God and Adam
Does God have feet?
This question is pondered because of a very interesting conversation I witnessed yesterday. It pertained to the spirit of Adam. He no doubt had spirit within him. He breathed the very breath of God. However, when God said, "in our image" could he have meant, his own creation?
A further note: God is spirit. He invented flesh; he formed the image of man especially from dust. Everything else was spoken into existence. Does our own image=my very own creation?
My second point concerns the likeness part. Could "likeness" have referred to Adam's original immortality? He was not banned from the tree of life at this point.
Any scripture to confirm or deny these possibilities?
What are your thoughts?I think no one can know. You can make up any definition you like for "likeness" as any one is as good as any other. God isn't going to tell you the truth, and it doesn't matter anyway - given that no definition is superior to any other.
I think a search of the scripture led by spirit would yield a very workable discussion and a more than likely conclusion based on all of scripture.
Let us see what happens.Well, that's what I said! A good imagination and a little reading and you have an instant definition, and one that even says whatever it was you wanted it to!
My bible doesn't change. It says what it says.
"Rightfully dividing" is the tricky part when the spirit of the Lord does not lead.Yes, your bible says what it says. It just doesn't mean what it means; your continual twisting and interpretation of the words have made that abundantly clear. Indeed, the OP is another example when you ask what others think the words mean.
What does "rightfully dividing" have to do with what "likeness" means?
God already said what He intended MAN to know;all He said is truth; He gave us gift of faith to carry everyone of us into different level of " knowing Him "...HE IS , it's amazing how He introduced Himself to Moses," I AM". Does God have feet? Sure He does, says my faith.
So He gave some people enough faith to fill the collection plate, others enough to feed from the collection plate, and the remaining large majority none at all so they will fill Hell with their tortured screams for His eternal pleasure.
Nice guy, your god...Nice or not, ' God has apportioned to each person a measure of faith.' (Romans 12:3). some do develop their portion of faith by choice , well -its a free market so that everybody makes decision to blame himself instead to blame me...
It's nice if you believe the PR, for you at least.
But there isn't even a hint of truth to the statement; too many people throughout history have had no faith and too many do not today.
To think otherwise is to believe that people that have never heard of your god nevertheless have faith that it exists. Nonsense.The Creator of the Universe- for not better term, called ' God' made it very plain for everybody - in their inner consciousness He has revealed Himself since the very beginning His invisible nature and attributes, that is, His eternal power and divinity has been made intelligible and clearly discernible in and through things that have been made= His handworks. So men are without excuse- altogether without any defense or justification… Whoever want to see, can see the heavens declaring the glory of God as the firmament shows and proclaimed His handwork.
So, there is room for " to think otherwise" - just don't , please, blame me for my choice to use my faith while the opposition practices other option.Nice thoughts again, but they are without foundation. They all boil down to your personal imagination and faith, not to anything factual.
For your god has NOT made anything plain; if He had there would not be thousands upon thousands of differing opinions. He has never revealed Himself at all, let alone since the beginning. His supposed invisibility does NOT translate into power OR divinity, and has not been made intelligible or discernible, particularly through things that came to be without any action on His part. Things such as the universe, sun and earth.
I shall not blame you for using faith, no, as long as you do not attempt to present your opinion and faith as fact. It is not, and you have zero evidence it IS factual. Looking at the sky, formed by natural actions without interference from a creator, and declaring there WAS a creator does not make it so. Your faith is yours, and is not transferable to anyone else. It certainly cannot be forced on anyone.H'm, it started with " God and Adam", meaning this forum and next dialog.Whenever these two are in focus, all the biblical account of the relationship or broken relationship was that Adam's distrusting the Creator for exchange to put "faith " elsewhere. This thing called faith is amazing : once a person develops it , begins trusting the truth of the Word, is ahead of those who don't . By faith it is that we understand that he universe has been made by God's word, so that what we see came into being from what we cannot see. (Heb.11:3) To diminish "speculation " of those who live by faith , we are told "No one has ever seen God, and yet the one in human body who is divine, who is closest to the Father has show us who he is,"(John 1:18). Complex simplicity of God is manifested by deeds and explained by the words as we follow Jesus from Nazareth recorded in the history of His time. Yet remain flexibility without faith freely create thousands upon thousands of different opinions…even to the point denying of existence of God- being nothing new,- as we read in Psalm 14:1 " The…( you know this, everybody is familiar with this verse)… The king David's explanation of behavior of those denying God, has help me to make right decision to know and to believe what is right in order to do the same , because God's word says righteous are living by faith. Simple, undeniable simple : My faith is mine, isn't transferable to anyone.Everyone has received portion of faith . Everyone has choice to be happy and blessed. For that purpose all this exchange; someone has been looking for the answer to this matter, and we only are the instruments of divine Wisdom.
"....once a person develops it [faith] , begins trusting the truth of the Word, is ahead of those who don't" Ahead how? They have no more knowledge, they are no more able. They DO have to learn to set aside reason to accept faith; does that make them "ahead"?
"By faith it is that we understand that he universe has been made by God's word..." No, faith cannot lead to understanding, just belief. Understanding is indicative of knowledge, which is not the bailiwick of faith.
"Complex simplicity " is an oxymoron, without meaning.
"Everyone has received portion of faith" That would be 100% false, something I know because I have no faith. I also question whether the billions of people that never heard of the Christian god ever had faith in it.
"Everyone has choice to be happy and blessed" Explain that to a starving child, belly extended and destined to die in the next hour.
You may feel you are an instrument of a god somewhere; I prefer to be the instrument of reason.This is so wonderful: All those who never knew either one of us, now they have information who we are by the way of our thinking, believing, expressing ourselves… Does anybody care? The society is divided into two active groups/party , the good and en the evil , believers in the God, or believers in a god, as well believers in not existing any of " gods" ;- no one is my concern neither my problem. It's always between " You and your 'god ' " -( whoever "you" is). [ It was a pleasure. or at least interesting.] Pax vobiscum.
Are you suggesting that those that believe in God are 'the good' and those that don't are 'the evil'?
Those two forces: good and evil are manifested mainly through the people, by the people ; NO suggestion on my part who they are or what/ whom they believe. ( A tree is known by the fruit.)
Your faith is in your ability to decipher right from wrong/good from bad, on your own. Though you cannot feed the starving children.
It is easy to see/hear.
You have "me" fruit.
Your words express your unfailing ability to know. And your adamant refusal to know God. This world of adherence to Godly righteousness operates under the spirit of God. We may change our perception of him. But he does not change. When you deny him, he denies you. But that is only if you believe as I do.
I agree Michael-Milec!
it is a mistake for others to want people to follow a specific set of dogmas they happen to follow: that kind of reasoning is not strongly based on he Love principle. Yes they might love their own ideas but a bigger and better Love will find a way to embrace other philosophies as long as they tolerate others and don't try to injure those who have different views.The bible didn't say tolerate other stuff. He said come away from them, one way to the father. If you love me, keep my commands, and how can two walk together lest they agree? And you are for me or against me. We know a fruit... You who are spiritual restore your brother and on and on and on.
He did not compromise his position. No discussion about which road the disciples preferred. Or what idea they preferred.
There really is no wiggle room on the standard; it is what it is. Petty quarrels over words among the followers was prohibited I think Paul said that. But to deny any leads to denying more.The problem with that is its causing confusion. For example: to the JW's (not to single out just them!) everyone else is going to hell except 144,000 of them; to each denomination a group hell is almost certainly foreordained for others!
See?
If we use the "glasses of love" to read scripture (from any religion) we can easily discern the hand of God vs man. Man is usually about dogma and politics and damning others; God is about Love and compassion.God is about right. Let us not get it twisted. He loves all. He told us what to do and what to not. We cannot amend or reorganize the messages.
The JWs didn't read my bible.Yes, let's not get it twisted or amended. God is about killing anyone not following His orders, particularly lives innocent of any wrongdoing. The JW's may not read your bible, but it seems you don't either. Or maybe just skip over, amend or twist the parts you don't like.
We must talk about that. Though you are not spiritual which makes you unable to counsel me on godly thinking; what do you see twisted from my stance? Strict adherence to the words of Jesus???
Once again, your use of the word "spiritual" is meaningless and only shows the desperation you have to defend your beliefs.
Which brings me to another point. The kingdom of God is spiritual. To deny that is simply denial. No one may will spirit away. It is essential in the receipt of its wisdom. Desperation only enters when my spirit longs for more spirit.
We all have it. And we may decide what it does. Yea or nay.Once again, your words are completely meaningless. You can't even explain it.
Thank you cgenaea, Amen. The Spirit of God only comes when invited. When we ask Jesus into our hearts as Lord and Savior we are born again. Then the Holy Spirit resides in us and we in Him. A gift from God indeed. 24/7 Our helper, friend, counselor, guide and advocate. The Holy Spirit is a gentleman and twists no arms for man to come to Him. He can be grieved. For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. (2 Timothy 1-7) The spirit of fear is from the enemy. He comes only to steal, kill and destroy (John 10:10) Jesus came so that we could have life and have it more abundantly. (John 10:10) In Love, In Christ. Skye
I'm not certain this is entirely true, and it showcases the problem with judging by our personal perception. JW, by my understanding, have no belief in hell. They think the entire world will be given the opportunity to live under the rule of Christ during a thousand year reign. After which time those who choose to rebel will lose their lives. No eternal torture, just death. The 144,000 are the elite who will help rule the New Earth.
I find their beliefs problematic, but not in line with your statement.
Hey Cg, I studied this in my 20s and believe that Jesus was Melchizedek, the incarnation of God in the OT. For sure, according to scripture, Jesus was there at the beginning with God and the NT says the whole world was created by him and thru him. God sent Jesus to be His hands and feet and now that Jesus has returned to the Father, His children are awarded that calling. Good thread.
I'm very interested in what you studied.
I always found it mind boggling that Adam was created in the image and likeness of God; but he was made of flesh. If God has no flesh, what is the term in my image referring to? Well, in my own image could mean the image he came up with? He actually formed Adam; but spoke everything else into existence. Can you recall anything that would help to confirm or deny this line of thought? It is really interesting to me. And I do value your spiritual connection; as well as a few others here.
ThanksHere is the thing, scripture can and is vague on purpose so you can make your own stuff up. Does God have feet? Why would he need feet? If he has a body he would be measurable. First one needs to decide if there is evidence that said God exists and then would have to decide what said God is. But the logical answer to your question about man being made in Gods image would be that we would be like him/her in personality and emotions.
So not a "spitting" image; but a spiritual one? God is not measurable. So, no "body" per se... I think this is what you are saying and it makes sense.
I was taught that this "image" looks like God. But that really does not make much sense. God does not have flesh.Beth! You're killin' me!!! Lol
One moment I think you're for, the next, I'm not sure.
Clearly you are light. But I'm not sure if you are agreeing with look alike or no.
Do you think Adam looked like God or is the image spiritual and or simply God's very own creation?
I'm just not positive how you interpret the scriptures. I just want to be sure I see the full picture of what God is most likely saying. I know you can help me clear it up in my head. Thanks for bearing with me.I read too fast and miss ppl's main points all the time. So sorry.
Do I think Adam looked like God? Yes, b/c we are made in his image. Does that mean God is flesh and bone? No, God is spirit, as scripture says.
What do I imagine? That God is spirit that has the similar appearance to man.
I Cor 2:9
However, as it is written: "What no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, and what no human mind has conceived" -- the things God has prepared for those who love him--
I Cor 13:12
For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
I believe we cannot fully imagine the things of Heaven, but I have total faith that what I don't know, I don't have to know now and He will reveal all things when we are face to face. That is good enough for me.Yet...we cannot look upon God; his glory will destroy us. But we can look on each other without problem. How can we look like the glory of god without causing harm?
Because none of us are without sin, I don't think that will ever be an issue. It is b/c of His holiness that we cannot look upon Him.
Then we don't look like Him. Or we do, but for a few little things such as the holiness that is His most visible and notable feature? It would make more sense to decide that "likeness" refers to love, or soul or spirit or something we can't see.
Thank you! A great sigh of relief.
I too believe we cannot imagine. It just does not seem fathomable.
To say we can't imagine (which I agree with) and then say all we have to do is look in the mirror (which I'm mentally flip-flopping) seems kinda... confusing?
I guess I do know that we may only speculate and this point is not of urgency to a spiritual walk. I just feel like a kid in a candy factory. can't you feel me tugging at your hem along each aisle? Lol!!! lt popped into my head and I threw it out there.
The scriptures you provided were key. The mirror was enlightening."Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path."
Did Adsm look like God? Yes,my faith confirms ," No one has ever seen God; the unique one, who is divine, who is close to the Father, has shown us who he is" (J.1:18); " He who has seen me (Jesus) has seen the Father ( (God), (J -14:9; 11.) Pilate pointing to Jesus from Nazareth said " look, here is the man." ( J.19:5). Adam, ( first) - God's chosen representative of human race. Created in His image- likens - so little of description at the " creation" story- all and everything with the " second Adam" Jesus conformed to the nature of God." My " discussion " in this matter begins and ends in faith, and I am more than persuaded by my trust in the Creator - faith it is giving me peace because as children of the Most high God we are born of His Spirit - spiritual likeness- at the present rime we can see the bodily form only.
A painting looks like flesh, too, but has no flesh itself. Neither would a bronze bust or even the voodoo doll the witch doctor uses, but they would all look like the model; they would have the "likeness" of the model.
God created the Earth
Gen 1:1 a
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Who was helping Him create the Earth?
26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
The NT says it was Jesus with God, creating the Earth
John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.
God is not body, He is spirit
John 4:24
"God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth."
So who was walking with man in the garden?
Gen 3:8
Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden.
Jesus is the embodiment of God
John 1:18
No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
John 6:46
No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.
Verses on Melchizedek
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bib … lchizedek/So if Eve was formed from Adam's rib then she was a clone. She must have had his genetic material, so that would make her a man?
Good thought. But God formed her differently. She had her very own stuffs that distinguished her from the man. She was not the forethought that Adam was. She came to enhance his experience and give him children
she plays a very important role in the complete aspect of things. She was the very last creation. But certainly not least. God topped off his creating with woman. She was the last work he put his hands to. Adam was impressed.Yeah, Adam was impressed all the time even before he could see the excitement, beauty and the rest accommodated in his rib - until the Creator have presented her to him. Next is giving us a spontanious answer to "HIS OWN IMAGE" -- ( humanity will never gues aright to determine God's "gender"- hey HE IS FIRST OF ALL THE SPITIT- taking bodily form , including Jesus from Nazareth)-- as we are told " in the image of GOD created He him MALE AND FEMALE created He them. This is where my faith knows the truth abou the God-Creator - even my Heavenly Father. (( he/she applies to the bodily form of humanity, no spirit included).
You haven't answered the question though. If God did not use the genetic material in Adam's rib to create Eve, and seeing as all the complex chemical constituents to make a human are not all present in a human bone, then why bother with the bone? For the bible to be literally true as you appear to believe, it should say something along the lines of "Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, altered the genetic make up, and added in some further chemical compounds and minerals that he dug out of the Earth."
The answer is there! The " God " is the Creator, he does things in His unique way. All those who believ already know.
All those who believe already believe; knowledge is not a part of the belief equation.
The Wisdom is! " the chief wisdom is the awe of the YAHWEH .( Prov.1:7)
' Getting wisdom is the wisest thing you can do!'
No apology might do any change, ' we do walk by faith not by...' Once on that journey , there isn't looking back - " wisdom is the principal thing ; therefore get wisdom; yea with all your getting, get understanding.."( Prov. 4:7) you can use different translations of this message, however without the Holy Spirit and faith , well, -the results might lead to endless dialog to which none of us has time, and my choice is not to continue in that direction.Check your dictionary; "awe" is NOT "wisdom". The two have nothing in common.
What does any of that to do with equating belief to knowledge? Or are you changing the subject with random words to sow confusion?Clearly by believing in a literal young earth creation this wisdom has completely eluded you.
Sir, thank you. This already gone too far.
Well where were you when they organized the canon? That's brilliantly described!
God gave her her very own chemical make-up. She had to do things that her guy was not made-up to do. she was not given his strength, so she needed his protection. She was made of him not like him.
The genetics are original. We may only speculate as to what they must have been before death took over. The Lord must have needed to make some changes for adaptation to the newer dying world with its thorns and stuff.
Eve was not a Man, Mankind, he and she, Adam, mortal Man, the Flesh Body was born of the dust of the ground, was born of ordinary, natural means, the Evolutionary Process, cause and effect.
Eve is just another side of Man, he a she, Mankind, Mankind's second Nature, is a Creation, is not born of ordinary, natural means, Evolution, cause and effect.
Being a Creation Eve, was born of magic, out of nowhere, was born of God, created in the Image of the Immortal Spirit of God, Eve being Mankind's Spiritual Body, Adam being Mankind's Mortal, Flesh Body.
It is Man's, his and her, Mankind's destiny, God's will for Man to walk the Earth having both a Flesh Body and a Spiritual Body.
Before Man's Spiritual Body can rise up, the Flesh Body must be laid to rest, the desires of the Flesh must die so that the Passion, the Boundlessness, of the Immortal Spirit, before Mankind can be made manifest a Free Spirit.Satisfying the desires of the Flesh Body is not an act of Free Will.
The logical conclusion would have to be that it is the Sentience Itself of God that has been repeated in man. We are fully sentient beings and this is a God like quality or "image"/"likeness" that the Bible is referring to.
Thank you. I feel that we're on to something.
We are also able to "rule" our surroundings/make decisions, and control our thoughts.
How do you feel about "likeness" being used to point out that Adam was created immortal "like" God?
For the record, I don't believe that this is anything more than minor discussion about the deeper things/meaning of scripture. Belief either way is not something that will count against anyone. We also know, through the spirit, the important matters of the law we have been given. We know his voice.
And you sound familiar
Two different words are used in original Hebrew describing the creation of man in " God's" 'likeness' and 'image'. By now we know that "God is a spirit",- infinite, neither limited by parts nor definable by passions. He can have no corporal image after which he made he body of man. The image and likeness must necessarily be intellectual ; His mind, his soul must have been formed after the nature and perfection of God. God was producing a spirit- a spirit too, form after the perfection of his own nature. Thus God made man in such a way as to reflect same of his own perfections- perfect in knowledge, righteousness and holiness- and such resemblance qualified man for dominion; constituting man lord of all creatures that are destitute of intellectual and moral endowments. If you like a man in partnership with the Creator supposed to be a "god" on Earth as The God is God in heaven.
Adam was made "god" of the fishies and stuff.
I see what you mean though. Image and likeness. Spiritual. It just seems that flesh would put the body of man in a totally different category of spiritual.
SirDent kind of prompted this line of thought when he spoke of the spirit aspect of Adam. And he has not input as of yet. Hopefully, we will hear from him. I really would like to know where he is on this.
Do you know if the body of Adam was transformed at all by his disobedience? Was he changed? I know his body started the process of dying at that moment but did it change him physically? Do we have word on that?
Beth,
is this a Mormon belief? I love and respect the Mormons but i don't necessarily adhere to all their beliefs.
I know their men practice a "Melchizedek priesthood" today.Not just Mormons.
When a Catholic priest is ordained, he becomes "a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek." Words directly from the ordination and directly from Scripture as well.
Just thought I'd toss that in there.Yes I understand that Melchizedek was a great priest of high repute etc.
Once again the problem arises between the different denominations as to who is supposed to have a "monopoly" on the priesthood.
Reading the scriptures of various denominations and religions with Love in one's heart easily solves the problem, but reading with the eyes of blind dogma causes confusion.
Love says that each religion is allowed its own priesthood and all are equal. Blind dogma says the opposite.Wow...!!! So that's what you want to convey? Anything goes??? Ok.
But that is not what Jesus taught. That is what I follow.No; I said only things that are based on Divine Love are from God.
What biblical things are there that meet your loving requirement? Which part meets the human standard of love?
In other words; which parts of the bible may we actually believe to be the word of God? Have you put together a reference of those texts that should be blotted?
allegory
ˈalɪg(ə)ri
noun
1. a story, poem, or picture which can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one.Rev 1:15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
This is speaking of Jesus, the Alpha and Omega. Feet like fine brass.
Adam was created in the image and likeness of God. Sin free, naked (not needing clothing).
When Adam ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he changed. The spiritual man became carnal and he then needed clothing to cover his nakedness (shame).Gen.2:17…' for in the day that you eat thereof you shall surely die.' Adam died the same day he sinned - failed the test of trussing the Creator- the only FATHER he ever had , turned to believe lie of the satan. By being found guilty, man became a mortal creature, the image of GOD in him was deformed-- prolonging our curiosity of " i m a g e and l i k e n e s s of GOD.
I do like where you went there. It is like we may not know the fullness of the image and likeness until the return of Christ. Adam changed when he sinned. He could no longer remain in his original form. The knowledge of nakedness is key. The fact that he began the process of death at that moment is also telling.
No problem then, all we need to do is join Nudist Colonies and we'll all be sin free.
Renewing of mind is what it takes.
Nakedness causes sin in many arenas.How does nakedness cause sin?
Don't you really mean the lust inside a person? Not the skin on the outside?I am sure that's what she meant. Nakedness tempts people.
1Jn_2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.Everything tempts people to do something bad. Food, drink, hot cars, money - everything can be abused. But it is not the hamburger that is evil, or the medium of exchange we call "money". It is the person with the desire bigger than their morals.
Nakedness is not evil, but the lust of the person viewing human skin can be. So there is nothing inherently evil about nudist colonies in spite of the comment that nakedness causes sin. It doesn't.Then, Adam did the right thing by covering up his nakedness. You people should really try to get your stories straight.
Covering his nakedness was Adam's first sign of Wisdom after having eaten the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, said fruit, Knowledge having a dual quality, being the Knowledge of Good and Evil, being Guileful; mankind, Adam, becoming deceptive, Duplicitous.
That still doesn't make sense. That would mean God did not have the knowledge of good and evil if he made Adam in his image, prompting Adam to gain that knowledge and cover himself up.
If SirDent is happy the people are covering themselves up in his church, then he too would be deceptive, duplicitous, guileful, just like Adam. He should instead insist everyone be naked so they strike the knowledge of good and evil from their minds and restore Gods image.Only God can restore when we obey. To strike from one's mind of the knowledge he obtained is impossible for a while. We cannot UNknow something.
People with disorganized schizophrenia sometimes suffer from hallucinations and delusions, but unlike the paranoid subtype, their fantasies aren’t consistent or organized.
http://www.helpguide.org/mental/schizop … ymptom.htm
For some, restraint is of a steel quality. But I would say that for many more, the eyes take us on amazing journeys.
Nakedness was not sinful before sin entered. But now Adam has a much different view of the booty.Restraint need be only stronger than desire. People CAN learn to control their emotions; just ask Mr. Spock.
But if god did not mean for man to have sex he would not have ordered them to perform the act. Sex is not evil, either, and the only prohibition I recall is to stay away from the neighbors wife. HE is up for grabs, but not his wife.The bible lets us know that we can control our thoughts but it takes a renewed mind to get to the right thoughts.
Thought happens quickly. In the blink of an eye, two horrible thoughts may be born.
There are many restrictions on sex. Simply thinking about it may be wrong.
You are contradicting yourself. If Adam was created naked, (in the image of God), then that would mean the image of God is a temptation.
How do you resolve this contradiction?God don't need no swinging things
he makes children with his hands. The tempting parts are not there.Gibberish. Try to come up with something thoughtful rather than just stringing random words together.
Sorry...
The penis and testicles of a man are really tempting to look at when women and/or some men have lust in their hearts. God made Adam in his image yet added the tempting parts to Adam because he needed to procreate.
God on the other hand, needs no penis and testicles (tempting parts for many) because he creates with his hands.
Funny how long and drawn out one becomes while trying to be "thoughtful" gibberishlessly. LolNo. Jesus called his father "him" and "he". God is male minded. His body is spiritual not flesh. No need for sperm.
And, you know for fact that God didn't have a penis and testicles? How do you know that? Where in the Bible does it state that? How do you know God gave Adam a penis and testicles to procreate? Where in the Bible does it state that?
Critical thinking...
Errrrr...God told the man and woman to be fruitful and multiply. He didn't state ANYTHING about sex... did WE make that part up from lust??? Hmmmm...maybe children ARE supposed to come via stork delivery??? And we lusted it all up with the sneaky freaky???
The bible said NOTHING about what to do with them parts! Hmmmm... maybe snazzy coat hangers and flower pots???
When I thought like that, it didn't seem to logically flow...
I assume that since God doesn't sleep, he may not have sex or pee either. I don't know really.
What's YOUR best guess?You say that the Bible is God's word.
But you do an awful lot of assuming. How do you know your interpretations are correct?The assurances that I get from knowing a lot of what the bible says; and the confirmations of the holy spirit.
I can assume if I want to. I will not lead away from the path, in the name of Jesus.I wouldn't want to lead you away from Jesus. Each person is entitled to their own version of religion.
But this is a discussion board, and I'm pointing out what I think are flaws in your religion. Just as you are pointing out what you think are flaws in other people's thinking.But, you actually don't know much about what it says, you just make stuff up pretending you know. It's obvious. You certainly aren't fooling anyone here.
Oh no, it is quite true that you aren't fooling anyone.
I don't need to guess that you're just making this stuff up as you go along, dishonestly trying to defend your beliefs and qualify your contradictions. Sad, really. But, that certainly has been shown to be part of result of religious indoctrination.
That's the weirdest thing I've heard anyone say for a long time.
How many women are running around being tempted by testicles and penises? Women aren't that stimulated visually. That's why there isn't a huge market for porn for females. Women are more sexually attracted to personality and pocketbooks. Those men who are more likely to provide for their offspring.That's very well said. I was thinking the same thing, but as a heterosexual male I have no idea is these things are attractive. I see them all the time in change rooms and don't want them near me.
Don't get out much??? You speak of the way women are portrayed or portrayed themselves in the 50s.
It's a new day now.
Today's woman is very enticed by what she sees. And she goes after it too.Actually, what I said was based on studies of human behavior.
I have no trouble personally with seeing a penis. I don't have any lustful thoughts when I see one. I am more likely to be sexually attracted to someone based on general appearance mixed with personality if judging a man at first glance. But I don't often feel any sense of sexual attraction unless I've known someone for quite a while and become attached emotionally.Men aren't much different either, from what I've read. While more attracted to woman visually, they tend to see the big picture more that individual body parts. Youth, good teeth, wider hips for childbearing, glowing skin, things that radiate health. This is done subconsciously though, as a means of determining if the female is a good candidate for producing offspring.
Normal men are perfectly capable of controlling themselves when seeing an attractive female.Even a thought can be sinful. Self-control is a sign of maturity. Yes, we do not jump on it in most cases. But the mind is fluid. One day, when the moon and stars line up right and the music is right and the feeling of today hits at the right angle in the right lighting, BAM!!! A really nasty thought. Just from the sight of the perfect set of genitals. Clothes are a precaution in this case. The body looks good to many. Now you don't suffer there but many do. Cover it up says the bible.
Hummm, better be married as Jesus said you'll have to cut out your eyes and or hands off.
"But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell."
Actually that's not true. The Bible says God created with his word.
God didn't call humans into existences. God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being [Genesis 2:7, Genesis 1:26].
OOPs, my bad:)
But it doesn't say which body part was used, does it? Maybe God used his toes.
What did the bible say about the creation of Adam and the girl??? (Our subject)
The appearance of naked t'na or bulging other stuff arouses thoughts that most likely should not be there for many. One could not even be thinking lasciviously; then one flash of the flesh...
Ya know???No, I do not know. People are responsible for their own thoughts, just as they are their actions. Blaming sinful thoughts on someone else is no different than blaming sinful actions on someone else. Or on Satan; while there are millions of scapegoats out there, people ARE ultimately responsible for themselves.
The bible tells us that we may cause others to sin. And we will be held responsible.
It may well say that. Doesn't matter - everyone is responsible for their own actions at the root. No one else.
And in this matter, Wilderness trumps bible. Our world is slowly deteriorating into people that cannot and will not accept responsibility for themselves, that will blame someone else, something else, anything but themselves for what they do. And it is already hurting society as it degenerates into the concept that anything is OK because it's someone else's fault.
It isn't. Our own actions belong to us, not someone else, and we are responsible for them. Best that we learn that, and if it means the bible is false so be it. It isn't the first time that has happened and it won't be the last.We each have the responsibility to learn of him. An ear to hear him works best. However, not everyone believes that.
We may lead others into sinful ways of thinking and sinful acts. Though you are correct that we each are responsible for our choices; wilderness NEVER trumps the bible EVERWould you wave an open bottle of whiskey in the face of a recovering alcoholic? This is what temptation is. You could wave a bottle around me all you want and I won't drink it but there are other things that will tempt me simply because it is what I used to do.
Yes, everyone should take responsibility for their own actions and confess them before God, acknowledging their sins. Stop blaming the devil for their own lusts. Let the Lord clean them up and move on with their new-found lives. A new creature, born again, something they never had been before. The day of salvation has come and it is now.Make up your mind - either you blame Satan and the neighbors for your excesses or you take responsibility for them.
And if God will fix you, and give you a clean life, then it has to be in you, not the naked neighbor. After all, He isn't fixing the neighbor, just you.
And whatever does confessing your sins have to do with anything? God already knows them - you don't need to tell him. You aren't "confessing" (complaining about) the sins of the neighbor, just your own, so He won't take action to stop the evil there, either.
Bottom line; if you think talking to an imaginary god out there will help stop the sin, the problem HAS to be within you because certainly those talks will NOT make a tiny bit of difference to the neighbor. Just you.Well you have gotten TWO lols from me on this one.
The naked neighbors are a temptation to their lustful friends. The Lord covered those up for that reason. Most people are tetempted by juggs and stuff sex is built into our make-up.
Confession of sin is not a favor to God either. It is for the ears of the one confessing. Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. If you like your sin, it shows by the way you confess or not. It is an excercise that also reveals your faith and willingness to do things God's way to self.Do I have this right? God made man (both sexes) in such a manner that the sight of them entices others that God also made into sinful actions. And it is the person being looked at that carries the blame for those actions (by both God and the other persons); the sin that can and will send them to hell if they don't hide God's crowning work from anyone that might see it.
Are you really sure about all that? Because it doesn't make an ounce of sense, but then I guess God's propensity for punishing children for the sins of their fathers never did either.
As far as confessing, don't be silly. Speaking your sins aloud for you to hear yourself talk reveals nothing you don't already know. It certainly doesn't "show by the way you confess or not" whether you like your sins or not to either you OR to God. Unless you mean that people, knowing that not confessing will condemn them to hell, refuse to speak the sin? That would be incredibly stupid...When was the last time you swung your "work" around during a naked stroll through another creation of God's (the public park)??? Uh, the police will not arrest the ladies (or men) pining for the "work" with which you were bestowed. They're gonna throw your naked butt into the squad car.
Even GOD knew the new need for garments.
Confession is requested. I have a reason for believing it to be for the one confessing, but I forgot... maybe later.
Again you seem to think people can't fix themselves and take that credit. Take credit for the good things you do and take the blame for your mistakes.
Never mind thanking the Lord for winning a BB game and blaming him for your lose.You can wave a bottle of whiskey around to a large majority of people and they will not be tempted. Your example is only relevant to those who have a problem with alcohol. Of course, their problem is not so much with alcohol as it is with self-control, which is a result of thinking, reasoning and logic.
Turning to religion does not solve the problem of self-control, it only misdirects it to another vice; the religion.
In other words, solving the problem of self-control requires education, not delusion.
But, nakedness is the image of God. Are you saying the image of God "arouses thoughts that most likely should not be there for many"?
No. The "image of God" has been redefined to indicate "spiritualness", or "mind" or some other invisible attribute, depending on the speaker. Just not physical appearance even though that's what it says.
God has an immortal body of flesh and bones as well as spirit. Man was created in "our image", that is in the image of God the Father and His son, Jehovah. Jehovah was the God of the OT and Jesus Christ in the NT. Melchizedek was mostly likely one of Noah's sons, Shem. Adam was the premortal Michael the Archangel
Please tell me where you got it that God was flesh and bones? That really would be helpful.
Hi Cgenaea
it seems that God can take on flesh and bones if He/She wants to. Advanced spiritual ideas suggest God is pure intelligent energy that can do whatever He/She wants to.I often refer to the wisdom of the Hindu philosophy where all of us are seen as "gods" within so God is depicted as having many heads and arms and feet to symbolise this idea. Another view would be to consider the idea of a God to be the correct story out of millions of possibilities so therefore such a Being could take on a human form like JC etc and have for a time flesh and bones.
I agree. But that does not sound like the point. Adam being flesh was not spirit but spiritual. Godly but not God. He was God's creation. Likeness/image I was trying to get a full understanding of what he meant by in those two terms.
Yes I think we are basically in agreement here.
My understanding of the generally accepted spiritual theory is that our "souls" are the "God part" that is housed in the physical body (with its feet!)
Hence if God Himself wanted to take on a physical form He would be the spiritual soul of that particular body eg. JC, Buddha etc.
So we are two forms in one: one soul plus one body. ie Adam was a man with a spirit soul.
As god comes from another universe, a universe with natural laws much different than our own, it would seem more likely that god is composed of matter/energy/something that is totally foreign to our universe. To say that he is made of the same energy that our universe is composed of would seem wrong from the start.
I kinda hear what you're saying there. He created this world and formed the people he placed in it. It does not seem that any of the material used would be of himself but that was part of the point of this forum. When God said "in his image", I felt that maybe he could have meant the image he made up own his own rather than Adam being a mirror image.
I meant that god does not follow the rules of our universe; presumably the "materials" he is built of do not either. He cannot, then, be flesh and blood.
But not sure what you mean - He made up an image in His mind and copied that imagined image onto man?Kinda. He spoke everything else into existence. He did not even take part in giving the beast and his own kind or the crawling creepers nor the swimmers their names. But Adam and Eve he formed especially. In his (very own creation) image. Can you feel me???
No. What a "(very own creation) image" means I have no idea. Any more than I can decipher what "... he could have meant the image he made up own his own..." means.
You're killin' me Wilderness!
Ok, instead of, "in our own image" we could replace that with "my very own masterpiece that I will put together myself"
It just sounds logical to me at this point. I just never understood "in my own image" if one is flesh and one is spirit. God can be what he wants. Does he have an image per se? Just my thoughts. I was hoping someone could give me a confirm or deny based upon scripture. Beth did well. But I am still wondering. With your statement that he must not be flesh and blood; I agree...As an artist paints a person, but a person for which there is no model. Only in the "mind's eye" of the artist. Gotcha.
You could be right. Or you could take it as meaning exactly what the translator, working under God's eye and direction said. No need to twist it out of recognition with "inner beauty" or "spirit" or something; take it as what it says; that we look like God.
Wilderness
That's a lot of lot of supposing. In the larger scheme of things does it matter if God is the same energy or not as the rest of the universet?
Wow that's wierd cuz I had a dream about God's feet only two nights ago. He was walking and I could hear His footsteps.
It can be an error to take a parable literally as this could lead us into missing the point of the parable. If a metaphor is robotically taken literally it can cause misunderstandings. If a poem is taken mindlessly literally the beauty can be missed. The Bible is made up of history, poetry, parable, metaphor and even humour; so we need to discern when to take something "literally" and when not to.
I agree there too. How do you suppose we keep from such egregious err? Holy spirit is my guess what do you think?.
I had to look that word up! (egregious)
If you mean 'how do some people stop making that same terrible error of bible interpretation" yes I think its the Holy Spirit in two senses of the word. First The Holy Spirit Itself, and then our own individual sensible compassionate holy spirit within. There seems to be too many religious people "taking things literally" when they are not supposed to for hidden agendas; sometimes very deeply hidden agendas! Many atheists, but not all, are also very very good at making the same bad errors of taking the wrong things literally: they often seize on this common error to mock religious points of view. in other words an atheist can deliberately use false logic without a religious motive but a political one.
In all the confusion the Truth of course remains immovable.
- Emile Rposted 10 years ago
0I haven't read through the thread and I know you have little respect for my opinion, but I'll share me penny's worth.
If God is the observer, making judgments and coming to conclusions on the ultimate point of reality, then each human is in God's image. We possess that ability.
God, by the text, made some sharp turns in his assessment of his creation. He found peace with the way the things he set in motion played out. He found the good in others and focused on it. And committed to focusing on it through the story of the sacrifice. The world, itself, didn't change first. He changed his attitude first.
We have the ability to change our perception, just as he did. We also possess the ability to mold the perception of other life by our interactions with them. We aren't solely driven by instinct.I have great respect for the way you put thoughts together. It's like you have a 7th sense.
The instinct comes from the brain. What else do you suppose we could be driven by?
And will you also please explain what you mean by God changing his attitude first?The Old Testament view of God was one of a vengeful, wrathful God. Do as I say, or suffer the consequences. Bow to me and be blessed. Don't and regret it later. He belonged to Israel and they belonged to him through a contract made in the wilderness.With the exception of the creation story, that God was reactive through the entire text.
I don't think you can look at the gospels and see the same God. That one chose to love the world, when the world did not know him. That one chose to send a gift when no one had asked for it, no one understood it and they couldn't fully appreciate it. That one was proactive.
If it is the same God, then that God made some serious attitude adjustments toward humanity somewhere between the end of the Prophets and the appearance of Jesus.+1 The god of the OT was a spoiled, cruel, vicious child and nothing like the god of the NT. Somewhere along there He had a massive change and grew up or something.
*edit Or the people that designed him decided that enough was enough. We've seen that even after the changes in the NT: god made the crusades, the inquisition, the witch burning, etc., but given time god always has a change of heart and rejoins civilization.The way I see it, the God of the OT is the same, bow to me or suffer kind of guy as in the NT. Jesus came to show us the true mind of God; and what it all means.
In the OT, the instruction was for the travelers. He wanted to keep them pure and unspotted. They did not listen. Then enters Jesus right on schedule. he provided a way of escape from the death of sin. He showed us how to do the word of God.
God has not changed. And he never will. He will be doing a final sweep of those who do not listen. He promised.Well, I suppose you can count me in the ones swept. Because, I honestly wouldn't want to have anything to do with a God like that. I'd grab onto the broom straws and jump away as far as possible when the broom reached full extension. Those who chose to stay would probably have a sad awakening after it was too late to do anything.
That's interesting. To place oneself in the f- it category is remarkable. We each have our own decision to make though. God deals with our cognition. That area is very powerful. He made the way easy and potentially successful. No must for walking it if one would prefer swept.
However, he WILL allow a big change of "attitude" as long as one lives.Honestly, genea. I don't foresee an attitude adjustment. I believe that the Divine is more than what you perceive it to be. I don't think it sits in judgment of us.
Now, if the horror stories you want us to believe to be true are, then I'm not interested in participating.Really? You don't see another attitude adjustment? I do.
It will start with the treatment of gays, when "god" decides they aren't all evil after all. It will continue slowly, backing off the requirement that all mankind follow his rules, and allowing tolerance to enter the world of His followers.
I actually foresee, in the next 50 years or so, as great an attitude adjustment as between old and new testament.Oh. I must have misunderstood. I thought she was saying her god would allow me to adjust my attitude to accept her idea of who it is.
And I didn't catch that, but I think you're right. My error.
Gays are not beyond the mercy of God. Most that I have met, don't want it. Putting on the mind of Christ is necessary. But since that mind breaks one's comfort level with things that are sinful most people prefer their own minds. Not many people like to walk his path; as easy and successful as it is.
I suppose not, as long as they buckle under to the orders to be different than how they were created.
But they are surely beyond the mercy of God's followers - that they are shoved down as second class citizens, unworthy of the same life the followers enjoy, shows that pretty plainly.We ALL are called to be different. It takes a renewing of the mind though. Buckling under is not possible until then.
Some Christians do preach to HELL and back; but they too will be judged with their own measuring stick.
Followers of God are people too. we have problems and set-backs and times of question. But we know who to run quick to, with all that baggage, and find relief. God gives peace that surpasses understanding. It's a nice deal. I understand the believers are people too. But why is it that so many of them have the same egregious fault; the all consuming desire to tell someone else how to live? Because they are taught to be that way is all I can figure - it is far too common to be anything else.
But renewing of the mind isn't required - just a recognition that the Golden Rule, as given in the bible, is one of the most important guides they could have. Of course, that means that proselytizing is unwarranted and should stop, but then the bible has never been noted for consistency.The messages are not about telling anyone how they should live. People go too far. The message is about what is right as reported biblically. Right should be the highlight.
Oh! The message too is for those who have their measure of Faith in it. No one else cares to understand.
Your problem, as with many Christians, is that you rely on a book to tell you what is right and wrong.
You should decide what is right and wrong. Don't you have a little voice inside you that makes you feel bad if you are doing something wrong? That's your conscience.
Being gay isn't a "sin". There is no such thing as sin. Sex between consenting adults isn't wrong. You are ignoring self-responsibility if you rely on a book to tell you what to do, so you don't have to do the sometimes hard work of deciding what is the right thing to do in any given situation.Yes, instruction for the children of God are contained in a book. And I do not consider it a problem. I really like the wayIit fits together. I like the firm stance and the prophetic messages. I also like the love and mercy part.
NO. I cannot know what is TRULY right until I check my pages. The inner voice ALWAYS errs. "There is a way that seems right unto man..." (Google that phrase.)That is unfortunate for you. You are missing good chances to learn from your mistakes.
God's instructions are contained in a book. That's priceless. Isn't that what the pharisees argued?
Probably. They had the old book.
a lot of that word was misunderstood. Jesus gave us a new book. He wants us to remember what he said and do it.Right. You keep telling yourself that if it helps you sleep better.
Jesus told me. In the book. Telling myself is easy.
No. You choose to read it that way. I've read it and get something totally different out of it. What makes your interpretation supersede that of another? Just because you claim membership in an exclusive club?
It never ceases to amaze me how history repeats itself but those doing the reenactment can't see it.
A lot of the old book was misunderstood. I can certainly understand that - a great deal of both old and new are still misunderstood. That the whole world was flooded at one time. That it was created in 7 days, that man was formed from dust or woman from man's rib. That a dead man came to life, walked on water or fed hundreds with a tiny bit of food.
Yes, lots and lots of misunderstandings.
Except that the "love and mercy" part is one extremely small part of the Bible. More like an afterthought.
It seems to me God has a hard time with love and mercy, as he is too busy "hardening Pharoah's heart", sending bears to kill people for minor infractions, telling Abraham to kill his own son, killing large populations of people indiscriminately
and so on
and on
and onYeah. He can get pretty vicious. I would never want to be one of his targets. I try to do as he said. He knows.
Would you do anything that God told you to do?
If, like Abraham, he ordered you to kill an innocent person, would you do it?His followers have been doing that for thousands of years. From conquering neighboring states, killing all they didn't want for slaves, to the crusades to the inquisition. From witch burning to murder of blacks to killing gays to bombing health clinics.
His followers show no hesitation in killing for Him. And innocent people seem preferable - perhaps they don't fight back as hard.I agree. But I don't understand it.
I want to see what she has to say, because it might help me understand the reasoning behind it.
I can sort of understand that someone would use religion as an excuse to do crappy things. But what I don't understand is why someone would "do whatever God said" just because he said to.The question will be avoided, probably through the sophistry of "God wouldn't do that" while ignoring that He has done exactly that dozens of times.
People do it because it makes them feel superior, better or more important. It helps keep their belief system alive and functioning ("See what God did to the infidels?"). It maintains and spreads their control over others. Because it wins them 72 virgins, or eternal life.
Lots and lots of reasons, not a single one of which makes any sense. Keeps happening, though - the gay killings and clinic bombings are not far behind us. Though the perpetrators were undoubtedly not "true Christians"...Jesus was not told to kill. He brought life to a dying population. We see the hand of God in the work he started and finished. It is somewhat a cop-out to continue to deny him because of the OT. To label God the father a killer is false witness. Jesus showed us the love of God. And he told us what is expected of us as followers of the commands he gave. We have no stones to throw; Jesus gladly took them from us.
Sorry, but you have no idea what Jesus was told. You were not privy to the conversations between Jesus and his God.
Jesus made plain his mission as well as the will of his father. I know all I need to know about their exchanges. And Jesus killed no one. But was himself killed purposefully. We live because of it. I will die in awe of it.
I understand that you need know nothing of what God told Jesus, but do you? You have whatever you wish or need right now, merely by re-interpreting the bible to say whatever you wish - knowledge of God's instructions would add nothing to that.
The test of faith... he would not tell me to kill. He knows I haven't the gall.
That is a totally BS answer.
Why don't you just answer the question?
Would you or wouldn't you?
Oops - I see you got an answer while I was composing mine. And that it matches what I predicted would be said.
Think I'll open a psychic shop, or was that answer just too predictable?I think you are just becoming familiar with the ways of God.
Niiiiice
No. If I heard God say to kill someone, I will NOT listen. I know his voice; he don't talk like that.
Only to Abraham, I guess?
Otherwise, God is NOT a vicious, tantrum-throwing tyrant.
He's only all about LUV.
As was Jesus, who threw tantrums as well, and treated his own mother and family like dirt.
It's nice how you can pick and choose what you want out of the Bible, and ignore the 95% where God is acting like a mean spoiled child.Um...excuse me...did Abraham kill someone??? I do know the story; do you?
Mean spoiled child is the judgment you came up with for the God of Abraham? Hmph...ok...
95% of the bible points to Jesus or has him explained directly.
You must've missed that.No. I was clearly referring to the fact that God ORDERED Abraham to kill his son.
And then YOU said God would never order YOU to kill an innocent person. And I said, then He would only order Abraham to do so?
I never said a thing about Abraham actually killing anyone. Only that God told him to.
Since my whole point was to see how you would react to an immoral command from God, simply because it was from God.
Which, of course, you still haven't answered directly.
You just say that God wouldn't do that?
How do you know what God would or wouldn't do?
Yes, the God of your Bible is a mean child, if not much worse. And yes I do judge God. Why shouldn't I?I'm not sure what you mean by "picky".
I'm not going to keep asking you the same question.
You choose to be a blind follower of a book, and the immoral tyrant who you think wrote it.I mean, you attempt yp prove God some nasty names. Then bring up as evidence, one of the most loving tests of faith in the book.
I smile just thinking about it.
Thanks. That was sweet.A "loving" test, was it? I wonder if the little boy, about to be burned to death by a father that was obviously more concerned about himself than the boy, found love in the test? Or madness, likely to dog him for the rest of his life.
Wow. I guess we have totally different ideas of what is "sweet".
I didn't call God any nasty names. Just the fake God of your fake Bible.
Not that I think the real God is all sweetness and light. In fact I have plenty of issues with him. But I certainly don't call God names. At least not very often.Wow. Must've been tough huh? Sorry to bring forth such ugliness. You've really hurt my feelings. I need s moment...
I think I'm over it now...wait! Nope, false alarm. (I had whole milk)You're the one defending a hate-filled book.
I find that strange.
I have said nothing to offend you in any way. I have merely commented on the characteristics of a character in a book.
Do you deny those characteristics I mentioned? Or do you still insist these behaviors are "loving" and "sweet"?Merely commented on a character in a book? You mean the one I've been calling my father all day? That character? It is quite funny how passively aggressive...
I don't feel much sympathy for you in regards to this.
You are defending abominable behavior.
It doesn't matter much whether the behavior is committed by a real entity or a fake one.
That you would defend it as "loving" is enough for me to judge YOU'RE character.And still, I won't judge YOUR character. And I did not ask for nor expect any sympathy. I stand behind the principles of Jesus and Paul etc. listed in scripture. I do not ask you to join me. I just ask that you to please grant me the permission to speak the pages of my own mind at my whim. Wait...I think...let me check my constitution copy. I'll be back!
Of course, you already have judged me, by calling me passive aggressive. That's the irony here. Everyone judges everyone else all the time.
This is one of my favorites. "I don't judge but God does and I stand behind his words." "If God's a bigot then I'm a bigot"
I don't know you. I only know what you said. It could have been classified as such; I judged what you said about God the father. Not you...
And now I am stepping on your constitutional rights? That's absurd.
I have asked you questions that you are too uncomfortable to answer. They are uncomfortable questions.
But I am not asking them to be "mean". I asked them of myself, when I thought I was a Christian. I decided that the real God couldn't be that heartless, and wanted nothing to do with the Bible and its contents.The bible tells us in so many words that we don't know what heartless is. Our faith is in God to know. And to do with that as HE sees fit. How is faith ever placed in someone whose decisions you don't trust? His own cannot be plucked. Spirit and t r u t h.
But I do know what heartless is. I can tell when something is heartless, it is easy to see. I trust my own judgment as to whether something is good or bad. I don't want to rely on a book to tell me, that would be irresponsible.
I don't trust a God who would :
harden Pharoahs heart(take away his free will)
kill entire cities and populations because SOME of the people are bad
Send good people to an eternity of torment because they refuse to accept Jesus as their savior
I honestly just don't believe that a creator would be that cruel
I understand. Many people follow you on that. The divine is not really perceivable. He gave instruction possibly for that reason. The horror stories are real. I will not participate in them either.
Well, if Jesus was flesh and blood I would think he would have been perceived. Are you saying the apostles couldn't see him? Or, that he didn't perceive God? You lost me.
You told me that God was more than I perceive. And I agreed.
I really don't think we will ever have the full picture until...
Jesus came in flesh. He was truly perceivable, but many rejected what he said calling him nonsensical; and or demonic. But it was because they felt that they already knew better. He did no arguing his points though. He simply stood firm on his message and invited all that accepted to join him.As simply as by His own words, Jesus from Nazareth was God in human flesh:" Jesus said to him, 'have I been with you all and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father. Why do you say, show us the Father?' Don't you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me ? What I say to you all I do not say on my own authority ; it is the Father who dwells in me and does his own works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me…"(John 14: 9-11 ) Consciously following the "creation of man" into the Creator's-God-the Father image will confirm the authenticity of Jesus' words.
The O.T. view of God is righteous, in first place and in certain cases " jealous ' and rightly so as you can find in reading the Book carefully. This world is His world, He is the Master of the universe leading the history of mankind on very well design course.
Well, at least His followers claim it is His world and that He is the Master. God himself has never bothered to say anything himself, to show himself or even to let any hint of activities due to Him.
Followers of other gods make a little different claim as well; the bottom line has to be that maybe it's all His, maybe not but the odds are very much against it.See, it's responses such as yours to which i can only assume a stance of fear propels such comments. A one which also assumes every thought will be weighed to determine if you've payed homage to a liege lord correctly. I can't fathom such. Tell me, if i created a mini environment in a bubble, put sentient and sapient beings inside, can you imagine a 'righteous' moment when i could annihilate them to satisfy a jealous whim? If i did such, would I be a good God?
This is why I sometimesrefer to the compassion of the Hindu philosophy and the concept of reincarnation. It seems to be the truestexample of a real compassionate God and the neatest way to deal with sin. It also removes hell out of the equation. I am inter denominational.
The bible says that there is hell. The bible also says that we cannot make up our own rules. That is not a stab at any other religion. It simply means that Christianiy is tied to the bible. It is what Christians believe. ALL of it. Those who pick and choose what they will have faith in/adhere to biblically are simply not on the path that Christ paved. Truth is truth. Where else do we find the words of Christ??? He said be doers and not hearers only. You look in the mirror and forget the image as soon as you turn away? Christians are convicted by many parts of scripture. They do not puff up become proud and become haughty. They bow their heads in sorrow and pray to be healed. Christians love above all else. Love hurts sometimes.
and the smack on the face in the face of truth, really hurts sometimes. I know that well!!!
But Jesus was not a conformer. He did not giggle and laugh with those who did not believe him. He ran with those who knew they needed what he had.
The bible is called reproof for those on the path. Not a history book to be poked at. He hid the message well from those who do not follow. He laid the path biblically. To pick and choose what we will or will not agree with is not tolerated. He is not negotiating a contract. He did that already. What from the old must we adhere to??? Jesus told us in the new. We are not contracting. We are WALKING the path already laid already. Nothing added. Absolutely nothing subtracted. Jesus paid the cost to be the... he says what right is. When you have the FREE EAR you hear him.
***FREE EARS AVAILABLE AT A LOCATION IN YOU!!!
*while supplies lastNevertheless there does appear to be very wide differences in scriptural interpretation between the different Christian denominations (and indeed between the different religions). hence we have innumerable websites such as this to debate these things.
We have already agreed that some parts of the Bible, such as poetry and parable, are not to be taken literally. Can we build on that now? Are you now saying this is not true?
The way we decide personally as to what interpretation to put on different doctrines is to ask : "is it based on Love?". This question is profoundly the Bible's main teaching (and indeed all other scriptures) as the principle of Divine Love is the core. Therefore in the great and small debates between denominations and religions Divine Love has to be the chief arbiter. If hidden doctrinal agendas are the core of a debate it is bound to fail.
Do you agree?Definitely. A house divided cannot stand. I am not trying to say that God does not love. I am saying that the eternal fiery, place with teeth gnashing and lake of fire does not sound like a walk in the park with lemonade. I would not translate eternal torment any way but to say that it probably is not good. And to have such a scary metaphor that it brings some people to nose around about THAT aspect alone??? Sounds clever.
Please tell me how do you personally translate hot coal, brimstone, and/or eternally without light?I interpret the brimstone stuff as the work of man not God.
We can discern between the hand of God and the hand of man if we read scriptures with the eyes of Love.Wow. So we do have to make stuff up. I thought they were wrong!!!
lol
I believe that the bible is true in the forms available for reproof. No mistaking eternally separated from all that is good. Do you believe that the story of Noahs boat was figuratively put together? Or the story of the ccrossing of the sea on dry land? Just curious.
I think there is some truth in the story of a flood in the ancient middle east and also I believe in miracles such as the parting of the sea.
What I don't believe is that God wants to destroy entire races: that is always the work of man.
That what it is : we are believers because we choose to believe and believe it all. Distinguishable from all others -makes the anointing- the presence of the Holy Spirit enabling us to yeald to the will of the Father - willing to know ,- knowing what is right and doing it : in essence it means to be righteousness of God " For it is now being revealed through the Good News that the beginning and the end of the process by which God puts men right with himself is faith. As Scripture says ' the man who is right with God through faith will live. "
Well said, that you are believers because you choose to be so. Not because your belief necessarily describes reality or is true, but because you choose to believe.
Now, can you convince the other believers that choosing to believe does not alter or describe reality, that others believe differently and should be left alone? Just as you wish to be left alone to worship and live as you see fit?Aint nobody tryin to alter nothin.
It seems quite a waste to consistently debate someone on THEIR nonsense. The belief of fairytale has been solidified. But who's the dreamer??? It is as plain as the nose on my face (and some nose Iit is) to me. I have no fear of being shamed into twisting my faith in an effort to keep up with the crowd. My bible teaches me that they are going the wrong way. Aint a lotta people on his road...
It was not hard to change my mind. God did it for me once I gave him my will. He spent a lot of time correcting my perception of him. It is really a brand new way of thinking. Stiffness got me nowhere fast. I gave him my brain and he recreated it, in his image...Irregardless of how plain the nose may be (and I sport quit a sniffer myself!), if you cannot demonstrate a connection to reality it might as well not be there.
And that is something you cannot do; to demonstrate that your god, demon, hell, heaven, all the supernatural beliefs you have, have any connection to reality.
So it's probably a good thing you aren't trying to alter anything; without that demonstration you aren't going to do it anyway. All the platitudes, all the stories and tales about a "recreated brain", all the theological jargon and all the writings of bronze age barbarians; none of it will change reality one tiny bit.I recognize that you are saying that none of those things change your reality. It cannot at this point. However my reality has been drastically changed since I started at this life on my own. We have different realities, I know. And I have already explained how that may occur. Simply put; what is real for you may not be the same for me or vice versa. God is real to me no matter how you deny it. He may not be real to you; but he is to me.
Wilderness, I'm going to qualify these remarks. First, you know that I am a Christian. Next, you know I am NOT an evangelist. Lastly, you know I have a very deeply ingrained live and let live philosophy.
That being said, I disagree entirely that faith is a choice. Just as non belief is not a choice. Can you make your lack of faith into faith by simply willing it to be so? Nope. No more than I can set aside my faith for any reason. Now, I am NOT willfully ignorant, I'm not uneducated, I am, in general, a very rational, reasonable, and logical person of relatively sound mind.
I understand science, for the most part. I don't deny scientific facts in favor of my faith. I have walked a road throughout my life that has found me doubting God, hating him, and wondering if he even exists at all. At a point in my life when I set aside my faith and totally went my own way, I lived a life not much different than the one I live now.
But things happen that reinforce my faith constantly. I don't use it as an excuse when I'm too lazy to do things myself. I don't use it to prove anything about how wonderful or special I am, and I most CERTAINLY do not believe it's a gift given only to a few chosen folks with a direct line to God and a mission to tell the world what he really wants from us or to warn them that they'd better behave or he's going to roast them for eternity. Really, now, a being who created us solely out of love really wants to see the majority of us separated from him forever and be cruelly tortured and punished-JUST because we couldn't find faith. How stupid is that?
At the end of the day, I hear my mother's word echo in my head constantly. She always said that God made us in his image, and we've been trying to return the favor ever since. And really, he made us evil by nature? Then tell me why, when he surveyed all that he had made did he see "that it was good?"
We will never understand God apart from common sense.
So ends my rant..lol
Thanks for listening.I'm sorry, but I have a really hard time with faith being anything BUT choice. You say you understand science, that you do not set it aside for your faith. But the methodology of science MUST be set aside to have faith - you cannot use the scientific method, the root of science, to build faith.
Indeed, you comment that you have things happen constantly that reinforce your faith, but I'll bet my bottom dollar that you have NOT applied the learning tool called the scientific method to those things. You haven't repeated them, you haven't tested them, you haven't submitted them to be "debunked". You haven't even tried to find any reason but the one that results in reinforcement.
Am I wrong? Do you do a statistical analysis on events that show you God? Do you use the tools of science to investigate them and try to disprove what you want them to mean? Do you set all subjective feelings aside when looking for a cause and only consider objective observations? Because it seems to me that until you do, building your faith through those events is a choice that has been made; you have chosen faith over knowledge.
But common sense? There is nothing quite so uncommon as "common sense". A compilation of long past stories from our elders, old experiences that reinforce it while ignoring those that did not. An intuitive look at the world, without any real analysis being done. These are all "common sense", but very few of them show reality. It's why "common sense" so seldom produces a correct answer to an even half-complex question. Only those things that have been experienced over and over and over.
And that ends my rant. As always your post is thought provoking and honest - I thank you for that. You are a rarity in these forums, and as others have said one to be emulated.You're right in that I don't apply scientific methodology and stringent examination to certain things that have happened that reinforce my faith. Sadly it can't be done to any physical and material standards that our modern world would objectively accept. In some cases, it just comes down to one's personal level of comfort with the unknown. I don't feel a need to understand absolutely everything. And sometimes I understand things and still find myself in awe of them and filled with wonder.
I'm comfortable enough to say that I don't know and can't prove certain things that I believe. I have to, if I want to be an honest person. But faith comes when and if it comes, and can't be willed away or willed into being. That's my only point. And I've had this conversation with a dear friend who calls faith an excuse and a cop out. The verse that says faith is the substance of things hoped for - the evidence of things not seen. The only way I can understand that is that faith itself IS the evidence. That I can't shake it seems to me that there is something there that I can't see and that my faith someday will realize it in its entirety.
And I think you and I may have talked before about this, but there are people who just don't care about the whys or the whos. The how, where, what matters way more. And neither group is wrong, they just approach the search for truth in different ways.
Not that this is the greatest example, recognizing your own lack of faith, but hear me out. When I was discerning religious communities before I became a nun, I found myself very drawn to two different communities. Group A was very, very intellectual and in constant search for the "truth" of God. Group B was very simple and charitably active-also well educated and intellectually capable-but more ultimately concerned with searching for and sharing the "love" of God. Both beautiful, kind, loving and amazing women, but I chose group B. I might think-IF you were a man of faith-you might have chosen group A.
Different expressions of different personalities. You're willingness to say I don't know is a true sign of humility, as far as I'm concerned. The ones who are so certain that they feel the need to convert the world and get us all goose stepping in jack boots down the same road are a little more prideful, and that comes with its own set of problems.Heb 11:1 (NIV) Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.
I thought that another version of that scripture would shed light on what faith is. It MAKES one SURE and CERTAIN.
You cannot continue in faith of God without some assurance. "I don't know" is probably more of a sign of a lack of faith. Not one time did Jesus proclaim that he was not sure. And he rebuked his followers for their lack. "Have I been so long with you and you still don't know me?" He said something similar to them when they lacked faith.Regardless of the translation you choose FAITH is the evidence. And mine is quite certain, otherwise I'd be able to set it aside without compunction. Still, there's a LOT I don't know, but I trust that God does, so since he's got it under control, I don't feel a need to worry-or to worry anyone else.
I got no problem with your light underneath the bed. I just must've misunderstood your assertion that not being able to prove some things you believe as not being able to read; rightly divide; and know as evidence of faith. None of us knows it all. But trusting that God knows and believing what he said in the spirit of how he said it is essential for faith. "Lord, I trust you, but I don't believe/cannot prove (therefore are skeptical of) some of this stuff" Is not really faith. That's all... I misunderstood. Sorry
Yeah, I think you did misunderstand. I very specifically said that I can't prove it with physical and material evidence that is objectively acceptable to the modern (scientific) community. I don't have to. I believe it. I have faith. Always. My light is never hidden. I've said before and I'll say again-because of God my life and actions are no different in the daylight than in the dark, and I'm exactly the same person in the street as behind closed doors.
I say this too, not to be provocative, but I feel like maybe one of the issues that impedes communication sometimes is that you equate doubt with unbelief? Doubt is very human. It doesn't mean that one's faith is disappearing or nonexistent.Antonyms of faith: disbelief, distrust, doubt, misgiving, skepticism, suspicion.
Ok...maybe you are referring to the OTHER faith. Maybe THAT is what impedes communications. Doubt and disbelief are both listed in the thesaurus as antonyms of faith. So they equate like i do. To what kind of faith are you referring? Maybe that would help us...I don't think we're speaking of the same faith. It is my evidence that God can control everything and even if I doubt or am afraid, I TRUST him always. Can't prove to anyone why that is. To human, scientific, objective standards. Don't have to though. My occasional doubt or fear or uncertainty doesn't diminish his power in the least, and it doesn't make him angry with me. He just keeps being who he is and I keep growing in my understanding of him.
As usual scientists forget they have faith too: in science!
So a scientist has an irrational quasi-religious "feeling" that his/her "faith in science" is the only way. Its like another type of dogma.
Wilderness,
I disagree. my point is very original!
Also I respect science in the same way I respect any other religion. I allow them their Faith.
I note that Scientists like to take the credit for many earlier religious discoveries; also science evolved out of early religion so there are only irrational and emotive reasons for scientists turning their backs on their early heritage. Why be ashamed of the religious roots of science? It has to reveal a deep seated antipathy towards evolution! My point is that Science has not eliminated Faith, the irrational, or emotion from their mental processes therefore this is hampering the forward momentum of true science. Scientists should accept their own evolutionary roots, admit their faith and purge out the irrational emotion reactions to religion.An interesting comment, but not very original, and without much truth, either.
For science does whatever it can to eliminate faith; it is the antithesis of the whole field. Instead of depending on it for all we think we know, a scientist will do whatever they can to eliminate any subjective faith from whatever is being studied.
As far as "the only way", that is completely false. Science does not paint a picture, drive a car or play the piano. There are other ways to do those things. What science DOES do better than anything else is find truth and reality about our world. No other tool ever devised has ever done so well, not even a small fraction as well. One day we may discover a competing methodology, but until then science reigns supreme at understanding our world and universe.Ok. Well what times and days do you all hold services? The church of Science sounds interesting... lol
Services are held 24-7-365. Learners are always welcome, and are asked little more than to forego subjective feelings in making conclusions as such feelings most often result in error laden conclusions.
No faith is required to begin learning or to enter into the innermost sanctum and there are no prerequisites. Beliefs are not required and actually discouraged although if the learner is willing to adjust and change belief as knowledge becomes available learning is still possible.
Suggested beginning classes are Using Logic 101 and Analytical And Critical Thinking 101. If mathematics has not been covered, the remedy is Calculus and Number Theory 50, followed by more advanced classes.
It's very sad that believers must make up lies about science in order to defend their irrational beliefs. Our societies offer them freedom of religion, to practice their faith without persecution. Yet, they feel they must step well over that boundary and make up things that aren't true at all. And, we can clearly see it is those who have no understanding of science, how it works or what it offers.
Why do they do this? What purpose does it serve for them to be so dishonest?
Wilderness,
I just added some more to my previous remarks. Did you get that?Wilderness/Enchaplio, I am still waiting for a reply re:
I disagree. my point is very original! smile
Also I respect science in the same way I respect any other religion. I allow them their Faith.
I note that Scientists like to take the credit for many earlier religious discoveries; also science evolved out of early religion so there are only irrational and emotive reasons for scientists turning their backs on their early heritage. Why be ashamed of the religious roots of science? It has to reveal a deep seated antipathy towards evolution! smile My point is that Science has not eliminated Faith, the irrational, or emotion from their mental processes therefore this is hampering the forward momentum of true science. Scientists should accept their own evolutionary roots, admit their faith and purge out the irrational emotion reactions to religionScience doesn't operate on faith, it operates on evidence, observation, predictions, logic and reason. Faith has no place in science.
Such as what?
It's an evolution of man, evolving from ignorance (religion) to logic and reason (science). One comes after the other.
Who exactly is ashamed?
That makes no sense. What are you talking about?
That would show you don't really know much about how science works.
Why? What is that point of that?I'm sorry, but I'm finding little to nothing that is original, and almost nothing that is true, either. Claiming science operates on faith is not original, just an indication you are not a scientist and don't understand the scientific method. Claiming science grew out of religion is not original, but the only truth in the statement is that science followed religious thinking, not that it came out of it. Saying that science cannot eliminate faith is an obvious truth and again not original.
But mostly I don't understand any point at all. Just a bunch of disjointed comments, with hardly any truth in any of them. Opinions based on nothing but a desire to discredit the field of study that has brought us out of the dark ages of faith, belief and near total ignorance.
You're going to have to do better than that, I'm afraid.
A correction have to be made: my comment above followed as an agreement to Cgenea's " Yes! FAITH is FAITHfull; and acts like it." as it is stated, "We are believers because we choose to believe and believe it all. " ( There wasn't need to emphasize that we do act upon the gift of FAITH which every single human being has been given certain measure to act upon, to use and develop it, because God the Creator " shows no partiality and is no respecter of persons." Us, who choose to believe "it all " the God wanted the humanity to know revealed in the written Word as well in the nature- we do just act differently than those who are using their faith to believe simply the opposite. Our reality is so much real as much is comprised in all His revelation. Next : Your suggestion " Can you convince the other believers… so on." My respond is, to convince anyone of anything isn't my business. What the " other believers, including you - do - my answer is always the same "It's between you and your God "god" ."
I think there is quite a lot of truth in the story of a huge flood (in a certain part of the ancient world) and I also believe in direct and large miracles such as the parting of the ocean for people to cross.
However we could say that the story of Noah and the parting of the sea also contain some benign elements of child-like story telling which gives it a unique and endearing feel; but also some insinuations of entire evil races: what I do know is that the "added bits" of messages regarding the alleged utter annihilation for specific races is certainly the work of man not God.
I certainly believe in miracles.
I respect Hinduism. I'm not sure how prevalent reincarnation could be, especially human to human, but anything is possible.
The Christian belief of hell can't be resolved to a loving God. It can't be easily resolved to the bulk of Jesus's teachings and it's impossible to resolve to what he stated are the two commandments all others hinge on.
I don't not respect their belief completely, since at its core it must begin with the premise that the person who holds such a belief is not worthy of heaven. There is humility there. And, the belief that we are all, at our core, alike is something i do agree with, I simply don't think we are bad
So, when they expand this view into a cosmic view, beginning with a position of insecurity causes the creation of an insecure God. Of course the fact that this entity will overlook their shortcomings would cause that entity to have to look for them harder in others. If it didn't, how could the scales of justice make sense? They know what they believe to be wrong. They have deemed themselves guilty of crimes. Someone must pay.
But, no father worthy of the capitalization of the f would want his children to live in self loathing. Nor would he expect them to hate the rest of humanity, hoping for their ultimate demise. But, as long as humanity judges one another we will live with insecurity since none of us are perfect. And we will hide our insecurity through attempting to highlight the shortcomings of others.Emile
Of course I agree with you on the general thrust of what you say as its based on commonsense.ie. If a dogma is not based on Love then surely we agree it needs to be questioned. If a group belives all other groups are going to a hell then it must be seen for what it is: love of dogma and not divine compassionate Love. The most compassionate and loving view is surely correct. A God who gives another chance in another life even if it might be slightly hellish is a far more compassionate view than an eternal burning hell for anyone who doesn't believe what one group believes.Mark 9:43-48 says, "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." Jesus...
It is a lie that Jesus did not teach about hell. This is just one passage. Now I know no one said he didn't, but I feel that it was implied. There are some covers that will be yanked up; this being one of them. The Christ (head of the Christian family) said that there was hell. He also said, "if you deny me before men, I will deny you before my father." I believe it includes denying what he said. Do you?
Christians follow Christ. All other roads are not Christian roads no matter which halo you wear. Jesus laid the law. We cannot tamper with it. Truth is essential.I can only repeat, that when read with the eyes of Love it is easy to discern between what God wrote and what man wrote.
God is Love.For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. Hebrews 12:6
I just remembered that Jesus very consistently rebuked his followers for fear, doubt, and disbelief.
God did not supply us with the spirit of fear. When we suffer that emotion, we are not dealing with a holy spirit. No offenses intended. Truth of bible.
If I were rich, I would find each of you and take you to dinner or recreation, or bowling, or Acapulco we'd kick it; and you would see how cool I am. I'm also very over myself. This is not a need to beat anyone over the head with anything. Honest. I just input something from scripture to confirm or deny. It is how I check myself. We are definitely ok to agree to disagree.I don't think we disagree as much as you think. Jesus did rebuke his followers when their faith wavered - as he does for me when I have moments of doubt or fear or find myself struggling to trust. But he never let Peter sink when he began to sink as he was walked on the water. When the disciples feared the storm while he slept, he didn't abandon them or lessen his love for them. And when Thomas asked, he allowed him to touch his wounds. He didn't tell him his faith was unsatisfactory.
I trust-even when I doubt. I trust-even when I'm anxious or afraid. And I've never been let down. And, oh how I've been chastised and continue to walk through the refiner's fire daily!
It's just the ways in which you and I express our faith that make the difference-and that's totally okay.The is a big difference between a little parental rebuking and the wholesale slaughter of entire races.
God rebukes, man slaughters.Right. And Jesus rebuked all the time for faithless and fear. To say doubt is about being human is cloudy. Jesus knew they were human but no excuses were provided for faithless or fearful. Truth is all that matters.
??!! The wholesale slaughter of innocent Egyptian first born is not "parental rebuke"?? Ordering His followers to another nation, to kill or enslave every living being there is "parental rebuke"?? Wiping out entire cities with fire and brimstone, including children and infants is "parental rebuke"????
I'm glad you're not MY parent!Oh that... well, the Egyptian first-borns were killed as a sign that the hand of the Lord was involved and serious about his people being released.
The land they were able to seize had been given them. They were instructed to take the land. No concern for the inhabitants taking it back or bringing their ungodly practices into the fold.
Sodom and Gomorrah? Not one good man???
I cannot sit in judgment of God the father. He has always had a plan for the purity of his people who are in the world; but because of trust and faith in him alone are not of the world. It has nothing to do with being special or respected over others; it has to do with the covering of the spirit with the blood of the one special son. That blood makes one clean in the eyes of the Lord. Scarlet sins become white as snow; not through your actions, but your faith that shows.The Egyptians weren't "parental rebuke" then, but certainly was still "wholesale slaughter". Just as the neighbors the Jews were instructed to kill and enslave. I wonder if God would give me your house? And you and your family to have as slaves as well?
Knowing the reaction to S&G, I specifically spoke of the children and infants there. Were they all evil, too?
You may not sit in judgement of your God, but I definitely will, and that evil creature is not fit to shine my shoes. Not if it is as described in the sacred writings it produced through man.The Lord does things differently now.
Have you ever heard of the new testament? It was a turning point. Jesus came; fulfilled the law and mixed the races. Now the bible does say that the treasures of the wicked are stored up for the righteous. He probably won't take MY house and give it to YOU, but...
He was not a parent of the Egyptians in that time. So you are RIGHT there (+1)!!! As for shoe shining? That may be the least of worry for now. We've got bigger fish to fry.You mean your lord hasn't committed any atrocities for some time; an eye blink in His lifespan.
Unfortunately that doesn't mean He won't turn on us again. Perhaps another dinosaur killer, or a rogue sun spinning through the solar system. It might give him a giggle to turn the sun off for a month or so and deep freeze the world, killing all life once and for all.
Who knows with that psychopath?Please get hand sanitizer.
you just got your fingers dirty. LolBetter than wallowing in it all day, I'd say. Those with eyes know to step over the cow pies in the pasture of life. The blind, going through life with closed eyes and depending on centuries dead barbarians to guide them, are the ones tripping and falling face first into it.
eer.......I said that wholesale slaughter is not from God but from man.
Got it?
Slaughtering races? Is there a biblical race slaughter? Oh Noah, Sodom and Gomorrah??? But that wasn't race slaughter. It was some kind of a hole slaughter; disobedience and evil and lie preferences.
Absolutely. The infants in Sodom were disobedient (at 2 months of age), evil and lied all the time.
How is that even remotely funny?
People don't bring these things up because they think it's FUNNY. People think it's atrocious.
I personally think it's atrocious to condone something horrific like that, and to think it's OK for God to do it.There can be no real counter, so...laughter. Make a joke, make fun of it. Anything but recognize it for the truth it is.
Personally, I find it atrocious that anyone should glorify the events of the first passover. A story where god hardened the heart of the Pharaoh so that he would go against his decision to let the Israelites go numerous times just so he could keep punishing him with plagues. On top of that, for the last plague, god commanded the Israelites to smear blood over their doorways so that he would somehow be forced to remember that they were HIS people so he would not kill them as well so that he could kill the firstborn of everything in Egypt, from the cows to the goats to the human beings. It's a horrific story, and one that does not point to a loving or benevolent being. If that being were a human being, he would be condemned as worse than Hitler, yet so many people choose to worship and love it anyway. Such a concept is untenable to me.
I KNOW what you think. You have made it no mystery. However, you know what I think too. I will never sit in judgment of God. He is grading me one day. I know I will not be able to explain hatred or malice toward him.
I don't hate God. My feelings are mixed. I don't know God well enough to decide what I feel.
I just don't believe that the God in the Bible, or Koran, or the Gods of the Hindu Vedas or other religions are accurate portrayals of God. I have been a Christian, and before that I believed in Kali, and even entertained the possibility of the Egyptian gods. My current theory is that ALL religions are probably wrong, yet still hold some basis of what the true reality of God is. I think religions are poor interpretations of individual experiences of God, which have then been misinterpreted even further by fanatics without any real experiences of God.Granddaddy said, "if you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything.
Truth is (and everyone knows this) we will never know all of anything as far as religion goes. We pick and stick with that. Or we "waver with each new doctrine"I totally disagree. I think choosing something(religion in this case) just so you have "something to stand on" isn't a good idea in any sense. It might be comfortable. It might make it easier to live and be content. But it just leaves you in a position that might be faulty. How do you know you chose the correct one? There are many religions to choose from.
We may not ever know the truth of religion. But I personally want to try and figure out what is truth and what isn't. If that means tearing everything apart that I "know", and repeatedly if necessary, then I am willing to do that.It IS obvious. So tell me, how will you know when you have researched and poked at anything long enough to end the search for truth? Possibly too good a question, but I would really like to know how one with your same mindset will ever end the search for truth and pick; which is the supposed goal. Or is perpetually searching the goal in itself? Because it is pretty hard to hold one to anything to which they have not become committed.
I don't know what the truth will look like, if I ever find it.
I suspect that I won't find it, though, in this lifetime of mine. I don't think I have enough time, I'm already middle aged. I also think I lack sufficient intelligence to fully understand it, or to figure it out.
Maybe I will find out in the afterlife, if there is one.
Maybe I will become enlightened through divine interference.
But my desire to know is strong enough to keep me looking anyway, even though I think the chances of it are slim.Do you know yet (now that you are middle aged, like me) which way has been most impressive? There is no hiding from the one who knows the heart.
I'm not sure what you mean by "most impressive" will you rephrase the question?
I know there is no hiding from God. He knows my heart inside and out, and all my faults. In all of my experiences with him, he has shown me that beyond a doubt. Unfortunately those experiences are few and far between, I'd like him to come around more often. Even if it isn't always pleasant. It's no fun having your faults shoved in your face. But a necessity, I think.By most impressive, I mean which faith has made the deepest impression? He comes, but you miss him. You are looking for specifics. Our God works his way, not ours. His plan sometimes doesn't include our desires. But the faithful wait on the Lord. I know he's gonna work it out for my good is much different than he must not even be there if I didn't get what I wanted. One of those reactions is faithful. Guess which.
No religion has made much more of an impact for me than any other. Hinduism and Christianity have made about the same amount of impression, but in different ways. My personal experiences of God have been a mixture of both of those religions.
I know that you will never be satisfied with any of it without renewing old mindsets. Biblical truth is unlocked through spiritual guidance. I don't know about Hinduism.
Jesus explains the bible. Jesus never doubted his father. He knew better. When we believe what he said, we know better too. One must be reborn. PLEASE don't make me have to explain that.I am not a Christian.
I don't need to be a Christian to have spiritual guidance.I know. I was only stating that only the spirit of Jesus is good, as far as Christianity goes. All other spirits are not; according to Christianity. Jesus said that you are for or against. All that is not for...
I am not against most of Jesus' teachings. I just don't believe that Jesus was a real man. I believe Jesus is some part of God, more like an aspect of a sort.
?
Not sure what you're getting at.
But I will take a guess and say you are thinking that I'm a heathen or something because I don't believe in Jesus as a man, and can't be saved until I do. And that my spiritual guidance comes from a sourse other that God.Well to not believe that Jesus was a real man, come from God, to show humanity his way and save each one who believes in that leaves one at a never-ending fork. It allows one easier access to fabrication and misunderstanding. Which way do I go? Is always the question.
Would you mind telling me what exactly you believe Jesus to be?I'm not sure. Possibly the aspect of God through which we can reach a higher level of spirituality. I equate Jesus with Buddha and Horus.
I still tend to think of Jesus as a sort of personality, or entity. I can't seem to shake that type of feeling. I have had experiences where I've felt his presence.
Pick and stick is always best, isn't it?
Easy, we don't need to analyze and think, we can just go with the flow. No effort required. The only real con is that we can never progress - we can never improve or learn - but that's a small price for easy. Isn't it?Aint no flow to go with here. Those who speak for God are few and far between (where are you SirDent?
) on this network.
We progress in faith. It is a great progression, and often painful.
But the reward is great too. Progression in wisdom...??? Shooooooot... none comparesI can imagine how painful it is to try and describe why you have faith in something that is known to be false. That would hurt.
I can believe the wisdom; the bible is no different than other philosophical tomes that are written as a guide to proper living. All contain at least some wisdom along those lines.Ok. So pick the one you like or stay neutral or a-theism til the cows come home...
your decision.Sir, if that is necessary for you to imagine, so be it . However might not happen soon, to " describe " faith in the loving, caring , faithful , the only True God, who was and is and ever will be, the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End - this one does not to be " described " for His sake and for anyone who know Him. When you'll be knowing Him for seventy years and most of those years walking with Him as is in my case, your perception, definitely will be different.
"He is grading me someday"
Perhaps. But in your Bible, he is grading you on OBEDIENCE. To him. Not much else, if anything.
I think God does grade us, but I think it is on our behavior. On our moral decisions. On how we treat others.The bible is the rubric. It tells us exactly what God grades on. Yes, everyone.
His message to the mankind proves what you just said;" ... So that each one may receive [ his pay] according to what he has done in the body, whether good or evil, [ considering what his purpose and motive has been, and what he has achieved been busy with and given himself and his attention to accomplishing.] This God, the Crator of the universe is righteous God, he made it so simple from the very beginning : find out what is right-- and do it. You - no one does need the "Bible" for making right , right , The Bible makes it much easier to know God, His wil , to do right and live righteously .
The Bible does have some wisdom in it, and some truth. But it is so mixed up with things that contradict any wisdom it might be attempting to teach that it is useless as any real guide.
True. It all depends on personal faith. Even Jesus left it to every person discretion : be it according to your faith.
Not if you look spiritually. All of it is true. Rightly dividing takes spirit.
Right; and the spirit is based on Divine Love so it should be easy to discern between man's interference in the Bible/Scriptures when it is not love based.
@ jenesix , the Bible integrates ( all the God wanted humanity to know ) including His word, the word of men, the angels, the devil as well in some cases the words of animals. As far as " the Word of God speaks is alive and full of power- making it active, operative energizing and effective; it is sharper than any two edged sword, penetrating to the dividing line of the breath of life (soul) and [the immortal] spirit, and of joints and marrow [ that is of the deepest parts of our nature] exposing and sifting and analyzing and judging the very thoughts and purpose of heart.
And not a creature exists that is concealed from His sight, but all things are open and exposed , naked and defenseless to the eyes of Him with Whom we have to do. " ( New Testament , portion of the Bible )I don't think the Bible is the word of God. But that's just my opinion.
Just man.
Some of it I think is possibly inspired by God, but the rest is just a mixture of astrotheology, pure folk tales, made up stories of men based on their own ideas of wisdom, and blatantly borrowed/rehashed stories from other religions.Terminated. There isn't compromise to what the "word of God IS.
Terminated?
Um, Ok.
If you want to actually respond to what I said, feel free to, and we can discuss it.You have your " opinion " that's where termination has been decided . Besides , when " blatantly/borrowed/ rehashed stories from other religions..." is thrown at me in such a provocative manner who needs it? My time is precious to me and my God's word won't be subjected to any " discussion " on my part, because of its absolute superiority.
That's fine, as it is obviously easier to have a discussion with people with an open mind.
It seems pointless to me to discuss things only with people who are of the same opinions as you. At least you can pat each other on the back and congratulate each other on how correct you are.
We've been there already ; who needs more discussion ( not me ) with someone categorizing argument as an open minded discussin ?!-besides , getting aggravated , labeling others by their own classification.
Compromise? Perhaps, perhaps not.
But there is certainly differences in what the word of God is. Should we assume that you, and you alone out of all the world, have talked to God and know what His word is? Or that your opinion on the subject is no better than anyone else's?
I think so. You're claiming the bible was not inspired by god, that he did not write it through the hands of men.
That nothing in the bible can be considered as true; just claim it was put there by man and is not based on Divine Love.
I get it.No, you still haven't got it. The truth in all scriptures regardless of religion is based on Divine Love (which comes from the Divine, get it?).
I'm still waiting for a response re; Wilderness,
I disagree. my point is very original! smile
Also I respect science in the same way I respect any other religion. I allow them their Faith.
I note that Scientists like to take the credit for many earlier religious discoveries; also science evolved out of early religion so there are only irrational and emotive reasons for scientists turning their backs on their early heritage. Why be ashamed of the religious roots of science? It has to reveal a deep seated antipathy towards evolution! smile My point is that Science has not eliminated Faith, the irrational, or emotion from their mental processes therefore this is hampering the forward momentum of true science. Scientists should accept their own evolutionary roots, admit their faith and purge out the irrational emotion reactions to religionWell that is exactly what you get when you attempt to disjoint the bible. Disbelief in some leads to disbelief in much more.
Excuse me? I was defending the principle of Gods Divine Love against an atheist who was trying to label God a murderer!
So are you saying you removed my comment defending Gods love?
That's very odd.
As this is a brief discussion I will also try to be brief.
We agreed a while back there several aspects to viewing Bible content. Remember? Not to take a poem literally etc? Have you now changed that?
Further to that by basing a view of the Bible on the eyes of Divine Love we can safely remove all attempts to eradicate other entire racial groups as NOT of God. This makes up only a small portion of the Bibles content and almost none of the New Testament which is mainly about Love.I hear you but we cannot edit the bible. It was already done.
There are some poems some analogy and some metaphor but I believe God had some terrifying ways of dealing with the sinfully wicked. He hates sin. When you proudly wear that cape, he cannot see the glory of the blood of Jesus. Your scarlet sin is just that. No covering.
Well I just replied but cant see it again. Another delete???
I believe some posts are unavailable for viewing at one point or another. Possibly the ones that are being responded to. I have noticed that before.
Dont tell me atheists are running the site!?
Every time I win arguments against them I get switched off !!Atheists run the world. Remember?
The particular comments usually reappear after some time. Possibly on the previous page as people sometimes respond quickly and the system seems to need to catch up and reorganize based on order??? I'm not sure. But you usually can go back a page or two and find the comments after 1/2 hour or so.
I'll try again: the parts referring to the annihilation of entire peoples/races are a tiny part of the old testament and almost non existent in the new testament which is mainly about Gods Love.
I hear what you are saying but though God is love without doubt; he is judge and executioner. He is just and merciful to those with the covering. He protects them; chastises them; corrects them; and he punishes them.
I agree i agree.
He just doesnt do mass murder.Doesn't the bible say something about that? He did take his "hand" and go through the town of the Egyptians. And helped the Israeli armies to demolish town after town. And he did rain fire on Sodom and Gomorrah. Are those the parts of scripture that you feel should be omitted/adjusted/compromised???
Are you saying that we should ignore such repeated insanity because there are a lot of other words in the book?
When you sit on the court bench with a mass murderer in front of you, will you set them free because they tell you they love everybody now?Wilderness
Why do you irrationally refuse to see my point?
I sense great hostility and emotion.
Are you blaming God for bad stuff? That shows an indirect belief in God as you are blaming Him.
Perhaps you were let down by JC when you were a child?
Do you want to talk about it? My door is open.I understood your point to be that mass murder by god was not in every chapter of the bible and should therefore be ignored. Was there something else?
When God does bad stuff, then God gets the blame, yes. When He kills kids, or entire cities, then he gets the blame.
Been let down by that particular fable all my life.
Wilderness
You still havnt explained why you deny the early evolution of atheism.As atheism started as a lack of belief in gods and is still a lack of belief in gods, I am at a loss to see where the evolution happened.
Atheism and its accompanying code of ethics evolved out of religion (theism).
Science and Art evolved out of religion (theism).
I am just asking you to accept your roots and to accept evolution.Let me put it this way: it is apparent that the New Atheist Movement has created an ethical vacuum in many, but not all, of its adherents.
The most obvious example to me is a widely held view that hypocrisy now has no meaning. For example; all ethics, science and art evolved out of religion (a belief in God/God’s) but many atheists,not all, deny the evolutionary roots of their own philosophy while at the same time defending the principle of evolution! Ergo, hypocrisy.
This new Homersimpsonion atheist view that “everyone is stupid except me” does not count as a philosophy or an ethic. For example, if a budding new individual atheist (say for example a Peter Singer type) was to develop his unique code of ethics by practicing Zoophilia with a pig and happened to create a new types of AIDS this would have to be seen as “bad”, stupid, undesirable or possibley evil as it would be potentially fatal to millions of other humans.
In other words atheism as a philosophy as described by ……..doesn’t work (yet).Can you make a case for art coming from religion? You can start with the earliest art, in cave drawings and show that religion had people drawing pictures of animals. Or making jewelry.
And then do the same for science; show that religion is the root of the concept of testing and observation before declaring truth. That the idea of gaining knowledge via experimentation comes from religion. Not, mind you, priests or other religious people, but from the tenets and teachings of religion.
And I'm just asking you to understand that atheism came long before any religion. While Ugh Ugh the caveman had a god or two, his ancestors did not; when humanity invented it's gods it came about from curiosity and a drive to understand, which means those questions had not been answered. Which means there was no god to answer them.
And to think that the scientific method of thought and research came from the methodology of theological studies is laughable. It most definitely developed independently, although likely from people that at least professed a belief in theism; it was dangerous indeed to fail to do so when science caught hold.Wilderness I can't agree with that. theism has been around as long as humans and probably before with Neanderthals.
All early scientists were either priests monks or god fearing men. This is all well recorded by history.All right - please put the evolved religious thought to use and prove that scientifically. Don't just make the claim - prove it with tests, observations and/or evidence.
What was the earliest god, if you know it was before Neanderthals? What were it's orders, how did it interact with man? Where did it live and which tribe invented it? You've made a claim, back it up with evidence.
You most definitely do not know early scientists, using the scientific method of investigation, were theists - you merely know that they said they were because the alternative was death, torture or at best incarceration. And then only in Western countries; very early chinese peoples were bordering on using the method long, long ago.This is a very shaky argument. You are speculating, about as much as he is. If a person professes to be something we can only take them at their word. Claiming people were wearing a theist coat, out of fear, is simply attempting to back up your beliefs.
And, asking someone to identify the gods of lost civilizations is like the missing link argument by creationists. You refuse to consider his point of view simply because he doesn't possess a specific piece of information, while you ignore the vast amount of information he does offer.
Very few known civilizations didn't have a deity, or two. We can look at the odd indigenous tribe which doesn't and claim that proves early man didn't but that would be foolish and shortsighted. Archeological evidence consistently points in the other directionWilderness,
I can't do your homework for you. Just pick up any good book on archaeology and have a read at what the atheist Scientists themselves are telling you about early forms of religion; and the many proofs they have discovered in early cave art and burials. It is basic high school education.But you did not say "early" man; you said the first man on earth. That the first man was religious and a theist. No archeologist would ever make such a statement, but you did, so it is up to you to prove it.
Actually, when Neanderthals first started to integrate with humans, they had their first taste of "faith" when they watched shamans perform rituals right before a big hunt.
Oops... I always thought Neanderthals were considered early humans.
I started a thread called, "Be Prepared", it is quite relevant to your posts here.
Neanderthals are considered early humans in a way. The current theory is that they and we evolved form a common ancestor, somewhere down the line.
Neanderthals also interbred with some human populations within the last 40,000 years or so.
+correction, Neanderthals died out around 40,000 years ago. I'm not sure when the interbreeding occurredHomo Neanderthalensis are not "homo sapiens" and are not a part of the same species designation thought we share the same "homo" genus classification.
I still think of them as a sort of human though. They are certainly close enough genetically to interbreed with us.
As might any of the other "great apes", I don't know.
And if you DO know (that they can) I don't want to hear about it!
But they are of the "homo" genus; very close genetically.The creepiest part is that you can now get genetic testing done to see if you have Neanderthal ancestors:)
I don't think I'd want to know, but I probably am, since that's where they think red heads might have come from:)That would be cool - I'd do it in a heartbeat if I could. Just think of the things that could be excused because I'm "just" a Neanderthal. And humans owe me for the genocide and land grab!
WILDERNESS,
the point is that religion has been art of humanity and even pre-humanity for a long long time (100,000years?) and all art, culture, science, music and philosophy evolved out of various religions.Proof, please, that "humans" of 80,000 years ago all over the world were religious.
Proof, please, that all cave art came from religions attempts, along with all music and philosophy. What I have seen depicted more hunting scene than god.
You've got some major claims here, but I do not think a shred of evidence. to back them with.
To my understanding, the bible does not borrow or rehash. But corrects. That is what Jesus came to do. The ideas that some have about faith are off-kilter based upon the bible and the words of Jesus. We have a new and improved understanding because of his ministry. No one here may say that they have not been made aware of the commands he left with us. No one may say when they stand face to face with God that they did not know. The bible promised that all will know. And all will bow and confess that he is Lord. Now or later...
You can't say the story of Jesus was a "correction" of the story of Osiris, because the Bible says that happened 2000 years ago. The story of Osiris originated at LEAST four thousand years ago, and probably longer.
I won't bow to anybody.Osiris schmiris!
check your book. There were a few differences between the two. Jesus came to show us God. Do you believe that?I didn't say Jesus and Osiris were carbon copies. And that's just ONE example. Mithras was even more similar to Jesus that Osiris.
And no, I don't think Jesus came here to save us.Your last statement is the ringer. No Christianity for you. Is that a problem? Because you seem pretty perched.
Jesus coming to save us is one of the biblical basic truths.
My take on this mythology is that they are basically recognized as myths.
Quite possible in my mind that someone has visions and drew them out. Could have been predictions.
I wholeheartedly believe the biblical accounts. Now our conversation will onlybe mmisdirected. We are speaking from two different planes. I, Jesus spiritual. You, another kind. How will we climb this mountain?
Uh, you want me to move it for you? Lol!!!I know where youre coming from. Its called comparative religion and its a subject studied at uni. Many religious people get stuck in one book. I read all the scriptures and study archaeolgy.
The Alpha and Omega - Jesus - The Lord God Almighty , who was , is and ever shall be isn't in " religious" completion with anybody or anything. The term " religion" is created by man for the sake of communication when comparing invented religious systems. For that reason the " bible" containing the word of living God is superior to any other " religious " writings since the Word is alive and active ; faith leads up to discovery of supernatural .
Did I read that right? Am I in an episode of the Twilight Zone?
You can make that claim all you want, but you saying it does not make it true. In order for you to demonstrate your claims truthfulness, you would have to provide evidence for discussion - something you seem unwilling to do. Or maybe it's because you know you can't, and you just want to preach at people and make a bunch of claims that cannot be defended.
To "provide evidence" for the sake of discussion isn't what the believers are told to do , and don't expect me to expose myself to everyones mock or ridicule . However you probably have been aware by now the following words of Jesus saying ,"In very truth I tell you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I am doing, and he will do even greater works than these because i am going to the Father…"(John 14:12); likewise "Wherever men believe, these signs will be found: men will drive out demons in my name, speak with new tongues, and take up serpents in their hands; if they drink anything deadly it will not harm them; they will lay hands on the sick and they will recover."( Mark 16:17.18) . The gospels are detailing the "deeds of the kingdom" performed by Jesus from Nazareth's earthly life : the people came to him asking for help ,believing they will get it -he just said " be it according to your faith…. or even " your faith made you well ." In his home town he didn't do many of those "supernatural miracles"- we are told , because of "their unbelief". More of His works you can read in the gospels, more of the manifestation the same is going on since His followers obediently doing his will,whenever and wherever is both receiving faith and giving faith. Quite many times happened in my presence , and by me being used as an obedient vessel to his word. Never bother to count as something extraordinary, just giving glory for His faithfulness. It's no big deal when a believer speaks to the storm to stop, or the demons leave a person's body as it is no big deal when it doesn't. Have you ever witness the presence of the anointing in the action? - Just asking. Not needed to be answered. We who know the will of the Lord, we also know that we are accountable to ourselves and to the Creator, not to any other authority .So what you want from me? Just please be fair and polite in communication. We are here for you and everybody else, sharing the irrevocable truth as a sign of times. And OH, how the scripture is being fulfilled even as we speak and no human can do much about it.
To "provide evidence" for the sake of discussion isn't what the believers are told to do , and don't expect me to expose myself to everyones mock or ridicule . However you probably have been aware by now the following words of Jesus saying ,"In very truth I tell you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I am doing, and he will do even greater works than these because i am going to the Father…"(John 14:12); likewise "Wherever men believe, these signs will be found: men will drive out demons in my name, speak with new tongues, and take up serpents in their hands; if they drink anything deadly it will not harm them; they will lay hands on the sick and they will recover."( Mark 16:17.18) . The gospels are detailing the "deeds of the kingdom" performed by Jesus from Nazareth's earthly life : the people came to him asking for help ,believing they will get it -he just said " be it according to your faith…. or even " your faith made you well ." In his home town he didn't do many of those "supernatural miracles"- we are told , because of "their unbelief". More of His works you can read in the gospels, more of the manifestation the same is going on since His followers obediently doing his will,whenever and wherever is both receiving faith and giving faith. Quite many times happened in my presence , and by me being used as an obedient vessel to his word. Never bother to count as something extraordinary, just giving glory for His faithfulness. It's no big deal when a believer speaks to the storm to stop, or the demons leave a person's body as it is no big deal when it doesn't. Have you ever witness the presence of the anointing in the action? - Just asking. Not needed to be answered. We who know the will of the Lord, we also know that we are accountable to ourselves and to the Creator, not to any other authority .So what you want from me? Just please be fair and polite in communication. We are here for you and everybody else, sharing the irrevocable truth as a sign of times. And OH, how the scripture is being fulfilled even as we speak and no human can do much about it.
Why even bother in the first place?
Why not just preach and leave?
I don't get what you're doing here if you don't want open communication.If you don't leave soon, you'll se what am I doing here. My place where to be will be decided later, by someone else.
1 Peter 3:15 "But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,"
It seems like that is EXACTLY what you are told to do.Would you , please be specific what " you ( me?) are told to do ?
A scripture quoted above is a direct instruction to the believers suffering for righteousness and it's results. By now you know that original Greek text is written in capital letters and each book from the first word to the last one having no punctuation, no chapter or verses , while modern languages you see chapters and verses. The English readers have choice of multiple translations, including New International Version which is less reliable . In order to understand message of v.15th, a reader has to start at least at v. 13-" if you are devoted to goodness who can harm you but - ( (only "but" in these verses )- if you should have to suffer for doing what is right count yourself blessed do not be afraid of men and do not let them upset you reverence Chris as Lord in your hearts always be ready if you are questioned to speak out IN YOUR DEFENSE OF THE HOPE YOU ALL SHARE."
Thus, what is the question regarding my eternal Hope, please ? And as far my heart's referencing Christ as Lord - iHe knows about the best.
What am I told to do EXACTLY ?Reason for the hope you have. Not miracles of concrete evidence on the spot.
Concrete evidence comes from God. When you say yes to him; he plugs in. When you say "maybe, let me see what you're working with first." It kinda doesn'twork.
MICHAEL MILEC
Its OK to believe "our football team is the best" but to say there are no other football teams might look a little odd!
Just imagine if a football team made that claim during a football season: there are no other teams only ours!Jesus said that there was only one team that will make it to the father. All other teams...
Are there really other teams?
One true God...one itty-bitty way to him...
What other teams do you mean?Just a fun tidbit I found that I thought you might like:) I am not into gematria, but I at least thought it was interesting.
In Bible gematria, Jesus equates to the number 3168, and Bethlehem is located at 31.68 latitude. This I found not at a gematria website, but a number/geography one, mostly surrounding the number 3168. It was quite fascinating.What does that mean? What is the significance? I know you said "fun tidbit" but why is it interesting? I'm kinda slow.
but I do catch up...It's not significant to me(yet) , I thought it might be to you.
The number 3168 is significant to me though. It's kind of like (in my opinion, and many other people, including ancient people who existed way before Christianity started) God's signature number. I could go into detail about why I think that, but unless you're interested, I won't waste my time or your time.
The reason I brought it up, is that it, in more ways than one, ties in with the Bible, and specifically Bethlehem.
That God points to specific things from the Bible through numbers, geography, and geometry. I'm curious to know why.I believe his concrete alignment with things we may grasp is done purposely for those who look for concrete evidence. However, it only works for those who seek; and seek him in it. He may give many valuable pieces of "evidence" but if one refuses to give him credit for the "evidence" they miss it.
The other teams are the different sects of Christianity and also the other religions
They each need to respect one another's beliefs. It is disrespectful not to respect other cultures beliefs. If a belief causes harm to the weaker members of society or creates violence then of course we need to condemn that. In general however, there is a lot of room for more tolerance of other doctrines between the different churches and even the different religions.To know followers of Christ, one must listen very carefully. Do they say what he said? Do they believe what he believed?
I understand that respect is needed. Even when I am not respected. We are to be tolerant of all, as instructed. But being respectfully honest about truth is imperative. We haven't time to waste.
The language of Christ is written. His heart/spirit is illustrated thoroughly. When we play with it a little, we carve another path to nowhere; I mean, another Religion. He will not conform to our fancies about his unrequited love and everlasting mercy. He said, "Keep MY commands/remember what I say."
What anyone ELSE says is as moot as moot can moot.I keep feeling that you are defending ONE particular sect that is remaining unspoken by you. You seem to be hinting at a strong attachment to one special set of doctrines over others.
After a while, you'll realize that Genaea is not merely hinting at one special sect. She flat out believes and states often that only a select few are going to Heaven with her. She has a special line to God to which other believers are not privy, and thus a unique understanding of scripture that only she and a select few possess.
I don't say this to insult her in any way, but it is indeed what she believes.I am speaking it loud and clear. Jesus is the example of what God wants. His doctrine is the right one to me. What you speak sounds foreign.
there you go again: hinting that there is some silent one special sect out there you are defending.
God created a " soccer team " first, just look around; and a season is being extended : we still enjoy the grace time period.
Then, God created a soccer ball and called it an 'atheist'
You guys....what an unpleasant analogy. I presume that God's soccer team is made up of Christians. If the idea that we kick Atheists around like the soccer ball is a prevalent one, it's no wonder they don't want anything to do with the coach of the team.
Appropriate though, isn't it.
You got it, sister.@ Michele Benner, you are so correct: it has been very foolish of me to respond to the analogy " our football team…" directed to my name, and having not much to do with the subject at all. Assuming to be, additional 'funny remark-Soccer" came only due to popularity of the sport in other parts of the world. My sincere apology to every reader and contributor in discussion for making this mistake. That is far strange practice in my life"kicking Atheists around"; contrary ,I respect every human being regardless of their loyalty and faith toward other " gods " , if in dialog, my conclusion would be " It is between you and your 'god', leaving it there since everyone is ' playing' under different rules elsewhere on a separate playground.
I was not bothered about any of the analogies. My God knows the direction of each. Jesus used parable all the time to cross his points over. Somebody hollared, "I aint no sheep" and the rest is history...
His sheep know his voice and though they struggle to understand it sometimes, they never yell at it or argue with it.
Thanks for using the right voice Michael. I hear and I follow.
The reality is that atheists do not believe that there is a coach of the "team". They do not worry about being kicked around by air. They want us to realize that we are head-less in many more ways than one. And that our team is a losing, off-center, delusional bunch of idiots mindlessly running around the field; or crapping up the chess board.
In many instances, that isn't the case. You're so convinced that atheists are against God. That isn't always true. Sometimes, we-Christians-are the ones who push them away from God. The hypocrisy that we as Christians display is one of the biggest issues. We say God is love-and act like jerks to anyone who doesn't instantly agree. Half the time we act like jerks to each other. We say God is merciful and judge, judge, judge as often as we get the chance.
Fr. Brennan Manning said once that "The single greatest cause of atheism in the world today is Christians, who acknowledge Jesus with their lips, and then walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. This is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable."I thought the very term atheist has something to do with belief that there is no God. I asked jonny once, "if your brother was mean to you, would it make you to blot yourself from your father's will?" He never responded.
People have a decision to make. To base opinion of God on the behaviours of a handful of his followers is loss. But whose???Or, just a lack of belief in any gods, yours included.
According to the bible there are many Gods; yours included. But only one true God.
There are also many beliefs in the one the true God. But only one way to him.Yeah, according to almost every other religion, there is "But only one true God" which doesn't include yours. This is something many believers ignore.
Not ignored; disregarded. There is but one God. All others are imagined. Many worship their money; others, themselves; still others, ancient or not so ancient men. And the list goes on and on from there. We all must choose whom we will serve. The bible prefers we do it today.
Disregard: pay no attention to; ignore.
You "disregard" (ignore) the fact that those many other religions say the same thing, that your god is imagined, as well. In fact, some of those gods are far more plausible than yours.
Yes, many followers of your religion fit that bill quite well."Come away from them." Says the bible. The disregard is not ignored in this case because it is taken into consideration. But then the realization that only comes from the spirit of God, alerts the sheep of the off-decibel and key change from the shepherd's voice.
and they do not follow.It is really funny how you keep ignoring the fact there are other religions in the world with followers that say the same thing as you.
Not ignored...
It doesn't matter what others say or believe. What I believe makes the difference to me.
Everyone else must decide what makes the difference for them.Same as all the other religions. Still don't get that?
Now you're just making stuff up. ALL other religions??? It must be some sort of reach...but why? We just talked about the religions that include many more deities and at least one female. You nervous?
With all the choices, some people get stuck and try to stay neutral; but it is not possible. No belief in God or not enough evidence of God is a no choice. See?Yes, the other religions have followers that believe just like you, expect in their god, not yours.
You are forgetting that there are those who expect of my God but will not receive. And there are those who expect of other Gods with the same results.
So I guess it doesn't really matter (again) what others believe from my standpoint. What I believe; is of utmost importance to me.And, of no importance to anyone else, just like every other follower of a religion, they have their expectations of their gods just like you have of yours. Still not getting it?
I think that I get it just fine. Are you missing something?
We have acknowledged many times over that gods come in ALL shapes and sizes. Even the bible acknowledges that fact. To consistently discuss it is of what importance? Our religious conversation seems to have a Christian sway. We bring up the Christian part because that is what we discuss. All other religious leanings don't have that flavor. Jesus' flavor was salty. and he sprinkled it wherever he went. He changed the flavor of all.
If we want to go where he is; we will work on our flavor to ensure the salt content. For when we add SUGAR; we throw off the chemical reactions and ruin our "food" making it unpalatable to God.Yes, even the Bible acknowledges the fact there are many other gods.
It is important to the fact that since there are so many gods, yours is just one of many and insignificant amongst them.
Sorry, but that makes no sense. All those other religions didn't just disappear overnight because of Jesus.
Gibberish.The bible also acknowledges that none of those gods should come before the one true God.
The so called insignificance of my God is the gibberish part. He has everyone's attention.
The disappearance of the other religions is yet to come.
I know that you do not comprehend the salty part. It is biblical. No one studies that part because it does not have that debunk quality but Christians are to be the salt of the earth without losing their savor. Im sure Google can handle that for you.
Too many of God's children are adding sugar to their message. And springing up new sects of syrupy goodness that give children the gift of goo. But Jesus said add salt; the gift of life. Who's wrong? Jesus? We shall see...
ANNOUNCEMENT:
I just out debated an atheists blog on another thread on Hub and was immediately locked out for it.
It appears Hub could be run by atheist moderators.Well ok, some people who wear the Christian title do get locked out for winning arguments and occasionally embarrassing super smart asses with big fat BS degrees.
I forget that part... no biggie. This battle was won thousands of years ago. The Lord will not be shushed. He's much mightier.
The unfair ban...discussed over and over.
It has happened to most of us repeatedly. But it seems that the Christian must not be as interested in the report button.OK
I admire your attitude. Anyway I complained and got my post through.
I am not trying to detract from the Truth and Beauty that is in the Bible.
There are two definitions of faith: faith the noun refers to doctrine but faith the verb is an action of deep hope. As all doctrine is changeable I see faith in action as the more truthful and real Faith.
All people theist and atheist live on hope even if they dont admit it.Yeah, we discussed that too. Faith Everyone has It, was the name of the forum. Also, True that people attack to get a banable response? was another discussion we already had. Not too long ago.
You are right on-track!
Your faith shines as well as a handful of others here. (I just cannot get with the idea that God is not what the bible says he is; nor that he did not do what the bible says he did) God does not think as we.
The OT was full of his vengeance and wrath. I believe he wanted to show us his power and his intolerance of disobedience. Though each of us struggle he desires that we have the right ideas about what he says is right, so we will at least be headed in that direction. He can work with a repentant heart. He can work with humility. He can increase faith and faithfulness. But we must meet him where HE is. He doesn't change his way to appease. Spirit and TRUTH.
Some will never get thatThat's right: no one can live without hope/faith in something.
There are many believers who study the Bible from a point of archaeology; they are still believers.
As a person who studies the Bible and religions in this way my personal view is that the main value of the OT is its pre-figuration of JC. Of course it has other great value.
People, like me!, who intellectualize, need to study the prophecy and events in the OT to fully understand the events of the NT.
For example, its hard to fully understand the concept of sacrifice without understanding about ancient Hebrew concepts of sacrifice.
That being said, it is better to believe "without having seen" and the pure in heart and the simpler believers don't need to know all this stuff. It is part of God's plan to provide for both types of people: those who might need a higher level of study to believe and those who don't need a higher level of study.
Your share would be 3cents in light of the fact that many would follow you to the Neanderthal testing site sleeves raised. Lol (anything for a buck...)
Lying to people and changing the words of God to be more "palatable" turns people away from God and/or causes one to sin. Not truth.
Truth frees.Does anyone else have this same image as seen on my pages? The las comment:
I
will
agree
with
you
there.
no chance for "reply ".(Looks strange)
Under the assumption we continue "God and Adam" - forum thread, one would presuppose we are talking about "God" revealed on the pages of the Bible in English language, given him this name "God" by 'man' for better communication. Substantially we are talking of the living being- a person, omni present, omnipotent, ever existing spirit, - spiritual being as you and me- the real person- and every single person IS SPIRIT,SOUL, -living in the body. A faith in this only living God is the way of communication and trust is link to relationship with Him.Without these is impossible to know Him, experience communication with Him or give wisdom and knowledge of Him to anyone denying these two virtues. Actually all this is beside the point while in this conversation we are too far of the things His nature when we are talking about "religions". The spiritual things of supernatural God can't be compared to any other "religion" , because Creator of the Universe isn't religious, didn't created any religion what so ever. He was and is communicating with His creation while the other religion gods don't .
Let's look the first recorded instance as this "God" gave His name to Moses mentioned in the Bible; the God said, "I AM " . Once again we are dealing with the translation - 'eh-yeh = I AM in Hebrew ; 'eh-yeh 'a-ser 'eh-yeh - that is " I AM WHAT I AM": ( Ex.3:9) -God answered Moses "I AM WHO I AM. this is what you must say to the people of Israel: "I AM has sent me to you." At that time of the history this was the only people who has earned God's attention because of FAITH in His provision.
Perhaps one of the best proof of God's communication is promised redeemer to all people. Decades before coming of "Emmanuel"- God with us,- has been written into details how it will happen as well when it happen the story of Jesus from Nazareth presented God's presence in human body. Those who read the Gospels and other historical evidence know about this very well. No other religions "gods" have ever communicated this way, never proved word - to be life manifested in flesh and when He came- the Word- Jesus - " to those who received Him he gave authority to become children of God to those who believe in HIM. They were BORN , not from human stock, nor from physical desire, nor from the will of man , BUT FROM GOD."(John 1:12.13.)Let's remember the FAMILY relationship : The children , only the children have free excess to the father…
Final word :"God is SPIRIT, and those who worship Him-( (come to Him)- must worship Him in spirit and truth.' These are words of Jesus: " Believe me …a time is coming, and is now here, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father seeks such people AS HIS WORSHIPERS. "(John 4:21-24)Usually when I see that view I am not signed in. Or it could be threaded view that you may change at the top of the screen. The later a bit less likely.
He changed after the bite. Immediately different. Knowledge of nakedness.
What an awesome thought.
Thanks.Yes. The description of what women look for in men did sound familiar. I read about that study. Women on what types of mates they tend to seek. But in my community (which is where knowledge of ethnicity and culture are important) women are "bread winners" and heads of household. Just looking for something pretty to come home to. Lol
Our men are locked up; gay; locked up; taken; just playing the field; or dead.
The chicks are fighting for a piece of his time these days. Any ole piece will do.
Women have babies to "keep" one who will not stay. And yes! Sex and/or sex appeal plays a huge part.Disclaimer:
Black women do have standards. Many of them wait and don't settle. Many are single still.- Motown2Chitownposted 10 years ago0
This may just be the single most bizarre set of comments I've ever read in these forums.
I have just been reading over the posts.
It is undeniable that hypocrisy should not be condoned in either theistic or atheists philosophy.
It is hypocritical for one religion not to respect another.
Likewise it is hypocritical for atheism not to respect their evolutionary links to ethics via religion.Actually, it seems more to me that those " evolutionary links to ethics" are the teachings of the atheists, trying to raise the morality of the religions into something more civilized.
Well you could be wrong there as there is no actual evidence of that. All the early scientists were devoutly religious men.
The goal of early science was to discover what, was on the mind of God.
Respect is something that is earned. Not many religions have done that for me personally. Or many, many other people.
I tolerate them. As long as they don't cross certain lines, that is.
People have valid reasons for not tolerating certain aspects of certain religions. As it should be.Trust is earned. Respect is everyone's right. Right???
"I tolerate them as long as they toe the line I draw everyday with my big red matker???" Lol
Who did you say are you again???Respect: "a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements."
Not in my book.b : to refrain from interfering with <pleaserespect their privacy> Merriam Webster
See...in an effort to keep the congruence of conversation intact; one must remain aware of context.
My definition more closely relates to the topic of discussion; see?
You do not have to have high esteem or regard for anyone to "respect" them...Just a misunderstanding between the two of us, I don't think our actual opinions on the matter differ much. Just a word usage problem.
Just imagine...many of our words and thoughts of meaning fall victim to our culture, our education, our personal experience. We often know things only from our own multifaceted and unique perspective. Context is often missed from the person who types out a reply. The words of Jesus must definitely be somewhat hard to get at first.
Tolerance: "the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with."
So then one could say that I "tolerate" you??? Who, did you say, am I???
Thanks for "tolerating" me. It is appreciated to the max!' tolerance' as a temporary fix living between two opinions, isn't in God's vocabulary, similarly as compromise man's acceptance for temporary solutions, subject to constant changes , short lived.
That sounds reasonable.
However, I'm curious to how you know what's in God's vocabulary?Easy, by reading His Word and wherever possible digging into "original" meaning not lost in translations.
We MUST remember that God never changes. We cannot be unfaithfully tossed to and fro by every new idea.
Thanks!But people change. Are we supposed to keep outdated ideas?
How do you know what God wants , thinks, feels anyway?It is written.
We have instructions on how to successfully live this life. Though people change; it will always be wrong to kill, steal, and destroy says the Lord. Certain other things will ALWAYS be WRONG as well. We know what those things are when we read the instructions that he left for us.
Oh!!! But we CANNOT read the words with our red marker. We must use our EMPTY cup. Get it???I disagree. I think our sense of what's right and wrong come from within. A gift from God, but more like a compass that is always pointing up.
It's not always easy to determine though, and can be greatly influence by circumstance. Guidance is helpful, but only to a certain extent. We still have to determine what is the right thing to do, and that is relative. Some things are obvious in their wrongness or rightness, others not so much.
I don't think the Bible was written by God. Perhaps inspired, but the messages are obscured by the human writers, and their own personal faults and agendas, incorrect assumptions.
Wisdom is there, but it has to be sifted through, and still taken with a grain of salt.That"s everyone choice: to agree or disagree. God's word won't change, his Principles are established, He is ruling the Universe by His word. Knowing right and wrong didn't die within Adam when he broke his trust-faith in the Creator. Even before Christ's redemption there were individuals who by choosing doing "right" became righteous, the greatest to remember "Abraham believed God and so God accepted him as being r i g h t with Himself" (credited to him as righteousness) Rom 4:3. See , there is this 'slight' difference produced by ""Faith is ability to treach into spiritual realm of God-The -Spirit "' and after the bold step believing-, receiving His Word via faith the one is being transformed into family relationship with the Father--things are differently distributed within the family. Outsiders, well we all know and see and and are "nice" to each other, tolerating each other, religiously compromising , while God is not religious; religions are man made organizations to accommodate will and want of particular membership...
Do you realize that some people cannot distinguish their own voice from God's? How will we ever come to know without the writings???
There is a plan to kill the writing, so that man may decide for himself what God (whom or whatever that may be for one at the moment) is saying.
The very elect will be fooled.
It was written for a reason. The purpose of it is reproof. Why praytell would one need that??? See the first sentence for this comment."Do you realize that some people cannot distinguish their own voice from God's? How will we ever come to know without the writings??? "
Through the natural spiritual evolutionary process God was kind enough to naturally install within us.
I'm not worried about anyone being "saved" because we all will be, eventually.Maybe you should read the ENTIRE chapter of James 4...
Hallucinations are sounds or other sensations experienced as real when they exist only in the person's mind. While hallucinations can involve any of the five senses, auditory hallucinations (e.g. hearing voices or some other sound) are most common in schizophrenia. Visual hallucinations are also relatively common. Research suggests that auditory hallucinations occur when people misinterpret their own inner self-talk as coming from an outside source.
http://www.helpguide.org/mental/schizop … ymptom.htmYes, I know. Hearing inner voices is wrong. Hearing with the heart is quite different than head-voices. And gives peace that worldly heads will never understand.
Encephaiio
as a matter of fact ALL sensory input is processed in and by the individuals mind be it schizophrenia, logical thought or true religious experience.
Does that make maths an hallucination?Huh? I have no idea what you're talking about.
Computers were a new idea, the internet was a new idea, this forum was a new idea. Funny, how you seem to be using them extensively and unfettered after saying that.
New idea??? People have been finding faster ways of communication for eons.
I keep up with that. However, in matters of the heart/mind/spirit, I have one formula. I stand on that. No swaying; no bending; no sugars; no additives. Just "salt". And the salt was already provided. Jesus is the salt. His spirit changes its surroundings. If we have him; we change our surroundings. If we don't, we have "lost our savor" which isn't good.That must be very upsetting for those who would much rather avoid new ideas.
I kinda like the internet
The idea that God accepts all people on all paths is a new idea that will be discredited one day.
"But Lord! I was handling (charming) snakes in your name!!! Oh! I forgot that thou shall not tempt the Lord thy God...oops"Can you provide that verse from the Bible?
"Thou shalt not browse"You read into everything. Try just reading. You said, "careful that may be a sin" in response to my, "I kinda like the internet" my response to your "careful..." was "nope, I checked"
It is not sinful to like the internet. I guess depending upon what you're liking on the internet. But that's another discussion.Can you provide a verse from the Bible confirming that?
No. John and Paul had no visions about the www.
However sin is fully illustrated. We know sin when we see it.
Organizing papers; processing letters; looking up helpful information; and learning about new things, all help us while we are in the world.
Who am I?
I am an infinitesimal fragment of God, living this particular awareness, until my life energy is recycled into another being, until I return to my Creator.Even God himself respects the rights of a man to choose how-so-ever he wishes.
Examples:
I tolerate Christianity, because I don't agree with most of it.
I respect most of the teachings and values taught by Jesus, because they are admirable.I'm just know he thanks you.
Btw...what is admirable? I mean, who decides what admirable is? Have you written a book on the do' and don'ts of admirable? How do we ensure admirability??? Are you the only QCI we have on the matter; or are there others?Janesix, very interesting. Christianity of today has become corrupted by ego and divisiveness. I suspect that Jesus never wanted that to happen, though he knew it would. He talked about this corruption.
I have a new book in the planning stages that digs into this subject -- the dilution of Christianity.There seems to be corruption in most religions, if not all. The seed of meaning is always nearly lost. But the seed in most of them is the same.
Its important not to make sweeping statements like "all religions are bad" as it is similar to racism where misinformed people say "all dark people are bad". You just can't tar everyone with the same brush.
Better to say there are SOME theists and some atheists who are bad.I didn't say any religions are bad. I said there is corruption in all of them. Neither did I say anything about theists or atheists.
The SEED is the same for religions. The MEANING and the message are corrupted over time.
The message can be found in all, but it has to be sifted through, and understood on a personal level through God's guidance.As well, it is important to not make sweeping statements like, "all religions have an equal share in the spirit" too. We must have the mind of Christ if we wish to follow him.
It is in keeping with the character of Divine Love to tolerate and respect the beliefs of others. Likewise, equality. Isn't that what Afr-Americans want? Isn't that what all races and cultures want? Equality? Even under man's law equality is mandatory. So under God's law equality is even more sacred.
Cgenaea, our Real Faith (verb) should not feel challenged by the rights of others; only a believer's small faith (noun=set of rules) is challenged. The set of rules of a faith is small "f" faith. Divine Faith is the "F" faith.
Don't allow yourself to feel spiritually challenged by tolerance and equality.Please write out a list of all other religious beliefs Jesus endorsed/embraced please. I really need the challenge of which you speak.
Take your time.When Jesus was alive Christianity did not yet exist. He was a practicing Jew.
He warmly welcomed all people of all religious persuasions into his sermons, including Romans, Jews, Samaritans and Edomities etc.
He made no claim he was going to limit His grace to one religion in particular or one particular Christian "future sect".
His sermon on the mount drew no religious distinctions but only appealed to decent human values of meekness, humbleness and charity
I feel like you are trying to pin Him down to one special sect (your own) which is remaining silent but becoming more obvious as we talk.
Are you a JW?"I do the will of my father, the one who sent me."
"If you love me, KEEP my commands."
He told the woman, "Sin no more." Now what is sin? But how can we know; with the bible being untrustworthy and all???Jesus said, "I am the Way the Truth and the Life. No man comes to the Father but by me." John 14:6
Unless a person can acknowledge Jesus for who he really is, that person cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. The Way has been made, not many ways.
When He chose His disciples, He said, "Follow me." When he healed people He said, "Sin no more."
He fed people because they were hungry, but this did not save them.
Cgenaea, the first scripture I'd point out is 2 Corinthians 3:6. It warns us that the letter (literal) leads to death. Only the spirit of scripture leads to life.
In other words, don't take the words of the Bible too literally. You'll miss the real message. Some is literal, yes, but some is metaphor and symbol meant to make you think and to dig with the Holy Spirit to find the True meaning.
Just look at how Christ used difficult parables. He wasn't a literalist, though many biblical literalists claim that he was.
The literal approach to Bible interpretation is easy, but Jesus told us that the path to salvation is narrow and difficult.
Fact: None of us know God's full Truth.
Implications: We need to remain humble and hungry at all times until we do know the full Truth, which might be forever.
What gets in the way is ego. Jesus described this as "first" -- the attitude of needing to be first. Arrogant, know-it-all. Humility is the antidote to ego.
There appear to have been 3 Adams in Genesis.
1) Adam, the spiritual being in the Garden.
2) Adam, the tribe (see Genesis 5:2, where it describes Adam as male and female and them.
3) The eponymous leader of the Adam tribe, if there was such an individual.
Man has a dual nature
Genesis 1:26 tells us that man was created in the image and likeness of God, but He is not Homo sapiens. So, that means we are non-physical, spiritual and immortal sources of creation, for that is God's image and likeness.
Genesis 2:7 tells us that man was created from the dust of the ground. This is chemicals -- DNA -- Homo sapiens.
So, man is sleeping immortal spirit wrapped in Homo sapiens flesh. Genesis 6:3 emphasizes this.
God doesn't care about these human bodies. After all, he trashed the lot of them during Noah's Flood so he could start all over again. Something had threatened God's purpose to rescue His immortal children.
My new book, The Bible's Hidden Wisdom, God's Reason for Noah's Flood, talks about the Flood's target -- described in Genesis 6 as the "daughters of men" and located through science as a species which matches the description in Genesis 6 -- a species which disappeared at the new Flood date of 28,000 BC.
There is still much more to learn. Humility and hunger to receive the answers is essential.Please tell me what comment you are replying to. I'm having a problem following your first sentence.
All of your threads so far are only promoting your books.
Did you read the TOS where it says that is not allowed?No! God does not have feet.
If you were able to look upon the feet of God it would be as though you had been made blind, for you would see NoThing.
When the breath, the Immortal Spirit of God, was breathed into Man’s, he and she, Mankind’s nostril, it was the Immortal Spirit of God that became a Living Soul, that was made manifest; the Immortal Spirit of God alive in the Flesh Body of Man, he and she, Mankind; Mortal Man to walk the Earth having both a Mortal, Flesh Body and a Spiritual Body; the Spiritual Body, the Immortal Spirit of Man, he and she, Mankind created in the Image of the Immortal Spirit of God.
Immortality used in reference to Man, He and She, Mankind, rather than the Individual Man, the individual Man, the Flesh Body being Mortal, Man’s Spiritual Body having been created in the Image of the Immortal Spirit of God returns to God, NoThingness, Non-Existence.
Has anyone ever met with the CEO of a successful company that employed you???
During your meeting, did you whip out your red marker to blot out the company rules that don't work for you; and show him/her YOUR plan for how you will run his/her organization from that day forward???
*Keywords*: CEO of a successful company that employed you.Yes, we should look carefully at your keywords. We can actually see and talk with a CEO, but we can't see or talk with your God.
If I had the opportunity to do so, I certainly would pull out a red marker on Him.I see your red markings all over the place
and God does too.
You cannot see him because it is clear that you do not want to. Proving the fact that he is not there seems most important to you to me. Am I right?Fragmented thinking is characteristic of schizophrenia. Externally, it can be observed in the way a person speaks. People with schizophrenia tend to have trouble concentrating and maintaining a train of thought. They may respond to queries with an unrelated answer, start sentences with one topic and end somewhere completely different, speak incoherently, or say illogical things.
http://www.helpguide.org/mental/schizop … ymptom.htmReligion is not classed as a symptom of mental illness.
Aberrational thinking is quite different.
However, it could be argued that noted atheist ethicist Peter Singer could be classed as a sociopath/schizophrenic (by law) for his views on "after birth abortion"/ legalizing infanticide of children; not to mention his personal fondness for Zoophilia). Those who do not protest this view and/or support it are also arguably potential sociopaths.But God is NOT in it. He has one way. It's a little narrow path that has a little narrow gate. Only a few find it. Not everybody. There is one way to the father.
Maybe I am arguing with one not interested in the full message of Jesus??? This is clear. Who/what do you represent?But, mental illness has been shown to be closely related to religious zealotry.
If you say so. But, Singer's arguments are not based on the bible as are the arguments from Christians who disagree with him.
Not actual words. Just impressions through dreams, synchronicities, visions. What is a sign for one may not be a sign for another. However, I'm not sure if God plays an active role in this, or if we just become more open to the signs of God through an expansion of awareness. My feeling is that our awareness is expanded through a natural process when the time is right for each individual.
He "speaks" to us in many ways. Daily life is guided by the spirit of the words he left for us. When we play with those words and give them new meanings, we miss. He will not tell us to kill steal lie or be otherwise sinful. It is written what he wants so that we do not get it twisted. When we are led away from the path, the spirit reminds us what he said. We still must decide to do or don't.
When we debunk what he said, where is our correction? Inside??? James says no.If that were true, then why is the Bible so contradictory?
I bet you could find a passage for just about anything in there. And a passage a few chapters a long will say the opposite.Context is important. We have to know what he was talking about. The bible does not contradict itself. It speaks to all.
The contradictions are the editing of men for political motives. What is not Love based in the Bible (or any other scripture) can not be from God.
That what is happening within the family, isn't known to outsiders, the Heavenly Father communicate with His children by the Holy Spirit they were brought into the relationship with. Jesus made it clear : having to reveal himself not to the world "If anyone loves me he will keep my word, and my Father will love him and we shall come to him and make our home with him."( (John 14:23) Before you ask, here is the answer, He is the same One God the Holy Spirit.
Michael...you're "singing" to the choir.
I am aware of how the spirit of God works. Thanks for knowing and conveying.That's right: and all religions have an equal share in the spirit.
There is no "competition" between religions: if there is it is man made competition.And, spirit is what, exactly? How do you share it?
' God is a spirit,'… or '"the Spirit is God'", a divine person, possessed of all divine perfections, as appears from his names, works ; God as a spirit, is immaterial, immortal, invisible, and an intelligent, willing, and active being; however differs from other spirits in that he is not created but an immense and infinite spirit,and an eternal one which has neither beginning nor end; he is therefore a spirit by way of eminency, as well as effectively,, he being the author and former of all spirits - whatever excellence is in them, must be ascribed to God-YAHWEH- in the highest manner; and whatever is imperfect in them must be removed from him . One approaches him in spirit and truth and without being agreeable to his will, one is a stranger in confusion and misunderstanding.
By the way, before you ask, whenever you hear word 'love"- is the most popularly accepted description of invisible God, because GOD IS LOVE, while not everything thought 'love' - feelings, emotions and such isn't love at all.You are contradicting yourself. If something is immaterial and invisible, it is non-existent. Yet, you go on to say God is a person, an active being. People and active beings are not spirits, they are material and are visible. And, if something is immaterial and invisible, then there is no way you or anyone else could even conceive of it's existence.
You are a spirit; I am a spirit- the real eternal being living in each human body-visible - is a living soul and spirit- eternal. Many know this, many believe and know ; others , well exactly the same spirit soul an living in the body for some reason asking for more proof that they exist and are here on this earth on temporary, mission for a purpose by the Creator's appoint
Sorry, but there is no evidence whatsoever that we are spirits, that we are immaterial, that we are invisible.
That is false, it is only a faith based belief, people do not "know" that.
Sorry, that's just incomprehensible gibberish.
Other dimensions mathematically discovered by scientists are also "invisible". Numbers themselves are invisible.
Get it?What I get is that you have no idea what you're talking about.
When we say the "spirit of the law" we can begin to understand what spirit means. If we cruelly judge someone just by the "letter of the law" we have an inhumane (not quite human) mindset.
Spirituality is an esoteric inner feeling directly synonymous with Love and compassion. Spirituality is beyond the lower animalistic mind which is limited to self and temporary materialistic gains.
