 7 letters attributed to Paul. On the contrary, your evidence that all of the epistles were, in fact, written by Paul is...you just believe.
Look, if you don't WANT evidence supporting your beliefs, and if you don't WANT truth, just say so, and that way we can stop wasting each other's time.No waste of time... we need this light. Evidence is lacking. As we know, scribes were employed. Paul may have had several. It certainly stands to reason. Plus, none of his friends are alive. We cannot ask. We MUST believe one or the other. Or toss it up...
We "MUST" believe one or the other?
If two men have contradicting stories from each other, that is not a reason to believe either one, they could both be wrong.
If two religions have contradicting beliefs, that is not a reason to believe either one, they could both be wrong.
If two gods have contradicting commands, that is not a reason to believe either one, they could both be wrong.
Like many who have seizures, they attribute them to supernatural experiences.
How would we know if Paul had epilepsy, or any other disorder? People in the ancient world thought diseases were inflicted by spirits, and that hallucinations were visions from gods.
Don't you care if the things you believe in are true?I have faith that they are true.
I cannot tap Paul or any of his friends on the shoulder to inquire. How do you know that any of the ancient writings are true? For all we know, all debunks are false and hold NO water. But obviously, we all believe something.So you DON'T care if the things you believe are true? You just believe them blindly? How did you come to your beliefs if you don't care if they're true?
I don't believe ANY ancient writings without outside evidence to corroborate it, and then I only believe it on a contingent basis.You mesn you have faith contingently??? You believe what the other people say for now??? That's ok. The bible speaks about that kind of uncertainty. They named it tossed to and fro. I just prefer the "solid rock."
Until what they say can be disproved, and depending on the claim. I'd probably believe you if your profile said that you have a cat, for instance--I know that people have cats as pets, I know lots of people with cats, I've met a few cats in my life, etc. so it's not an unusual claim, and I would probably accept that without further evidence--"on faith", as you would call it, but I'd just call that 'trust' (because 'faith' is what I call 'believing something when you have no good evidence to believe it'). Of course, if I happened to go over to your house and saw that there was no litterbox, no food and water bowls, no cat toys, no cat hair, no veterinary records, etc. then I would call your claim of cat ownership into question because of a lack of evidence that your claim was true. I would want you to then prove to me that you have a cat before I continued to believe the claim that you have a cat. Whether or not you actually have a cat, though, matters little in the long run, because I'm not going to be basing any life decisions on whether or not your cat is real.
If you claimed you had a pet unicorn, I would NOT trust your claim on a contingent basis--I would want you to show me evidence of your unicorn immediately, because unicorns are not common pets; there is no evidence for unicorns even EXISTING, so if you had one as a pet, I would need to see it to believe that your statement is true. (Especially if you then claimed that if I didn't believe in your unicorn, I would be sent to hell by your unicorn's father--who is also that unicorn.)
Facts are solid. I'd rather KNOW that I'm accepting facts rather than the first thing that comes along and tells me 'Hey, this is a great patch of sand to build your beliefs on--totally solid! BELIEVE me.'Totally understandable. But my "unicorn" wrote a book thousands of years in the making. He has proven himself to me and many others around the globe. He protected that book when others tried to mishandle it and he left it as further evevidence of his existence. His little "unicorn" came here to show us his dads single "horn" and he left instructions on how to properly perceive it. Most did not listen to his claim and kilt him on a cross. BUT!!! He came back, just as he prophesied and many people actually SAW him with a BRIGHT AND SHINY NEW HORN. They that saw wrote books and were willing to die in protection of their new evidence SEEN with their own eyes. So, my "unicorn" HAS in fact proven himself time and time again. Some just don't believe it. Now that is fine. The faith that God requests is the type that requires only the evidence already provided. He is not looking to populate HIS new world with skepticism. Believe or don't. Bottom line.
That is one of the reasons why we can't take anything you say seriously. God's don't write books, people do.
Yes, people with ulterior motives for domination and control of other people.
Domination is for another venue, thank you
and control is not my tactic. Look around.Oh, but control IS your tactic! You are trying to influence my thinking on the basis of what you say here.... That is your effort to control.
You're here to tell us they're true. That should be enough, right?
It may seem obvious that we all believe something, but what makes you think that something is the same thing as you, or should be the same? Why can't YOU allow others to believe what they want?Never have I insisted that anyone believe as I. The belief system of a person is strictly their own. My only point has been that God has shown himself to many. He has written the things he wants us to know. If we accept him, we accept what he says. For the gray areas, he expects us to use the wisdom that he gives through his spirit. Jesus fully explains how our thought and actions should be. He SHOWED us God. I may only believe and repeat. You are free to do the same...or not.
Cgenaea, you contradict yourself in this comment. First you say a person's belief system is their own. Then you write as though you think anyone who does not think as you do is doomed in "god's" eyes.
You cannot, (have no wish to), change your thinking outside of your tight belief system, so the argument continues ad infinitum.That is the only reason you're here. We all know it and you know it.
There you go again, telling us what to believe.That's like saying 'With all due respect' before insulting someone, you know that, right?
Huh??? I said believe or not. That was assurance that I am not trying to coerce my opinions. Bible scripture...believe or don't. Does that sound like a threat? Or insult?
Considering you just tack on 'or don't believe it' to the end of whatever poorly thought out apologetic you trot out in what I can only assume is an attempt to look humble (while actually being condescending)...
Allah is said to be the God of Abraham. Guess what... MINE IS TOO!!!
I believe there will be Muslims in the kingdom of heaven. And some Christians too!Well you are greatly deceived JESUS is GOD!!!!!! The ALPHA and OMEGA like I stated previously You are entitled to believe what you choose.
Your claims are just as valid as the muslims. Neither of you have any proof.
Oh boy, looks like it's gonna be good. Glad I've got a front row seat.
*bows* I've been doing this for a long time. It's a benefit of being an atheist who was a former Bible student in a christian college. I'm just more picky about who I debate with now - I have no tolerance for those that like to mock people for being well-educated :-) Want some popcorn?
Yeah, I was raised secular (perhaps somewhat inadvertently, as my family identifies as Christian), so I've only ever seen the Bible as literature--and in no way more truthful than any other myths.
But yes, please. lol
Every single believer on the planet is greatly deceived because they don't believe the same thing as every other believer on the planet.
If there were a God, he would have the sorest neck ever, always shaking his head at everything you guys say.You do realize "Allah" is the Arabic word for the Hebrew word "El," which is what we translate as "God," right?
Jesus is the SON of God. Remember? He spoke of his father often while he was here. He said from his lips that he was SENT. He stated that he did not know when he would return (but the FATHER only)
No need for a big argument here. Can we reason it out and come to an amicable conclusion?Wait, so does Allah have a son or not?
According to the Qur'an, straight from an angel's mouth who heard it directly from Allah himself - Allah most certainly does NOT have a son - and it's blasphemy to say he does.
"Say He is God, the One and Only God, the, Eternal, Absolute. He begets not, nor is He begotten. And there is none like unto Him!" Qur'an [112:1-4]
They said, "The Most Gracious has begotten a son"! You have uttered a gross blasphemy. The heavens are about to shatter, the earth is about to tear asunder, and the mountains are about to crumble. Because they claim that the Most Gracious has begotten a son. It is not befitting the Most Gracious that He should beget a son. Every single one in the heavens and the earth is a servant of the Most Gracious. He has encompassed them, and has counted them one by one. All of them will come before Him on the Day of Resurrection as individuals. Quran: [19:88-95]
In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every - one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things." Quran [005.017]
They do blaspheme who say: "Allah is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help. Quran [005.072]
It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, "Be", and it is. Quran [019.035]But...the mountains are not crumbling, the heavens are not shattering and the earth is still in one piece.
I conclude that the angel lies and God begat the Holy Ghost.the holy ghost is not technically considered a son, however.
No. I do believe that I just read in the Quran that he has no son. Not sure though.
I'm pretty sure that no, Allah had no son. The whole 'There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet' line denies that Jesus is divine.
yes! Sister JESUS is with me and he loves you more than you can imagine, but you already know this.
However some believe JESUS was only a prophet and not GOD robed in flesh. GOD loved us so much until he put on the clothing of flesh(humanity) and came down to save us from our sins. Now if that's not love I don't know what is....
When you have a super natural experience with GOD there is no need to check to see rather he was authentic or otherwise , you will know that you were touched by GOD just as Paul knew.
but Muslims receive personal experiences, and they KNOW they were from Allah. Hindus receive personal experiences, and KNOW that they are from Krishna. Pagans receive personal experiences, and they KNOW that they are from a pagan god. Personal experiences are nothing more than confirmation bias from a belief system that you already have. For example: If you have an experience, you attribute it to Jesus, because you already believe in it. Christians don't attribute their experiences to Allah. They do nothing to confirm that what you're saying is true.
Not to mention that the members of Aum Shinrikyou committed murders and released poison gas in the Tokyo subways because they believed their leader was the Second Coming, and he gave them supernatural experiences (usually by giving them LSD and then giving them shock therapy/hanging them by their ankles/doing sensory deprivation).
Aum believed that it was their duty to bring about Armageddon--they KNEW it would come because their prophet 'the Christ' told them they would make it happen. They're one of the many groups that I mentioned scares the hell out of me.
Katie pray and ask GOD in JESUS name to give you a supernatural experience.
Alright--what should I be expecting? 'Cause right now, I'm experiencing pretty natural things.
Why don't you ask God to reveal himself to me? After all, I'm a non-believer. I'm probably not doing it right, after all.And just to hedge my bets, I asked Lord Krishna, Allah, and Odin for supernatural experiences, too.
If any one of them is real, the supernatural experience I get ought to be smiting for praying to another god, right? lolHeretic. Loki is much more fun than Odin.
Oh, and you missed Bacchus. I imagine he's fun too.You're right. I should put together a list and try them all! (Besides, if I drink enough in order to pray to Bacchus, I'm sure to have SOME sort of experience!)
I personally recommend tequila. Not exactly around in that time frame, but I'm sure he'd like it a lot.
Cheers.
If you lined up every god ever posited and tried one every day, it would take you the rest of your long, natural life - and you'd still have a laundry list left over. If there is a "real" god, just cross your fingers you got to him/her/it before you ran out of time.I'd have to make sure to cover gods not posited, too--after all, just because humans haven't worshipped it doesn't mean that the one true god isn't off on some other planet right now, bringing logic to the Vulcans or teaching the meaning of honor the the Klingons.
You've actually hit on one of the main problems for non-believers and believers alike. Although many have tried, they have never had such an experience, which then downplays the validity of the experience by those who claim they've had one.
Of course, "you will know that you were touched by GOD" is not a very good explanation for what it is we are supposed to experience, especially considering we have never seen God or would know what to expect. It could be, and usually is very different things to different people, often described by emotions and feelings and little else. How those people manage to distinguish those feelings from just feelings and claim they are a supernatural event is quite puzzling. For the most part, they appear to be the very same people who have the poorest of intellectual abilities and understanding of the world around them, unable to even grasp much of reality.
Certainly, we can't take their word for it.
So, why all the hide and seek? What's the point of God going around hiding from us and only coming in the form of feelings and dreams, why not just come out of the closet and show Himself to the rest of us? Seems a fairly simple thing to do. I mean, if He wants the world to believe in Him, that would do it. No one would question His existence, then.
But no, we're supposed to pray for a supernatural experience, one that never comes.And if we don't get that supernatural experience, it's because we doubted. Even though they say that 'faith as small as a mustard seed' is enough, apparently even a mustard seed's worth of doubt is enough to prevent an all-powerful god from acting to remove that doubt from someone. Funny, that.
In the old testament we were under the covenant of the law, due to humanity's disobedience. However it saddened GOD to see humanity in this state and we could only be saved by a lamb without blemish and GOD made the ultimate sacrifice for you and me. Glory Hallelujah Praise his name I feel a praise break coming on...... Now we live in the dispensation of grace, however one day that dispensation is going to end and we will meet him in judgment. He is giving all of humanity a chance to get it right, no matter what you have done, thought and etc.....GOD is stretching his arms out to you, all we have to do is completely repent, get baptize in JESUS name and let him fill us with the precious gift of the Holy ghost. Brothers and Sisters you will never be the same. Your mentality will be different, he will give you a devine contemplation and elevate you that you walk in a different realm. You will experience a peace that surpasses all understanding. One day we will exchange our mortality for immortality and we will spend eternity some where.....It is up to us where that somewhere is.......
Why was any sacrifice necessary? God made the rules arbitrarily (apparently without playtesting his rules, either!), and can change them arbitrarily. An all-powerful deity shouldn't be obligated to find a loophole in his own rules.
It was not necessary. Any omnipotent god has a near infinite number of choices as to how to accomplish anything at all; salvation could have been accomplished a thousand different ways with unlimited abilities.
But it is in line the the sadistic, cruel and violent god portrayed in the OT. The creature described there would jump at the chance to torture and murder his son, or anyone else for that matter, and did so by the millions.When he's not doing he's watching. Even by human standards he is either powerless or sic.
Ding ding ding ding! We have a winner!
So it took a human sacrifice to save us? That's rather silly on it own, except there was no sacrifice because as the story goes it wasn't a human, it was a God and the God got up after he was dead and rose up into the sky. He is supposedly with God, wait no he is God. What was sacrificed again?
Not to mention, that was at least the third 'human sacrifice' in the bible, and the second that god specifically sanctioned! Judges 11 tells us that a sacrifice of a virgin girl is considered fair payment to god for one victory in battle. Guess the exchange rate for human lives had improved by the 1st century, huh? Some sort of Heavenly stock market crash? Or maybe the economy on sacrifices is like the economy of Zimbabwe.
Yes, I can see how our mentality would be very different, but that's the frightening part of it.
But when you ask, you must believe and not doubt, because the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. 7 That person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord. 8 Such a person is double-minded and unstable in all they do.
So, in order to believe, I'm supposed to ask, but since I doubt, I can't ask? Perfect! Your system has built itself an out for when people make counterclaims.
So again, why don't YOU pray for me to have a supernatural experience, since I OBVIOUSLY can't do it right?"So again, why don't YOU pray for me to have a supernatural experience, since I OBVIOUSLY can't do it right?"
Because the inevitable failure looks very bad on the Christian preacher.Yup.
'Bad vibes make the ghosts not show up at the seance! Get out!'
Didn't you read what the bible said? No faith, no expectations of experience. A mustard seeds worth will do.
A prayer like, "Lord I want to believe" is possibly enough if you really want to believe. He don't do Vaudeville. What supernatural experience will you believe with your frame of mind??? Zilch. He knows that.So let me get this straight. If I want a supernatural experience to prove God's existence--like SO MANY Christians claim to have had because they asked God for a sign--all I have to do is ask.
BUT. If I doubt--which is the WHOLE REASON WHY I WANT GOD TO PROVIDE ME WITH A SUPERNATURAL EXPERIENCE--then I don't get one, and God is content to not try to argue for his existence with me?
I see a few options here: your god is powerless to affect the material world, which makes him, for all intents and purposes, indistinguishable from a non-existent god; your god is a terrible apologist and knows that he can't stand up to one lone atheist; your god doesn't CARE about human affairs and so praying and kowtowing and professing belief and designing whole religious systems doesn't make a bit of difference, and assuming there is a heaven or a hell, nothing you do or say can change where you'll end up; your god is imaginary, like all of the other gods. Take your pick.God is content to not try to argue for his existence with me? For sure!!! But do you hear him? Or are you waiting for some of that magic you think he gives us???
Take YOUR pick... I have chosen.Pam told me that he would work magic for me if I asked. The Bible says that if you ask, God will answer. Then you come along and say that's not so?
That's not the only word. You first must believe. Or have just enough faith to humbly ask without a preconceived notion of what BETTER happen to get your attention. Faith and trust does not work that way. True love is not manipulative.
Which is why the threat of hell is leveled at those who don't make friends with god's kid? That's a mob threat. 'Oh, nice soul you've got here...it sure would be a shame if anything were to happen to it...but let me make you an offer. You come to my kid's birthday party and tell him he's the greatest and give him 10% of your pay every year and come over to my house for some, y'know 'family time'...I'll try to not break your kneecaps with this baseball bat.'
Nobody would be more thrilled to observe a real, bona fide supernatural experience than a skeptic, scientific-minded person. Do you know how many scientific awards someone would win if they presented my findings regarding a real, observable, repeatable supernatural event? They would win ALL of the awards. A whole new group of awards would have to be established, because they would have discovered a whole new field of science. Scientists everywhere would be ecstatic to have a whole new field opened up to explore.Okay, so that's why prayer has never worked for me. Even when I was a believer I guess I didn't believe enough, however you claim to believe enough and the bible says prayer can move mountains, but I'm wouldn't ask you to do that. Something more ethical would be nice, so if you would just pray that all the starving children in the world would get food that would be great. I'm sure you'll do it because it's the right thing to do with very little effort on your part. You'll make a believer out of me when I read about it in the headlines.
Thanks, you're doing a good thing.The poor you will have with you always! God did his part. There is enough food for all. We are poor managers. We cannot pray in that manner. The Lord knows what we need before we ask. Yes mountains will move but it as well is figurative.
Right, so the trick is to not pray for anything you know you won't get. And to keep your prayers purely selfish.
We as saints of GOD(Christians) have a divine duty to go out into the highways and by ways to minister the gospel to the lost, Luke 4:18 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. We are not all called to dwell in the pulpit, be Apostles, Teachers and prophets and etc. However when GOD~~JESUS called you he did not call you to keep a pew warm in the church. We who are in CHRIST JESUS need to be about our father's business. Enough of this nonsense souls are dying everyday and need the true unwatered down word of GOD. Once you are saved you are a new creation..... Shall you continue in sin~~~~GOD forbids.....When people meet you they should walk away feeling as if they have had an encounter with GOD.
You're preaching, and avoiding our questions.
Do you care whether or not your beliefs are true?Ah yes, one of the self "anointed" ones who believes they should go about "annoying" everyone.
Each person needs to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling. I know my beliefs are true, if others disbelieve I can only pray and fast for them. I can't beat them over the head and change their thought patterns and perceptions, only GOD can do that. I plant the seed, another comes and waters it; and GOD gives the increase.
How do you determine that they're true, and how can you demonstrate that truth without proof
I am eagerly awaiting the answer to this question. I'll bring the popcorn for this one.
You do what is done for all the other information you accept... have faith.
Or don't.Belief with OUT seeing. For instance, no one saw a BIG BANG but many believe. As well, no one SAW Jesus hanging therewith a sticky hat, but many believe. No one saw the Santa Maria but somebody sailed the ocean blue and docked on the rock. Or so they say...
No one saw, say, JonBenet Ramsey get murdered, but we have evidence that shows that she was, in fact, murdered (a body with a skull fracture, DNA evidence, etc.). The difference between the Big Bang Theory of Cosmic Expansion and Columbus's expedition is that we have evidence that they happened outside of Columbus's own journal and one Catholic priest's research.
How do you know about the evidence? Have you seen big bang bits??? Or have you just taken "them" at their word? You see Columbus got you with a journal and a Priest??? The bible has MUCH more scrutiny than that. Was Columbus or the priest drunk or on meds at the time???
Did you SEE little Jon Bennett post mortem? Was her skull fracture from a post mortem accident??? Did you perform any tests? Or is your FAITH acting up again???Yes, I have done all of those things. Because you blindly accept things you are told as true, you must believe me.
In theory, if I went to Colorado and asked to look into the materials relating to the JonBenet Ramsey murder, I COULD examine that evidence--it's only a question of distance which prevents me from doing so right now at this very moment. I can examine the evidence for the Big Bang right here with the magic that is the internet, or I could go to an observatory and use their equipment to record my own data and compare it if for whatever reason I didn't trust the outcome of their numbers, and one can check the historical records pertaining to Columbus's series of petitions across Europe seeking patronage for his voyage, Queen Isabella granting permission, the millions of dead natives who died as a direct result of Columbus's arrival, the objects he brought back from the 'New World' can be examined in museums, etc.
Honestly, comparing me accepting facts to you blindly believing whatever makes you feel warm and fuzziest regarding your religious tradition is not only ridiculous, but it's intellectually dishonest.Talk about dishonest... you started with I have done all those things. Then a long discourse about how you "could". Then an admission that you "trust" THEIR numbers???
Faithfully???Oho, so you DON'T just believe anything that comes out of anyone's mouth? So you DO care about what is true and what is not true?
Your argument is silly and childish, and you evidently have poor critical thinking and comprehension skills if you couldn't get that my opening zinger was, in fact, a sarcastic jab at your blind faith in something a bunch of Bronze Age desert tribesmen wrote thousands of years ago.Thanks for at least not being like the OTHERS. They can be so mean and brutal with their assessments of the fool that they perceive me to be.
One chick KEEPS jabbing... and she whines like a baby when I don't crumble beneath her sarcasm but instead give it right back with jelly and a whilst holding firm to my coveted position... she thinks she has more education, but I know she's wrong. Does it matter? Hell no!!! there are two options here; yes and no. Not yeah well maybe on Tuesday and Thursday between 7-9a. while dressing the kids for school. God is not to be picked up and put down as the feeling hits. It is an ENTIRE way of life. He has rules. Yes..... he does. Jesus told/showed us what they were.
Your kindness is ever (and I do mean eternally) appreciated.
Yes, there is plenty of hard evidence to support Big Bang Theory, visible evidence. The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) is just one of those visible pieces of evidence.
CMBR??? Is that another one of those faith things??? Those parts didn't result from that other explosion??? How do you KNOW??? What is the evidence that what THEY tell you is true??? Or did THEY have to TEACH you the method of how to connect a and b??? You see me yet???
I believe that Jesus was in fact the son of God made specifically by God inside the womb of his choosing. THEN gave Jesus the power to teach his way thus healing a small sliver of the land. Jesus told the theif, "Today you will be with me in paradise" I believe that statement. I believe the theif by faith alone received an introduction to my unic... I mean Father.Ever give any thought to that story? Critical thought to the story of the virgin birth? Did God ask permission from Mary to impregnate her before he did it. Nope he told her afterwards. That's rape and a violation of her rights as a person. Was she Married to Joseph at the time? How many men are married to virgins. Well some are but not for long.
I am almost positive that Mary fully appreciated the "rape" and the birth of her son. I do too...
Almost? How would you know? She was not given a choice.
Does it matter? She said "amen". She carried that baby and followed all direction. See... God knows who belongs to him
I, personally, love getting pregnant against my will.
Pregnancy is great. Labor is marvelous."Labor,"? Mel? Would you bring politics into childbirth?
Politics involved in what goes on in a woman's uterus and vagina! Pfft, that's crazy talk.
LOL. No, it's called "science"
I can't imagine trying to explain anything scientific to you, so it's best you go back to your funny version of religion...
Yeah, that funny version.And YOUR choice is made. That's all that anyone asks.
I haven't made any choices based on anything you've said or asked.
You aren't the only one who roams these forums preaching the gospel, fyi.
There are several logical fallacies, the No True Scotsman is just one of the many you fall for when presenting your argument. You just fell for another one. You might want to read up on the various fallacies before falling for them all the time.
I see. While others have a god of love, yours is one of fear, trembling and violence. That would explain quite a bit.
But, you keep saying that we are all entitled to believe whatever we want, yet you want everyone to believe the same thing as you. That's a contradiction. If we are entitled to believe what we want, who are you to tell us what to believe? Who are you to decide what beliefs are true or not? Who are you to change peoples thought patterns and perceptions?
No. People have been predicting the end of days for centuries, and here we still all are. Just live and don't worry about stuff like this. Live your life to the fullest
Let us make sure we make our call and election sure. For our SAVIOR comes in an hour we think not. Like someone previously posted it can happen a few seconds, hours, days, months or years from now; however It will happen.
ooops!!!! Let us make our call and election sure, for our SAVIOR comes in an hour we think not.
Fyi...we don't have to wait for Armageddon. Life is but a breath. When it is over, the chance to CHOOSE is gone. He may come for me tonight. I'm ready. You???
He's been taking his sweet time, so why bother? John must be over 2000 years old by now, because Jesus said his disciples would still be alive to see his coming.
A lot of what Jesus said was figurative. He could have meant his resurrection. A few of them were alive for that.
He also stated that he did not know WHEN he would return. Only the father knows. He said that too.How can one identify what is meant to be taken literally, and what is meant to be taken as metaphor?
The spirit of God leads. You get that when you say, "ok, Lord give it to me." From a sincere heart.
"But what if I don't believe that jazz???" Then you don't ask.Or in other words, you make up what you want to believe. If you like the story it is literal, if not then it is a metaphor.
Understood.How do you explain Christians who come do a different conclusion than you regarding whether a verse is literal or metaphorical? Are they 'Not True Christians'?
You almost got me! I aint falling for the no true Scotsman stuff this time!
God knows the heart. He says who is who. Coming to a different conclusion is not always bad. For instance some biblical Jews didn't eat the sacrificed meat. But according to Paul it was lawful but not expedient if it caused a brother to stumble. So those who were not spiritually bothered by eating it could eat it. But if one felt it to be sin to eat it he was admonished to not eat it. Diffrred opinion both ok.So what about different opinions on key elements of scripture, like whether Jesus is divine, or the Messiah, or real, or how to get into heaven? Many denominations disagree on very basic tenants of the religion--how can any of them determine which is right? Is it all just a crapshoot?
Jesus broke that down when God sent him here. He told us ALL we need to know. Many things flub interpretation. Self mostly. The spirit of the Lord guides us in those matters. He knows the heart.
So how can anyone know that they are following the correct one of the 3,000+ denominations of Christianity? Or even know that Christianity is correct? What proof is there that the Quran isn't the truth, or that the Baha'i Faith is correct?
Just faith. God makes himself apparent once you say yes. But he may not be fooled.
Funny, that's what the Muslims say, only they never say Jesus is involved. The God that is made apparent to you is not the same God that is made apparent to Muslims. Why is that?
You may read about Ishmael and his mom in scripture. Seems like specific reasons were given. But I really try to know/do as I believe to be right.
Ishamel was man's way of accomplishing what God promised. It failed. Isaac was the child of promise made to Abraham and Sarah.
This seems to be a problem with many. Men are trying to accomplish and fulfill the promises that God made. Men can't do what God alone can do.When will we learn... we have a few who have elevated themselves above him but pride usually goes before a tearing down of self.
Thanks for... well you know. You just always knowAh, but it seems like in this case man did give Abraham a boy. And your God was involved because he told the pregnant slave to go back to Abraham. I was only Sara's bitchiness that led his away, it had nothing to do with God.
Man gave Abraham a carnal son while God gave him a spiritual son.
Pointless argument, since there is no god, except in the mind.
Oh, I know the story. That's when Sara let her husband/brother rape her slave so he could have a boy to pass his land to, When the slave left because she was pregnant from the rape, God spoke directly to her and told her to be a good raped slave and go back. When Sara eventually had her own boy with her husband/brother she wanted Ishmael gone so her son could inherit the land. So they kicked Ishmael out and Ishmael is supposed to be a direct descendent of Mohammad.
Did I get that right? So I can see why the Muslims are not fond of Christians or Jews.
But none of that explains why the God you perceive is different then the God Muslims perceive, but you think they are two separate God. Well, in your case that would mean you believe there to be at least 3 separate Gods. The Christian God, the Muslim God and Christ.I believe that since Abraham belonged to my God and Ishmael belonged to Abraham; Ishmael was not ignorant concerning the God of his father. He was raised and loved by his dad until well past the age of accountability. Then he rebelled. He was possibly angry with his father and DECIDED to go a different route than what he was taught. this is only opinion. But it seems quite plausible.
Sorry, as the story goes Sara kicked the boy and his slave mother out because she wanted her son to claim the land. You can't just make up your own story.
At what age was Ishmael and his mother "booted"???
Lord Krishna made his divine nature as the Avatara of Lord Vishnu apparent to Arjuna in the Mahabharata, and nothing happens unless it is the will of Lord Krishna--even his own death. When he was struck in the foot with an arrow, the hunter who shot him was very upset to have killed such a great being, but Krishna consoled him and said that nothing, not even this, happened if it was not his will.
Why is the claim that I just made not held by you to also be truth? Why are you not also a Vaishnavite?But the accounts of Krishna are much older, and have been carefully preserved through the millennia because according to Hindu beliefs, prayers are only heard if they are pronounced EXACTLY correctly--otherwise, the universe will fall apart.
If you were from India, you would probably believe in Krishna simply because that would be the dominant religion in your area. However, you're living in America, where Christianity is by far the majority belief. Did you compare all of the possible choices, both between religions and between denominations before settling on the belief you now hold? Or was it just something you 'inherited' and now believe because to not believe--to question, even--would be to head into the great wide unknown?I inherited my faith. Then I was disheartened by the contradictions I saw.Then I asked. I asked in faith to understand. I pored over the info once again. All by myself. Then I began to hear confirmations. Like the VERY scripture that fluxed me during study would be explained to me by a random stranger out the blue without me asking. Or I'd think I received a good revelation and be corrected by a tv minister. Or I'd feel right and hear confirmation that I was. It was an amazing year. A lady passed me during the Census while I worked and confirmed another word my spirit received. I didn't know her either. Many more confirmations of God came in that manner. I do not know much about Krishna beside his followers seem so peaceful. But Jesus is my shepherd. For good reason.
Just to make a brief point... Some Christians really do choose Christianity after a full examination of many religions. Not all, because that would be exhaustive and never ending, but the biggies at least.
Of course, in general, those are the Christians that are more willing to discuss Christianity, warts and all, openly and honestly... without resorting to "Goddunnit"
You fall for it all the time whether you choose to admit it or not. The idea is to present your argument without having to fall for it.
Look Em. The ideas that I present are biblical. Not subjected to the laws of fallacious arguments. It IS what it IS. I have no doubts about what I say because I really believe the bible. I present it how I am given. It is your faith that labels it some sort of fallacy. Truthfully speaking NOT all Christians are real Christians. That is a biblical statement. My "argument" is labeled by me, I call it truth. Let the Scotsman fall where he may.
No, they're not, they're YOUR ideas based on YOUR own personal version of the Bible.
No, the fallacies are yours, based on your own personal version of whatever it is you believe.Then your whole argument is worthless. This is like playing Chess with a pigeon.
Which is abject nonsense.
Son of Sam had no doubt about what he said....because he really believed his....dog.
Yep...Atheist all have faith. lol
And whether you like it or not, those of us living in the real world will still go by the laws of debate, and call your assertions here just what they are.....pure dishonesty....and abject nonsense!Hi getitrite!!!
I TOLD you it was like playing chess with a pigeon. Spirit can only be fathomed by spirit. Pigeons dont have it.Yeah...except you're the pigeon here.
There you go....using that word "spirit" again. Just in case you don't remember, you never did provide any evidence for the existence of any such entity, yet here you are using it again to explain something. Do you, now, see why this is like playing Chess with a pigeon?>>>>
"Arguing with a religious person is like playing chess with a pigeon.
You can make the best moves in the world but they'll just knock over all the pieces, soil the board, and strut around triumphantly."
And neither do you, because it does not exist....but that doesn't stop you from continuing, blindly, to use it to explain away your inability to learn the game.This "game" has a different set of rules. If you cannot fathom spirit you will never know God. He is spirit. Chess is a game made by men. Not spirit. So yes! The pigeon is commanded to soil the foolish board and strut PROUDLY in faith of the God/spirit of Abraham. He cannot lose and will check mate repeatedly.
DRIVEL!
Maybe if you showed me a "spirit" then I am quite sure I could fathom it. So until you do, could you please refrain from using it to explain your position? Do you not understand logic at all?
PLEASE STOP REFERRING TO "SPIRIT" .....something you CANNOT provide any evidence for, yet feel it's appropriate to keep using....to argue with rational people. Man alive!!! What is wrong?
Thoroughly and hopelessly lost in a silly man made fairy tale. Unfortunately, believers have nothing but a lie, but they have all this faith in this lie, because they fear authority so strongly. And at the expense of their own dignity.
And since you can't define "Spirit" let me define,
for you, what you erroneously think is "Spirit":
The trouble with most people is, they bow to what is called authority; they have a certain reverence for the old because it is old. They think a man is better for being dead, especially if he has been dead a long time. They think the fathers of their nation were the greatest and best of all mankind. All these things they implicitly believe because it is popular and patriotic, and because they were told so when they were very small, and remember distinctly of hearing mother read it out of a book.
It is hard to over-estimate the influence of early training in the direction of superstition. You first teach children that a certain book is true -- that it was written by God himself -- that to question its truth is a sin, that to deny it is a crime, and that should they die without believing that book they will be forever damned without benefit of clergy. The consequence is, that long before they read that book, they believe it to be true. When they do read it their minds are wholly unfitted to investigate its claims. They accept it as a matter of course. ~ Robert Green IngersollDrivel! Living this way has brought me many nights of peace; many reassurances of the sheer and awesome power of God; love beyond compare and hope where there was none. I'm actually grateful for being able to say this.
Anything else???Unsurprising; few people will voluntarily hang onto a belief system that does not give them comfort and happiness. That they continue to believe, unfortunately, does not indicate such a system has any truth in it, just that it gives comfort to those that refuse to examine their beliefs for truth or reality.
You have already indicated that your idea of examining your beliefs is to see if they fit with your pre-existing ideas of god; an extremely good indication that you have no particular interest in truth and certainly no intention of objectively looking at your beliefs. So it's not surprising that you get nights of peace, that you can reassure yourself of the power of your god or that you feel His love. You should definitely continue to believe, but you also badly need to recognize that not everyone will share such irrational beliefs. Individuals that can fool themselves to the extent you have are fairly rare, after all.Fairly rare... I like that!!!
but I'm no fool... the love I have found in him has forced me to investigate; trying to glean as much of him as humanly possible. I was rewarded with his presence; resting, ruling, and abiding daily. He taught me... I let him...
It is not lack of evidence that deters; misplaced faith.
Oh! And misguided study. See... I will not look to L. Ron to tell me all about Jesus. I will go to the bible; ask; and receive.A fool, no. Just not someone particularly interested in truth.
You won't go to L Ron, but you WILL go to the words of priests and church VIP's that died 1500 years ago. Because you like those words, they give comfort and they fit better with what you want to believe than the words of L Ron do.
Others find the words of L Ron to provide comfort and fit what they like to believe, but that needn't affect your belief one bit.
And still others prefer to do their best to find truth and reality, finding comfort in their efforts to do so. Not necessarily in what they find, just in that they have made an honest effort to find truth. And that needn't affect your belief, either.I understand. But truth is EVERYWHERE. there is a little truth here; and a little truththere. We may SEARCH uuntil we no longer exist and pick up tidbits from every source. To accept what I accept as truth is in no way a requirement. But when is the SEARCH complete? How do you tell when you have found the truest truth? Granddaddy said, "If you don't stand for something, you fall for anything." What truth is stood upon using the search method? What can be proven? And when I say that God has proven himself to me, who can argue with that??? Well I will tell you the truth as I know it: The only person who does deny me my "experience" is he who has faith in another message. Right? They trust "most often" themselves to decipher what is reasonable; or L. Ron. I got no problem there. I will stand HERE. With absolutely NO insistence that anyone else do the same.
Truth can be found most places, just as lie and error. The trick is to determine the difference.
I will argue that God has proven himself to you. You can produce zero evidence of that; evidence that can be tested and experienced by anyone else. And that is, of course, one of the basic tenets for truth; it is the same for everyone. Anything else is perception only and may or may not have a correlation to reality and truth.The fact that you don't believe and will argue is further proof that your faith lies within yourself or elsewhere. But you're still searching
Your lack of belief in what I tell you HAS been my experience; does not affect my own verdict.
Many people will attest to experience with God and some of us are willing to die for that truth. Your lack of belief is written.
You claiming to be so very biblical again, huh? What does the Bible say about women preaching and speaking out in public?
It does not matter who agrees or disagrees by today's standards, it's in the Bible and if you speak so biblically as you claim, then it applies to even YOU or else none of it applies to ANYONE. It's funny how you often select the words 'speak biblically' about yourself instead of using the words 'preach the Bible'. You know better as a woman than to use the word 'preach' but think that you've found a loophole and no one will notice. So if you find loopholes to skate through in the very Bible that you hold in such high regard and brow beat others with, then why do you think you have the right to PREACH to anyone else about what they choose to skate through regarding the Bible? You are no different than anyone else, that is plain by your own indiscretions.
And now you will follow with a claim that God is using you to do good so then you feel that usage excuses your complete and total disregard for what the Bible specifically INSTRUCTS you not to do. You will now claim that you are just doing what you feel is right and that you hope God will excuse your blatant disregard for HIS WORD and have mercy on you. Well then, what's good for you is good for the rest of us and we should all very well expect then that he will do the same for us too, right?Ha-ha!!! The conversation that got me banned...
We crushed that cow the last time. The notes are thereIs that so? Hmm, I would've thought it was most likely when you called the people that disagreed with you a pack of dogs...that would've been my first guess. People tend to get themselves banned when they are their own worst enemy.
That's the problem right there. Your not willing to look critically at your own believes for fear the will not hold up to a critical analysis. This is called not being honest with yourself. It seems you are willing to look at all other beliefs critically but not your own.
As you refuse to hear but repeated many times by me, I have critical analysis under-belt. I just found how it all works together. How you doing with your belief systems?
The interesting thing about your statement is that a lot of the ideas presented here can be considered biblical as there is scripture that lend credence to what is being presented (well except the non existence of God). The issue here is that when someone else's biblical idea differs from yours, you quickly dismiss it as false. I have seen this done to both Atheists and Christians. The difference in your dismissal is that you say the atheists lack the spirit to accurately copy and post scriptures that support their ideas yet the Christians may be in spirit, but they toss out elements of the bible because they apply other biblical principles in their treatment of others. You state that the bible says that not all Christians are true Christians, which may be true, but you have gone a step further and actually made the direct implications of who is and who isn't a real Christian. This oversteps bounds because it is not your place to make that determination. That is for God alone. This is what others try to show you
Implication about who is and who is not a true Christian? I have NO idea. I know that there are some here who don't want that title. The ones who do are not judged by me. I simply speak the bible. Some well most have a huge problem with biblical scripture. Our "reproof" in all things???
I am judged based upon scripture. Or rebuttals thereof. I have not been in a situation where I have been called a liar (with evidence presented) when one saysGod condones rape and murder, I say no he ddoesn't. When one says your foolish God is a whiny, false, imbecile with stupid ways of doing things (eventhough he aint there) I say no that is not true; he lives and he spoke to people frequently. When one calls the bible tainted by men; I say, no. Jesus stated it is written... not regarding "falsified" information. Now, if you will please provide an example of my sub-par behavior, I may see you clearly. I am no judge. God is. The bible reveals the iintent and heart of man. Not me. Please an example of my judgment of anyone's Christianity/non...Just saying 'nuh-uh!' doesn't mean that the Bible doesn't say those things that you deny, though. Yahweh ordered the Hebrews into battle time and time again, condoned Samson's slaughters, willingly took Jephthah's daughter's life in exchange for giving him a great slaughter against the Ammonites, Numbers 31 has Yahweh condoning the Hebrews murdering the Midianites and then taking all of the virgin girls for themselves as sex slaves (and Deuteronomy 21 gives specific instructions on how to make such captive women your 'wives'), Judges 21 has a similar account, etc. There are whole websites dedicated to pointing out the cruelties and foolishness of the characters of the Bible, laying out the whole comedy of errors. To someone who doesn't believe it to be the literal word of a god, it seems just as ridiculous as the jealousy and follies of the Greek gods.
Exhibit C: The atheist you replied to offered an idea of something that is in the bible and instead of replying to it, you change the subject... dismissal
Foul!!!
I cannot respond to it ALL. Some of it cannot be perceived
I am dismissed quite frequently but it comes with the terrorist... I mean territory. I have no qualms about being referred to as unlearned or delusional or a slithering something or another that flaps at the feet of the accused and "guilty" as "charged" God is my help. I serve him wholeheartedly. Sorry if some are offended by scripture; its all I got...But the atheist replied with scripture as well, yet you refused to concede the fact that it is scripture and as such a biblical idea was presented.. No foul.
If a biblical statement oozes from certain lips it is in an effort to cajole an "uncle" because I am too dumb to understand as well as the atheist with the paperwork that shifted the focus from God to a powerful sense of knowledge beyond compare. I KNOW where my help comes from.
Jesus! Hanging partners & nice atheist converting responses, please???'Once again, you are casting stones at me stating that me responses are "hanging partner and nice statements" My help also comes from the Lord as well as the Bible.. You are basically stating that your actions and words are accurate because they come from the bible and Jesus yet say mine are only to appease others though they also come from the bible and Jesus? Did you not say earlier that when two people have a different understanding it's because Christ spoke to them differently?? Exhibit E
..
Well, I've made my point enough as well as used the same Bible that you do and you STILL accuse me of not acting as according to the Bible and state my beliefs are just to appease though they are biblical.. Good night..You misunderstood. Or maybe not. The statement should have read. Jesus, (who were his) hanging partners & (what were his) converting statements to atheists? I guess that may change a portion or two of your post. So I'll disregard for now. It's 5am. Good morning. I'm going to bed.
More than half of his disciples were unbelievers before he met them and converted them. I'm sure you've read the whole story of Christ and the disciples.
I know how this is going to end, but here goes..
Exhibit A (spoken to another Christian)
You basically told another Christian that they veered from their belief in God in favor of another side. Just because a Christian agrees with a non-Christian does not mean that they are less Christian.
Exhibit B
Now This one, you may exploit the loophole that you were making a general answer in respond to a post, and to the casual observer, it may appear that way because you didn't use any names in this specific post. However, to those who have been here for a while and seen your posts, they will recognize that this post is a reflection of previous accusations that you have made directly toward specific Christians. You have accused Christians here of omitting parts of the bible, changing their views just to be liked, and of being lukewarm and tepid.. These statements are judgmental of someone else's Christianity.
These two examples are fairly recent (as in within the last two weeks). I could comb back further and pick out comments you have made directly toward me that are questioning my Christianity and judging my faith. Matter of fact, if memory serves me correctly, your initial comments about me were saying that I was atheist. But I digress. Here are examples of your behavior toward your fellow Christians. And I can pull a bunch of posts where Atheists, like you, have presented ideas that can be seen as biblical in nature as they also post scripture yet you have accused them of not knowing what the bible says because they lack spirit.Have you considered that Jesus could not have quoted from the "bible" as it is known today? I am no scholar, but surely Jesus would have been quoting from the Hebrew scriptures? Do they form a large part of what we know as the Old Testament? Relevant for Jesus to have quoted directly to his fellow Jews?
The "New Testament" was not known at all to Jesus, it had not been written or compiled. Is it not possible for the New Testament to have been written with a high degree of preconception and prejudice?Get outta here!!!
yeah... you definitely know how this will end...lol...
I do remember your exhibits A and B. Do you remember the the "accusation" you and she made of me??? Uh, I guess it was probably the same post. See...you said, not basically either, that I was not behaving as Jesus would because he was all for the lost and I was shaming him by not being "soft" with them who DO NOT believe as he would have been. I never got a response though when I stated that Jesus "buddied up" with those who believed his message. True? Those who did not believe got passed over. True? You came to me as enemy #1 because your buddies were offended by the bible (which STATES that we should tell his message and spare not) Now, I Genaea Carson am probably one of the nicest, most flexible, and reasonable people you have ever met. I do not brag on myself because there is NOTHING to brag about. I have absolutely NO fire and brimstone for ANYONE! Just facts... I remember you conceding to the assertions that the bible is or could be tainted. Implying (because I have opinions too) that it is unreliable. But that is not a biblical statement. It all works together. And we are admonished to remember what Jesus said. Disbelief in any leads to disbelief in a little more etc. A soothing statement to one who states that there is no God is not like Jesus. True?Show me the post where I said those exact words that I said you were shaming Jesus by not being soft on with them who do not believe. I never stated you shamed Christ at all.
Again show me proof of that? I did not come to you because my "buddies" were offended by the bible.. I did come to you about passing judgment on other Christians (friends or not). I also came to you because you made personal statements against people (that had nothing to do with the bible)
You just did. This is bragging on yourself. Usually those who exhibit these qualities do not have to tell others that they have these qualities, these qualities speak for themselves and others will speak of those qualities in that person
I agree with that. you do present facts as what is written in the bible. However, you do hide personal attacks behind those facts.
You're right, the implicating accusation is an opinion that once again is making an accusation against my faith and what I believe. Show me where I specifically said it is unreliable.. This is Exhibit D and still making my point
not entirely.. Christ did make soothing statements to those who once did not believe and they became believers because of the way he treated them. This does not apply to everyone who did not believe, but he did do that with some..
Ultimately, I was right about how this was going to end.. I would show you where you questioned the faith of other Christians and even provided an explanation of how it was questioning the faith and not only did you NOT concede the point (as you stated that you would), but you also basically excused and defended your judgmental actions. It does not matter what reasoning you have for your judgments and questioning, it does not change that you have questioned and judged other Christians. Remember that you said you never judge. Then you also followed up with continual judgment and questioning of my Christianity yet again. The way I approach others here on the forums is biblical in in application. Christ rebuked those who mistreated others in his name. The new testament also speaks as to how we should treat others. One scripture on particular is Proverbs 15:1
15 A soft answer turns away wrath, but grievous words stir up anger.
So the fact thatI am "soft" with my initial responses to people (even those who don't believe) is in the Bible.. as well as the fact that I do not get easily angered by their comments.
Proverbs 15:18
18 A hot-tempered man stirs up strife, but he who is slow to anger appeases contention.
Continuing with the Bible, Apparently God is pleased with my actions as Proverbs 16:7 would attest (if anyone here would name me as their enemy)
7 When a man’s ways please the Lord, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him.
So even going by the Bible that we both believe in, I have shown you where I am lining up and operating in the word of God with scripture to back me up..
Now question thatJesus was NOT in Proverbs.
since the bible is a book for spiritual reproof, its applications are for whom? How many DENOMINATIONS would there be if the SPIRITUAL targets of biblical had read the Proverbs??? We cannot change the mind of a man by being nice. They see light where light is shone. Flip back a few pages. Good description of light. Only God can change the mind. Facts...
You give your opinions about my behavings yet you point fingers??? You insulted me when you explained to me my "unChrist-like" behavior. But did I get angry? No...facts... sorry you felt offended when you read between the scriptures. I have been extremely slow to anger. And i dont think I'm angry now; but you are pointing a dirty finger. And poking me in my splinter.True, God can change the mind. But God can and does use his people to change the mind does he not? People can become attracted to the light of Christ that dwells within us, can they not? As such it isn't me that people come to, it is the Christ within me. Now you state something interesting.. You state that you believe in the whole bible yet you apparently just dismissed an entire book because Jesus was not in it. Whether Jesus was in the book or not, you state that the bible is the word of God and everything in the bible is good because it is His word, True? If it is, then we are to apply everything in the book, are we not? If the book of proverbs can be dismissed, then you do not accept it and as such engaging in the very same behavior you accused me of(still with no evidence). Now if you want to go directly to Christ, You should be able to find several books of the Bible that he was in that sill speak as to how we should treat others, Including Matthew
. In fact, Slide over to Luke chapter 6 as how you should be treating others (namely do to others as you want them to do to you)
Ahh, so you think me pointing these scriptures is me pointing your behavior? It isn't. I am merely stating how I am in line with the written word of God against accusations and questions regarding my faith. As far as my pointing fingers and poking your splinter, I did not begin to speak of your behavior until you started leveling accusations against the behaviors of other Christians and I was the first one that mentioned Matthew. I have also on several occasions attempted to help clarify statements that you have asked questions about where others might have continued leaving you in the dark. But you r statements toward me have been rife with condescension long before I replied in kind. Now as I mentioned before the bible says to do to others as you want done to you. So with this in mind, Since you have leveled accusations against other Christians and claim biblical rebuke, you want the same to be done for you. Well, here you go. I am treating you as you have treated me and used the bible (same as you) to back up my statements.. This is not DM quoting my own words. This is DM speaking Bible just like youI hear you DM. The bible gets my attention
. But I actually requested information from Jesus that back your claim that he used certain statements to those who disbelieved and gathered with the same. The bible is right always. I am not trying to make friends. facts... scorn is ok. It too is attention grabbing. How can two walk together lest they agree? You do not walk with me a You walk with the atheist, an example.I was not trying to make friends either. The four friends I have gained here are simply a byproduct of my treatment of them as well as a mutual respect for each others position. This does not stop me from telling them about God and the word (which I do) but it does change their response toward me. I am also scorned by other atheists here as well because I am a believer in Christ and the Bible
No, I do not walk with you.. I walk with Christ
I do not walk with the Atheists either.. Again, I walk with Christ. And the atheists (even those that scorn me) Also recognize that I walk with Christ, Which is why they still gravitate toward me (though they may not always recognize it) despite their scorn of me
Edit- walking in the same direction does not mean that people walk together. IT simply means that they happen to be travelling in the same direction at the same time. Perhaps the two atheist friends I have will change their nonbelief to belief, perhaps not. But regardless of their choice, I will still follow God.. As for me and MY house....Good morning, again
You gave me quotes from Proverbs that spoke to how we are to deal with eachother. I believe soft words and avoidance of strife is intended brother to brother which is why I added the denominational splits happening as a result of those who know "better" and will cut a mutha to prove it. As I walk with Christ (a believer and spreader of the messages he sent to all who have an ear) I do not see you. You are way on the other side of the road. The wide one, changing minds and showing love to them who flat out DISbelieve. Again and for the third time will you please give me scripture that illustrates Jesus running after people who thumb their noses as the "FOOLISHNESS" that is his father so that he may change their perception??? One instance where he throws his arms around a disbeliever of his message. But he did get angry with those who mistreated HIS OWN in his name.And here is exhibit F (or is it G?). Yet again more judgment of another Christian with an implication that you know where I am going as if God revealed this to you. Feel free to continue to walk in judgment. As you stated Christ did say I will be scorned. But the beautiful thing is that I answer to one that sits higher in authority than you and it will be he that I will see when it is my time. Since you cannot see me, there should no longer be any reason for us to engage one another in any further dialogue nor for you to have anything else to say about my walk as you cannot see. There is none so blind as those who will not see. As for your other post, the rich guy walked away from Christ. Had the rich guy stayed to learn, Christ would have taught him. Those who I speak with are seeking to learn more. They scorn those who place themselves in God's position as judge.
Gods continued blessings on you. No need to reply as any further responses will be seen as further judgment and personal harassment as I am asking you not to address me anymoreSo you say your piece and cut the conversation???
ok...You had already said plenty of your piece regarding how you she me as on the broad path to hell and not being Christian because I have friends of differing beliefs. So there really is nothing more to be said. So please discontinue your addressing and harassment of me. Thank you. I have shaken the dust from my shoes and am parting peacefully. Any further communication from you to me and I will have no other recourse than to take the matter to the admins. Thank you
Be ye also ready~~~Matthew 24:44 Our lives need to reflect CHRIST in all that we do. True there is no perfect people, however we should strive for perfection. Putting aside fornications, lying, murder and etc.. And you know what the word says once we have done all of this?? It states that the righteous still will scarcely make it in, see our life have to be more than rituals~~~we need transformation and we can only acheive this thru the holy ghost~~~
- SirDentposted 10 years ago
0Of all the gods that have been mentioned in this thread, how many prophesied of the effects of nuclear warheads?
Zec 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.
I am not sure exactly when this was written but it is reported to have been written before 700 BC.No mention of tumors, no mention of the blinding radiation, no mention of shockwaves or strong winds...
How is this a reference to nukes, again?Did you read the whole thing? Read it again slowly. Just because every single symptom isn't mentioned doesn't mean it isn't the effects of radiation.
Zec 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.
I bolded the text to emphasize what it says.Necrosis, gangrene, leprosy...sounds more like a disease to me.
Their flesh shall be consumed while they stand on their feet. What kind of heat will it take to make that happen? They won't have time to even fall before their flesh is gone.
Edited to fix a typovolcano, water heated geothermally into steam, asteroid or other space junk, forest fire, lightening.
Before I reply to your post I must make a correction to one of my earlier posts. the book of Zechariah was written sometimes between 520 and 515 BC.
In answer to your post, Lava could possibly consume flesh while a person stands. Not sure about heated water though I suppose it could be a possibility. I have fought forest fires before and don't think they can get hot enough to do it. Lightening is certainly hot enough but it would have to strike the whole person. Haven't seen or heard about anyone with their flesh consumed from a lightening strike.Live steam will certainly flay the flesh from bones. Nothing in your quote says that 100% of a persons flesh will be "consumed" before falling; a forest fire can certainly light a person on fire, with flesh being consumed as they run in agony. An asteroid can fill the air with vaporized rock, instantly "consuming" flesh, bones and all. I've seen the results of a mere man made electric spark, blowing out large chunks of flesh and charring what is left. Lightening is a million times stronger and can do a million times the damage. Have you ever examined the trunk of a tree hit by lightening?
Seems to me that a wet tongue in a closed wet mouth could withstand a bit of heat while running and being consumed by fire. But it's gonna take some fire to smolder your tongue out where you stand. Yes???
Why don't you look into reports of the firebombings of Tokyo, or people burned with napalm?
Or heck, just assume it's magic, like the rest of what your god does?Did you say bomb? Uh, that's what we were talking about. Nuke??? Remember?
Yes, my memory is not so poor as to not remember that we're discussing the ludicrous idea that a vague description of a plague in the bible is in fact a description of a nuclear device being detonated, in spite of not containing any other information which could POSSIBLY draw such a connection.
Tongues burning out of mouths before one hits the ground. Connected for me.
That's an Olympic athlete's sized leap; you've fallen prey to yet another fallacy--the 'Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy'. Because one of these things (supposedly) lines up with another thing, it's a prediction--but you can only make that connection after the fact. It's also a huge, faulty leap becausthe original wording was 'shall consume away/shall rot/shall decay', not 'burn', and there are exactly ZERO suggestions in this passage to suggest that it's a nuclear weapon, even if we include your faulty interpretation of that line.
Besides, this passage is talking about something that god will supposedly do--why does it have to be a nuclear weapon, instead of, like I suggested, the magic that melted the faces of the Nazis in Raiders of the Lost Ark? Or some magical leprosy which kills them where they stand?
This is at least your third or fourth fallacy. You should quit while you're ahead.
You are right that live steam can flay flesh from bones. To do it all at once is a long stretch. Their tongues shall consume away in their mouth. Their eyes shall consume away in their holes..
I have never examined a tree that was struck by lightening but have seen a tree struck, though from a distance of about 400 to 500 feet. The tree fell as if cut but was not consumed.
Don't know why I didn't mention an asteroid in my previous comment. I imagine it could possibly do the same as a nuke.
To run while on fire is a no-no. Firefighters know to stop, drop and roll. Of course the general public may not know this, though I do and am not a firefighter.There is also the problem of the blast from a nuke; concurrent with the heat will be a wind strong enough to drive grass into the side of a tree. You won't see anyone standing near enough to have their flesh consumed. Flying horizontally in the wind, maybe, but not standing.
Radiation. Remember? Light bulb moment... now the stuff that occurs after the nuke or asteroid could probably seep over into plague-like phenomenon.
Sharpshooter fallacy--no other symptoms of radiation sickness are being described, nor any indication of why radiation should not affect Jews.
I guess it's magic. In which case, why use a mundane weapon like a nuke? Just make the whole thing magic. There's no reason to think that this is describing a real phemonenon like the fallout of a nuclear blast (mostly because it's not describing any other, equally dramatic results.)
Have you seen photos of people in Nagasaki and/or Hiroshima after the atomic bombs were dropped? I recall seeing some and clothes were burned into the flesh of some surviving victims. For instance patterns from clothing.
You can view some photos at https://www.google.com/search?q=Nagasak … mp;bih=477The point being made is the fallacy of Christendom stating that these passages refer to a nuclear strike based on a single statement about flesh burning and eyes melting. No other possible explanation is ever offered, and no questions are ever raised about why the other effects of a nuclear strike are not mentioned.
Then we have to ask why is it God needs to use nuclear weapon when he can strike the first born of all living things in Egypt dead? How is the secular state of Israel somehow preserved from this strike? Longer term effects of radiation poisoning are not considered.
This is another example of a myth/fallacy/unsupported and unexamined statement that pervades Christendom that is passed around verbally and blindly accepted. An example of a prophetic statement selectively interpreted today by being erroneously linked to modern technology or science and thus being proclaimed as an example of the bible being written by God.
Plus, you can probably outrun steam or fire and even lava ash; but definitely have time to fall. The prophesy sounds like a sudden, didn't see coming, really hot BOOM. my money's on nuke. Though the asteroid sounds promising.
My money is on 'They said something that sounds scary to try to intimidate their enemies'. There's ZERO evidence that this is describing a nuclear weapon. Ancient people in this part of the world barely had a concept of the atom, and CERTAINLY didn't think atoms could be split to create a massive explosion (because the concept of atoms that did exist at that time and place was incorrect).
Then why didn't 'the inspirer' outline Atomic Theory and explain the mechanics of such a weapon, and instead describe that 'they will rot where they stand'?
This is completely baseless conjecture.He wants us to trust him. Even when one tells us, "you will not die, go on...bite it!!!"
Why should I trust someone making an outrageous claim with no evidence to support it?
Then why do you? Some dude just came up and said 'hey, this passage is describing a nuke!' and you accepted it blindly.
We spoke about it for a minute. I found it highly likely as the "dude" said. I know that said "dude" is spiritual and that he properly devides the scriptures (putting them where they belong) on a regular basis. I use what is necessary for me to make the proper analysis and satisfy my own spirit. I know that you require more scrutiny than that. But I liked the interpretation.
Exactly, which is why most believers beliefs are all about what they want to believe is true as opposed to what IS actually true, because they like the interpretations.
It doesn't matter is something is in Scriptures that you're supposed to believe is true, if you don't personally like it, you won't believe it, no matter what.
If Christianity or any other religion is all about what people want to believe, then the claims they make about their gods are biased and probably false.
So, are you a Christian because you decide what you want to believe or are you a Christian because God decides what you should believe?
Nothing in that verse states that it was caused by extreme heat. 'Consume away' could just as easily refer to rotting, or like what happened to the Nazis in Raiders of the Lost Ark. It's a huge jump to state that it is categorically describing a nuclear blast when it doesn't describe a blast of any kind.
I guess a big ole asteroid will do it... they've been threatening that one for a while... similar calamity.
Of course. It's happened before and will happen again, right here on earth.
All of which, of course, is completely irrelevant as none of those things are a "plague" any more than a nuclear weapon is. Even if gravity is shut off and people are flung into the sun (pretty effectively consuming their flesh) it isn't a plague.
Uh, SirDent, if you read the rest of Zec. 14, you'll find that is not a reference to nukes in any way.
A lot of ancient aliens guys believe that there was a nuclear device detonated in ancient India--and the Vedas considerably predate your Book of Zechariah by 1,000 years. But I don't believe the ancient aliens interpretations of the Vedas, either (especially since the Vedas and the Mahabharata don't say what they claim it does).
You have no evidence to support that what you interpret as the effects of a nuke (which the very scripture you just quoted described it as a PLAGUE) is, in fact, describing the effects of a nuke--especially in the absence of any other indicators of radiation sickness or the detonation of a nuclear bomb.Show evidence to what you stated. I showed evidence to you and anyone who cares to read it. Because men today believe there was a nuclear device detonated 1000 BC doesn't show evidence. it only shows they guessed at something.
I already said that the Mahabharata doesn't say what the Ancient Alien Botherers claim.
But it's funny how quickly you dismiss a rival claim which is just as outlandish and unsupported as your own, hm?
^ This! I love the stage magic behind those shots, so cool!
Wow.
Just wow.
The level of joy in sadism in this thread makes me a bit uncomfortable.
I don't get why Christians feel the need to try and terrorize people into believing in Christ. Does that ever work, really?
Has anyone in history ever said "I'll worship God so I don't have my flesh consumed"
What kind of pathetic, spineless jellyfish flops around on their belly like a brainless sycophant at the feet of someone who has just threatened to burn them where they stand?
Sorry. Can't do it. If somehow that's the Christ I've been following, he can kiss my arse. I really don't know how anyone else could NOT say it.
Once again, you Christians... so unlike your Christ.Christ is JUST like God. No worries, I never accused you of following either of them...
Don't worry, your opinion affects me not.
Well, you're being confrontational and abrasive. You chose to try and insult me for a comment that wasn't addressed to you. Please refrain from commenting on my posts. I assure you they weren't directed at you and I have no desire to have a conversation with you.
Have a good night genea.I'm sorry. I was sure you were on my thread. No confrontation intended. But I thought :
What kind of pathetic, spineless jellyfish flops around on their belly like a brainless sycophant at the feet of someone who has just threatened to burn them where they stand?
was kinda confrontational. Glad we cleared that up! 'nite Melissa.
So Christ isn't God he's only like God, well just like him?
Ask yourself how many "believed" because of the inquisition.
Nothing has changed; threat of violence has always been an effective way to gather Christians into the fold, and if we can go a little beyond a mere threat all the better. They may not be true believers, paying only lip service and a few coppers to the collection plate, but that's all right.And it produces a congregation of opportunistic fake believers with no backbone, an inferiority complex and a whiny "My daddy will kick your ass" mentality.
Did you read the whole verse of scripture? The first part of that scri[pture is Zec 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem;
If I recall correctly, you are a parent. What kind of parent would allow their children to be destroyed without lifting a hand to help them? Not accusing you but showing you. I am sure you would give your life for your children just as many others would do the same.
Edit below:
This thread is toted end times prophesy. The scripture quoted is about the end times.Yes indeed I would give my life for my children.
Yet if I could control everything, I would stop my children from being attacked instead of killing their attackers afterward.
I mean if God has the ability to do a wipe of all human civilization, then surely he has the ability to stop the bad stuff in the first place. And don't give me the free-will crap because the people being smited have no free will.You say they have no free will but yet God made a way for them also. They choose to hate Israel and they choose to fight against Israel.
God did wipe all of humanity from the earth once before, except for Noah and his family. Of course, He could do it again, but he is giving everyone a chance to be saved. After all, Jesus didn't suffer death for nothing.The point I was making was if you, as a parent, had the power to stop your children from being attacked and didn't, but then punished the people attacking them...
How does that make you a good parent?
I mean if someone is beating my child and I wait for him to finish so that I can kick his ass, what kind of parent does that make me?Sorry, as the story goes Jesus didn't die. If Jesus didn't die, there was no human/god sacrifice, not sure why a sacrifice anyway, sound so barbaric and juvenile. Like, God want us to kill stuff to show him our love.
Wrong wrong wrong Sir Dent.
Verse 2 "I WILL GATHER all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped. Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city."
God states explicitly that he himself gathered the nations, they did not attack Jerusalem by their own free will. God drew the nations, incited them, called them, commanded them, made them, whichever way you cut it, God initiated the whole event, he made it happen. The nations were dumb pawns unable to resist the will of a God who by some means not described "gathered" them, and all the time he knew what they would do to Jerusalem. Yet God watched observed as his women were raped and did not lift a finger to stop it until some hours later. Was God going to apologise to his women for what they suffered so that he could prove his point?
But here's the difference between the blind Christians and those that question. Some say, "No this action by a god cannot represent a holy loving god, something is wrong with this picture". The blind Christians say "It's in the bible, it must be true, God is always just, so these nations are evil and Israel is as pure as the driven snow."It's sort of like how, according to the story, Moses asked the Pharaoh to let the Hebrews go, and Pharaoh wanted to, but every time he was about to say 'Okay, they're free', God hardened his heart--in other words, took away his free will specifically so he could then unleash a bunch of plagues and destruction and death on the people of Egypt.
Let me reiterate: Pharaoh wanted to release the Hebrews from slavery, but God wanted to kill a lot of people, so God FORCED Pharaoh to keep the Hebrews enslaved as each request came and each plague went.
Haven't you heard? "End of Time" was December 21 last year! Yet you are still here! Funny that.... must have meant the wrong end, it was only the beginning end.
And in May 2011 and in October 2011! And 2003 (when Aum Shinrikyou and Nancy Lieder both predicted the end), and 2000 (when Isaac Newton and all of the premillenialists proclaimed the Rapture MUST happen), 1999 (Nostradamus and others), and 1997 (Marshall Applewhite and, coincidentally, when Bishop Ussher decided the world must end based on his calculation for the exact date of creation), and 1994 (the first three times Harold Camping was wrong in his rapture predictions, what a lolcow), etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_d … tic_events
Such a great list of fails.
Mary called herself blessed, I think. She was humbly obedient with glee.
and look how she is STILL seriously discussed some 2,000 years later.Krishna is still seriously discussed over 3,000 years later--my appeal to tradition is older than your appeal to tradition, and according to the rules of 'appeal to tradition', I win.
I was just "threatened" with the admins... oh boy...
My piece is solid. And still in a state of unrespoonse. I am not surprised; I know what to expectSince she insisted on judging and attacking my walk with Christ, I politely and respectfully asked her to cease speaking to or about me since she "cannot see me" and I will not stand for someone who claims A relationship with God not following his word. She continued to address me after my polite request and I advised her that I would take her harassing behavior to the admins if she continued. I made and make no is threats. I advised of a consequence of a continued action
It's an open forum. I doubt you could have someone banned for posting a reply to you.
It's gray. Harassment is grounds for banning, from the forums and the site. If he's asked her to stop interacting and she continues, he's got a case for harassment.
If the replies are personal attacks (as they have been) I can.
Since I insisted on receiving a response concerning the true actions of Jesus and did not relent when personally attacked, I got booted from yet another poster.
I am no judge but I do say what I see and I do not run from biblical correction. I prefer that when I slip they that are spiritual restore. (You can Google that one too.) But I will not be led down the path of least resistance with false words about how Jesus truly was. He had all kinds of personality depending on the day. And he showed us and told us what he wants. Disbelief is NOT an issue. It is the twisted frame of thought that includes the self more than His will.I think I understand what you are attempting to say. Let's see if I get this right?
You are an obedient slave to the bible. You simple refuse the think for yourself because that's what you think Jesus asked of us. You think Jesus wants a bunch of brain dead zombies rooming around making more brain dead zombies. I get that, but not everyone feels that way and we are not all brain dead. Some of us are capable of thinking for ourselves, it is in fact what evolution has given us. It's sometimes difficult for those with the ability to think watch someone as yourself make ridiculous claims, like your claim that Jesus wants zombies who are incapable of thought.Are you calling her brain dead? That appears to be the gist of your comment. Not very nice.
There you go again running to the aid of another while you just finished pointing out how closed minded I am.
I most certainly did not directly call her a brain dead zombi. I merely stated that what I get from her post is that Jesus wants brain dead zombies. I would never ever call someone a brain dead zombi unless of course they admitted they they were unwilling to think for themselves.Don't you mean Encephliodead???
no, not "nice" but acceptable. I have no idea that I would be acceptable to my forum peers. It is written.
Life, Sir. And that more abundantly. I really dont mind if you don't accept. I don't understand how that is considered demeaning or insulting but have your way your way.
Oh, I guess I got it right in that you think Jesus wants brain dead zombies to create more brain dead zombies?
See Emile, she doesn't think I insulted her, she just doesn't get that I don't agree with her.
You make Jesus sounds like he was a psycho. Different personalities?
rad? men think far to much. and endeavor to know it all.maybe that's the lesson in the story. and my fave part of the story is in gen; 3; 17 thru 19 i think.its the curse god puts upon man for Adams transgression
I don't think we can ever think far to much. It's that thinking that has given us some of the greatest joys and freedom we have. It's that thinking that has given us the ability to communicate such as we are doing.
I suggest the metaphor of the first part of Genesis simply tries to indicate how we, with our enhanced powers of perception, have a somewhat less happy time in life than the other (please note - not lower) animals. Our minds come up against all manner of choices and we can dream up all manner of possible outcomes from our choices.... frightening this! With it comes worry; anxiety; reactions; aggession; distractions from the beauty and integrated nature of which we are a part.
When the majority of christians can see and "get" the metaphor they will no longer feel the need to argue.When will Atheists no longer feel the need to argue? ...nevermind...
It takes two to tango!
However, I do not carry the label Atheist with a capital A. The word simply describes my way of thinking, with a lower case a.
How do you see the label Christian, with a capital C? Does it make you what you are? Or is it simply the way you think? With a lower case c?Only one to flub the moves and mess up the whole song.
Just joking. Your point is noted.
A little a??? A little atheistic??? Ok.
Capital C? Ok. I am first a human woman.
The Christian part is dominant because I insist. as I said this is a way of life for me. Still just a woman though.
I keep waiting for it all to go down, but after the last couple of doomsday prophecies never quite panned out I am going to stop torturing myself with the possibilities. If and when we are all going to die, I am pretty sure none of us will know the date and time in advance.
No. No one knows the day or hour. And the bible warns that many false prophets will arise with their lies. If they tell you he is meeting you anywhere at any time, do not go! We will ALL see him at the same time.
Jesus said time and time again that the Kingdom of God was at hand, iminent, near. Paul who you would say was inspired to write inerrant infallible letters also believed Jesus's return was about to happen. So were they wrong?
I guess...you seen God's kingdom??? Though i dont think the kingdom is a place per se. Does that further solidify for you your idea that your line of thought is correct???
Oh, so the Kingdom of God isn't a place? I guess Jesus was drunk when he said, "I go to prepare a place for you."
Heaven??? Kingdom of God??? Same??? You been sneaking in some study on the subj??? Jesus also said, "Thy kingdom come" he WENT to prepare a place that will COME??? He makin' mobile homes??? Lol
Coffee time. IcrackmyselfupYes, the Messiah is supposed to be the guy who establishes the Kingdom of God on Earth and establish world peace in his wake. Guess what two things Jesus neglected to do.
So if Jesus doesn't even fulfill the requirements of the Messiah, why base a religion around him and claim him as such?
Not to mention there's the ludicrous notion that he resurrected and ascended to the heavens. He is comprised of mass, therefore he cannot travel at the speed of light, so all we have to do is look for a human flying about less than 2000 light years away from us. He's small, so it'll be tricky, but he's supposedly shining with the light of God or whatnot, so he should still be easy to spot.Now see? You quote the I go and then quote a here? You confused? Let's break it down. The kingdom of God and world peace are on their way. Be patient... your knees and tongue will be present.
Yeah, no.
Jesus said to his disciples that their generation would not pass before his coming. And I'm pretty damn skippy a single human generation doesn't last 1900+ years.Not that it matters much. But wasn't that before his death on the cross?
The prophecies of establishing the Kingdom of God and world-peace are spiritual and allegorical. Other related prophecies such as “a child playing in a Cobra’s den”, “turning swords into ploughs”, “lambs befriending wolves” are also speaking of a great love & peace with God and His creation that leads to a state of Paradise so to speak, or a Heavenly Kingdom for those who accept and follow. This of course does not mean that there may be other forms or manifestations of Paradise such as in another life. These prophecies had been misinterpreted.
Jesus’s (pbuh) following today is a mark of him being the true Messiah. His enemies were never able to suppress his following. Today he is revered and honored by two of the most populous religions in the world: Islam and Christianity. Even in Israel, 2000 years later, there is a group called “The Messianic Jews” who are accepting Jesus as the Messiah today as we speak—and they get hounded by the Orthodoxy there to abandon their heresy which has also. But just like the Orthodox have been failing for 2,000 years to stop it, so they will today.
You absolutely correct! There was no resurrection and no super-natural ascension to Heaven. These are irrational dogmas and should be rejected as such. There is plenty of theory on how such notions and the Trinity got fused into Christianity i.e. Roman influences etc. The second coming is also not literal, it never has been with scripture i.e. just as Jesus himself explained how John the Baptist has returned in the power and glory of Elijah—not literally Elijah himself.It seems just as likely that Jesus envisioned the kingdom of God upon the Earth as something very real: a restoration of the theocratic state of Israel, the replacement of the corrupt priestly arristocracy, and the throwing of off Roman rule. He did have a zealot as an apostle, and he was executed for the crime of sedition, a crime that was exclusively punished by means of crucifixion. Heck he entered Israel on a donkey as a king which would have been seen by Rome as a direct threat to their authority.
You might say there was no resurrection and indeed that cannot be proved either way. However you cannot ignore the fact that his apostles and followers were put to death on account of their blasphemy and at no time did they ever recant their claims of a resurrection. To say categorically there was no resurrection is to say the apostles died for what they knew was a lie.But Jesus (pbuh) does not categorically make statements that he wants a theocratic state under his rule or other political notions, he does urge the Jews to pay taxes and conduct themselves as good citizens which runs contrary to the notion that he saw political power as a means. He did speak much in parables which can give the impression that he sought such power but even Pontius Pilate’s statements and conduct, who absolved himself of the responsibility of crucifying Jesus (pbuh) and rested it on the Jews, raises the question if these notions of ‘Kingdom of Heaven’ and ‘King of the Jews’ were in any political sense.
Entering Israel on a donkey would be seen as threat?? If anything, the choice of a donkey would have baffled them and perhaps caused Pilate to believe otherwise. Anyone riding a donkey and making a bid for Kingdom could possibly be not serious or has something else in mind.
Not saying there was nothing of the sort with resurrection. The resurrection was not out of death, but possibly from a swoon. This is more acceptable because it agrees with the laws of nature and science. Today, many cases have been recorded of a clinical death and subsequent return to life with in a short span of time (I guess the grey area between life and death where people today are declared to be dead but really are not). Jesus himself prophesized a survival (not revival) when he said the only sign that will be given is the sign of Jonah—like Jonah was three days in the belly of the fish, so will the son of man be three days in the belly of the earth. Jonah survived, did not die and resurrect: all agree on this. Jesus disciples would have understood this. Their faith would come from seeing Jesus(pbuh) stand firm in the face of death and not waiver. And they would have seen the Jonah prophecy come to pass before their eyes with Jesus surviving the crucifixion.
I have a Hub on the subject if you are interested . . .
http://amer786.hubpages.com/hub/Did-Jes … Israelites"The resurrection was not out of death, but possibly from a swoon. This is more acceptable because it agrees with the laws of nature and science."
God does not have to agree with the laws of nature and science. His law supersedes each. Do you not agree???
"Jesus did not die on the cross as you think, he was just knocked out some." Wow!!! And all the prophecy which led up to that moment??? Sounds like "that OTHER" report to me.
"Hey y'all! The bible is WRONG again! Wasn't no death on no cross, no REAL resurrection, no tomb, no stone to roll away!"
Where did you say this "more valuable and much more accurate" message came from???God is the author of the laws of physics, why would he not agree with them? If He is All-Powerful and beyond Space-Time, then why would he have to override these laws to resurrect Jesus back to life and up into Heaven? In fact, why would He do it at all if Jesus was meant to die for our sins?
Given God's power and the agencies that execute His will or Decree, I believe He would not have to break His own laws which alludes to the unthinkable that He may not have foreseen the event.
This more rational and acceptable version is in fact in The Holy Quran and The Holy Bible.I KNEW you would make that first statement. He is ALL powerful. As if that isn't enough of an explanation, I will add that he wanted the final "blood" sacrifice to him for the remission of sin. And he raised him up the firstborn of the faithful (those who follow his example) (My take; though I got my answer from the bible)
The bible says, "lean not unto your own understanding but in all thy ways acknowledge him and he will direct thy path." You not thinking that God would have to do this or that does not really follow biblical tellings.
You appear to be avoiding my question.
I'm not going to retype it, you can see what I asked above.
Nevermind, it's just not THAT important to me
So questions you cannot answer are not important to you?
I can answer all questions to the best of my ability. But the retyping of the question was denied in favor of my scrolling back to find it. It was just not that important to me. Now, if you have a question, ask. I will answer. Please try not to ask many questions at the same time. I will prioritize according to my own heart and may miss the real question.
The bible has predicted many things. It is above reproof and for our reproof. Spirit knows how to read the bible and impart the needed message. Some opt not to participate. We must expect that many will select that option. It is their decision alone. I respect that...
Your spirit knows how to direct your mind into all manner of beliefs, many of which are quite incongruous.
Not trying to be unkind here, Cgenaea, but you do stand alone in much of your beliefs. So Happy New Year to you, provided it is not against your Pagan beliefs to say so.Aaawww...seems I've hit your "funny" bone... lol sooooo soooorry. Your spirit isnot equipped for belief and "congruous ness" either. But I don't need to call you on it. No need...'member??? We are both adults, yes??? You call me names (and I often wonder from what deep-seated angry place it comes-though it aint my business) but they only work to REinforce my belief in my father and the bible he produced for guidance into his mentality.
By the way, I just learned about the Pagan abomination celebrations; and secret society/frat/sor devil worship practices. Wow! Heavy stuff. But I know that my heart is clean. According to Paul, I am ok. prob wont celebrate as the Pagans do no longer; but I am in strict confidence of the fact that I am no Pagan. They worship many Gods.
Happy New Year jonny!!!
Just because God could have done it does not make it so. A blood-sacrifice for Himself for the remission of sin-- makes no sense to me.
God bestowed upon us the faculties of reason and rationale. I believe in Jesus Christ (peace be on him) as a great prophet of God. I do pray to God to direct my steps. I believe in salvation. If I have a reasonable doubt in a dogma because it defies God's known framework of physics for our world and because it is inconsistent with how God's messengers have usually lived and died, then I believe God will honor that reasonable doubt, even if it happens to be wrong.
Who is really following the Bible will, God willing, come into the light one day. There is no point in accusing each other willy nilly.You must first understand "covenant".
That is the ONLY way a blood sacrifice makes any sense.You stop your "preachin"
(my sarcasm to the nth)
And thanks...Sorry, their is no way a blood sacrifice makes any sense. Stop for a moment and imagine how or why and God would need you to kill a lamb to please him and then attempt to image a human sacrifice. It's rather immature and very barbaric.
Let me!
God wanted people to be deterred from sin. The killing of the animal represented the fact that sin is death in a real way. However, the people slaughtered goats and bulls left and right without allowing the message to sink in. The mentality became, "I hate him and I'm gonna kill him, I got an extra bull this month to pay for it" or "I really want my brother's house and wife, Bessie aint gave me good milk all year, I'll just send him on a mission and step in his place. Where's my firewood for this altar?" Abuse of the intent of sacrifice. It was to be a deterrent and a reminder of how seriously God considers sin to be. But the people didn't get it. Jesus is the answer to such mockery. And still today, we remember him.The people didn't get the idea of sacrifice; an idea that God set up for them.
Being omniscent, God knew before hand that they would not get it, and so set up the greater sacrifice of His son. Knowing as He did so that people still wouldn't get it, that only those willing to make up their own stories and metaphors would be happy with blood spilling through the streets.
Quite a God you have, here.It seems counter productive to kill an innocent animal or human as a display they we understand right from wrong. Do you think killing innocent animals pleases a God?
Of course it does, at least the Christian god. That one absolutely thrives of blood and slaughter, as shown by His own actions throughout history.
Uh, comprehension seems lacking. Hmmm...it was not a display of knowledge of right and wrong. It was to be a sacrifice for the wrong committed. A deterrent. It should have made the people think like you. Innocent animals should not have to die because you were wrong. If you think, "if I do this, im going to have to kill an innocent animal and possibly lose a bit of profit."It may keep you from doing that wrong. But the people had rams on deck! Probably breeded animals for the purpose of sacrifice so they could really get ugly. Get it???
I think you are saying that God wanted us to suffer a lose if we sinned so he had us kill something we didn't want to kill so we would understand the lose. Perhaps you are not understand how ethically immature that would be for him to not teach us why it's important to do the right thing and simply using consequences like one would use on a small child and in the process killing innocent animals in the process which in itself is certainly if not a sin is certainly wasteful. Can you imagine who strange it would be if we still practiced the same sacrifices to day. "oops, I just had thoughts about my neighbours wife, better rush out and kill something.
Bible says, "if your right eye causes sin, pluck it out. better for you to lose an eye than damn your whole body" or something like that.
you gotta go get a spoon. Lol...
I understand that sacrifice and covenant has a place in the scheme of things- especially in the discourse with prophet Abraham (peace be on him). Its the remission of sin and the doctrine of atonement that I have issue with. Jesus's (pbuh) call to prayer on the cross was 'eli eli lamasabachtani?' (my Lord, my Lord, why have you forsaken me?). Firstly, he clearly is not God-- he was praying to God. Secondly, he did not give the impression he was being sacrificed for the remission of humanity's sins. He expected to be saved per the prophecy of the sign of Jonah.
If you know the story of Abram, then you must know about the sacrifice of Isaac and the substitution of the ram.
Jesus is quoting Psalm 22 as far as -my Lord, my Lord, why have you forsaken me? So I am unsure of your point there.
Jesus is the Son of God, God is the Father. They have a father and son relationship.
From the beginning of NT in John unto the Last Supper, Jesus was to take the sins of the world.You forgot the Holy Ghost. And can't Satan be considered a god, with powers equal or nearly equal to those of the father?
You also forgot Thor and Odin, Aphrodite and Apollo, Poseidon and Zeus. Along with 5,395,378 more.The more you step away and look at religion as not of your own the more one realizes how bazar it in fact is.
"for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments."
Who wants a relationship with a jealous person let alone God?Thank you! THANK YOU! thank YOU! the more you deny it. The less it makes sense. Thank you. My point exactly.
No, the more you look at it subjectively the less it makes sense. Tell me does it make sense to you that the God you believe in admits to being a jealous God. He's jealous of other Gods.
Exactly!.
As Odin was the leader, we should all accept him as the One True God. Not some johnny-come-lately that cannot be found.See how very easy it is to just pick a side???
Glad you got that different spelling, thought you were refering to me as god for a moment. Not yet - getting my Crown of Thorns ready though.
Jesus (pbuh) may well have been quoting Psalms 22 but he did do so on the cross during crucifixion. So, my point being that by quoting so he is not reflecting that he’s sacrificing himself for the sins of mankind. He appears despaired and expects to be saved.
When the Sanhedrin accused Jesus (pbuh) of his religious crimes, among them was him ranking himself higher than Moses (pbuh) as a Son of God. Jesus (pbuh) defended that he only called himself a Son of God or a God in the same sense that prophets have been called as such in The Old Testament i.e. Exodus 7:1 “I have made thee a God unto Pharaoh”
Well, let me ask you as a Christian (I believe)—what does Jesus’s dying for our sins exactly mean? Given my background I was brought up with the notion that the doctrine of atonement is nonsense and a fault-line. It appears that the majority of Christians who now find it ok to as normal life-practice to eat pork, consume alcohol, accept homosexuality and extra-marital sex despite guidance to the contrary in The Bible. Is this due to this doctrine since Jesus (pbuh) has already died and these sins are essentially forgiven?Under the circumstances of being crucified it would be difficult to even speculate what Jesus' intent was when quoting Psalms. Under duress and quoting a verse, one cannot extrapolate some dogmatic significance. But we do have the entirety of the NT to draw from, such as John the Baptist saying that Jesus is the Lamb of God, come to take away sin. One of many Christians favorite verses to quote is John 3;16 -For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. The NT is replete with Jesus being a substitution, propitiation or sacrifice for sin. So, I do not understand your stance to the contrary.
As to the latter part of your post, I suggest Hebrews 6 4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.Purification or taking away of sin is a function of all prophets of God. Jesus quoting Psalms on the cross, under duress or not, is significant for me.
I do not understand your response to the latter part of my post. Can you answer in your own words please without quoting scripture.
Do you feel that the doctrine of atonement is any way responsible for the current state of the Church and Christians abandoning many commandments of the Bible?Have you ever read the Book of Hebrews? The OT is not necessary the NT is not necessary in regards to a good overview of, or about Jesus.
The commandments are to love God with all your heart, mind and soul and to love your neighbor.
Are you familiar with the substitution of the Ram for isaac? Are you familiar with the Brazen Serpent in moses time?I'll just take it that you don't have an answer
Well, there are no short answers to superficial concepts. If you want to talk, debate or learn someones true positions you have to be on the same page.
Why do Xtians eat bacon bits on their dinner salads? Its cuz they gotta get outa Jail Jesus card.
Now are you happy?Actually, doesn't make me happy at all. Wish the Xtians had erred on the side of caution. If Jesus said don't, better not to even if the Pope says its okay. There is plenty of great legitimate meats to eat.
However, as the story goes in the Garden of Eden, Adam & Eve (peace be on them) did eat of the one fruit they were told to avoid. But they realized, asked for forgiveness, and ended on the right side-- that, I believe, is the true example to follow.Jesus said: "there is nothing from without the man, that going into him can defile him: but the things which proceed out of the man are those that defile the man."
When there are apparent contradictions in scripture, which can appear so to the uneducated, these do need to be reconciled in an acceptable manner.
What is your reconciliation? To follow the law stated in NT i.e. Leviticus 11:47? Or to take this statement of Jesus to mean that all is kosher (including narcotics)?The highest authority is Jesus and not a Levitical Priest, of a former covenant, applied to other people.
Let me ask you. Do you have a Levitical Priest give offerings at the Temple, for you?Just a gentle reminder, that this book of Leviticus was written literally hundreds of years before the time Jesus arrived on the scene. The verse being mentioned by Phoenix there about nothing that goes into a man can make him unclean, was written hundreds of years later on, and is clarifying the texts from the distant past. Jesus was not ignorant of those ancient texts. Leviticus is part of one of the earlier books of the Old Testament, Jesus came 400 years after the end of the Old Testament, which is often referred to as the 400 silent years. God seemed to be silent for a time, and it picks up again with the New Testament. This is the second time I saw you refer to the book of Leviticus being part of the New Testament, and that is an error I wanted to point out, that is likely not purposeful.
So we have to contrasting things, Jesus saying one thing (which the Christian will follow, as he is the Christ they are following), and the older Levitical Law which was prescribed for the ancient people's of Israel, etc. There is no trouble, or needing anything to be reconciled here for the Christian. Most of them understand the Early books in the Old testament to be a simple recording of history of the ancient people of God. Leviticus falls into this group, as a book that is more descriptive than prescriptive. It isn't being prescribed to all, it is being described of what they were to do for a time.
Jesus is basically declaring all things to be kosher. I don't understand the mention of narcotics. I wonder too at what other books you may be thinking of, that have nothing to do with the Old and New Testaments as I understand them to be.
I have not had a Levitical priest do that for me as I am not a Christian.
I am sorry, rules are rules. Unless you follow another god?
I think you may be confusing Christians with Jews here? I know of no Christian that ever even remotely considered dealing with a Levitical priest.
The history of the Israelites in our bible, is one of just that, a history. Its like we are looking over their shoulders to what God told them, and experienced what they were told also, through their prophets over the first several centuries of that recorded history. It is meant to lead up to what Christ did on the cross much later on. It was a precursor, and explainer of things in advance, if you will.
I'm sure its just one God. The question is, which are the right set of rules?
But the payment for that error loudly resounds even unto this day. With that one act, they changed their world entirely. And everyone else's. And they lived a looooong time probably wishing they had obeyed (regretfully).
If I may jump in, I am curious about the suggestion of many Christians abandoning the older commandments in the OT. Please keep in mind that Christians are followers of Christ first, and that the understanding of many/most of them that I know is that they understand the Old covenant to be between a very particular group of people at a very particular point in time. This is not to to say that many of the older commandments ought to NOT be followed, as many are.
Jesus did simplify much of the law in his fulfilling of it, and making it very clear he didn't come to abolish it. He also made it more concise, in stating the two greatest commandments when asked what the greatest one is. He also SHOWED how HE dealt with a tough situation in the case of the woman caught in adultery. He didn't state much in that case, but showed how he dealt with it very carefully. He didn't lean toward swift capital punishment, and seemed more intent on the same thing he always was, and that is the heart of man becoming right with God and repenting and changing when need be. If you look back, this is also God's deeper desire for all his people even in the Old Testament, but the heart of a person can be so fickle and evil as it wants.
His desire is for fellowship and repentance of the sinner, and Jesus shows this clearly, and he is the one who the Christians follow, not the old Covenant that was for a particular people in a particular time. I hope this helps to explain from the Christian's point of view as I understand it. An older and harsher covenant for a particular people (The Abrahamic Covenant), was timely for that time. I don't think any of what we see now or in the NT practices has to do with the the fact that Christian's sins are forgiven once they repent.I agree with most of what you say. I don’t think any Christian realistically believes that they are free to sin as they please. But abandoning a Heavenly law, which is in the NT (Leviticus 11:47 > To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten), has consequences.
Jesus (pbuh) taught to deal with equity and compassion and to be patient with people, but abandoning law/guidance altogether is different—it’s about what you become as a people and then there’s no end to it (if you abandon one, you will abandon others too which is what has happened).In Matthew 5:38-48, Jesus teaches us to abandon some of those Heavenly laws from the NT, particularly Exodus 21, where the consequences are actually an improvement.
Self righteous nonsense. Mr. Pharisee.
How thoughtful and considerate. Perhaps we can avoid stooping to innuendeo and name-calling.
As someone once said, name calling and putting down doesn't qualify as good debate or argument, or conversation even.
Hello, I may be misunderstanding something here, but you seem to say that Leviticus 11 is in the New Testament? That is in our Old testament actually, and goes way back in the history of God's people.
As for my response, I can give my point of view and my understanding from my studies. Christians follow Christ, and it is part of what draws many to Christianity. None of the old Levitical laws are what draws them, nor do any Christians I know make those laws part of their life. It has the feel of an ancient and often nomadic people group. Here is how it was put to me once. When you are looking at those older Old Testament scriptures like Leviticus, we are to look at them like we are looking over the shoulder of one of the people that those laws were given to. It was for them, and for that time. They weren't likewise given to all of us. Even for modern day Jews, even the strictest ones, they don't follow those older laws, and it might be curious as to why that is. I mean that they very much still care about God and his commands.
I don't necessarily agree that it is a downward spiral occurring where some laws begin to be broken, and that only more and more follow. I never get the impression Jesus would be pushing such laws. I have seen some others share scriptures where the talk of the clean and unclean DOES come up in the New Testament. As a Christian, my deepest understanding of what God requires seems to be matters of the heart. It goes against my conscience to do certain things, but never does not eating shrimp make me feel convicted in my heart. Not ever. It isn't because I don't want to follow God's laws either. Jesus also speaks of being overly legalistic not being a good thing, and seems to focus more on the heart, and the two greatest commandments. Does this help to answer at all?
It doesn't seem to me that to eat shellfish is to abandon a law or guidance of God, not even a little bit. However, if it truly feels that way to you, then I WOULD listen to my conscience over someone just telling you. Jesus declared things clean, and went into great detail about the things that make us unclean, or not right with God."For he who knows what is right to do and does not do it, for him it is a sin."
I cannot quote exactly where that comes from, but it sounds relevant.Good thought. KNOWS is the focus. We KNOW via Jesus that what goes in is safe. What comes OUT should be carefully considered. But if the eating of shellfish causes issue with her brother, wrong to eat it in his presence.
Because parking lots are hard to pull into when it snows???? Or...b e c a u s e it cau ses a pro blem for your bro ther...
So, conducting oneself in a manner which causes another to stumble on the path to their spiritual growth is wrong? In your opinion?
Depending on the situation. If one's path is off, then correction is in order. Some people may find it ok to lie; and upon finding out it is not he/she may think twice about the God stuff. Right is right. But with situations such as this eating or no... yes, I am not to cause his faith any stress by whipping out my prawns.
Which makes you the arbiter of cosmic law? I would suspect the responsibility weighs heavily.
Help me to understand what you mean.
To whom much is given; much is required.Ahhh. I see. Cosmically, you have been raised above all others. Much has been given. Herding the rest of us must be a difficult task. However do you find the patience?
Ahhh...I see, a trap
how do you find the time?
Where you at? (Lol about the little old lady on the phone commercial). It's now 6a. Im usually not up this early. Stupid Sinus cold coming. Woke me up. Are we in the same time zone?Nope. It's 7am here.
Back to my problem. You appear to know that causing another to stumble spiritually is a no no. It appears you qualify this by assuming your take on spirituality is the only acceptable one.
But, willingly leading someone down an incorrect path is said to be a transgression difficult to forgive, cosmically. How do you maintain such a position of surety? Sure, you'll tell me God tells you. But, does humility ever knock you upside the head and give you cause for pause?Yes. Humility has caused the current pause. Again if we know what to do and don't it is sin. And there are consequences. God does not hold you responsible for anyone else unless you cause him to sin. Qualifying my statement is just not necessary. It is not you I owe. However there is a certain assurance that allows me to know. My heart is quickened in the directions in which I should go or not go. Why so curious?
I'm curious because you seem to be bent on insisting that only your take on that book is the correct one. I find that odd.
How so? Are you serious? How many people are you arguing with over it, at the moment?
Counting is ongoing. But have I stated something about the bible you feel to be dead wrong? Am I being misleading in any way?
I would say you would be misleading if anyone were following. As it stands, you have simply invited a great deal of argument. I'm not sure what purpose is served. I realize many, such as yourself, believe they are speaking God's words...therefore defending his word. I, personally, think if it mattered in the least on a cosmic scale there would be no room for argument.
I believe they would swarm whatever she said.
Some casual, glancing in observer/believer might liken it to a bunch of dogs and villains encircling someone. Some might say it looks like a bunch of demonic zombies gnashing their teeth at the gate. Others might see it as a poor tactic to bum rush or thug someone into submission by sheer intimidation, coercion and volume. Then others may see it as a refining fire that gold goes through and the encircling entities are just dross awaiting the hearth.
Where do you stand? Or what do you think?I KNEW someone was watching. Happens all the time though. They just get vicious-er until someone bumps their head on my tooth and run to the administration. They know me. I know them. This is the gazillionth.
Aren't you relieved that someone else jumped in to call people dogs and villains and demonic zombies so you didn't have to?
Thats a lie. I said I believed yall were swarming her. Then I spoke in generalities and paraphrased verses.
And when I say "yall" I say that in general and no one specific.
If they have a heart and its convicted, that is not on me.Of course. Good writers do that often. Just makes the worst insults look more poetic.
Same thing I did. But you are now branded for life, "dog caller"
My "sin" was, "My former pastor said that if you throw a rock in pack of dogs, the only one who hollars is the one that was hit." Not only did I get the "dog caller" label; I was throwing rocks across the forum. LOL
Speaking in generalities after making a direct statement can be seen as exploitation of a loophole to avoid being banned for making a personal attack. It can also be seen as more of an implicated belief of the person making the general statement
I'm sorry you see it that way. True, some do simply appear to attack anything or anyone they perceive as thinking in a spiritual manner. But, i don't think you are encountering argument primarily because of that.
Honestly, I'd be sad to see a professed Christian defending your behavior patterns here.I know. It just feels better to have one who speaks for God alone to agree with ANYTHING being said. I honestly believe that I am so hated because there are not many here that converse with this crowd who stands their ground firmly. The awww you're ok lie is preferable. The yes I understand your lie argument and see where your lies are coming from is "nice" aint it??? I cannot. Right is right. I will not agree that the bible is or could be full of lies for anyone. But, here I stand, Island genaea.
and im smiling.Ah, here we are again! Behold folks....the only person EVER going to Heaven is here among us...genaea! Can you believe it? I'm speechless (almost). Let's have a moment of silence to take in this momentous occasion! Let's bow for she is holier than all of mankind! Everyone has it wrong but her! She is the wisest of wise because she reads the Bible and uses it's words as her weapon to threaten, insult, and condemn her fellow man! We should count our lucky stars to be on the same forum as she in all of her most holiest of flawless greatness!!!
Pack some crossword puzzles and a deck of cards, some checkers or chess if you prefer, and have a great trip to Heaven when you go, genaea, 'cause it looks like it's just going to be you and Jesus there!Was this level of sarcasm necessary? I know we all have our issues with certain behaviors, but we still also must make sure we do not stray too far from where we stand for ourselves and our walk with God
And you're entitled to your opinion of my opinion of her. Thank you.
Don't get me wrong, I didn't express nor do I have an opinion of your opinion of anyone else. I just know and respect how you generally behave on the forums and this seemed slightly out of character for you, so I commented.
Actually I don't think it was sarcastic enough.
I've read the whole Bible, not a word about sarcasm...well, not really.
That works. Don't really care where I end up at as long as I'm with good people. I'll save you a seat on the boat. The music is better down there anyway.
I'm delighted to hear (see) you say that, genaea! You're sometimes very critical and condemning here toward many whom anyone would consider fine outstanding Christians so the lines blur for me on occasion just who you deem qualified to join you in Heaven. Although you sometimes seem to imply that you think otherwise, many Christians here on these forums will be there with you, like it or not, they are your spiritual brothers and sisters so I get confused why you often treat them as thought they are not. You don't have to really answer. It's just mostly an observation that is perplexing for me.
Do you think it's okay for a bunch of Christians to "swarm" an atheist, or a believer who disagrees with them, but it's unacceptable in reverse? Mo is a godly, kind, Christian woman, and she's said nothing insulting. A lot of people on both sides of the discussion have issues with genaeas approach. Is it more likely that all of them are wrong or that the one against them could take a care with the message that she's portraying?
Swarm of rabid, demonic zombies indeed. It would be sad if it wasn't so. .. comical.Truth is my crime. We all get hit at one time or another. I just know where to run when I get hit. And it is not human bosses. I know that if you ever prove my UNGodliness to you, I will apologize and pray. Truth is my crime. Repeated bible phrases cut sometimes. I have not hurt anyone. I'm just the whipping post right now. Maybe it'll be you next year, who knows?
And to other casual observers, it would also look like a combination of people from different belief structures trying to discuss the bible and some peoples use of it as well as trying to point out how some behaviors and cements can be deemed as insulting. What you are generally saying, yet directly implying would have more merit if it was only one specific believing group speaking, but it isn't. There are people from each of the sides (Christian, atheist, and agnostic) all holding this discussion.
Invented argument??? No example??? What kinda slanderous misinformation factory are you running?
In fairness to her, don't all of us kind of do that? Don't we all think our own views are the correct views, and that is the reason we hold them as our views? Whatever the next person's view of the bible is, is doing the same thing really. We all kind of do it, some hold it against others, though not saying you are doing that, I don't know for sure and am in and out of these conversations.
Not entirely. There is a difference between saying that a view is the best one for a specific persin and saying a view is the only correct one period.
I think that we all think we have the best views on many particular things, if we are being completely honest. Its not a put down, but an observation.
Its just funny, for example, when a person says, "you just think your view is the best!" Or some such thing...but they probably do, and the person saying that also thinks THEIR view is the best, and just isn't considering that at the moment, lol. That is my only point. Speaking in general in this example I just gave, but I have seen versions of it a ton of times.
From my point of view, any talk of what "god" would like/would not like, is all part of the guilt/shame/fear/repentance/controlling Game. The "god" bit makes one feel powerful an right in contrast to the other person's "wrongness."
Not entirely. A lot of the desires and dislikes of God are taken (by some) from the bible, now of course there are some who will say that God's dislikes coincidentally mirror their own because their hatred is backed be the bible even of not listed in the Bible
I'd have to agree on that. Any thinking person can clearly see that there are too many different takes on the words to pinpoint any clear instruction that might be from a deity.
The premise is flawed.
Christians are not Jews under mosaic ordinances which have been canceled, anyways.
Christians are under a new covenant. The levitical priesthood (under which the people received those ordinances you speak of) was replaced by Jesus of a new priesthood.What's this, then:
Matthew 5:17-18
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."I'm surprised you'd throw out a passage that clearly corroborates the statement you think you are rebutting. Did you read that before pasting it?
You mean the verse where Jesus says, "The Law of Moses will never, never, never be changed or go away"? Because that's exactly what Jesus is saying.
Read it again. The entire passage you posted. He claims he came to fulfill the law. He subsequently states that, until the law is fulfilled the entire law remains in effect. Sooo...think man, think.....
You conveniently left out verse 18: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
Looks like the earth's still here to me.LOL. You simply don't bother to read what you type. Read that whole sentence. If he claims to have come to fulfill the law and one assumes he did fulfill the law.....????? Can you make the connection?
LET THE SPIRITUAL HEAR ME PLEASE!!!
I just heard something:
Jesus said he came to fulfill the law. Then he said, (because???) Not one jot nor tittle will pass...til all be fulfilled. NOW Did we drop some jots and tittles because all has been fulfilled (stated by Jesus himself)? He did say, obey MY commands, when he was here.
Please spiritually and CRITICALLY think with me.
Didn't/won't pass away. It will always be WRONG to kill and steal and stuff.
Keep the Sabbath. Love no Gods before him. No graven images etc. Jesus showed us how.Yes. And never wear two different types of cloth; kill those that do. And kill disobedient children. And kill fornicators. And kill homosexuals. And kill non-virgin brides. And kill neighboring peoples. And kill and kill and kill.
When do you intend to begin following the laws that won't pass away? Or will you pick and choose the ones you like, that your find moral to do (and why is your god requiring immoral actions to begin with?)You're forgetting the other 603 commandments.
They are...inconvenient in civilized society today.
They asked Jesus, which is the greatest commandment? Oddly He did not say "they are of all equal value" . Find that verse and find that answer and use that one verse as the central theme of your own book and print it up and send us all a copy. That way you and your readers dont have to waste time thinking.
Are you insinuating that the only thing we need to do is love the invisible creature in the sky? All the rest of the commands are OK to forget about?
Gotcha. Hard questions only come from trolls, don't they?
Well I was trying to have conversation with amer786, because I find the Ahmadiyya Movement on his hubs or profile of interest to me. They, amer786, was asking questions about Jesus, Christianity and dogma/doctrine of atonement etc etc. and I thought I would have a conversation with amer786 about those subjects. Then come the anti-religion trolls that spend their lives in the religion forum. Not that it matters, because amer786 didnt seem too interested in finding out about Christian dogma/doctrine from someone that subscribes to it.
And I answered your reply to Zelkiiro. I can certainly understand how that would disturb your conversation with amer786 and how you would instantly classify anyone doing such a deed as a troll.
I humbly abase myself and back out of the conversation with amer786 that I never intruded into.Do you see me hanging out on atheism/agnostic threads all day, flaming, trolling hijacking, swarming24/7/365? Huh?
Explore»
Religion and Philosophy»
Christianity, the Bible and Jesus»
The Bible»
Discussion
What religion are you again?
Go and, never darken my towels again.The muddy towels after a base ball game, presumably.
My religion is irrelevant to my posts. Only reason and thought matter.
I shall not darken your towels again, as long as they are private and on a private forum or other location. Those on a public forum are open to everyone, or did you not realize that you are just not that special?
Presumably He did not hate the rules and laws He made.
You'd better think harder about following them all. Glad I'm not YOUR kid, though, if you decide to follow God's wishes.
I think most trolls use the term "sky daddy" . Have a nice day.
That might be why I did not use it. "invisible creature in the sky" fits best as "sky daddy" is a troll concept and "god" implies an actual living being.
Just because not bringing in drugs or weapons is the most important rule of an airport doesn't mean it's the only rule of an airport.
Galatians 5: 2
Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
What do those verses mean? How is this possible considering they, the disciples, were already presumably circumcised?
Tell me how ya gonna follow that rule? Or show me you understand, what it actually means.Automatically disqualified for quoting Paul as if he were a reliable source of the official Christian movement.
Like asking Master Miller what he thinks about Liquid Snake.So, debating or discussing the New Testament with an anti-religion person that hangs out in the religion forum every day is kind of like me being Chris Tucker, in this scene > ?
As I've mentioned countless times, Paul was a Roman spy sent in to pacify the Christian movement by claiming to have been in contact with God and spreading very Roman-friendly doctrines that fly in the face of everything in the Old Testament.
If you really want to get some insight into the early Christians, you need to dig up the Gospel of Mary or the Gospel of Thomas. The Gospel of Mark is okay, I guess, but it was written about 30 years after the fact and even then it's the earliest of the canonical gospels.
But no, trying to justify that the Old Testament is invalid by bringing up Paul is like trying to justify that women are shallow and slutty by bringing up Michael Bay movies: They both know nothing about the material they're discrediting.No offense, but you are not credible to discuss the NT or OT. You cannot become knowledgeable of the NT or OT by reading stuff off of Reddit or similar places. I sincerely mean no offense.
I suppose it's a good thing I've never been to Reddit, then. And that I was a Christian for 20 years and have read the Bible numerous times.
I'm sorry to interject here, but why do you assume that atheists have no knowledge of scripture and that all of their information comes from Google or Reddit? Some of us have spent years studying it - in college and out of it - and that a great many of us WERE once Christians or members of other faiths - so to dismiss all atheists as being ignorant of religious materials seems singularly judgmental, condescending and a bit rude.
Well to ignore 3 posts of various scripture rebuttal of which, was just the tip of the iceberg and then reply to one and claim* Paul dont count* He was a spy" cuz i say so , and oh yeah here is some 3rd and 5th century irrelevant red herring noncanonical apocrypha -coptic, what am I to do?
Well if you want to have a conversation rather than a name/accusation tit for tat free-for-all, recognizing that you're not in a one-on-one conversation with someone and that you're in an open forum is a good place to start. Also, in the Christian vein of "treat others as you wish to be treated" you can treat those that disagree with you with a modicum of respect - unless you particularly enjoy being disrespected, that is.
Here's the thing - with very few exceptions, the people we interact with here are virtual strangers - and you, without asking - have no idea what their backgrounds are. So perhaps, prior to making sweeping statements about someone, it would behoove you to ask, rather than assume. Just a thought. They way you come off (at least to me, watching the conversation, but not participating in it today) is arrogant, and that's off-putting for conversational purposes.Respect works both ways. Why do yall anti-religionists that hang out in the religion forum all day, assume me, a Christian is not well versed in apocrypha? Just thought yall could throw it out there and hope a red herring would walk?
What is next? Paul responsible for 9/11 cuz I say so and what about some harry potter book?. Bring a game and stay on topic.In order to hope to get respect, you have to give a little first. I have said nothing disrespectful to you - just trying to point out ways to improve the conversation so that middle ground and understanding can be reached - yet here you are calling me an anti-religionist, just because I'm pointing out things to help and I happen to be an atheist. There's a difference between being an atheist and an anti-theist. I went to Bible college while I was a Christian, and since I spent a large chunk of my life AS a believer and studying the Bible to (at the time) go into the mission field, it makes sense that the subject still interests me - even if I no longer believe in it. Am I supposed to throw away that interest and those years of careful study just because I decided that I no longer believe that's true? What a waste of time and effort it would have been.
I'm here for conversation, and you will never see me actively, aggressively trying to "deconvert" anyone. People typically go to forums about subjects that interest them, and the subject interests me - and in an open forum, you can post things about all sorts of subjects, even if you don't hold a belief in them. That's the joy of forums. If you're just going to label me an anti-religionist because I'm not religious, then the term can equally apply to you. You're an anti-religionist when it comes to any religion but your own. For that matter, you're an ATHEIST when it comes to Allah, Zeus, Horus, etc. See how easy it is to paste labels onto complete strangers? Do you accept and embrace your anti-religionist attitude now or your atheism?
I didn't say anything of the sort about Paul. And I didn't throw out any red herring or imply that you didn't know anything about the apocrypha. Or are all atheists the same and any atheist that posts just one person? It's like saying all Christians are identical from the Westboro Baptist crowd to the Pope - and we both know that's not true. I'm trying to improve the conversation. You might want to address those comments to the person that made them, and not the bystander attempting to help foster communication. Why don't you just admit that you're not here for conversation. you're here to name-call and attempt to discredit and diminish those that do not share your beliefs. The least you could do would be to be honest about it. Then intelligent people wouldn't have to bother stepping in to try to improve things.I have just been spending some time catching up on the last few pages of this thread, it is very interesting. I jump in here again, because like you I care about conversation, improving it, and respect, etc. If you are indeed not anti-religionist (and therefore pro religionist), then it is good you make that clear here like you seem to almost be doing, as many in these forums are very much anti religionist, and esp anti Christian in particular. It would be like a breath of fresh air if you are not, so thanks for that!
I give you Kudos for being on the side of fair communication, etc. As I looked back over the last several pages, I did seem to think however, that the person you are responding to above, seems to also be concerned with keeping to the points at hand, and fostering honest communication. I understand you don't maybe like his verbage, or the way he is saying things sometimes, but he does seem to care very much about the truths of the matters at hand, like pointing out that some are into using red herrings (which is true, that I have seen, that wasn't disrespectful but seems to be factual). Asking people to bring arguments over assertions, with facts, and keeping things relevant etc, is all a good thing, far as I am concerned. Just wanting to point out that I agree with you on many points, but disagree with the person you are seeming to take such issue with, which was strange.I take issue with the fact that, when faced with disagreement, the first thing out of a person's mouth is "anti-religionist" and the implication that a person without a belief has no business posting in a religious forum because they lack that belief in a particular deity - or that they're educated purely by internet searches.
As Phoenix has stated several times in the last few days - atheists (or anti-religionists as he calls us) have no business posting in religious forums, despite whatever we may have to say, because we aren't believers. I study history, and when studying Western History, it's impossible to get the full picture unless you study religion as well. My lack of belief has no bearing on my ability to post, or study, the material effectively.
I'm for personal religious freedom. Everyone has the right to believe (or not believe) anything that they'd like. I'm against using that religious freedom to restrict the freedom of others, to pass laws based on one religious ideal of morality over another. I'm against a lot of the actions I see being taken in the name of a religion, and there are a lot of things about particular religions that I don't exactly like - but that doesn't mean that individuals do not have the right to their own beliefs. I believe that conversation is tantamount to understanding each position, and in order to have a productive conversation, I do not see the name-calling or label slapping helpful to the overall cause.In fairness, couldn't many people here be truly and rightly be considered anti-religionist? If so, is it not ok to point it out? The opposite is pro religionist. Is it ok to be what we are? No harm, right? I think if i was an atheist, I would be pro "letting people be whatever they want to be", no matter what the religion, etc. What we see is actually undue disrespect toward a particular group and lots of name calling and putting down. It does always strike me as a little bit odd when the group that tends to bash the most, also gets up in arms the most over being "put down" in any way. It is like they are looking "almost" to get to display a victim mentality and bemoaning the points and getting away from discussion, WHILE elevating their own intelligence and claiming others aren't, etc.
When I see someone like Phoenix point out the observations he does, (and I see it too, and have for years in this site and others), I would maybe be careful to not assume he is putting anyone down, but allow for the possibility that he is expressing how it seems just a little strange the amount of time that seems to be devoted to it. I mean, that some are expressing they have concluded there is no longer any reason to believe in a religion, and that they supposedly respect the rights of all people to believe how they want, and yet spend an inordinate amount of time in the forums and sites talking daily about it. It doesn't have to be a put down, but an observation, and if I may add to that my own thought, a possible clue into something deeper in all of us.
I mean, that to me, it looks like a clue that people are clearly drawn possibly for other reasons that can be explained by one of the worldviews represented here, and not by others. I think that whatever worldview is true, it will be reflected of the truths playing out in what we observe around us. What would explain even the sometimes strange things we observe around us in the world? (speaking here more in general.) If you are genuinely for personal religious freedom (especially for all people), then a huge kudos to you! Thank you. Many times in these forums, that is very much not the feeling one gets, not by a long shot, and even quite the opposite. For me, I want that too, personal religious freedom for ALL of us.That's not really the point I was trying to make. I was attempting to point out that labeling a complete stranger as an anti religionist just because they're an atheist is like me going around calling every single Christian I meet a member of the Westboro Baptist Church and asking them about their protests and pocket signs. Automatically assuming anything abouta complete stranger without making any attempt to get to know them at all is absurd, and it doesn't lead to continued conversions
I don't think it is like calling all Christians, Westboro Baptists, because he is either right or wrong. You either are pro religious, pro religion, or pro religionists, or "anti" all those things. (However you want to word it.) He was right or wrong, and it seems to me that you may be taking issue with him calling something, exactly what it is? I have asked a couple of times if he was wrong, not in so many words. He is right or wrong. Which is it? Hope I am making sense? I am trying to understand.
So an Atheists can be in favour of religion? You see I'm an Atheist, but understand that religion is necessary to keep some people from doing bad things. That would make me a pro religion atheist.
Well, are you the type of Christian holding Westboro picket signs or aren't you? It would be either right or wrong, wouldn't it?
It's either true or it isn't is kind of a false dichotomy. I am not anti all religion, especially when it comes to some Christians who assert that without jesus, they would be murdering, raping and pillaging with no morals whatsoever. In their case, I'm grateful for a religion that prevents then from doing those things. I see many different religions doing a lot of good, and I see many religions doing a lot of harm. Is that supposed to be black and white? Where do you draw the line? Are you pro religion, so you are therefore pro all of the negativity that religion causes? Or do you throw the baby out with the bathwater and become anti religion and turn a blind eye towards the good? Do you understand what I'm trying to say now?I think that that more I think about it, I was taking issue with someone taking such issue and an almost victim mentality for what turned out to be actually true. In fairness to you, most atheists ARE anti religionists, and would state it flat out in another conversation. We have all seen it. It isn't a put down, is it? That was my point. There is likely a lot to get into defense mode about, I just didn't see it here. Perhaps this is cause for pause to think about something.
Sometimes, the things that cause the hair to raise on the backs of our necks are things we are definitely feeling, but don't have fully thought out. Are we getting upset at the right things? I say this to myself first! If something isn't lining up exactly, and there is some disconnect somewhere and we can't ascertain it head on at a given moment, let us be careful to not lash out at a wrong thing and miss the whole point of why we may be REALLY upset....if we are. What is really bothering us? The best antidote is to go after that thing and search it out and solve the dilemma.How, pray tell, did I take the victim mentality? I was polite, I was calm and I was rational. I didn't whine or cry or report him for some imagined slight. Heck, he wasn't even talking to me. I was just trying to assist in a conversation that I saw was headed downhill.
Are we going to actually talk about what I actually said, or are we going to discuss assumptions about people that may or may not be true? I just want clarification prior to continuing to explain things pointlessly?
This is an interesting post. You imply labeling someone an anti religionist is disrespectful, yet go through the motions of ticking off the religions someone else is against. You attempted to correct the poster for pointing out (rightly), that another poster was simply regurgitating comments read elsewhere on easily googled sites. This was not a display of a lack of respect by Phoenix, but an attempt to point out that original thoughts on the subject command respect.
I don't see where self proclaimed 'intelligent people' (as if the party you are responding to lacks the same attribute) are improving either the quality of the content, or the tone, of the conversation. What we observe is someone attempting to defend another of the same mind set; without the benefit of any lack of hypocrisy when viewing the exchange and commenting on it. To quote you, 'the least you could do is be honest. Then you could command respect.'lol. Yes, dear. Anything you say, Emile. Happy New Year to you, too.
Not capable of rebutting an honest post. That constitutes honest. Well done
Oh I'm capable of refuting an honest post. I'm just not sure that your post was an "honest post" and there's just no point in arguing with you. We've been around this circle before.
I am always honest. I wasn't looking for an argument, simply offering an unbiased opinion.
I disagree again. I do not find your posts to be the least bit unbiased. Oh well. To each, their own I suppose.
Interestingly enough, I never trust anyone who says they're always honest. It's too biased of an opinion.
What is it called when Christians who have not gone to "bible college" for umpteen years and still believe, are dismissed as ignorant of religious materials???
Because, when asked questions about history or the formation of the bible, you admitted that you knew nothing about it - and more than that - you didn't care to know anything about it, and that it wasn't important. That's what makes someone ignorant about something. It doesn't make you ignorant overall, but it does make you ignorant of that history. Something that you, yourself, freely admit - often with great pride.
Just to insert truth, I didn't assert that I knew nothing about the history or formation of scripture. I DO NOT know about how to walk away from what I already know to be true in favor of information that debases it. The constant bicker about people "hiding/throwing out" very pertinent information that calls God a liar or worse nonexistent is nonsensical to me. Not unknown.
So, ignorant of the scripture we have and the many arguments that render it null and void, I am not. I am learned on the bible as it is. I feel that it is sound and valid. THAT fact renders me ignorant in your eyes because I have not come to the same KNOWLEDGEABLE conclusion.No, you're wrong. I don't think you're an ignorant person, and I wouldn't think that you're ignorant just because you've retained your beliefs. You have not studied the origin of Scripture, you have not studied the early church and you're content to read the bible that we have today in its translation into English like that's how it existed all along, which is fine - but it does make you ignorant of history, the early church and the canonical formation. You haven't studied it and you don't care to.
Again; I am not ignorant of the history of it. The bible speaks about the early church. And what I miss in scripture has certainly been used as argument in my more than two years here. So I know what you know. I just know what makes a difference; and what doesn't. THAT is where we cross. It aint ignorance.
did you know that the bible is made up of many books? A sort of historical account all by itself? Study of the bible is possibly the most complete. I mean, how many times have you sat in the library with 66 books surrounding you???Yes, you know what the Bible says. But the Bible never talks about the biblical Cannon OR the majority of early church history.
I've been in a library with dozens upon dozens of books around me. That's what a college degree kind of mandates. But the Bible never claims to be the end all be all history book. It's like looking at the sistine Chapel and saying you know everything about every church ever built. Or looking through a telescope at a small fraction of the sky and saying you know everything about the universe.
The early church father's knew that they had to combat heresy, which meant reading more than just the Bible to get a clear picture. It's sad that their followers thousands of years later disagree.Early church history has nothing to do with salvation today. Knowledge about the practices and mindsets of early Christian sects possibly had much to do with all the confusion for which God is NOT the author. The study of Jesus and HIS mindset is what REALLY counts in the life of one who believes that what he said was accurate and trustworthy. Wouldn't you say? To study Nietzsche for insight into the heart of Jesus won't do. You must meet HIM where HE IS... and where is that??? Them 66 books. Not dozens and dozens of others. Get it? What does it profit a man to gain the whole world...?
What good does all that knowledge do for the kingdom of God if it only turns one away???
I think it is called just another put down, though that probably isn't what you were going for.
I would rather be shown how, what I said is incorrect or wrong, in light of the greater context of the scriptures, rather than just be told, "you are ignorant" or any variation. It would actually hold more weight and encourage some great conversation and thought among us, which is a more productive and enjoyable thing for all.There are a great many things that I am ignorant about. It's not a put down. It's simply a fact. If you haven't studied something and you have no desire to learn, you are ignorant about that particular thing.
In my experience, when I try to discuss the Bible with a lot of believers, I am immediately disqualified because I don't believe in it, so clearly (according to them) I can't understand it - despite the years I spent as a Christian or at Bible college.So you genuinely think she is ignorant of religious material then? Is that a fact, that can be pointed out and not be a put down? I highly doubt that while she (and all of us) are ignorant of many religious, that she is ignorant of all of them. That doesn't strike me as making sense.
The same would be true of me saying of you, you are ignorant of something completely, because you don't know all the of the facts in totality? Isn't it just kind of an excuse to really let me say, "you are ignorant of all that?" Its just not true, and obviously so. My point I guess is that even her admission of some ignorance of some material, doesn't warrant putting down and calling her "ignorant...." no matter what the exact words, right? Just like it wouldn't be ok for me to do that to you?
Doesn't my point still stand, that it would be better to point out how in the particular case you can actually SHOW me to be ignorant of something? That was all I was saying. Hope it makes sense. I do think often that in these groups people are just putting others down, and she seemed to be touching on that, but I could be wrong.Please forgive me if I'm wrong and for stepping in, but I believe what she said was she was ignorant of the history of how the bible was put together, as am I.
No, I think she is ignorant about church history and the canonization process, which she herself has admitted on multiple occasions. She says it doesn't matter, and she doesn't care - and if I try to provide the information to her, she just dismisses it because I'm a non believer. I have been attempting to Converse with that particular person for months, until practically giving up when she called atheists swine - and got banned for it.
If I display ignorance about something, I want to have it pointed out to me. I want to learn and study and correct my opinion as a result. I never once said that she is an ignorant person, nor would I. But she is wilfully ignorant about some specific subjects - and that's okay.... it's just not for me.It was "dog" and it was a metaphor jumped on by those who were hit with the rock.
but that is not what SHE was banned for.
But out of context and sensitivity to that same so-called disrespect put out is how I am dealt with. It hasn't been a real problem as I expected that coming in. ESPECIALLY the second time. I was just "genaea" then, remember?
Ignorant is a fave term for the SO-CALLED LEARNED here. It gives that extra bit of superiority that they seek whilst using all their knowledge accumulated from the wrong standpoint. Spirit is the measurer. Not books.No, the first time you were banned because an unstable Christian reported you for attempting to perform a forum exorcism on her to get rid of demonic spirits.
People are banned for breaking forum rules. They are not banned for others insensitivitySpirit is the measurer? Pray tell, what units of measurement are used? Number of good deeds, or prayers made?
Spirit tries spirit. One w/o the spirit of God is ill-equipped.
You have studies galore. Not once did you read, "lean not unto your own understanding; in all thy ways acknowledge him..." ??? Or, "try the spirit BY the SPIRIT" ???
Bingo!!! However, I have found that there is little rebut of scriptural context/content. And much kill the messenger in a weak attempt to slay the message. But it was written many years ago that it would be this way. They did Jesus himself. We will in no wise be different.
Yet you will not sway from your chosen faith anyway, right?
Your objective would be to convince every atheist-thinking person that your understandings are correct, right?
It is not my objective to turn you away from you faith. Just for you to respect me for my way of thinking without judging me.But in keeping with that thread, what does what you say above have to do with putting people down in these forums and discussions? They don't count as debate.
As for being swayed from my faith or not, let me be very clear on something. A long time ago, after many challenges from atheists, I decided that I would test my own worldview the very hardest of all. If what they were saying was true, then I was a complete idiot and moron for even beginning to entertain the ideas about a God. I would have been weak and in need of a sky daddy and crutch, etc. So can my own faith stand up? I went after it hard, still do. The reason your question matters is that I think truth does exist, and that a lot of people don't have it. Whatever it is, I would hope that if I was not in ownership of it, that I would be willing to look at myself and life and the facts honestly enough to admit it. This is what I love to study and think about. Ideas matter, philosophy, and our short lived lives matter enough to take this stuff very seriously. Do not assume so much about my objectives, as you are wrong there.
My objective is the same that I hope others would be, to be the most intellectually honest I can be with myself first, and then help others to think a little bit more about their own held worldviews that also need to answer all the big questions as well. No one can change anyone, and I respect others and actually believe we can all live peacefully alongside each other in a pluralistic society. I can respect you for your way of thinking, and not judge you. Let me ask this however... Would you want me to tell you if I thought a view you had was incorrect or flawed in its logic if I saw it? I actually think some would not want to know about it. Some would not want to talk about it. I am fair that way.
Mentioning things countless times, things that you are asserting as true, won't make them true, with all due respect. If you are sincerely convinced by other sources that may not have as many documented manuscripts as some others, or not convinced by the letters written by the people in question, that is one thing. Expecting others to follow suit without making a good argument as to why it is a good idea to do so, seems like not maybe the best way to go. For instance, it makes no sense that Paul was a Roman spy, in light of the writings we have. If you are sincerely convinced otherwise that is fine. I don't see any reason for doing so, it just doesn't make sense. I am coming in late on this conversation, in fairness. Just saw that comment and it jumped out at me.
Some questions people could have for you, is what are your reasons for being so convinced the Gospel of Mary or Thomas is something that carries more weight than the other books of the bible, that it should believed over them? Also, are you studied in textual and literary criticism,and how texts come to us from antiquity? Do you care that some books/letters in question have many more manuscripts and reasons for being believed and trusted over others? Not all things are created equal when it comes to these weighty matters, and if truth is the goal, the finer details of what is more credible over others really does matter. Closer to the dates, for example, is better than say hundreds of years later. People hundreds of years later can't speak on the subject like the eye witnesses could/can, and especially when they are speaking for themselves. My apologies in advance, for I get wordy and I know it and its hard for me to not do it. It will be one of the first complaints I get.
One more thing, Saul was a very, very learned man, in regards to the OT laws..... He was not unaware of what was contained within, and seemed very much in line with many of the things Jesus said. Paul often referred to the Old testament too...
And your points of view, PhoenixV, will be equally biased, and therefore unbelievable by the unbelievers.
However, you are likely to find much more willingness to listen to the religous argument by the atheistic thinkers than the other way around. You could never concede the atheist's point of view if you are an affirmed christian. You would be likely to lose face amongst your peers.My beliefs are not based upon how others perceive me. I became a believer after considerable time of my own volition from a family that were not church-goers. I was like 19 years old. It was after reading a genius like Leibniz and others, could I make an informed choice.
Do you have a comment on Paul working as an Under Cover Agent for the Roman Government, which is uncorroborated and unsubstantiated by 5th century coptic apocrypha or any other apocrypha for that matter? Do you have a broad untenable position of Gentiles being under Mosaic Laws? I do not accept, defend or concede points of views based upon their personal beliefs, I discount them on their lack of merit.A 19 year old does not have the mature brain needed to make reasoned and well thought out conclusions. You were well into your 20's by the time that area of your brain developed, but by then habits and thoughts had set in that were difficult to break.
So it is actually unlikely that you developed a penchant for myth as truth by yourself; unable to reason logically and correctly, you fell for the emotion based words of a charlatan. Had you waited another 6-10 years before examining the question you would likely have a far different answer because you would have then been able to pick out the false claims and illogic.I never went to church really I just read. I read Leibniz, Spinoza, Kant and Descartes when I was 19.
Atheism is illogical. If one does not claim experiential or inferential belief in God, the only logical stance is agnosticism.Reading such merely pressured your immature brain into accepting their illogic, nothing more.
Agree with your comment on agnosticism, but have had some trouble with semantics here on HP. Most posters seem to treat "atheism" as a lack of belief, which to me is agnosticism. In order to maintain communication, then, I have switched my definition of the word "atheism" (belief there is no god) to having no belief at all. I still think it wrong, but it does facilitate communication most of the time.It is unfortunate that you think children with undeveloped brains have minds fully capable of rational thought. It is untrue, and that fact makes neither a logical fallacy nor a personal attack. Just a statement of fact.
PhoenixV wrote:
I never went to church really I just read. I read Leibniz, Spinoza, Kant and Descartes when I was 19.
It does not sound like you have ever read these men. Some were Christian or believers, and others were more pantheistic. Accepting "their illogic" as you say, I find immensely amusing considering the irony, considering what they accomplished.You insinuate that reading those people is what convince you, as a child, to believe in a god. If I misunderstood or read something into your post that was not intended, I apologize.
If, however, those men actually did convince a child to believe in a mythological creature as existing in the real universe, then you did swallow their illogic.Leibniz, along with René Descartes and Baruch Spinoza, was one of the three great 17th century advocates of rationalism. The work of Leibniz anticipated modern logic and analytic philosophy,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottfried_Wilhelm_Leibniz
Those Geniuses actually understood logic, concepts of exist, concepts of real. You throw them around as if...Should I rephrase, then, to say that the immature mind misunderstood their words, turning them from perfect logic to an illogical belief system? Quite possible, I'm sure - children simply cannot follow logical sequences very well. Their desires, their emotional state, their perception of the world around them are all far more important in making decisions than reason and logic.
Better a young mind than a senile one though right?
Of course. It makes as good an excuse as any for believing the myth. And the young mind is so impressionable and gullible - it can be used to repeat the nonsense to everyone in earshot for years and years to come as it is extremely difficult to convince the adult that what they "learned" as a child is only their imagination working overtime.
My beliefs, conclusions are partly based upon the principle of sufficient reason, specifically pertaining to Leibniz cosmological argument. I wouldnt call such things like the principle of sufficient reason a myth would you? These concepts are too difficult to relate to people " generally speaking " with low IQ for example or for example "generally speaking" elderly people obstinately intent on beating a strawman, in general.
1. Every existing thing has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external cause.
2. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.
3. The universe is an existing thing.
4. Therefore the explanation of the universe is God.
As to 1.
If everything needs to have an explaination of it's existence, a God would be no different.
As to 2.
Why do we jump to the conclusion of God?Great questions and I appreciate your honest debate, Rad Man. Currently I am running on not much sleep and too much coffee, for long haired discussions like this. However if you will be patient with a 50 year old, I will attempt to explain my thoughts as they may or may not align with Leibniz.
Imagine if there was no reality. There is no space. There is no universe, no big bang, no energy, no string theory, no gravity, nothing.
What best explains that state. What is the best explanation for that?The problem with that logic is that you are not looking for the best explanation you are starting with the explanation you like and assuming it's the best explanation. But if you think it through the next step would be where did God come from and then where did his creators come from. But if you have evidence for solid logic that doesn't start with the assumption that God created everything I'll gladly listen.
I am not offering any claims or explanations. I am asking you a question only. Feel free to answer logically.
Imagine if there was no reality. There is no space. There is no universe, no big bang, no energy, no string theory, no gravity, nothing.
What best explains that state. What is the best explanation for that?
Yea, right a void, thats what I said in a round about way. Thats a description. What explains a void.
Nothingness, surely? A difficult concept for many to grasp.
Because it's Infinite. When it's Somethingness it's Finite.
Oh, I get it know, you don't know what the meaning to life is and you assume there must be a meaning? Sorry, there doesn't have to be a meaning to all life, there is hopefully a meaning to your individual life, but the doesn't need to be a meaning to all life.
Nothingness is a difficult concept to grasp. It kind of cant even qualify as a concept or something to be grasped. Difficult to draw a circle around nothing.
Thinking about nothingness, or "what is a void...", compared to "something", what we see, is a very good exercise. We live in and among somethings, not nothings. Universes and worlds that we do for sure 100% see in front of us, don't just happen for no "reason."
The "something", the stuff we see is not just comprised of simple cells, or multiple rocks or something. We are super complex and intelligent and contemplate many of these things. I think it is all for a reason, and it is why so many come to these forums. The "reason", matters.
There would be no void because one needs space to have a void of space.
But, the cosmological argument isn't valid, there's plenty of refutations showing it to be completely fallacious.
One has to start with the premise that God created the universe to prove God created the universe. And to some this makes perfect sense.
I have not actually seen that presented that way at all. That is misrepresenting.
How am I misrepresenting this?
1. Every existing thing has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external cause.
2. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.
3. The universe is an existing thing.
4. Therefore the explanation of the universe is God.
The second assertion states the explanation is God.
One must start with 2+2 if they ever hope to attain knowledge of 2x2.
"But, the cosmological argument isn't valid, there's plenty of refutations showing it to be completely fallacious."
The cosmological model is based however, on undeniable logical ideas that cannot be refuted. It is backed by the best logic there is. When we look at the world and the way things work, it makes the most sense. To just deny it for any reason would take the undoing of the laws of logic.But, it already has been refuted because it has been shown to be fallacious.
The idea of there being an uncaused, first cause?
Nothing else makes sense to refute that. Can you in short order show the best argument that shows that to be fallacious? There are plenty right? Just give us the best one here that has you convinced there doesn't need to be an uncaused first cause.
I think this is an example of where we get into other people believing things by sheer faith over what is actually and scientifically true, backed by logic. Science backs up the cosmological argument. The universe and the observing of it with telescopes tells us it is true.
I see some people that seem to so highly esteem science and logic and reason over everything else, and then I see stuff like this. They take a back seat sometimes, and I hope that people are honest enough with themselves when it happens.The conclusion that it was God who dunnit.
It does? Where?With all due respect, you show me in your response that you are not in full grasp of what the cosmological argument even is. You are making jumps and adding in goofy things like "God who dunnit...."
I am speaking strictly of the cosmological argument in its simplest form, of an uncaused first cause. God need not be brought into that argument for it to be sound.
I was incorrectly assuming some things evidently, my apologies.Great then that changes everything doesn't it?
1. Every existing thing has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external cause.
2. The universe is an existing thing.
3. The universe has an explanation of its existence.
4. Therefore there must be an explanation for the existence of the universe, we just don't yet know what it is.
Your answer to the first cause and invalid by your own logic. Can't you see that. If you claim everything needs a cause then the very thing that caused the universe would need a cause as well. Inventing something that doesn't have a cause is not logically sound.
RadMan, I don't see the illogic and here is why. The second sentence of yours there is not my stance, nor the stance of the cosmological argument. As for the last sentence, no one CAN invent something that doesn't have a cause, so I didn't do that, no one can. Of course no one can invent something like that, and no one is suggesting it.
Yet here we are, all living in a universe that looks like it does. That cannot be refuted. Something sufficient for the effect we see in the universe with all science, logic and intelligence applied, is the most reasonable view to hold. This makes sense to me.
It is backed by good scientific research. With always room for fresh knowledge and understanding.
To be honest, I had no idea what I was talking about or what anyone else was talking about. The argument seemed to be going round and round, getting no where and never anything solid. Just philosophical prittle prattle to me. But then I am ignorant so my view doesn't count anyway.
If they were geniuses at understanding logic how do you suppose they would rate yours?
From what I have seen and read, high. (Not speaking of myself, but the person that was directed at, lol.)
Determining if a person cares about facts, logic and reason is pretty easy to do, even if you don't like how they say things. What they are saying is either reasonable, factual and logical or not. It is very easy to see in these forums and even on the news. Americans are getting worse and worse at detecting it or just not caring anymore.
Some truly great thinkers there, that we can all learn quite a bit from, that is for sure! Lucky you for reading them like you did so long ago.
Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive. I'm an atheist agnostic.
Atheism speaks to belief. I do not have a belief in God, therefore i am an atheist.
Agnosticism speaks to knowledge. I don't think it's possible to know with certainty whether or not a god exists, therefore I am also agnostic.
I know many, many atheist agnostics, and agnostic atheists and agnostic theists for that matter. What's the point?Yea, I'm not going to get into a debate on what the definition of atheism is or what the definition of the word is, is, or belief is, or vacuous claims of vacuous no belief, beliefs. How many atheists are there in the world? Each one has a definition for their belief that they have no belief in. Meanwhile they say, atheism but act anti-christian/ maltheist. They have no god-belief but boy is god a meany. I got no time for that.
I know plenty of anti Christians and anti theists, and if you think that these forums are bad, you should get our into the real world.
It doesn't really sound like you are interested in having a conversion. You just want to spread and justify your assumptions about atheists and act superior. Carry on.If atheism were simply defined as lacking a belief in gods, would that suffice as a definition you could work with in order to show us how lacking a belief in things that have never been shown to exist is illogical?
Then, please follow up your explanation as to how you would differentiate and distinguish one particular belief in gods over another and be an informed and logical choice?Imagine, that in my mind, I have a concept of an alternate universe where there is a solar system with a star and orbiting planets. On one of those planets is an inanimate object incapable of thought, such as a rock. This rock "effortlessly" also has a no belief, belief system. Well done.
I think you were attempting to say something clever there, but it seems to have failed. First, you say a rock is incapable of thought, but then has a "no belief, belief system". How does that work?
Perhaps, you should have just admitted you're incapable of providing an explanation to back up your assertions regarding atheism.Every single person reading this has a worldview. We develop and choose our worldviews over the course of our lives. We each have to give answers to defend our worldview, no matter if it is religious or not. We each are totally intellectually honest with ourselves, or not. We sometimes choose, mostly choose, our worldviews like we might choose a favorite food to eat. Whatever looks and appeals most to us, regardless of if they are even capable of adequately explaining the world we live in and our human history. Each of our worldviews are adequate or not, to answer the biggest questions posed to humanity over history. The tougher part is handling what the truth turns out to be, over our preferences so often. I am saying this to myself first, then to everyone else. If only it were on the level of importance of what to eat right now, or where to go right now... These are the weightiest matters of our lives. Our living and dying are touched on by these kinds of things, by what turns out to be actually true. No one escapes this.
This is why I think on a much deeper level, many are here and can't leave the topic alone. Anyone ever suggesting (Speaking in general) that their own chosen worldview is free from having to give explanations for itself, is sadly mistaken. Upon further research, every single one of us does believe in quite a number of different things, and exercises various amounts of faith. This is being intellectually honest, and again, speaking in general to all people here.There is reality, a worldview which we all share equally and cannot get away from, it is there in all it's physical glory.
Then, there are the worldviews that are over and above the reality we all share, often created from religions attempting to make us believe there are invisible entities swirling around us in a never ending battle of good and evil while they direct our destinies. These worldviews have failed in every way.
Being intellectually honest would mean that the only worldview that is valid is the one we all share.
Sounds like something I said...
And I've got a large block of time. The atheist has no business talking constantly about something that does not exist. But hey, I believe, and I usually have ALL DAY.
I LOVE YOUR MIND.
Funny, I did not see you or your strawman there. I am chuckling on your understanding of logic.
I just read your hub on teaching ID in schools and haven't stopped chuckling at your understanding of logic.
What's funny about teaching Intelligent Design in schools is that you'd have to include these guys who also believe the Earth was designed by a Creator:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C3%ABlism
I do that, too, sometimes. Other times they are discounted because of negative evidence, or because of strong evidence of something else that conflicts.
And sometimes they are accepted because of positive evidence. Unfortunately there is very, very little in the field of theology that falls into this category, and none of the core belief system.
LOL. Christianity is an "informed choice"? That's one I haven't heard before.
Tell me in your own words what you think these verses mean.
If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
and
For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.You obviously don't understand the point, which is why you continue on in this vein. It was for this exact type of mentality that the laws were enacted. Jesus's point was that if you abide by the two greatest laws the reason for the law was fulfilled. Those who refused to think had to fall back on the written words and stumble along behind them. Because they lacked the ability to understand.
Tell me what you think these verses mean.
23 Before the way of faith in Christ was available to us, we were placed under guard by the law. We were kept in protective custody, so to speak, until the way of faith was revealed.
24 Let me put it another way. The law was our guardian until Christ came; it protected us until we could be made right with God through faith. 25 And now that the way of faith has come, we no longer need the law as our guardian.What do you think is being said here?
13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.How on earth can you place such importance upon writings that you cannot understand --- because they were written so long ago, in a culture and historical context that was so remote from what we know today?
If you interpret according to your own desired understanding, then the meanings will be peculiar to you. If you take on the meanings as explained by someone else interpreting for you, your mind will be directed by that other person's desired interpretations.
My suggestion to you is get real, explore and learn what is relevant to this day and age. Use the manner of speech with the idoms we can all understand today.Today's idioms are problematic for the following of Christ. Common sense as we know it is bent upon the desire of self. Jesus knew how to think on the things of GOD effectively. He showed us how. "No, we will not stone this woman for her crime; as we aint stoning YOU for yours... " and "No, my people aint gotta be hungry cuz it's Sabbath, you wouldn't leave your trapped grazer stuck in a hole" and "go on and get that dollar over there in that fish, we can pay Caesar, but we gotta pay God too." We don't think right w/o Jesus. We may do ok here, where kill or be killed is the law of the land. But it will not work for entry into the Kingdom of God. We must practice what Jesus said whilst it is yet day. Night is a comin'...
When Jesus said that, he hadn't done all he was going to do. It was "pre-death", pre "fulfilling of the law."
Jesus' death and what it accomplished, accomplished exactly what the law could not accomplish. It is as if the law was in place to show exactly just how imperfect "the law" was, for even the most obedient man or woman could never fully obey it. It fails to save humanity from themselves. It was setting the stage for what Jesus was going to do for eyes that want to see and observe if it is even possible. We broke our creator's laws, death entered, and God made a contract of sorts that we can accept the terms of or reject. We broke the most simple of commandments, and then went and made some commandments even more cumbersome and difficult, which was strange but observable.
Jesus came and fulfilled all he exactly intended on doing. He has more to do, but the central event of all history was the death and resurrection of that historical figure. That was the main thing, and he got it done. For any areas of disagreement or differing of interpretations of this or any scriptures, we can look no further than surrounding texts, in verses, chapters, books, and whole testaments. The correct view will be corroborated by the other scriptures and sayings of the key figures. Not contradicted. If our views are in error when we look at things so sincerely, we then have a choice of what to do with our incorrect views. This is where we see a lot of different stuff going on, and stuff really begins to be just asserted, etc.
His will for what he wants is not our own doing. He did not ask me what I wanted.
he knows that I dont know. What "makes no sense" to us is not his concern. He reigns. Selah.............
God does not honor doubt. Plain and simple. It is faith that moves him. Selah.........
Willy nilly is a man made dogma when it comes to his will for his children. He wants x y and z. Not q p r. The bible contains what he wants. Do it...or dont. No argument from me...
http://www.comereason.org/cmp_rlgn/cmp005.asp
I liked it. Maybe you will too.Ego-driven masturbatory pap. The Bible, in its current incarnation, is the work of ambitious bureaucrats and nothing more. Why else would the vast majority of the writings of Jesus' disciples be left out while the penned subterfuge of a Roman spy is given ~85% of the New Testament?
You stop masturbating all over the Lord's writings!!! Lol high-pitched.
Now... spy??? Jesus's disciples left out??? How you know??? Where should one go to learn about the works and words of Jesus? Is it possible that the writings were burned or drowned because the people who kilt him were mad??? Were the writings of the disciples more convincing??? Do tell... Do we have an account of who ACTUALLY wrote each book from eyewitnesses??? Were the books of Matt and Luke written by the same people at the same time??? Side bar... you know those books almost have identical accounts. Was someone peeking???
I am convinced that the bible is guidance for followers of Jesus. What say you??? Nevermind.Interesting you should ask where one should learn about the works and words of Jesus, why not ask Paul of Tarsus the same question? He never once met Jesus, never saw his works or heard his words, never read about him as nothing was written until 30 years after his conversion, and in Galatians he boasts that he never learnt anything from the apostles and they added nothing to his ministry. He was a maverick who refused to submit to the authority of the apostles.
I notice the article you quoted states that the bible has no contradictions. Here a few I've found in the last couple of days:
Romans 10:13
for, ‘Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.
Matthew 7:21
‘Not everyone who says to me, “Lord, Lord,” will enter the kingdom of heaven
In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul calls the law a ministry of death engraved on stone, but Jesus said that anyone who breaks the smallest part of the law or encourages anyone else to do so least in the kingdom.
Paul calls himself not only an apostle but the first apostle but the requirement to be an apostle was to have walked with Jesus in the flesh.
When Stephen the martyr gave his long spiel to the Sanhedren, he got the burial place of Jacob wrong and said an angel gave the law to Moses whereas Exodus says God himself spoke to Moses face to face.
Matthew, Mark and Luke say Jesus was at the Passover before his death, but John has him crucified 2 days before.
In the OT Samuel has God inciting David to take a cencus of Israel, but Chronicles has Satan doing the inciting.
There are dozens and dozens of contradictions if you dare to Google.Contradictions can be misleading if the context of statements is ignored. Your first so-called contradiction is a great example. Who shall call upon the name of the Lord from a clean and faithful heart shall be saved. So it stands to the very famous REASONING that not all who cry Lord, Lord are doing it as such. Not long ago,'someone pointed out that many will profess Lord status to "appear" trustworthy for personal gain. Was that you? At any rate, the Lord can tell the difference between Lord, Lord for show; and yes Lord, Lord.
Paul of Tarsus was indeed chosen for his biblical purpose. The apostles were killed right? God chose one who would "confound" the wise. As in one who could be ooverlooked because of his previous stance. (Just my opinion for now) but God is smart. He knows how to get his message across. And NO ONE has been able to supress it; with all the attempts. I would not be surprised if Paul's statement about not being apostolically influenced was an effective tactic to ward off those who dared to try to supress him. Again my opinion. The writings of the true apostles were most likely chopped in bits along with their bodies (remember, the people were trying hard to do away with the message). But God is smart (did I say that already) he knows how to achieve his purposes.
If one were to ask for MY opinion, I find it highly contradictory for one with no faith in God to pore over and quote the scripture until memorized. And spend many hours on the subject. But hey...Nope. They are the literal mountains of Gnostic writings censored by the Church.
Mary! A girl...considered an apostle??? Whatever you do...don't tell jonny.
so what did she say? Wait a minute!!! Wasn't our earlier "consensus" regarding the fact that nothing was written about Jesus until MANYMANYMANY years after his death so NONE of the accounts could be trusted??? We go in so many circulars Yes, it's said that The gospel of Mary was written about 100 years after his supposed death.
Do we trust her? She was your example of scripture shielded from the public to supress the true truth? Or at least refute what we have?
Wasn't me and I don't trust any of them. You merely trust the ones chosen for you.
"Who shall call upon the name of the Lord from a clean and faithful heart shall be saved.
I notice that the bolded words are NOT in the bible, either plainly or by context. Indeed the context of the verses around is that people that do not know God may call on him to be saved. They were added, and the meaning of the verse changed, by you.
What gives you the right to change not only the words of holy scripture, but the meaning as well? Are you the next Holy Prophetess, charged by God to straighten out the mess man has made of His words?You are assuredly most amusing to me with this statement.
The scriptute reads, "But everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." A bit further down, Peter tells the people what constitutes the actions of one who is saved. See...just calling is not enough. "Not all who cry Lord, Lord are his" he knows... so, critical thinking leads me to believe that Peter meant that all who call upon the name of the Lord NOW will be saved on the day of the Lord's return. When he comes, and one may see him and finally be convinced, it will be too late. We must be already ready already.So where did the requirement for a "clean and faithful heart" come in? Because what I saw was a comment further down that other nationalities could be saved the same way; certainly they were not thinking that non-Jews had that "clean and faithful heart" when they didn't even believe in Christ OR God.
Read 38.
Clean and faithful comr from other scripture. It all works together. Jesus told us and showed us what it means to effectively call.There is no Matthew 7:38 in any of the bibles I found.
So you will take scripture from somewhere else, in a totally different context, and insert it where you think it will mean what you want it to.
Same question: has God appointed you the next prophetess, in charge of changing the bible to what you think it should say?
"I find it highly contradictory for one with no faith in God to pore over and quote the scripture until memorized."
Perhaps some people wish to educate themselves enough to hold a reasonable discussion.You mean people read things they may not agree with in order to know what they're talking about?! That's impossible!
Looking at the arguments presented by theists against evolution, I would have to say you are 100% correct.
Looking at the knowledge some atheists have accumulated about the bible and biblical times/history, I would have to say you are 100% incorrect.
Maybe it depends on which crowd you run with? Maybe?Who wants to know? Why does it matter?Why discussion about nonsensical fairy dust on a unicorn's lipstick?
If you don't believe the message, no need bothering it seems. You cannot receive from the Lord w/o faith. Unless the sole purpose is to deconvert.So you must know the Lord before you can know him. Believe in him without ever having any interaction with Him, and against all common sense and rationality.
What kind of person would do that? Why would anyone in possession of their faculties ever, ever believe in something they cannot sense, feel or otherwise detect in any possible way?You are right. It cannot happen. You must have enough faith to ask. Remember? Haven't we been here before??? "Lord I know you are most likely fake, I need proof." Just not that sincere is it? You must first believe that he is... (good Google statement). You have been bombarded with information about him. You just don't "like" it as we do.
There has been a conscious effort to disbelieve all that has been presented. Don't you see???
So, no; no one will receive of him without a tiny bit of faith. Obviously faith lies in the refuters (another unseen bit of data) for whatever reason. If your faith lies in the other report, ok.Yeah, we've been here before. And you're still making the statement that "you must have faith to have faith", neatly condemning all rational, thinking people to eternal fire as they do not depend on faith and have zero faith that there is an invisible god floating around.
Don't understand it do you? Expected??? Let me try this...
You must have faith just a tiny bit. Place it in the hands of the father and watch it multiply before your eyes. A bit of faith=A whole lotta faith. But you must choose which way you will lean. Faith??? Or, yourffabulous mind??? (I mean brain matter, sorry)That doesn't answer 1) how you have any faith, or 2) why you would want any.
We have had the faith discussion already.
everyone has it.And you know this how? Because you have lived within the mind of billions of non-believers? Because it is necessary to believe so in order to maintain belief in a kind, loving God?
How do you know everyone believes in your specific god, particularly when you know it isn't so? (Consider the thousands of generations of American Indians that never even heard of your Christian myth - are you claiming they nevertheless have faith in the Christian god?)
That's what you already said - that you must have faith before faith can grow.
To which I responded that rational, reasoning people that do not depend on or have faith are thus destined to burn forever.
Why are we repeating the same words? Because you falsely assume that everyone has at least some faith in God's existence and His innate goodness in spite of his evil depiction in His holy word? That those same people, depending on their brain to find truth and have diligently searched for thousands of years for the slightest hint of Him and found nothing nevertheless have faith He exists?
I'm at a complete loss for words. I feel like I'm talking to a petulant child.
My grandson, at 4 years old, used to tell us each meal that he would NOT spill his milk and so should have a full glass. He never went a meal, for months, without spilling his milk, but would always make the claim anyway. He lived in a world where what he wanted to be true WAS true; where reality held no sway over his perception or opinion.
I don't know about "petulant" but this seems much the same. Reality is irrelevant; desire and perception are what matters. If scripture doesn't fit what is desired, then change it! If the biblical picture being presented doesn't fit what we want it to, change it!Thanks!!! I shall work on my petulance.
...didn't mean to swipe your words.
Comparing scriptures I come away with the fact that Jesus stated that he was bringing in the new (covenant) law. He came to fulfill it so the New may start. He seemed to confirm by saying, whoever shuns these here commands... he compared their thought processes to his thought and told them the truth of the matters.
- SirDentposted 10 years ago0
Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus (the law of grace and mercy) hath made me free from the law of sin and death (the Levitical law which brings death to the person that sins).
Bold font added by me.
Yeah sure, I have decided not to understand your gibberish.
Related Discussions
- 133
The end of the world will be ....
by jerami 12 years ago
There are no such dates hidden in scripture point to the end of the world. How ever ! The beast which rises up out of the sea is given 42 prophetic months to committ blasphemy and to persicute any and all that does not sign up in their camp. This is the only...
- 26
Do you believe in the Mayan profecies? If you don't tell me why
by Juan Rivera 11 years ago
Do you believe in the Mayan profecies? If you don't tell me whyI don't believe in those profecies I can explain why but first I need your opinion
- 22
do u believe in prophecy?
by pisean282311 13 years ago
do u believe in prophecy or consider it to be mere stories?
- 78
Are we making a mistake by taking Revelations too literal?
by Julie Grimes 13 years ago
When you read the Book of Revelations, it reads like a good sci-fy story, or mythical mystery novel does. Maybe this is because of the fact that the Book of Revelations is virtually a storyline about a dream, which a man named John once had a long, long, long time ago.Most scholars now agree that...
- 58
The Next End Time Prophesy
by Emile R 11 years ago
So, the Mayans were wrong. Which doesn't mean that the end isn't near. According to Saint Malachi, anyway. His predictions on the popes have been eerily accurate.Once the current pope is gone, do you think that will herald the end of the Catholic church, the end of the world or simply leave us in...
- 29
How much of the Bible, especially Revelations, do you feel is relevant
by ntljhn 13 years ago
Do you feel that Revelation, in particular , how the signs are supposed to be incredibly apparent to God's children, is taking place in this day and age?