Atheists, would proof of Jesus as the Son of God make you a Christian?
And the trinity is the most irrational thing I have ever heard.
I pray that you may understand better the mystery of our existence through your heart and spirit, not of your mind, dear Chris. Oh yes, your name sounds familiar. Chris opposing the truth about Christ Jesus is but the truth about, perhaps, almost all atheists, if not all, who try to understand the presence of God with their mind, with their intelligence, and with what they see with their eyes. But is not God in spirit that we may as well understand in spirit?
Did you not know how Lucifer and/or Satan, with their fallen angels, have been made outcast from heaven and how they may influence our very minds and intelligence that we may not believe in God's words in Jesus, and be content with what worldly, yet, temporary and short live the basis of our happiness may be, and how other beliefs may influence us to deny the truth in Jesus, and remain confused, lost and be forever engulfed by evil in darkness?
Woe to him who has a hardened heart and soul, but blessed is he comes in the name of the Lord.I've read the bible twice. A more immoral and poisonous book I have not read. Jesus was either invented, mad or one of the wickedest men to walk the earth.
Well, the Old Testament, when not describing fictious events, openly advocates genocide, murder, hatred and child abuse not to mention the ridiculous ten commandments which are useless. However, there is no mention of hell in the old testament so at least when you died you could escape the evil, totalitarian nature of God. That is where Jesus (if he existed) comes in. He threatens people with hell if they do not follow his words - which is utterly immoral. And why should someone follow him? Because his mother never went to bed with anybody ... ? Jesus said to take no thought for the morrow (the central doctrine of Jesus of Nazareth); no investment, no care for your children, no thrift, abandon your family and follow him. A ridiculous and immoral proposition. Jesus must have either been a maniac, a sick man, an evil man, or he must of thought the world was coming to an end almost immediately and he was commanded to annouce this fact to the deluded, bronze age inhabitants of Palestine. Because if he didn't believe that he was divinely mandated then his words would not been inaccurate or false - they would have been wicked. For the sake of brevity, I will resist the urge to comment on the ridiculous circumstances of the crucifixion and the ressurection.
So Do Not Steal, Do Not Murder and Do Not Commit Adultery are useless?
Interesting...They are useless because man does not need to be directed to not carry out such immoral acts. That is obvious.
Under which bloody piece of history is this obvious? What epoch of Aquarian self-actualization ever had even a slight majority of people who didn't need to ever be told these things at all? Please, I'm dying to know!
Look, we know the human species could be as much as 200,000-years old and could as little as 100,000, as Francis Collins, an esteemed scientist and Christian apologist believes. So, lets go with 100,000. Here's what you have to believe: for 100,000-years humans are on the earth and somehow, against the odds, survive and just barely. Then, after 96,000-years of God just watching with cold indiffernece, he dictates to Moses the ten commandments. Well, if it wasn't for human morality we never would have made it that far and surely would have killed ourselves off. Its ridiculous to think man needs to be told that Genocide, murder and child abuse is wrong. All things, by the way, the Old Testament openly advocates.
We really are talking about Jesus in this forum.. OT matters are side tracking.
I'm sorry, but no study of history I've ever read or heard, by any historian, proves you correct. I'm not talking about the time-line. I'm talking about a) your assumption that human beings "don't need to be told that Genocide, murder and child abuse is wrong." I need a little proof, here. When did that happen? Yeah, there are times and places and people who didn't "need to be told" but if you look at human history it is, in fact, one long, sorry escapade of genocide, murder and child abuse. Even recent times, when humanity is supposed to be so much more enlightened, have born example after example of these very acts.
b) that the Bible in any way advocates these practices is also incorrect.The bible does advocate genocide, murder, child abuse and rape. You need to read the old testament again. What is more, all the history I gave you is fact. Just because you haven't taken time to do the research doesn't mean it didn't happen. The hard evidence is there for you to discover.Even educated Christians like Francis Collins acknowledges it!
I agree there has to be laws in society. Perhaps I have been unclear and I apologize. However, the Bible (and Jesus) does not provide proper morality. In fact, since God is man made and Jesus was obviously a mad man, the Bible gets its morality from mankind.Don't worry Chris we know who the "mad man" really is. LOL
Don't bother about pointing out atrocities in the OT. Chris refuses to acknowledge it.
He did a great job! Tackled Brian full on, quite nicely. I for one, am thankful for Headly's input. Very informative and interesting as well. He was like Christ knocking over the money changing tables (referring to the story in NT about Jesus dealing actively against injustice.)
He refuses to answer my questions, Kathryn. that is not doing a good job.
I may get banned for this, but at this point I don't care.
I have dealt with some recalcitrant people in these forums. People who seem only to be looking for reasons to pound you on the head with their POV. But not one of them acted like a jerk when they learned of my situation. They all acted with grace and humanity and some even reached out hands of, if not friendship, at least support.
Except you.
You seem to have some kind of complex where you think I'm trying to persecute you. Only you took my situation with a dying wife and special-needs kids and tried to spin it as some kind of excuse, accusing me of "emotional blackmail." You keep talking about me like I'm not here.
With anyone else, I would have assumed that a statement like the one you made is simply due to the fact that you haven't read enough of my postings or any of my hubs. I do acknowledge that bad things happened in the Bible. I simply say that the Bible does not condone those things. I said you would get the answer when I have a chance. You don't deserve that level of respect. I genuinely do not like you. And there are few people I can really say that about. I rarely say things like this about people at all, and even more rarely in public, but you have a problem.Chris, you know what the truth is? I'm sorry if I am wrong but I don't believe you are telling the truth about your wife. That's my personal opinion. Why? Because the day after your wife dies you come onto Hubpages and merrily chat away. That is bizarre behaviour.
I don't care what your situation is, you will not paint Jesus in a bad light. I will not stand for it.
That's because you won't answer my questions. You appear to capitalize on your situation to avoid tough questions.
You have a chance for everyone else but me! For days you have been discussing things with others and you cannot even provide me an answer for a yes or no question. I don't care what the Bible condones, I want to know what God condones! And He doesn't condone rape and murder which you will not confirm. You just make a general statement about there being bad things in the Bible.You don't believe I'm telling the truth about my wife?
You are evil.
Go to hell.Just wanted to say, I sympathise with your anger. I hope that you are coping with your hardship and that the time you spend on here (aside from this particular conversation) is actually giving you a good distraction when you probably need it most. I know for myself during hard times if I just dwell on it I get dangerously depressed, something as simple as a silly online argument can be the distraction that keeps me able to make it day to day until whatever hardship it is has passed/resolved/or I have just come to terms with it. I hope you are getting more release (or welcome distraction) from the forums then frustration/anger. If it gets to much, my advice is maybe trying a silly political argument instead?
(they are usually almost as engaging and thought provoking)Thank you. I enjoy the exchange for the most part, but this has building with Claire for a long time. And that one statement really pushed me over the edge. I owe everybody an apology, I shouldn't have blown up like that. But I don't like Claire. If that gets me banned, then maybe that's for the best.
I have been reading your exchange for a while now, as I was getting closer and closer to having my baby I was able to do less and less so the forums kept me from getting bored when I can't do much of anything
Anyway, I didn't get involved as I don't agree with either of you really but sometimes that sort of thing doesn't matter, we don't have to agree on religion or much else to want to offer some sort of condolence when I see someone who seems to be going through a really tough time. We are all human beings at the other end of a computer somewhere at the end of the day and humans can get angry, hurt, have problems, etc. and it's good to sometimes remember that. We are all (hopefully) grown ups and I don't blame you for having human emotions that lead to things like anger. It reminds us all that we are talking to humans not just words on a screen with a random mini picture.I'm sorry for your loss, Chris. I know we don't see eye to eye, but I am truly sorry about your wife, and I didn't know that she died. I wish you comfort and my condolences. You have every right to use this as a form of "therapy" if you will. And it's about time somebody went off on Claire, anyway.
Thank you and I greatly appreciate that. The only problem with it is that I, as a practicing Christian, need to be even more aware of doing things that Jesus told us not to.
And calling your brother a name is definitely on the no-no list.
You owe no one an apology. Claire does. I've had problems with her in the past and as a result stay clear of her.
I owe Chris an apology when I didn't accuse him of anything? I can have an opinion. I may be of the opinion that unicorns exist but that doesn't mean it is true.
Saying I'm suspicious of something is not the same as an accusation.Oh, Claire. What a beautiful (not) cop out. You most certainly accused Chris of lying about his situation to garner sympathy from other forum participants. I don't think anyone but you thinks you didn't.
Here is what I wrote:
"Chris, you know what the truth is? I'm sorry if I am wrong but I don't believe you are telling the truth about your wife. That's my personal opinion. Why? Because the day after your wife dies you come onto Hubpages and merrily chat away. That is bizarre behaviour."
Accusation? Accusation is, "Chris, you are lying! Your wife isn't dead!" You can't tell me I wrote that.
Whether his situation is genuine or not, it's still emotional black-mail. Why would I need to garner sympathy? Sympathy for what?
Before I'm contacted by HP about being banned (which I expect) let me just tell you that you wrote just about the most horrible thing you could have. I nursed my sick wife for months, watched her slip away, felt her body when she collapsed while trying to stand up, listened to her ask for help which I had no idea how to supply, bugged doctors and nurses to try to get her the best care, and laid her body in the ground. There is not a day I don't ask God to bring her back. I have three kids to take care of by myself and only the love of God and his agents in this world are sustaining me. I don't care what you write about "painting Jesus in a bad light," you show not a single one of the qualities that He told His followers to show to the world.
You are a manipulative, sniping, self-centered person and I hate you.Chris, how do I know who is telling the truth over the Internet? Nobody here truly knows the other! I don't know if you are telling the truth or not but I have a suspicion you are not.
If I knew for a fact your wife had died, I'd be most sympathetic but I just don't know.You know, Claire, you amaze me.
Oh, and btw, you owe Chris an apology for calling him a liar.
http://www.tributes.com/show/Lisa-D.-Neal-94354385
http://www.shirleybrothers.com/obituary.aspx?cd=4036Quote where I called him a liar! Stop lying yourself! You just ignored my quote proving I didn't.
I have no doubt to question this tribute as it is backed up Shirley Brothers Mortuary.
So, Chris, I am sorry for the loss of your wife but I do not apologize for having an opinion. I know that people over the Internet often lie about themselves and their situation but it's now a fact you are not one of them. I'm sorry you didn't bring this obituary to me in your response to my doubts as it would have quelled my suspicion right then and there.
I would greatly appreciate it if you would answer the question I have asked you to answer for weeks now. You have the courtesy of answering of everyone else but refuse to respond to me.Your words, from your post. Page 111.
I haven't lied about a thing, and you've proven nothing in terms of your lack of accusation. I don't feel it necessary to do so. I did, however, feel it necessary to point out that you were wrong in this case and that I felt you owed Chris an apology.Looked through page 111 and couldn't see anything that I accused Chris of lying. Please provide the quote. You can't because I never said, "Chris, you are lying."
I'm not sure why you don't understand the difference between an opinion and an accusation. Somebody accusing someone of lying doesn't say, "I'm sorry if I am wrong but I am of the opinion..."
I thank you for proving I was wrong but I did nothing wrong in having a suspicion and and an opinion and I do not think it was unreasonable of me to be suspicious. This is the Internet after all.Wow, you have a brilliant gift for manipulation, don't you?
"...I don't believe you are telling the truth about your wife."
Those are your words. Which I have already quoted. Of course, being human and ego driven, I'm sure it's quite easy to overlook our words when we're wrong and pretend that we never spoke them.
It's no wonder you have so many instances where you repeatedly demand answers to your questions. I pointed out where you made the statement. I quoted it directly from your post. Yet you still ask me to 'prove' that you said it. Do you even read these posts before you respond to them?
Yes, you are indeed entitled to an opinion, which in this case was an accusation. I'm sorry you don't see it that way.
But I feel better now that I've defended a brother in Christ. I hope you feel better now that you've apologized to him for your transgression.
I apologize as well if I've been sharp, but I was simply responding to what you said.
Have a nice day.
Do you know the difference between "I believe you are not telling the truth" and "You are not telling you the truth?"
My former quote was based on an opinion which I have explicitly stated it was.
Definition of opinion:
"A view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge."
Now if I thought it was fact that Chris was lying, I would not have said I am of the opinion that you are not telling the truth. Therefore an opinion is not an accusation.
Your statement is not correct. It's not an accusation. I was waiting for you to quote where I said, "Chris, you are lying." Do you agree that is an accusation?
I'm sorry you don't see the difference between an opinion and an accusation.
I have not transgressed. I would have seriously transgressed if I said Chris was a liar and not merely being suspicious that he was. I most certainly wouldn't have said I may have been wrong when I first voiced by belief.
And you misinterpreting my words. I don't know if that is deliberate or not.See what the 'opinions' of some others are, Claire, as to whether or not you accused Chris of lying about his wife. You play semantics better than almost anyone I know. Let me see if I can get to your level of word play.
In my opinion, your statement about not believing that Chris was telling the truth was akin to accusing him of being a liar. In my opinion, you were wrong and owed him an apology.
In my opinion, it is rarely worth discussing anything with you because you don't listen with an ear to understand because you're too busy preparing your next defense. You are certainly as tenacious as a high paid criminal attorney.
Lastly, IN MY OPINION, Jesus doesn't need a high paid criminal attorney to defend Him. IF He needs anything, He needs people to do the best they can to behave like Him. We fail at that too often, and when our brothers and sisters are suffering because we're too busy 'defending Jesus' to offer them comfort, we are flat out not behaving like Him. But, of course - that's just my opinion.
All the best to you, Claire.You do realize beating your head against a brick wall would be a more positive endeavor than attempting to have an intelligent conversation with someone not looking for an intelligent conversation?
Yes, and it is only your opinion. If the police suspect someone did a crime, does it mean they are accusing him of that crime?
I am going around in circles because you don't understand this sentence, "Sorry if I am wrong but I don't believe you are telling the truth..."
I can't make you understand anything.
Why can't I defend myself? You are the one who is not understanding and listening to what I am saying.
I had to make sure Chris was telling the truth before I offered comfort and when it was proven to be true I shared my condolences. Far too many times I have been gullible about people over the Internet and I was just being prudent. I still don't understand Chris but I'm leaving it at that.
And might I add, Jesus caused a LOT Of conflict in His existence and many despised Him.
Should we just agree to disagree and just leave it at that?Works for me.
But for the record, once the police label someone a 'suspect' in a crime, it does indeed mean that they are accusing him of the crime. The person is innocent, of course, until PROVEN guilty. You assumed that Chris was guilty of deception until he was proven innocent.
Have a good one, Claire. It's sad, but perhaps you and I aren't meant to understand each other.When someone gets murdered, the spouse is the first to be considered a suspect even before there is any suspicious evidence against him. So it is not an accusation.
Now if a person got arrested, then they are being accused of a crime.
I believe I had reason to suspect Chris but obviously wasn't sure so I didn't accuse him of anything. I'm just puzzled about some things. I'll leave it at that.I think that it's time I stopped being in the forums because every time I start to calm down you say something horrible all over again. Thank you to Motown2Chitown for finding those links, I didn't know about the one. But you've got problems, Claire. A simple "I'm sorry" would have gone so far toward making everything back to normal. But you just can't do it.
Chris, about 11 or 12 posts back I noted something about her. You may have already read it, but I was trying to say something with saying it. It may not be her fault. She may be one of those people unable to have empathy. None of her statements that I highlighted had any compassion beyond her own self. So, don't take it personally and don't let her take HP away if it's something you enjoy and gives you something to fill the void. As far as I can tell everyone except her showed compassion, including those who disagree with you. Just look at her reply, it's void of empathy and compassion.
I agree with Rad Man, Chris.
We enjoy your participation here, and are grateful to be able to be a source of release and comfort when you might need it. I often give up on certain folks in the forums, but I always keep coming back. Even those with whom I disagree the most often become my friends. YOU and your opinions are always welcome here. Don't let anyone bully you out of a place you enjoy. There will always be some of us here who got your back, brother. 
Not at all.
I think you said it quite well. Regardless, I respect your willingness to say it and stand up for Chris. We may not always agree on everything here in the HP forums, but I value the community immensely. This is a great bunch of people, for the most part, and I don't want anyone to lose out on that because of the insensitive or cruel words or just a one.Well then we agree on at least three things.
1. Catholicism is not a bad way to raise children (remember I'm an atheist raising three kids in a Catholic system and Claire says I shouldn't)
2. Respect should be given even when we disagree.
3. You write better than me.
I agree with you on both counts. Everybody except Claire has showed compassion which is really what I expected. Most people don't want to be jerks, and almost everybody recognizes that there are situations where it's best to back off, no matter how you may personally feel about the person who's going through it.
A while back I started talking about Mark Knowles with people in the forum and Mark was quick to point out that he's still here (back when he was still here) and it's rather rude to talk about him as if he wasn't. He was right, so I try to follow that same example with everybody, even Claire. But I am not dealing directly with her any more, at least not for a very long time. I do think she doesn't understand what is going on, for whatever reason, but I can only be that detached if I'm not constanty reminded of the facts that she accused me of lying about my wife and practically accused me of murdering her (although she never in a million years would understand that she did that.)
End of talking about Claire. But I thank everyone here, including you and A Thousand Words and Chasuk and Mark and Motown2Chitown and yes, even A Troubled Man, for your sympathy and compassion.
Claire, your words "I'm sorry if I am wrong but I don't believe you are telling the truth about your wife."
Notice the " I don't believe you are telling the truth about your wife." Wait more specifically "you are telling the truth about your wife." Incase you still can't see it "you are telling the truth"
"You are not telling the truth" is equal to "You are lying"
You can't even be honest about your own words.You forgot the "I'm sorry if I am wrong" part. So just because I didn't believe Chris, didn't mean I said he was definitely lying. The "I'm sorry if I am wrong" part proves I wasn't hundred percent sure in my belief.
It's getting tiresome repeating myself over and over again.There is no difference between (I believe you are not telling the truth) and (You are not telling the truth). And when it comes to such a sensitive subject why would you accuse him of lying rather than doing you homework first? It shows a lack of compassion and is un Christ like. I feel you should make a proper apology. Not one with a "but" attached.
The accuse him of lying story....I'm not getting anywhere with this.
I kept quiet until Chris called be a jerk for criticizing him. As much as it is awful to lose one's spouse, I felt angry that his wife's illness was brought up when he didn't want to answer my question. It is not fair to be made to feel bad just because I criticize someone when they are going though a hard time.
I feel as if my question should be answered by now as Chris is comfortable talking about Bible subjects again.
Let me give you a word of advice: If you want me to go away, then ignore me.
Anyway, I couldn't have done my homework. I didn't know the name of Chris' wife.I'm starting to see a trend here Claire, "I felt angry that his wife's illness was brought up when he didn't want to answer my question." and then " It is not fair to be made to feel bad just because I criticize someone when they are going though a hard time." and then "I feel as if my question should be answered by now as Chris is comfortable talking about Bible subjects again."
You will notice that in each of these sentences you are talking about YOUR feelings in regards to the death of Chris's wife. He is now left to raise three kids on his own and you can't show any regard for him? You pick a time like the death of his wife to accuse him of not telling the truth to get an answer out of him instead of saying "sorry for you lose".
Do you not see how insensitive it is?
Can't you just say (I'm terribly sorry) (I'm wrong) without a (but...) How un-christ like of you.
There is absolutely nothing wrong about having suspicions. I'm sure you have many suspicions about me even if they are unfounded.
I will never answer your question directly, Claire. One day I hope you realize why. I have given a very similar answer to other people, but you will never, ever receive a direct reply from me. I hope your self-righteousn hard-headedness keeps you warm at night.
I can't decide whether your post is more abhorrent than it is thoughtless, or more thoughtless than it is abhorrent.
I personally find it abhorrent. Is it really THAT important to you to garner assent to your opinions? To get answers to your questions. I've rarely seen anything more selfish in my time here.
Jesus needs to be defended. That is my motivation.
You're not defending Jesus. He can do that himself. You're demanding that your ego be assuaged and trying to win an argument.
It's quite sad.Well, you have got me wrong, I'm afraid. Jesus is not here to defend Himself. I will not have people equating evil with Jesus. Even if people think they have better things to do, this issue needs to be addressed immediately! Why? Because the grotesque god in the OT is what drives people to atheism. People refusing to condemn this god makes atheists believe Christians are in denial about certain things in their religion and don't have a refutation. If one is not convinced of the truth then how can one expect others to believe them?
Jesus is not here on earth. Christians have a responsibility to spread the truth. The early Christians did it.
Should a Christian not defend Jesus when others accuse Christianity of being false? Should I sit back and not defend Jesus when people call Him wicked?In this case it's not jesus you are defending, its Christianity as that is what you view as being 'under attack' by being called false. When you understand that christianity is full of what could be called evil you might understand that EVERYTHING that comes from it is tainted and corrupted, not worthy of defence.
It's not like jesus condemned the God of the old testament but I guess you know more then he did right?
Jesus condemned the hypocrites of the religion of the time but did not condemn either the religion or it's god.
BTW, I suspect the mythological creature called jesus is a big boy and can handle people who think he never existed saying that his nature (which they don't believe actually exists) is evil or whatever else. Most of the time it is the depiction of jesus in the bible which is under attack and it deserves to be. If the man existed either the bible is accurate and he is a evil man or the bible is a bunch of manipulative lies and jesus wont be bothered by the false image of him being insulted, the false image is what you should be 'defending' jesus from if anything at all.
All Christians should know that it doesn't matter what a person's situation is, Jesus comes first and we cannot associate Him with evil.
The Bible records these things, to be certain. I've read it cover to cover at least three times more often than you (you're on record as stating you've read it twice,) and do so regularly. But the Bible does not condone these things.
I'm assuming we're talking about two different things. I'm saying that no recorded history has shown an age of peace and love where nobody needed to be told what was right and wrong. I stand by what I wrote. If my memory serves, you said that people wouldn't have survived for however many thousands of years if they weren't keeping these commands just because they innately know what is right and wrong. My argument is boiled down, I do think more clearly about the vicissitudes of history and the fact that not all people are the same, but I have found no history where there was an extended period of peace, love and understanding just because. If you have the evidence, please show me. I really would like to know, and I think that if you look back on my history in the forums (a lot of it is in this one,) you would see that I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong.
Sometimes too much thinking bombards true reality feedback. Stop thinking so much, everybody!
I agree. Not thinking is what keeps the wish-thinkers and Christianity alive.
So you actually think that over a third of the world's current population is just ignorant, and that thinkers, yourself included I assume, are simply more enlightened and have evolved beyond archaic beliefs like Christianity? That statement in itself shows a deficiency in thinking.
There are 10,000 recorded religions in the history of the world. What makes you think yours and the other 9,999 are incorrect? What is more, Christianity it not even the most popular religion in the world.
Sorry, I just cannot believe in a God whose existence is based on faith and not evidence and that promotes genocide, servitude, hate, murder, rape, lies and child abuse. Yes, I would like to think I am above that. Thank you very much!
So, again, you're reducing a third of the world's current population down to a simplified definition born of ignorance so you can then stand above us all and claim yourself superior? Do you really think it's that simple? That you're that much more enlightened than 2 billion others who are just poor, delusional, misguided saps who may or may not realize their advocating hate, murder, rape, genocide?
I do agree with you that thinking is important, and I encourage it in all people equally.What is the percentage of Christians that are Catholic? Because Catholics are not taught to read the bible. Portions of the bible are read to them, I think they have no idea that the bible condones hate, murder, rape, genocide?
But you didn't answer his question.
Do you really believe that all Christians are non-thinkers? (You would hardly be alone.)I can tell you this. If half of Christians are Catholic then half of Christians don't read the bible. They only read along with passages being read to them and it's only a few passages being read. They are not taught to question the bible, but told what to think and told to SAY what Catholics believe every time they enter the church. This is brain washing.
We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in being with the Father. Through Him all things were made. For us men and our salvation He came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit, He was born of the Virgin Mary , and became man. For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate; He suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day He rose again in fulfillment of the scriptures: He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son, He is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
So at least half of Christian don't think. I don't know about the other half.Two things:
a) I don't disagree that in some churches, both Catholic and Protestant (and Muslim and Buddhist and Mormon, etc) there is brainwashing. I firmly believe, and have said often enough, that God gave us brains and expects us to use them. You were raised Catholic and I was raised, well, not Christian at all, so I can't speak to your specific point. I assume you know what you're talking about.
b) The point Headly was making is that Brian seems to believe that to be a believer automatically equates to checking your brain at the door. In every single case. So I was asking him to clarify if that is, indeed, his position.Catholics are not Christians. If you want to know the who Christians are here is a link
http://atheistpill.blogspot.com/2012/09 … ty-is.html
But I wonder if you could ever base your arguments on right definition.Hmm...Dictionary Definition
Chris·tian /ˈkrɪstʃən/ Show Spelled[kris-chuhn] Show IPA
adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or derived from Jesus Christ or His teachings: a Christian faith.
2. of, pertaining to, believing in, or belonging to the religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ: Spain is a Christian country.
3. of or pertaining to Christians: many Christian deaths in the Crusades.
4. exhibiting a spirit proper to a follower of Jesus Christ; Christlike: She displayed true Christian charity.
5. decent; respectable: They gave him a good Christian burial.
noun
7. a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity.
8. a person who exemplifies in his or her life the teachings of Christ: He died like a true Christian.
9. a member of any of certain Protestant churches, as the Disciples of Christ and the Plymouth Brethren.
10. the hero of Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress.
11. a male given name.
Seems to me Catholics fall into category....Could you please define the word Christian for me?
I think the Dictionary does a fairly good job...Why would my personal interpretation matter? That is the problem, to many folks attaching their own definitions to words clearly outlined in the dictionary.
And seeing as all modern Christians come from the Catholic Church at one point or another...You do know the word Catholic means Universal, right?I beg to disagree. Jesus was not a catholic, neither was Paul. They were actually Jewish. Modern Christianity stems from Judaism. Catholicism is an interpretation of the Bible (and apocrypha) and is also rooted in Judaism. They stemmed into many different directions however.
ummm, I don't think he said Jesus was a Jew. I'll have a look again, nope he didn't say that. He said all Christians can from Catholicism at one point or another.
I was saying Christians come from the teachings of Jesus and Paul, both were Jewish not catholic. Deduce what you will.
I'm not following you, how is that different the non-Catholic christians? They are also follows of Jews. In fact the same Jews.
He said that Christianity comes from Catholicism. It doesn't. I was saying if it comes from anywhere it comes from Judaism, and then there were the first Christians, the apostles most of which were martyred and then later came the Catholics.
Without Catholicism you would have no bible. Catholics were the first Christians.
That is what the RC would like people to believe. But that is Not true.
It is indeed true.
There was one (universal) Christian Church until the 11th century. Then, there was the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Catholic Church. Then the 16th century came along and the Protestant Reformation began. Ultimately, in the history of Christianity, the only denomination who can trace (literally) its roots back to the start is the Roman Catholic Church. This is fact regardless of whether you believe it is THE Church of Christ or not.
Have a good one!In the first century the apostles established various churches in various places. All of them together was called "universal" church. But the RC is not that. It is a separate entity. It is a pagan religion in the guise of Christianity. The word "catholic" does mean universal. But the RC are just playing with that word to try and establish an authenticity.
You are correct. Christianty was based from Judaism...Todays is mix of pagan traditions mostly.
I was talking more about Christians (the person/church) stemming from the Catholic Church...Not the belief system itself.
The Catholic Church is the one who formed the Bible as we see it today. So I would say the bible was built from their beliefs, not so much their beliefs coming from the bible.I don't think that is all that true. So many Catholic practices go directly against what is written in the Bible.
The Biblical documents were also in wide circulation before being combined into one book. They could not change much if anything of the Bible without people being very much aware. Even the process in which the documents were chosen were very careful. It wasn't about the Bible displaying Catholic beliefs (or else they would have cut out those passages that condemn certain rituals) but about displaying the documents which were most verifiable.Just out of curiosity, calynbana....what teachings of the Catholic Church go directly against the Bible?
Can you point to a place in Scripture where infant baptism is condemned?
You are to repent and then be baptized. Infants cannot repent, they do not a concept of self and other yet.
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. Mark 16:16
An infant does not believe anything.
Acts 2:38 also speaks of baptism although it is Peter speaking.The first to open the womb is to be dedicated to God...How is this accomplished if not through Baptism...Sacrifices aren't required anymore correct?
Yes, that is speaking directly to adults. I'm looking for condemnation of infant baptism in Scripture.
I'll save you some trouble. You won't find it.
Baptism at infancy hasn't always been the norm in the Church. As it is, it's the introduction of the child into the body of Christ, and it cleanses them from the stain of original sin. Do you believe in that? If not, then I suppose there's no reason for you to baptize an infant. As to it being a Scripturally unacceptable practice, it is not.It is also detication of the Child to Christ. With Confirmation be conducted when the child is of a rational mind...
Read Luke 2:21-35
This would be the "Baptism" of the Infant Jesus...according to Jewish Custom...And the Sacrifice of the two Doves? that is circumcision? Or is that the same as baptism?
I don't really understand what you are trying to say, I am talking about one specific practice. Baptism. Believe, repent and then be baptized. That is what the Bible teaches. Infants cannot believe, nor repent so the third step is not really an option either.
I was trying to use the least controversial topic I could think of. Baptizing them is harmless, but also entirely pointless.
I can list others, such as Matthew 23:5-11, Timothy 4:1-3, Timothy 2:5 there are more but this was not a discussion I wanted to get into.
Not all Catholics are Christians, not all are not. Many practices of the Catholic Church are not Biblical. I am not condemning the practices, I am saying that if the Catholic church wanted the Bible to confirm their behavior they would have made some changes.Matt 23: 5-11...Almost all Ministers are guilty of this...
Tim 4:1-3... Not sure how this applies...Catholics still married people and all Christians fast on occasion for one reason or another...
Tim 2:5... Not sure how this applies either...Catholics hold that there is only one mediator as well...Okie doke.
Do you call your male biological parent your father? Most human beings do. According to a literal interpretation of those scripture verses, they are all doing wrong. We need to correct this immediately. And what about all those children who have teachers at school and call them teachers...whoa! they even have those in Sunday school. Understanding that God, the Creator is the Father of all is essential to Christianity, of course, but if this were a literal command of Jesus, we'd have been wiped off the face of the earth long before now. The very word 'Rabbi' MEANS teacher.
The Catholic Church forbids NO ONE to marry. Priests, at ordination, make a voluntary - read carefully, voluntary promise of celibacy. Religious (nuns, monks, brothers, sisters) make voluntary vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. Sort of like someone who marries voluntarily commits to one person for the rest of his/her life.
Christ is the only mediator between God and man, even in the Catholic Church. A priest, after ordination is said to stand 'in persona Christi' - in the person of Christ. Remission of sin is granted by God through the person of the priest - who stands in the person of Christ. Prayer to saints or to Mary are simply requests for their intercession before the Father - they are in no way able to forgive sin, answer prayers, or anything...it's like asking your friends and loved ones to pray for you.
Many of these practices are directly derived from Jewish practices prior to Jesus's appearance. He did not condemn them.
As to the Pharisee thing and the doing it for all to see....you honestly think that happens ONLY in the Catholic Church? Hmmm. Let's talk non denominational mega churches, Billy Graham, Pat Robertson....so many others who insist on broadcasting their message for all the world to see.
Baptism took the place of one of the sacrifices preformed, the sacrifice of dedication to God. The only way to dedicate an infant to God today is by baptism. Infant baptism is the Parents asking for the "original sin" to be removed from their child and the Parents symbolically telling God that the Child is his and will be raised by his standard. It is not the infant asking to be forgiven of sins as they have not committed any sins other than the original sin that is placed on all mankind.
Where does it say it took the place of the sacrifices?
No I do not still perform sacrifices, I never did in the first place :p I am asking specifically how you believe that baptism took the place of circumcision and the sacrifice.
Baptism didn't take the place of Circumcision (according to Paul, Circumcision is only required for Jews not Gentiles) ...It took the place of the Dedication to God Sacrifice...
Nicene Counsel...Set the beginning of the Catholic (Universal) Church. Yes the documents were in circulation...Many more than what is included in the bible of today. It was also at this time that the bible was put into the form we see today. So the bible was built on the beliefs of the Catholic Church of 325 CE which was based from the "preached" version of the Teachings of Jesus and Paul. The Catholic church of today may or may not follow what they believe to be the correct interpretation of their bible.
Lets look at a few Catholic practices...
Baptism- In the bible
Eucharist- In the Bible
Minister to others- In the bible
Annointing the sick with oil- In the bible
Priest not being married- In the bible
Women not allowed to be priests- In the bible (Paul's letters)
Ordaining Clergy- In the Bible
Following what they believe to be the Teachings of Christ- In the bible
Confessing your Sins- In the Bible
If you would be so kind, could you offer some things they do that isn't in the bible?
Please read carefully what I write if you are going to respond. Thank you.*************Lets look at a few Catholic practices...
Baptism- In the bible
Eucharist- In the Bible
Minister to others- In the bible
Annointing the sick with oil- In the bible
Priest not being married- In the bible
Women not allowed to be priests- In the bible (Paul's letters)
Ordaining Clergy- In the Bible
Following what they believe to be the Teachings of Christ- In the bible
Confessing your Sins- In the Bible**************
Okay let us look at it.
Baptism - Child baptism is not a practice that came out of the Bible. It is non-biblical. The Bible says that baptism which a person accepts after repenting for his sins (for which he would have to be an adult) is necessary for salvation. By bringing in infant baptism they have done away with the real baptism. That is going against the Bible.
Eucharist- exists in the Bible. But transubstantiation is not from the bible.
Minister to others- also exists in the Bible but this is something that they don't do.
Annointing the sick with oil- yes it does exist in the Bible.
Priest not being married- Priesthood itself is something that has been eliminated in the New Testament. Christ is the final sacrifice and you don't need any other sacrifices. Hence priests are not necessary. Thus priesthood is non-biblical.
Women not allowed to be priests- Not Applicable
Ordaining Clergy- Since priesthood is not biblical this is also not in the Bible.
Following what they believe to be the Teachings of Christ- This is Biblical but they don't follow hat Christ taught.
Confessing your Sins- confessing sins to a priest is non-biblical as priesthood itself is non-biblical as I have already stated.
Roman Catholicism goes totally against the Bible either directly or indirectly.
****************The first to open the womb is to be dedicated to God...How is this accomplished if not through Baptism...Sacrifices aren't required anymore correct?*************Acts 2:38 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 22:16 And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.' Galatians 2:27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.
Matthew 26:26-28 (Catholics just take this a little more literal than other Christians)
You might want to check up on the amount of Missionary work that the Catholic Church does...
So we agree with this one..
Read 1 Corinthians 7
We'll just skip over this one I suppose...
1 Peter 5:1 To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow elder, a witness of Christ's sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed:...Elder is Church Clergy...Same as the Priest or Bishop is Clergy... 1 Tim 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
This is nothing more than your opinion and is not based in fact.
James 5:16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective.
This is just your personal opinion based on what you think the bible says and your personal beliefs.
They did not create it. The various books of the Bible already existed in the first century. They just compiled it.
Isn't that what I said...??? I didn't say that they wrote the bible...I said they are the ones who formed it into what we see today...
***********And seeing as all modern Christians come from the Catholic Church at one point or another...You do know the word Catholic means Universal, right?*************
Firstly you don't seem to understand simple logic. Christians are those who follow Christ. Roman Catholicism does not follow Christ's teachings and hence can not be called Christians.
Secondly you do not anything about the history or the nature and practices of the Roman church.Actually yes I do...I hold a Doctorate in Biblical Studies from Regents University...I have studied religions my whole life. As a matter of fact, I got my Bachelors Degree in Religion and my Masters in Theology (edit: Masters in Ministry from Regents) from a Catholic College. Saint Leo's University...So I would say I know a thing or two about the histoy of the Christian Church as a whole as well as the Catholic Church of today.
The Roman Catholic Church does follow the teachings of Christ...Try reading the Documents that came from Vatican II...
One of the Four Contitutions to come from Vatican II is the "The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church"...To Quote this document " Christ, the one Mediator, established and continually sustains here on earth His Holy Church, the community of faith, hope and charity, as an entity with visible delineation through which He communicated truth and grace to all"
The Catholic Church today recognizes that all people are Children of God, even if the don't believe or belong to the Catholic Church itself. And this is further outlined in the Documents of Vatican II...But I'll let you research the rest of that information.
I would recommend a little study before I started bashing my fellow Christians and the Church they attend. Just my opinion though...Ha ha ah...
Telling someone with a Doctorate in Biblical Studies that they no nothing about the history or the nature and practices of the Roman church.
ha ha ha ha you see what happens, they're not happy that one's a Christian, you have to be a particular kind of Christian to be correct.
If someone does not exactly belief or follow Christ as you do...Are they a Christian or not?
If they are following Christ they way He asked them to then yes. Loving God and Loving people that is all the Jesus asked for. Now those two commands are not quite as easy as they appear but that is what a Christian is to do.
I agree with you Catholics are brainwashed. But not Christians.
Catholics are Christians, they are followers of Christ. Of course the rest of Christians are brain washed. Are you kidding? When you are told do as I do or burn in hell, that's extortion and extortion works.
No. They don't follow Christ and hence are not Christians.
You shouldn't find any Christians that would tell you to do as they do or burn in hell. A Christian would not even talk about burning in Hell...unless they are not readers of the Bibles they are thumping.
Revelation 21:8
But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.
Matthew 13:41-42
"The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Mark 9:47-48
"And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, ‘where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’"Keep reading all the verses about Hell. Also make sure you are looking at the Greek word being used for Hell. There are three of them all with different meanings.
I need to correct that, look at the Greek and Hebrew words and meanings.
ahhh, nowhere did you say that these passages don't say if we don't do as told we will burn in hell. But YOU told me Christians don't believe this and it's clearly in the bible. Someone is confused.
No again Rad man, you need to read all of the passages. Three different Hells mentioned. One was an actual place on earth that Jesus referred to. There are two others. Look into it.
Yes all sinners will be thrown into fire. What's your problem with that?
Aren't your kids being brain-washed in a Catholic school?
I suppose. I do like much of what is taught. I do point out to them to question everything. They haven't asked to go to mass in a while so... I think it would be unfair of me to shove my thoughts on them at a young age. From time to time I show them something that doesn't make sense. For instance we told them from the beginning that Santa was not real. I take credit and blame for my actions and we bought those presents. The only problem we had was when my oldest told some friends that Santa wasn't real and the parents gave me an ear full. Whatever works for them and makes them a better person is good enough for me. I often am asked "if you are an atheist, what's stopping you from killing and stealing". For obvious reasons these people are better with believing someone is watching and judging there doings. Follow.
And BTW Claire, we all grieve differently. You have no way of knowing who Chris is, so perhaps instead of pointing fingers, give a little respect and move on. In this case you should be more Christ like.Why not take them to a secular school? I'm would not take my kids to a Muslim school. A secular school won't brain-wash children and when they are grown-up, they can choose if they want to be religious or not.
I have a right to have an opinion about Chris. I never accused him of lying. I just said I am on the opinion that he is.
You and others have tried to bring up this nastiness in the OT to Chris so clearly none of you have dropped the subject. I am warning you not to waste your time because you will never get a satisfactory answer. The subject just goes on and on even when I stopped corresponding with Chris.
What is being Christ-like? Not voicing an opinion?
Why does that statement show a deficiency in thinking? It takes a thinker to come to a different conclusion then the one that was given to them.
Or He was God and you simply don't want to hear what He has to say.
Sort of like a lot of the people who heard Him at the time!That is a terrible reply. Really, based on wish-thinking and superstition. There is no proof Jesus that was the son of god, just faith which cannot be supported.
What is a better option, Sir? Jesus pretty much came to tell us that we are here to get out of here. He gave us a reason to live. Sometimes we need more out of life than to JUST EXIST... Is "just existing" all you want? or a better question... What do you want for mankind? or for yourself. What makes YOU Happy in life? I am actually curious.
What makes me happy in life? My family, sex, scotch whisky, art, travel and literature and vindication.
I'm sorry but existing is all we have. I could lie to myself and believe in one of the 10, 000 religions (yes, that many) that man has invented or I can face sober reality. What is more moral - living truth or living a lie?Those religions all refer to the one and only God there is! I love God because I see evidence of Him everywhere: in nature, in animals and yes, even in people! In children, I see a Joy of Life. Puppies also have a huge Joy of Life. And when they become full grown they love their owners so much! If you doubt the existence of God, go get a puppy, I say!
dear kathryn, you described it very well. there is only religion of God, one god. there is 4 religions of God.. last one is islam. god sent his messengers to enlighten his people . our soul was created before our body and all people promised to be loyal to god. but most people choose the easy way by not believing. we are in end time, the doomsday is not far, before it, God's religion will reign around the world.
Dear ihayaydin... You agree with me? I cannot tell from what you say. I have to rewrite what you have written, if you do not mind:
There is only one religion of God, One God. so far O. K. but not quite: (What religion is the only one?)
There are four religions of God (You just said there was only one)
The last one is Islam. God sent his messengers to enlighten His people.. ( who? followers of Islam?)
Our soul was created before our body and all people...(you mean souls?) promised to be loyal to God, but most people chose the easy way by not believing...( in what? God? ) We are in the end times?( How do you know? Who knows really!!! ) The doomsday is not far before it...( don't you mean after it?) God's religion will reign around the world.... I am assuming that religion is Islam. I think that is really going to piss off Brian in Canada!what you understood from my writing is not that ı mean. such religion budism or hinduism isnt religion of GOd. there are 4 religions name of god so far , there wont be more, they are judaism, islam ,christianity.. people of those religion believed same god. jesus is god's messenger,prophet. Muhammed is last prophet of god.islam is for all people.
Qur'an tells us that all the souls of mankind were created before the creation of Adam and were asked to testify to the Lordship of Allah.
"When your Lord drew forth from the loins of the children of Adam their descendants, and made them testify concerning themselves: ‘Am I not your Lord?’. They said, ‘Yes, we do testify.’ This lest you should say on the Day of Judgement: ‘We were not aware of this.’ "
(Qur'an Al A’raaf :272)
about doomsday:http://www.al-qiyamah.org/Well I think all religions, even Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, etc. are based on the same God. So You do not really agree with me. Yep, I love Bhrama too! Not to mention Vishnu and Tara!
Not to mention, Buddha as well.
God is God: The one and same in any religion. I imagine that God can be worshiped in any way man invents! God really digs devotion. If you make up your own religion to show your devotion and spread the love of God, he digs that too! I know Claire will not agree.Not so. Allah is not God the Father of Jesus. He has no son called Jesus.
When religions do not agree there is a lot of trouble in the world. Why do they not recognize Jesus as Son of God.. What could it hurt? Claire, what about the Antichrist... what will his teachings be based on. Will he be the father of the new world order that will occur after the world has come apart? (which does seem to already be happening.)
Why do they not recognize Jesus as the son of God? Well, first of all, people don't like to admit their religion or non-belief is wrong and another is that Jesus demands us to forfeit the ways of the world to follow Him. For many people, that's just too much.
The Anti-Christ will teach that everyone can be a god should they be worthy. I mean, isn't that the message of the Adam and Eve story? They can achieve god consciousness and life will be paradise.
He will be the one to solve all the world's problems until he reveals himself for who he really is and then there will be hell on earth in a degree no one has experienced before.Will the Anti Christ be promoting worldly ways such as...
A. Technology: microchipped humans, robotic servants for all ages, eyeball implanted devices (?), voice activated PCs...(No more slaving away on the keyboard.) flying vehicles... Feel free to add to this list, Claire.
B. Health: magnetic healing techniques, living to be 150, plenty of sex until age 100, hydroponically grown food in one's own home, beautiful hair, (There will cures for baldness and loss of hair pigment.)
C. Creativity: sky is the limit in Art and Entertainment,( Desire to be godlike is already seen on the x factor, I think) beautiful colorful clothing, some featuring garments created from micro-fibre material, as light as air.
D. Government: The promise of equality for all, no injustice on any (visable) level, all working for the good of the whole, government issued health care for all, the rich gladly working for the benefit of the poor, legalized marijuana, which no one (visably) abuses, government created jobs for anyone wanting a job, free government training programs for the youth who want to work for the government, free public preschools, and free breakfasts and lunch programs for public schools. (The One world Government) High speed rails and air travel making the globe ( the earth) seem smaller and smaller.
None of this brought about the happiness promised?
Why not?
Quran is last holy book of God, it came on the earth after holy bible. as people announced that jesus is son of God, (that's impossible) God especially made this wrong belief correct in quran. the Quran is the statements of God. Jesus is just the prophet,not more. jesus was born without a father,which is great miracle.all details are explained in quran if you are interested. before the judgement day, jesus will come to earth and all christians will get together around him.
But it's not incorrect. Jesus Himself claimed to be God and to be God's begotten Son. Jesus Himself does not need "correcting," He put the facts out there for everyone to see.
Don't get me started on the Quran... The earth is shaped like an egg is it? ummm, I guess God didn't get that one right.
how can a prophet claim himself as God? God created jesus like us. he never told it.
Jesus] said, "Indeed, I am the servant of Allah . He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet,
And He has made me blessed wherever I am and has enjoined upon me prayer and zakah as long as I remain alive,
And [made me] dutiful to my mother, and He has not made me a wretched tyrant.
And peace is on me the day I was born and the day I will die and the day I am raised alive."
That is Jesus, the son of Mary - the word of truth about which they are in dispute.
It is not [befitting] for Allah to take a son; exalted is He! When He decrees an affair, He only says to it, "Be," and it is." maryam surah (19:30-35)
jesus is human , naming him as god is big sin. if jesus is god,where is he now? in fact ;who accepts jesus as god, makes shirk to Allah. Shirk is the biggest sin. there is only a God.no human being or other things can not be son of god. it isnt my view,it is God's own statement.Interesting, you state that Jesus was not God because you can't see him. "where is he now?" Yet the same question can be put to God. "where is he now?" Both must not exist if we use your logic.
jesus was a human not god, he had a body and soul like us, if he can be god,everyone can be god too according to ones who accept him as god. ı know where is jesus and what happened to him, God is not human, we will see him in judgement day.
You obviously no nothing about Christianity. Christian's think Jesus rose from the dead and ascended to heaven. That may or may not be true, but don't tell me what you know. You are trusting a book that states that the earth is shaped like an egg.
Firstly Christians don't trust a book alone. We trust Jesus whom we know through the book. Once we know Him and accept Him as our savior, He has always spoken to us and made himself known to us.
The book does not say that earth is egg shaped. Why do you put words into it?Quran
WAL ARDS BAID ZALIKA DOHAHA
AND EARTH AFTER THAT EGG SHAPED THING
Now see the English translation of the Sura 79:30 " And the earth , moreover, hath he extended in egg shape.I am talking about the Bible and you are quoting koran. Are you dumb?
You interrupted my conversation with someone else about the Quran and asked about the egg so I answered you. Calling me dumb?
If you were speaking about the koran, then may be you are right. If that is the case I must apologise for calling you dumb.
NO, just because we can accept Jesus as God does not IN ANY WAY mean that anyone else can be God. Why? Because we can't! Jesus is eternally existant, we are not. Jesus was there and took part in the creation of the world. We were not and did not and could not even if we wanted to. And we will indeed see God on Judgement Day.
Oh yes, I know where Jesus is, as well. At the right hand of the Father!
Jesus is human. He is also God. He is both man and God. And He said so.
Kathryn, you have no understanding of the 10,000 recored world religions, its clear. They do not all refer to one and the same God. To say that is ignorance. However, ignorance is readily taught by the Bible and in churches so I can see where you picked that up.
And how do you know that Mr. All Knowing Brian in Canada. ??? I hear people in Canada spend a lot of time writing f i c t i on due to the cold weather.
Cold climate people are grumpy it seems. They all need puppies to cheer them up. Hopefully they won't get too irritated by a puppy's happy playfulness ....Is that the reputation Canadians have? I thought they were the polite ones. Are you trying to uphold the American stereo type by throwing insults? Right now as a matter of fact its 80F in Toronto.
Yeah, but you are still recovering from a cold winter and spring and getting ready for the next one... are you not? just kidding... I have no idea.
I am just surmising and trying to give you excuses for your outrageous comments. And you know they are! Please back up some of your statements with cold hard facts. So many people are waiting to read your next installment of useful information!
How do I know that? I've read a book other than the bible.
Are there no athiests, agnostics or anti-thiests in your country? Your response are becoming stanger and stranger by the minute. First you criticize people for 'thinking too much' now you are finding cause for my opinons in ... the weather of my country? Also, why do you keep refering to dogs? Are you on a day pass from somewhere?I just got a puppy. thats all. Sparky is so full of the joy of life instilled by nature. Do you think nature comes from God? I believe that children also reveal the spark of life that God has given them. They are basically cheerful. That is the true nature of the child. The happiness which is naturally within a person or creature is proof of God to me.
Q. Can scotch whiskey cause lasting happiness?
A. Temporary bliss from Alcohol and drugs is not true happiness.
Oh, and before I go, I am curious about the "book other than the bible" you are referring to. Backing up your statements would be much appreciated, as well. How can you enlighten us if you do not make yourself clear?
Actually, that would be an oxymoron to say that ignorance taught by the churches leads to believing that all religions point to the same god. Christian churches teach that only Christianity points to the one, true God (and yes, I did capitalize that time on purpose.) Judaism laid the foundations but Christianity is the true religion. All other religions point to false gods.
One who is so quick to accuse others of ignorance should show a little less, ah, ignorance of what he is talking about.And what is your proof of this, Chris??? All religions benefit from Jesus teachings, but they are all ways to keep focused on God...(as long as they do.) There are such beautiful paths of devotion and instruction on how to live in other religions! The eight-fold path of Buddhism is beautiful. Hinduism is based on Brahma as God. (The other so called gods (Vishnu and Shiva) are actually just aspects of the one God Whom they call Brahma... what is in a name?) I am sure that God did not mean to abolish all other ways of worship... God sent Jesus to enlighten us ALL by keeping us in touch with Reality. We are still not there, not even the Christians. But, that is why this forum is alive and well... the search for Reality continues within each one of us.
My proof is the Bible itself. It teaches very different things from Buddhism or Hinduism. In fact, the assumption of Jesus as an avatar by some Hindus to me is more proof that Jesus is right, because the Jesus of the Bible does not and cannot fit into Hindu beliefs and practices. And if you read the Bible, you find that God regularly states that all other 'gods' are false and that any form of worship that is not of the one, true God is sinful.
Not arguing the aesthetics of the eight-fold path, but the truth of the basic teaching. Karma and nirvana are alien concepts to either the Jewish or Christian Bibles.What do Christians think this means: "If your eye be single your body will be full of light? (I do not know where it is in scripture.) To me, it refers to the scientific principle of tuning directly into God. It is similar to prayer. It is focusing on the third eye and intuiting God directly. It is a fine practice and it is a way to devote oneself to God. So all the Indian people should give up their cultural practices of devotion? Why do you take such an authoritative position about these matters?
They should start devoting themselves to the One, True God, not to Krishna or Brahma or any other being claiming to be a 'god.' I'm not sure about the "eye be single," I've read a couple of theories but I'm still confused. But it's a mistake to think that the God who laid out the rules for the Jews and the Christians thinks that just anything is okay because it all eventually leads back to Him. He has said exactly the opposite. The Straight and Narrow Paths should be a pretty good clue.
LIving truth, without a doubt. Which is why I believe in Jesus!
Jesus is not the son of God, he is only messenger of God, he came to the world to save people from innocence.
What? He came to save people from innocence? Where'd you get that one?
Perhaps this commentator meant naivety, or child-like ignorance, which is a type of innocence. Still they are correct regarding Moshiac not being Creator-himself, that accepted incarnation.
a. "He saved others but could not save himself"
b. "Not by might, nor power, but by the only Spirit, spoke the Lord of Angels"
c. The Issac sacrifice comparison. Even as he was chosen , as a youth, a teen, was not found without spot nor blemish. No sacrifice was available. Creator had to provide man with the first born sacrifice. As the Hebrews cried out, "His blood be upon us and our seed".
d. Bringing us to the term begotten. Anything begotten {created, born} cannot be Creator in totality, who is not begotten. Anything begotten has a name, a title, a master, father, authority.
Mosiach:
a. did not/could not save himself from the grave.
b. did not/could not, by his own power -as a 'demigod', lift himself up from the grave.
c-d. he WAS begotten, even of Creator, although not as Adam, but through {wo}man.
So then, through him, yes, the Work was completed as the obedient son. Yes, even though not being the last son of the First Promise, became the first son of the Second and permanent, never ending, eternal Promise. But, even after the Work was complete, remained a man -an immortal man nonetheless. No man is deserving of worship {utter and complete praise, adoration, offering, commune, submission to} nor obedience to. No man is Creator even though all men are creator. {Elohim-elohim}. Does man now worship himself and, like the pagans, make others servants and worshipers of him? Certainly not. Because if we are truly brothers with him, he being our eldest brother, the firstborn of the Promise, are equally heirs and coheirs of that Promise. And share all things as he does with Creator.
James.I understand what you're saying but there's one important point, which is that He (Jesus) did claim Godhood for Himself. And Judaism (and Christianity) acknowledge no demi-gods. Jesus is unique in that He is completely man and completely God, which is beyond the ability of men to understand. So either He is who He said He is or He's not and everything else becomes superfluous.
ignorance, he meant ignorance, not innocence.... probably.
- adeelgr8posted 12 years ago
0I am not an Atheist but could you provide me a single verse in which Jesus Christ is saying by himself that I am God and worship me.Infact none of the people of Palestine/Israel ever reported of worshipping Christ
John 10: 29-33
29 My Father, who has given them to me,[a] is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”
31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” 33 The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”
The gospels say people worshiped Jesus.Here is a link that will tell you, that looking for a specific verse for some doctrine is a stupid idea.
http://christiandebunker.blogspot.in/p/ … verse.html
- Jerry Hulseposted 12 years ago0
I sit here and I ponder how one could be so convinced that there is no creator or master mind behind all the vast universe especially the unique way everything is designed to function without drifting out of orbit and ending life as we know it.
It's probably really easy to ponder if the Bible is the only book one has read.
Others actually understand why we don't drift out of orbit.Actually, you need to be updated. First, the earth is so precariously designed that a slight change of orbit would certainly be the end of us. A comet could do this. What is more, the Andromeda Galaxy is approaching the Milky Way at 140 kilometers a second. So, in 4.5 billion years (only double the earths age), it will collide with our galaxy and undoubtedly destroy earth. Some design .... and that is at the macro level. At the micro level, 99.9 percent of all creatures that have lived on the earth are extinct. Leaving no descendants. What is more, 3 or 4 branches of homo sapiens who were living with until 50,000-years ago - who made tools, art, grave sites and who had some sort of religion and a God who abandoned them ... because they no longer exist. Some design ...
Wow, you are smart! Funny we're still here, ain't it.
How do you know God abandoned them? How do you know they no longer exist? Current evolutionary theory holds that that many people have some "caveman" in them.
It seems to me that the precarious design of the Earth is greater argument for God than against Him.
If Jesus came to Earth and everyone believed him world I still reject him? Yes, because I would know this is one of the false christs Jesus said (or rather, biblical writers said he said) would come after him (funny he neglected to mention all the christs who came before him)
You say "if." You have had 2,000 years to present proof and yet you ask what I would do IF you did. In other words, you know that you haven't so far.What I am really asking is what if you knew without any possible deception? Who says Jesus didn't mention Christs before Him? Christ just means anointed one. We have a drop in the ocean in the form of the Bible documenting what Jesus did and said. There is so much we don't know about Him.
Nobody has proof Jesus is the son of God. There's proof of His existence but His divinity cannot be empirically proven.I do not know why I totally believe that he arose from the dead... or that we do not die... and he pretty much proved that.... if you believe the bible. But, there were four accounts of this event... four separate witnesses. There were more witnesses but their accounts were hidden away in jars, (as the dead sea scrolls.) Thus, additional records and further proof of Jesus and his words are unknown. Some researchers of the dead sea scrolls discovered that Jesus spoke of God as Mother. It would be great to know more. I believe there is much to be discovered about the message of Jesus and the science of religion. That is why He will come back. But only when the students are ready (as in open and wanting to know Reality,) will the teacher appear.
(I do not think he wants to be crucified again. He's been there, done that.)Some people just know that Jesus is the son of God. Some are more spiritual than others and I think God knows a willing heart. Can you give me a link to those claims Jesus referred to God as Mother?
The reason Jesus will come again is to anihilate the devil and his minions once and for all and that can only be done through a monumental war between good and evil. He will not die again.Claire, I can't decide you are being extremely naiive or simply arrogant.
You could perceive it as arrogant but I suppose Jesus must have appeared arrogant and delusional to call Himself the son of God as the truth. I mean, it does sound arrogant if one doesn't know better to say, "I'm the truth, the way and the life."
Just google "Dead Sea Scrolls" and the writings of the Essenes who claim they researched them.( Atheists will have a field day with this.)
BTW Confidence and arrogance are two separate things.Wasn't it, " I am the truth, the way and and the light? ( light = same thing as life.)
No, people erroneously believe that is written but it is not.
What version do you have? I can't find that "light" part anywhere in any other version.
Ah. I wasn't paying enough attention; my apologies. I didn't understand that the word "light" was the disputed part of the discussion.
The word "light" doesn't exist in any translation, as far as I know. People are conflating this verse with John 8:12.
They are. Should I lie and say I don't know Jesus is the son of God to avoid being arrogant?
You illustrate my point very well in your answer.
Do you actually believe this, emphatically? What empirical evidence do you have of this Devil, his "minions", this 2nd Coming, Rapture, Monumental War? And again with the war thing and Christians. What gives with that? Weren't the Crusades and TWonT enough? How much blood spilled is enough to say enough!
James.Well, I suppose the Bible isn't good enough for you. I'm assuming you are not Christian?
It will be the Anti-Christ and his people, if you can call them that because I believe at that stage they will be man merged into robot, against Jesus and His angel. The devil will wage war against Jesus in the second coming of Christ. None of the angels will be harmed but Satan's demons will be.
What empirical evidence is there for your God?Scads of evidence too long to paper. As for the other items, no such thing as Devil {Satan, Lucifer} and certainly no "going out in a blaze of glory" by said Devil. It would be silly for any creature to even attempt to "war" against Creator and the Firstborn of Immortality {meaning Moshiach}. In short who can fight against what cannot be brought to life, again, nor killed?
James.I know. The evidence I have is too overwhelming as well. I could never have the time to tell you it all. You could give me just a tiny piece of the evidence. I'm curious.
You are going to have a shock of note very soon. Satan very much exists and his greatest deception is getting people to believe he doesn't exist.
I think Satan will fight in a final desperate attempt to save himself. After all, he would rather die in battle than kiss Jesus' feet.
When Satan is desperate, he isn't rational.
Where do you get this stuff from? Robots? Really?
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publicati … onvergence
I assume by the time the Anti-Christ wages war with Christ this technology will be in place.I don't see what that link has to do with Satan or anything else.
I think she's getting at that much of this fits in nicely (almost like it was planned that way!) with things that are fortold in Revelation.
Maybe not, I've given up on thinking I know what she believes, but that's the way I read it.I assume you asked me where I got the idea of man merging with machine? In Revelation it obviously doesn't say such a thing but if you have no free will of your own because consciousness is programmed, I don't think you'd would have a problem going into battle.
Satan wants man to merge with machine. Why? Because man will no longer be able to make choices of his own and cannot thus rebel against Satan.So you're just making stuff up. This has no connections with the bible and man using technology has no connection with loosing consciousness. Clearly many don't have a problem going to battle with machine guns. I'm using technology as I type this message. People use technology to hear, see and walk. You have no connection with Satan to technology and you should stop attempting to spread your lies.
John of Patmos used allegories to describe modern technology being used in Revelation. For example, insects with whirling women's hair strongly indicates he saw a helicopter in his vision. I think Satan can not afford to have anyone having second thoughts about going to war with the Son of God. He is not just anybody.
I assume you know the technology the public know about is nothing compared to technology that exists that we don't know about?
You might as well tell all Christians to stop spreading lies. Spreading lies is when someone knows for a fact what they are saying is wrong. The most I could be is mistaken. Of course I don't know everything but man losing his consciousness kind of makes sense when people get mind-controlled and have no control over their actions today.Of course it's lies- it's total gibberish.
I could spread the word that I have aliens living in my attic- same rubbish.Why do you make this assumption? Do you and Rad Man share knowledge of secret technology of which the rest of us are not privy? Or do you just assume that such secret technology exists, and that Rad Man somehow knows of it, while the rest of the general public remains ignorant?
No, but it's known that there are those privy to knowledge that others don't know about. For example, thousands of years ago there were nuclear wars. Where'd they get this technology? And if those who claim there are aliens in the Pentagon, then I'm sure there is advanced technology somewhere.
You have far looser definitions of "know" than is common.
To illustrate, let me revise your above paragraph:
No, but it's [hypothesized] that there are those privy to knowledge that others don't know about. For example, [it is speculated that] thousands of years ago there were nuclear wars. Where'd they get this technology[, assuming that this speculation is true]? And if those who claim there are aliens in the Pentagon [are correct], then I'm sure there is advanced technology somewhere.
EDIT: In fact, even the words "I'm sure" should be revised to, "I'm fairly confident that" or "it could be reasonably argued that."
I can safely tell you I know of no secret technology. Is there secret technology? Sure in the military, but outside of the military... nothing, because when money is to be made it will be made.
Nuclear explosions a few thousand years ago? Give me a break. Don't be gullible.Do your research...
http://www.philipcoppens.com/bestevidence.html
http://www.hitxp.com/articles/history/a … -evidence/
Do you believe everything the mainstream world tells you?Tell me Claire, why do you look at somethings so critically and other you don't question at all.
I concluded long ago that Claire doesn't look at anything critically at all. She scours the web for entertaining theories, chooses her favorites, then has conversations with the "Holy Spirit" until the "Holy Spirit" reveals to her that her selected theories are the correct ones.
Claire's primary criterion seems to be that a theory is _not_ mainstream, because a mainstream theory is apparently less likely to be true. That's a sensible criterion, right? Right?Right! She does look at the OT critically, but now that I think of it it's most likely to help her rationalize a loving God.
Rationalizing is based on the Christian belief that Jesus is one with the Father so how can they contradict each other? How can one preach against what the other practises?
Well, I do question. I mean, I look at the arguments posed for something and see what the strongest evidence is and my mind can be changed by thorough debate. It often doesn't change when people don't respond to a debate I try and make.
The atomic warfare in ancient times seriously alludes to it by the process of elimination. I'll give you an example of this. Let's look at the literary evidence:
Mahabharata: 3500 BCE to 6000 BCE
(it was) a single projectile
Charged with all the power of the Universe.
An incandescent column of smoke and flame
As bright as the thousand suns
Rose in all its splendour...
...it was an unknown weapon,
An iron thunderbolt,
A gigantic messenger of death,
Which reduced to ashes
The entire race of the Vrishnis and the Andhakas.
...The corpses were so burned
As to be unrecognisable.
The hair and nails fell out;
Pottery broke without apparent cause,
And the birds turned white.
After a few hours
All foodstuffs were infected...
....to escape from this fire
The soldiers threw themselves in streams
To wash themselves and their equipment.
It's startlingly obvious that this is referring to a nuclear attack. In fact, so much so that this is the conclusion:
Robert Oppenheimer (the Father of the Modern Atomic Bomb) witnessed the detonation of the First Atom Bomb Test at New Mexico July 16, 1945, the following lines from Bhagavadgita flashed through his mind:
"Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds."
What about the archaeological evidence?
an Englishman and an Italian Jace Davenport Enrico Vincenti put forward a hypothesis stunning – they stated categorically that the ancient city [Moheidzho Daro in India] suffered the fate of Hiroshima and Nagasaki …! In other words, the ancient metropolis was destroyed by a nuclear explosion! It is confirmed, in particular, scattered among the ruins of pieces of clay and green glass (whole layers!). In all likelihood, sand and clay under high temperature at first melted and then solidified instantly. The same layers of green glass appear in the Nevada desert (USA) every time after a nuclear explosion.
Read more: http://socyberty.com/history/nuclear-wa … z25U5j5hTf
Alexander Gorbovsky, in “Riddles of Ancient History” (published in 1966), reported the discovery of at least one human skeleton in this area with a level of radioactivity approximately fifty times greater than it should have been due to natural radiation. Furthermore, thousands of fused lumps, christened “black stones”, have been found at Mohenjo Daro. These appear to be fragments of clay vessels that melted together in extreme heat.
http://www.philipcoppens.com/bestevidence.html
Here is a video recapping this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_y5VhCowxN0
I find this is strong evidence but is debatable. As I said, my mind can change if someone will put forward a rebuttal.
Nope, it indicates he saw insects with whirling women's hair in his visions.
Rad Man, truly...how else is John to describe a helicopter since he never saw one in his life? There wasn't even a word for helicopter obviously.
Oh, I don't know, how about using words like large or flying.
How about using words such as...
Revelation 9: 7-10
And the shapes of the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle; and on their heads were as it were crowns like gold, and their faces were as the faces of men.
8 And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions.
9 And they had breastplates, as it were breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle.
10 And they had tails like unto scorpions, and there were stings in their tails: and their power was to hurt men five months.
Locusts fly, no? Locusts with iron breastplates? A loud locust that makes a big noise?You forgot the text leading up to Revelation 9: 7-10.
The fifth angel sounded his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth. The star was given the key to the shaft of the Abyss. 2 When he opened the Abyss, smoke rose from it like the smoke from a gigantic furnace. The sun and sky were darkened by the smoke from the Abyss. 3 And out of the smoke locusts came down on the earth and were given power like that of scorpions of the earth. 4 They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any plant or tree, but only those people who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads. 5 They were not allowed to kill them but only to torture them for five months. And the agony they suffered was like that of the sting of a scorpion when it strikes. 6 During those days people will seek death but will not find it; they will long to die, but death will elude them.A loonie (Canadian) theory I once heard. Goes something like this:
A meteor falls to earth -like a falling star. It crashes into the ground making a deep hole - an abyss. The rock cracks open upon impact and releases an alien creature resembling a locust-scorpion {like in The Day the Earth Stood Still}. The swarm sound is deafening {like that of a million Cicada}. They carry a very powerful venom -like a malaria carrying mosquito bite on steroids- whose effect is like getting stung by a scorpion. It is not fatal, but very painful. The effect lasting a few months.
As an alien form, they are protected by a shell that appears to amorous {gray thorax}, metallic head {golden}, two eyes, nostrils, mouth with lions teeth {fangs actually}, stinger tail and feelers or some sort of fuzz that look like hair.
James
Why the association with a loonie (Canadian)? It certainly is a loonie theory, but not in repeat to a Canadian loonie. A Canadian loonie is a description of the coin (that has a loon on one side) that is worth a dollar.
Yes, I KNOW. It is a tongue-cheek statement, as my older sibling is a resident alien of Canada. Hence the three way "loonie". Oye.
But why do you assume it is literal? I mean, locust with whirling hair? Would that really happen? Another thing, why would locuts have breastplates and their wings make such noise? Have you ever come across a locust with lion's teeth? Lol.
I don't assume it literal. I don't assume it's anything. You seem to pass over some aspects of the description and you assume that it must be true. I do not. They are but words to me just like words in any other book. Gene Roddenberry predicted we'd be all walking around with cell phones. Now that's specific.
Well, you pointed out what aspect I left out and I addressed it. If John was having a vision of the future in end times, it would not be unreasonable to assume he saw technology that exists today and had no idea how to describe it but saying they looked like locusts with flying women's hair. That's exactly what is looks like with helicopters when the blades are rotating slower.
But he didn't say "it looked like" did it?
3 And out of the smoke locusts came down on the earth and were given power like that of scorpions of the earth.
The rest appears to me as a threat to those who do not believe in God.
4 They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any plant or tree, but only those people who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads. 5 They were not allowed to kill them but only to torture them for five months. And the agony they suffered was like that of the sting of a scorpion when it strikes. 6 During those days people will seek death but will not find it; they will long to die, but death will elude them.
Yes it is unreasonable to assume he wouldn't have the right words. You make this assumption because it's the only way you can bring these words to life.Actually, God is punishing those who have sold their souls to Satan and are demonic. He does not punish those who do not believe in God:
Revelation 16:
4 The third angel poured out his bowl on the rivers and springs of water, and they became blood. 5 Then I heard the angel in charge of the waters say:
“You are just in these judgments, O Holy One,
you who are and who were;
6 for they have shed the blood of your holy people and your prophets,
and you have given them blood to drink as they deserve.”
7 And I heard the altar respond:
“Yes, Lord God Almighty,
true and just are your judgments.”
8 The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and the sun was allowed to scorch people with fire. 9 They were seared by the intense heat and they cursed the name of God, who had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify him.
10 The fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and its kingdom was plunged into darkness. People gnawed their tongues in agony 11 and cursed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, but they refused to repent of what they had done.
12 The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up to prepare the way for the kings from the East. 13 Then I saw three impure spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14 They are demonic spirits that perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty.
15 “Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.”
16 Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.
17 The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and out of the temple came a loud voice from the throne, saying, “It is done!” 18 Then there came flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder and a severe earthquake. No earthquake like it has ever occurred since mankind has been on earth, so tremendous was the quake. 19 The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God remembered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath. 20 Every island fled away and the mountains could not be found. 21 From the sky huge hailstones, each weighing about a hundred pounds,[a] fell on people. And they cursed God on account of the plague of hail, because the plague was so terrible.
So we can see those who God fights aren't the non-believers.
Now if locusts were literal as you are arguing, then John needn't have seen that they had whirling hair. Come on....women's hair and lion's teeth? You think that is literal? It is known that Revelation is very cryptic.
Do you believe this is literal?
Revelation 8:13:
As I watched, I heard an eagle that was flying in midair call out in a loud voice: "Woe! Woe! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth, because of the trumpet blasts about to be sounded by the other three angels!"
Considering these things are mostly not literal as it is understood then I can reasonably come to the conclusion that John most likely was having visions of modern technology.
Just to add, you cannot criticize me for a lack of critical thinking when you do not give me the opportunity to prove it and you to prove I don't. You sneered at the idea of ancient nuclear weapons. I gave you my argument and you glossed over it. You give me the impression my case is very good. So why should I believe I'm wrong in that case?Based on the evidence you supplied I don't believe there was a nuclear detonation thousands of years ago. I'm not that gullible. Science would be very interested in studying this if there were any real evidence.
Revelations just seems like more "burn in hell" stuff. I think you are making a leap by saying locust means helicopters. You want to make this leap so you make it. Seeing the future is impossible as far as anyone knows. Only the gullible believe in fortune tellers. Fortune tellers through out a lot in hopes of getting something. You would think these fortune tellers would be playing the stock market rather than taking money from the gullible.
Anything happen at the paralytics yet?
I will entertain that there is some evidence to suggest that 9/11 was an inside job.Cop out, Rad Man. So you can't explain the highly radioactive bodies at Mohenjo Daro and the clay vases fused together by extreme heat? And what could the Mahabharata be referring to? Since you are going to appeal to authority like scientists, I'd like to quote from Robert Oppenheimer, the Father of the Modern Atomic Bomb, after the Manhattan Test, during a visit to a school – when a student asked Oppenheimer about how he felt having witnessed the explosion of the first nuclear bomb on earth:
"Well — yes. In modern times, of course."
He sincerely believed that those Indian texts were referring to ancient nuclear wars.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Robert_Oppenheimer
http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2010/11/o … r-weapons/
Revelation is about the punishment and final defeat of heaven but the joy of those who love God when there is a new world and heaven. It is a message of hope.
You are being close-minded by not entertaining what I say is possible. As far as I know, Nostradamus wasn't wrong about all of his predictions. And, yes, my family has had personal experience of entities telling their future which materialized.
As far as I know, nothing has happened at the Paralytics. I don't think there is such a thing. I assume you meant Paralympics? As far as I know, nothing has happened but it would be foolish to dismiss any terrorist attack because it is not over. Whether it happens remains to be seen.
That reminds me of something, you ought to watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQuNlzA6D2Q
Take note when the Merlin part comes up.
Back to the Paralympics, there are adverts that make people reasonably assume something will happen. Here's an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS81SGqy … ure=g-vrec
This is the British Airways advert for the Olympic Games. This video above was deleted by youtube. There is a part when a man says, "Everybody is dead now" at 01:54. When I asked British Airways about it on their youtube channel, it was deleted.
People were also concerned about the song in the ad, "London Calling". The lyrics are too horrendous:
London calling to the faraway towns
Now that war is declared-and battle come down
London calling to the underworld
Come out of the cupboard, all you boys and girls
London calling, now don't look at us
All that phoney Beatlemania has bitten the dust
London calling, see we ain't got no swing
'Cept for the ring of that truncheon thing
CHORUS
The ice age is coming, the sun is zooming in
Engines stop running and the wheat is growing thin
A nuclear error, but I have no fear
London is drowning-and I live by the river
London calling to the imitation zone
Forget it, brother, an' go it alone
London calling upon the zombies of death
Quit holding out-and draw another breath
London calling-and I don't wanna shout
But when we were talking-I saw you nodding out
London calling, see we ain't got no highs
Except for that one with the yellowy eyes
See the rest of the lyrics here:
http://londonsburning.org/lyr_london_calling.html
I don't know why London should be calling to the underworld, the abode of the dead, and the zombies of death.
Concerned people asked British Airways about this and they said, "Oh, we didn't choose the song." Did someone make them include this song?
If you want to debate about 9-11 then you need to start a new thread in the September 11 forum.I don't have time for all of this right now Claire, but you just don't have evidence to support an old nuclear explosion. If in fact you do have radiation (and that has not been verified) we don't know how that got there. Pictures from space prove nothing. I think if there were anything to this a lot more people would be studying this because there is not need to cover it up.
Lol, you're just like Chris now. You've got no time...
In other words, you have no rebuttal.
Would a lot more people be studying this? No...you know, why? Because it doesn't fit in with mainstream science. Do mainstream scientists take the ancient astronaut theory despite despite the overwhelming evidence? No...because it threats the theory of evolution.
Do you really think the powers that be want you to believe there was a sophisticated race and that Darwinism is a farce?
How ludicrous is it to imagine that superior beings had nuclear war-fare and that earth was reduced to a primitive-like state again by technology?
Should it happen now people would have to start again and the thought of 21st technology prior to them may seem ludicrous.
So, in your opinion what does that Indian story mean? Doesn't it sound like nuclear warfare? Yes or no?I haven't studied it because nobody studies it. Science has no agenda, they just want the truth. Religion has an agenda. There is no reason it would not be looked into. There is no evidence. Religion has an agenda and I saw it this morning at a funeral. Some I know just committed suicide as a result of finding out he has Huntington's disease. I had heard him many times talk about how much he hated his mother and her Jehovah ways. The speaker's first words were. Tony had recently started Jehovah bible study, but his illness prevented him from continuing. This was a lie for Jehovah. They have an agenda and will lie for it. You also have an agenda, Chris and I know that, and we have lives. Do I have time to debate such nonsense with you right now? No.
Cop-out once again, Rad Man! LMAO! Tell me once again, what do you think that Indian story meant? You don't have to research for hours. Just tell me what you think it sounds like.
You think science has no agenda? Have a look:
http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/Ascendancy.htm
Did you watch the Opening Ceremony of the Paralympics? The book from Aldous Huxley, "Brave New World" featured in it. Here is an excerpt from Brave New World Revisited:
“The older dictators fell because they could never supply their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles, and mysteries. Under a scientific dictatorship, education will really work' with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown.”
- Huxley, Brave New World Revisited, 116
Also...
http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/Ascendancy2.htm
You are so ignorant to what is really happening in the world. It's sad.
What is my agenda, Rad Man? You and Chris have lives? Is that why you are on Hubpages all the time? Does someone with a life not able to answer yes or no to a simple question?
You slam me for not being able to think critically when you are so guilty of not being able to do so yourself. You have time to write dillions of comments consisting of a paragraph but not for a rebuttal of my arguments.
You aren't interested in the truth or else you would seriously investigate what I've proposed instead of dismissing even the opinion of the father of the atomic bomb.
Atheists and Christians are so alike. They believe only what they want to believe.http://www.conspiracyarchive.com
This is where you get your information? Really? This is the problem.
I have to say, I don't think there is anything to debate.Lol! lol! Lol!
Oh, you are so prepared to pick apart the Bible even though you think it is a fairy tale book but when it comes to a conspiracy site, it isn't worth looking at. The reason why you don't look at it because it would scare the hell out of you. It is reasonable because no one wants to be believe they have been lied to about almost everything.
It comes from a conspiracy site because it is a science dictatorship CONSPIRACY! Do you think you are going to get this info on any mainstream science site?
You failed to answer two questions:
What is my agenda and what do you think that ancient Indian story is describing? A quick paragraph will do.
Aside from the problematic grammar of that statement (but look who's talking, right?
) that's not entirely true. Yes, 'Science' as a concept has no agenda (and please don't either forget or discount that much of what we know about science came from men who did strongly believe in a Creator God,) but many scientists do. Not all, maybe not even most, but certainly enough. Just watch PBS, for cryin' out loud! (Actually, I don't know what you do up in Canada. I used to live in New Hampshire and we received two CBC channels, including a French one.) But in any case, there are plenty of 'science' shows on PBS where, with all ernestness and straight faces, scientists talk point blank about the philosophical superiority of an atheist, evolutionary, non-religious POV. I've watched them since I was a kid.Interesting, I've never heard them talk about atheism. I've seen them talk about evolution, chemistry, biology and astronomy. But I don't think talking about those things has anything to do with religion. It's the creationist's trying to invade science, not science trying to invade religion. Perhaps I'm a little confused... Do you think science is invading religion when they talking about let's say evolution?
Many scientists were and still are creationists RadMan. Evolution and religion are not mutually exclusive by the way. They actually work really well together. The evolution that is proven of course, not common ancestry.
Check this out.
http://the_wordbride.tripod.com/origin.htmlPerhaps it's my inability to properly communicate, but I think you missed my point. I was commenting that science has no agenda, as opposed to religions. Science of course could have an agenda if the science is trying to confirm religion. For instance a creationist would not make a very good palaeontologist.
I understand that...I do think that there is an agenda to many scientific endeavors. This article was a great example of that.
I didn't read it all, but I don't see an agenda. I think they were just trying to prove that a spark could have created the correct amino acids in an old earths atmosphere to create life. That's not an agenda, they are just trying to find out how things started.
The original experiment had an agenda, this article was about a series of experiments that came after the original. It really is a good read.
The original experiment had NO agenda, it was simply trying to prove or disprove the The Oparin-Haldane model. The article however does have an agenda. Trying to show that people over exaggerated the results to prove that the experiments didn't really supply enough amino acids because you don't like the idea of evolution is an agenda.
But one must do more research.
http://ncse.com/creationism/analysis/ic … experiment
or have a read from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller–Urey_experiment
"After Miller's death in 2007, scientists examining sealed vials preserved from the original experiments were able to show that there were actually well over 20 different amino acids produced in Miller's original experiments. That is considerably more than what Miller originally reported, and more than the 20 that naturally occur in life.[7] Moreover, some evidence suggests that Earth's original atmosphere might have had a different composition from the gas used in the Miller–Urey experiment. There is abundant evidence of major volcanic eruptions 4 billion years ago, which would have released carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen (N2), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and sulfur dioxide (SO2) into the atmosphere. Experiments using these gases in addition to the ones in the original Miller–Urey experiment have produced more diverse molecules."
This is interesting because it states that Miller underestimated his findings.
I agreed that 'Science' has no agenda. And just because some scientists are trying to "prove religion" doesn't mean that all those who aren't have no agenda. And just because it's not a blatant agenda of a group of scientists getting together to "prove God doesn't exist" does not mean that there aren't scientists who, publicly, are quick to grab any thing they can to say, "See, science proves that God doesn't exist!"
Like, say, Richard Dawkins? But not all of them are as extreme as him. But they are out there.You do know that diseases have been created as a form of eugenics? Yes, AIDS is one of them and there is strong evidence to prove this:
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish … 1597.shtmlClaire, I did take the time to read all of your aids conspiracy link. You really need to start looking at things critically. Did you look up the drugs that were mentioned as a cure? Tell me Claire, what do you think happens when a person inflicted with HIV reads that link? They try to get the drug. A one time cure for HIV and AIDS with no side effects? Oh, and BTW I believe that Dr. Boyd Graves passed away a few years ago. Please don't spread websites like this around anymore. Do you really want to victimize the victims again.
Have you and Chris been sharing notes? When you want to weasle yourself out of something, you turn around and make me look like a bad person. Emotional blackmail.
No, I did not look up the drug. I did so now and come across something interesting.
Robert Gallo, American biomedical researcher, quote:
"I CREATED AIDS to DELIBERATELY DEPOPULATE HUMANITY"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgiMqgjS … r_embedded
Doesn't Gallo have guilt all over his face?
http://danieltowsey.wordpress.com/2009/ … cure-1997/
What would an HIV positive person think reading this? They probably want believe it or if they do, they'd be livid.
Treatment for HIV exists because there is a hell of a lot of money to be made from it. However, that treatment doesn't reach the vast majority of people so it is still an effective weapon of population reduction.
Here is another example of eugenics:
"Top-secret files recently declassified from the National Archives of Australia, despite government opposition, has revealed that one of the fathers of modern biotechnology and genetic engineering advocated using biological weapons against Indonesia and other "overpopulated" countries of South-East Asia. Australia's The Age reports that world-famous microbiologist Sir Macfarlane Burnet recommended in a secret report for the Australian Defence Department in 1947 that biological and chemical weapons should be developed to target food crops and spread infectious diseases.
Macfarlane, who won the Nobel Prize for medicine in 1960 and died in 1985, said, "Specifically to the Australian situation, the most effective counter-offensive to threatened invasion by overpopulated Asiatic countries would be directed towards the destruction by biological or chemical means of tropical food crops and the dissemination of infectious disease capable of spreading in tropical, but not under Australian, conditions."
http://www.theinterim.com/2002/april/02nobelwinner.html
I don't know what the point of your comment was that Boyle has died.
Not interested in answering my other comment like what my agenda is? Yip, cop out.You miss the point. There is no cure, it's just snake oil.
I'm not going to answer questions that you know the answer to.First of all, Graves died of e-coli poisoning. People without AIDs do die of that. There is one person who has been cured but not due to tetrasil.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012 … feel-good/
There are suspicious signs in the Graves case:
"Determined to understand his new diagnosis with a 'new' disease, Graves immediately began researching HIV/AIDS intent on understanding how to best preserve his health and help himself survive. In 1993 Graves' research into HIV/AIDS led him to a formerly secret federal virus development initiative coordinated by the Pentagon called, “The United States Special Virus Program.”
“The United States Special Virus Program.” involved the complicity of two government agencies, the Pentagon as coordinator seeking biowarfare solutions and the National Institute of Health as administrator. The veneer goal of the NIH program was to meet Nixon’s challenge of a war on cancer. Unfortunately for the program participants, the goal came at a cost of using humans / in vivo subjects to produce viruses, deadly viruses including the HIV/AIDs virus. For 16 years, between 1962 to 1978, the National Institute of Health, published 15 annual progress reports. Each year in this history, a report details thousands of human and non-human virus experiments seeking 'candidate viruses'. The most concise salient microcosm of this Mengele-madness was the 1971 U.S. Special Virus Research Logic Flow Chart. The secret blueprint coordinates every experiment and contract inside the U.S. Special Virus Program and demonstrates the true intent of the secret research – live human subjects, US citizens, US veterans, your brothers, uncles, cousins, friends, and neighbors.
On September 28, 1998 Dr. Graves filed his first class action lawsuit in the Ohio Federal Court in forma pauperis, seeking immediate investigation into the formerly secret U.S. Special Virus Program, including a petition for make whole relief for the class of members infected by HIV/AIDS.
On January 1, 2000 The United States Department of Justice notified Graves, they had named The Office of the President of the United States as the primary defendant in the case. On election day November 7, 2000 the sixth circuit federal court silently dismissed the case, Graves vs The President of the United States. Graves appealed and on April 11, 2001 appeared in the United States Supreme Court. The court quietly dismissed the case without comment and instructions 'not to publish.' Determined and armed with the 1971 Flow Chart, 15 years of 'missing medical history' and the evidence of the laboratory birth of AIDS, Graves continued filing litigation requesting immediate investigation into the formerly secret tax payer funded program until his death.
In 2001 Dr. Graves became the first American and African American to receive an injection of Tetrasil, the U.S. Patented Cure for AIDS (Patent # 5676977). Almost immediately, Graves health began recovering from years of damage inflicted by the 'special HIV virus' and he became an outspoken proponent of the Tetrasil treatment demanding immediate clinical trials and world wide accessibility for people living with HIV and dying of AIDS. Soon afterward Tetrasil was recalled by the patent owner/manufacturer, Dr. Marvin Antleman and Antleman Technologies, Inc. without public explanation. Graves took his experiences and requests to the Congress, General Accounting Office, the Centers for Disease Control, United Nations, World Health Organization, and several Ministers of Health around the world with varying degrees of success including China, the UK, and several African countries where he was widely revered and respected as the 'Man Who Solved AIDS'."
Why recall this wonderful product that shows signs of curing AIDs? Why did Robert Gallo admit his created AIDS?
I seriously don't understand what you mean by saying I have an agenda. I have no idea. I don't think you have any idea, too. As for the Indian story, you think in your head, "She's right, it does sound like nuclear warfare but I never tell her that."Are you not trying to get people to believe in the same version of God you do?
Glad you agree with me about the Indian story.
I am trying to explain the contradictions to Christianity. It's really simple: anything that is said about God that contradicts Jesus is wrong. How can they be at odds with one another?
It is so hard to get this through to people. They will try and find every other explanation for any scripture other than say it is corrupted. I also love discussions, also.
Is your agenda to deconvert Christians?No I just enjoy the debates and it help my dyslexic brain to write. I am aware I will not open anyones eyes to reality.
You are really not trying to deconvert Christians?? I find that hard to believe. Why would you not admit to that? Even if you are writing for sport?
I just enjoy the debates. I have no idea what works best for people, so if becoming an atheist makes someone miserable and depressed then I've made a mistake. My kids go to a Catholic school and I don't tell them there is no God. They may come to that conclusion some day on there own. I think one already has, but I'm not sure.
I think that scientists are admitting they have an agenda when they talk about how evolution is a superior theory to creationism and is better for humanity. Again, not all scientists, probably not even most scientists, but the ones I've heard are on public record.
Evolution is evidence based while creationism is faith based. Science is not trying to disprove the existence of God. Science doesn't care about God. It's trying to teach and learn how we got here. It's when creationist and IDers try to teach that Creation is scientific that science has to step up and show that there is nothing scientific about Creation. If they don't they will end up with ID taught in science rather than religion class. Currently there are way to many (mostly southern) Americans who don't understand evolution because it was not taught to an entire generation.
That's an interesting statement. All my kids were taught evolution and I was taught evolution. What entire generation was not taught evolution?
The John Scopes trial in 1925 banned evolution from being taught in science class because it was not in line with the bible. This remained in much or some of the states until 1980. Creationism was banned from science class in 1987 and then came back in the 90's as ID. Half of Americans think that God created us just as we are. This does not jive with Canada at all. If you can have a look at (the end of god a horizon guide to science and religion). It is a fair guide to the debate about God and Atheism.
I'll look into it, but the title of the book alone gives me little hope that it's truly a fair or balanced account. And yes, Scopes "lost" the trial but he won the PR campaign (or rather Clarence Darrow did, helped in no small part by the historically innacurate play "Inherit the Wind.") I was never, ever taught Creationism in class, and I graduated 12th grade in 1984.
And you already know that I believe that God created us just as we are.It's not a book it was a bbc special. It was fair because it was asking the question, do we need God? You may be able to find it on youtube. Did you go to school in the south? We must be about the same age. 1983 for me.
I went to school in the "south" for 4 years. I don't know how much American history you know, but Maryland is considered to be South by Northerners and North by Southerners. It has to do with the Civil War. I lived in Bowie, a suburb of Washington D.C. for all intents and purposes, and I wouldn't say I was surrounded by Southern culture. The rest of my school career was in New York (my home state) and New Hampshire.
I'll see if I can find that special on Youtube.
It's been banned from Youtube for copyright reasons, which means I will have to find time to listen sometimes. But I'm not given a great deal of hope by the fact that when I google that phrase, the second entry for the documentary is richarddawkins.net.
Right. Because you can't image that John's fanciful descriptions describe anything but modern technology, that's what they _must_ be right?
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity
Interesting to read all the comments,Here I got some new ideas which encourages to participate and share ideas.
Yehowshuwa is the true Hebrew name of the Messiah, and the true Hebrew name of his Father is Yehowah.
To accept Jesus Christ is like accepting a false God.Thank you for your knowledge. How did you obtain it?
Ah, a book. Well I have read the bible. That is a book. Am I allowed to believe its authors like you believe Strong? To accept Jesus Christ is like accepting the Gift that God gave us: Forgiveness and Redemption.
I'll take it.Strong's Concordance is a reference book which tells you the original words that the KJV translated from. For example the word LORD in the OT is a translation/replacement from the original Hebrew word Yehowah,and as for name of the Messiah, the original Hebrew name is Yehowshuwa.The Greek and then the Latin, took the liberty to change it to Iesous, hence the incorrect name Jesus.
And all this was done by Satan, who wants everyone to worship him.oh oh! This is getting really complicated. And how does Strong know this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong's_Concordance
As for the Satan bit, everyone knows that names are _really_ important!!!!
Or maybe ro-jo-yo just worries about inconsequential stuff.
So, Chasuk, What do they mean by O T??? I think it is a RLH reference... LOL!
Ok. I get it: Old Testament. Thanks for your links. The military religious beliefs link was very revealing. I got the sense that People are afraid to believe in religion because of the indoctrination aspect. That is really sad. I have only known preachers preaching God' love. Children have a natural belief in God. They naturally feel love for God. I remember kneeling at my bed at night enjoying the experience of talking to God. I never felt forced or tricked. Later as a teen I tried to become an atheist, but it didn't make sense at all. But, I certainly do respect an individual's choice to not believe in God...especially if in doing so, it diminishes rational thinking, decisions and reality feedback within one's own mind.
Some people -- citizens of repressive atheist nations or members of repressive atheist households -- are afraid to believe in religion. However, most people seem to believe in it naturally. Of those who don't believe, there are myriad reasons for their disbelief. Fear of indoctrination is seldom one of them.
You wouldn't know that from the forums. Indoctrination is the reason I see most often cited.
Frankly, that's because they are stupid.
If you are not disposed to accept doctrines uncritically, then you can't be indoctrinated. If you are an atheist, then your modus operandi should be the rejection of uncritical thinking, period. Therefore, you should have absolutely no fear of indoctrination.
If that isn't true, then you haven't sufficiently thought through your atheism to be able able to legitimately call yourself one. Atheism is an philosophical position, _not_ a fallback position.I understand what you're saying, but please permit me an amused smile as that sounds almost exactly like what serious Christians mean when we say that someone is "not really a Christian." And the response to both positions ("Hey, they call themselves that, so that's good enough for me," or something very similar) would be very similar if not the same, except for certain words.
Just because the name translates to something else in another language, doesn't mean it's false.
I doubt the hebrews used the English alphabet, either
An atheist becomes such by lack of interest on the subject, by choice, by reaction against christianity etc. I see no logical reason for such a person to become a christian based on the promise of a proof than nobody is able to deliver. It's been a debate for thousands of years and it's not going to be resolved here and certainly not now. People are free to believe whatever they want to believe, and I do respect that. Which means that if a person is an atheist, everybody, including christians must respect that too.
It states in Rev 18:23 ....for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived .
The word 'sorceries' is translated from the Greek word Pharmakeia. Pharmakeia is a mixing of poisons, example drugs. That is what they will use to control people's minds, they that love not the truth will be decieved.
Satan was a liar and murderer from the beginning, he stole our rights to the tree of life, with lies, which in turn we all die. But the Almighty Yehowah loves us, so he sent his Son Yehowshuwa, to redeem us back to the Father so we can have access to the tree of life again. And Satan and his angels will be destroyed and all those who seek not the Almighty Yehowah will also perish.Explain what Tree of Life is. Please. Apparently access to it, is what we have to look forward to. Do you have a vision of that far into the future?
It's quite a long shot to assume he would someday descend from the sky and claim himself saviour of all, no? Still, if he ever does, why would I want him as my saviour? What is he saving me from? Myself and my 'sins'? Isn't such an endeavor an introspective one? Consider the ramifications it would have on everyone in the world, who now knows that Jesus (this man who calls himself as such anyway; you can't possibly do a paternity test between him and God, can you?) exists. Do you think everyone would give up their own beliefs at the drop of a hat?
In a word, yes.
If you saw a being that powerful coming down from the sky, and you knew without question that your choice was to either worship Him or face eternal torment, which do you think most people would pick? Eternal torment?
This is what always floors me, the people who say that even if Jesus came back and proved He is who He said He was, they still wouldn't think it worth their time to worship Him. All right, but it seems academic at that point. He said to worship Him or face eternal fire. You can protest all you want about whether He has the "right" to demand it, the choice would still be stark and everlasting.
Considering the ramifications, that is...Chris, with all do respect, don't you see the evil in your statement? A loving God would not say that. A loving god would say follow me or you will no longer exist. Only man would invent a loving God who is not loving at all. Only man would invent the mafia, give me money or I'll cause pain. Same thing. That is why many people say they wouldn't follow such a God. Because no such God exists.
But if he did come down and demand worship he would get it, but he would not get love back, he would get fear. Come to think of it, it's recently been found that love in actually not an emotion it's an addiction. That's why it's so devastating on the young. Are people addicted to the idea of a loving God? Break ups are so painful because they are actually going through a chemical withdrawal. Is that why people won't let go of the idea of a God?Rad, normally I don't join the discussions, but I noticed you said," a loving God would say follow Me or you will no longer exist." That is exactly what the Book teaches. Only man would invent the fiery eternal torment, and he did.
What if a loving God said," I will be very quiet so that the wonderful humans I created, (through a long process of evolution in which I had an invisible hand in guiding,) will have free will.... But, what if his sons and daughters misused that free will and started doing ignorant, cruel and unjust things...like making slaves out of fellow human beings and watching people kill each other in arenas of public spectacle, sacrifices, stoning and misinterpretation of spiritual laws, etc.
What if this loving God sent someone, in fact his only begotten Son, (someone who loved His Father so much that he would play out a drama and be crucified like a common thief), in order to address the injustice occurring in the world. How else could God remain invisible, yet redeem his people and establish love as the reigning factor in the affairs of men. What if this loving God wanted to let us know, through this begotten Son, how to to find Him by Going Within. After all, the kingdom of heaven is within each of us, within our own soul, which is the energy, consciousness and love with which we were created.
P.S.
I believe we can go home to God when we desire to go home with our whole body, mind and spirit. Yep, we can, by meditating with the love of our hearts on God. Meditating is being with God... pure and simple. I have heard that Jesus actually taught a meditation technique. Was it lost by King Charlemagne when he got rid of most of the writings about Jesus. That king kept only the works we find today in the NT.You do not have understanding of God. You need to study more. About Bible being altered that is not true. The below link will show you this.
http://atheistpill.blogspot.in/p/bible- … anged.htmlNo Thanks. I have my sources. Maybe you should study mine. But I won't trouble you about that. Like Jesus said,"He who has ears to hear."
Enough already. I do not come on these Forums to argue... Just share! I don't think I will bother at all anymore! Good night.
All fine. Sure "what if as in maybe", but that was not what Chris said. He said follow me or burn in hell. That is not loving. That is what I was addressing.
Ms Hill, I'm not doubting the love of the Father, now or ever. What I was saying was, that He would not say " do as I say or burn in hell forever" simply because the Book does not teach of a fiery eternal torment. This is a concept invented by man. I'm commenting on that particular statement only.
But the book does teach of an unpleasant eternal punishment for not accepting the Lordship of Jesus. I'm not saying that's why we should follow Him, I'm just saying that it does teach that.
Agreed Chris. What you and I would have to come to terms with, is the punishment. I may be mistaken, but I seem to recall you being in favor of an everlasting fiery torment. I believe the Book teaches that hell is the grave and the payment for unrepentant sin is death.
As usual with forums, it's a long answer that must be compressed for space. The OT does not mention hell, that is true. But Jesus does mention different kinds of torment waiting for those who do not follow Him.
Yes Chris, He mentions punishment. None of them refer to fiery torment. My views would take up space also (many don't seem to care when they do), but please, take a moment and show me a couple of verses (or anyone else), lets see if we can come to an understanding or agree to disagree. It's a vital point, many are being led astray because of this one particular subject. Our Father is a loving Father, He would not sentence anyone to burn for all eternity. I know you are going thru a very difficult time, please except my late condolences. Take your time. I'm looking forward to conversing with you. Shalum
Mark 9:43-48
The story of Lazarus and the Rich ManPopular choices Chris. It would take a hub to explain everything being said in his parable, but hopefully this short version will be sufficient. In Lazarus let's begin in vs 22. Notice it does not say he was card into heaven. It says he was "carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom." Mn assume Abraham to be in heaven, they think the expression "Abraham's bosom" means heaven. First Yahusha (Jesus) said "No man has ascended up to heaven"...(John 3:13). We should not need to go any further. If no one has ascended up to heaven othe than Mashyach (Messiah), Abraham was not in heaven. Bosom, was used many times in scriptures and it illustrates closeness. Abraham is dead, awaiting resurrection along with all the other dead. Now the rich man died also (vs22). The Book does not say only the rich man's "body" died, it plainly says "...the rich man died." And what happens when people die? Just like Abraham was buried, and decayed long agolike all the rest. the rich man went to the grave. Hades is the most commonly used Greek word used to reference "hell". Search all the references and see hades never has anything to do with fires or infernal regions. It is used as the exact counterpart of the Hebrew word sheol (you know all of this). Gehenna or geenna is rendered as "hell" also.You know about the sons of Hinnom". Why Yahusha spoke of gehenna fire was just an analogy of the Valley of Hinnom, a valley just outside of Jerusalem used as a trash dump. They burned dead animal carcasses and the bodies of dispised criminals, along with the trash there. The sarificial alter of Molech was also located there. Sometimes when the bodies were throw over the edge they were caught in the brush. They decomposed and maggots (small worm worm looking?) developed. The maggots turned into flies that laid eggs, that turned into flies, a perpetuating cycle. Thus the "undying worm". The bodies were completely consumed by maggots, fire, or both. An unquenched fire is one that has not been extinguished. It continues intil there are no more combustibles. Yes the Book does speak of burning fire as punishment for the wicked (Mal. and Peter) But those fires are not burnig now, nor are they "eternal fire" burning forever and ever. The parable of Lazurus and the rich man is not describing to us a rich man who was ignorant, and never had a chance for salvation. It describing a heartless, cruel selfish man, one who had no compassion or pity. He stuffed his own face while utterly ignoring the poor, emaciated, sick and starving beggar at his doorstep. The inference is that the rich man may well be among the incorrigigly wicked, who would not hear during his human, physical life. Look at what the rich man sees immediately, when finally resurrected (vs23,24). In order to clear up widespread misunderstanding of the parable, we must go to many other scriptures, equally inspired, many of them direct quatations from Yahusha, to understand the whole truth of exactly when the rich man "lifted up his eyes, being in torments..." At this time setting of the rich man (vs23) he is facing imminent death by fire, as in the second death. Yes it would take quite a lot of time and space for me to possibly enable you to grasp the full meaning of the parable. May be a hub is necessary? There is no fiery torment. Only death and destruction for the wicked (Rom. 6:23).
I have some questions:
Isn't there proof of Jesus' existence today? According to the bible he came out of his tomb with a solid physical body. Does it say in the NT where He walked off to? Did He die again or did he ascend into the sky? Maybe he is still walking around somewhere on the earth. Like some one saw him hanging out in the streets of Los Angels, talking to people the way he did 2000 years ago. And then he performed a miracle, by giving sight to a Erik, blind homeless man who slept every night under a bridge with his faithful Jack Russell named Jim. Some one reported it to Fox who then did an interview. Jesus, Erik and Jim appeared on channel 11, news. Some people were amazed by the beauty of this gentle soul and compassionate demeanor and believed the testimony of Erik who could now gaze with wonder upon little Jim. But, some people called him a magician, And some people got angry that any one would dare to give people false hopes of healing through love and forgiveness...of hopes for the freedom to make a new start in life and the opportunity to change their ways which were causing themselves and others suffering. Maybe they liked being stuck in their ruts. Yet no one, certainly not Jesus said they Had to get out of their ruts. They could stay in their self made hells, but compared the the options, why would they want to?You are confusing evidence with faith.
If claims written in ancients sacred texts constitute evidence, then claims made in the Vedas, the Book of the Dead, the Enuma Elish, the I Ching, and the Avesta constitute evidence, too.
You accept Jesus' resurrection on faith, not evidence.There were four different accounts of the resurrection!
BTW this is no proof that tomorrow will come... BOO! Sure the earth could stop turning, You NEVER know!
Absolutely. When four different authors make the same claim, it has to be true. Right?
In nearly everything, humans require two or more accounts/witnesses/testimonies for a thing to be considered acceptable or factual...
There are NUMEROUS accounts of the Lochness monster... Big Foot... etc, etc. We should believe that, too, then, right?
Correct, four DIFFERENT accounts. Written after each other and most likely read by each other. Notice the first has very few if any miracles and as they precede more and more miracles appear until last has lots of miracles.
So how can we be positive and keep our chins up in life? How can we not end up like you... all troubled? How can we explain all the really amazing things in life? It is just hard to say it is all accidental! Or that it really is all up to us! What do you think of the principles outlined in the once popular book, the secret?
Human nature. Are there no depressed theists or optimistic atheists? There is nothing depressing about a life without believing in God.
You must be confusing me with someone else. I'm not troubled at all, I've got a great partner in my wife and three great kids who are becoming people of great character.
Besides human intelligence there is nothing that separates us from any other animal. We all live, get sick, die, prey and get preyed upon. Will build building around us so as not to be preyed upon. We are not the only animal that is self aware and this self awareness can be turned of. I don't think it's accidental we are here, we just are and for a limited time. There is most likely million or billions of other planets capable of sustaining life. Here we are. Enjoy, we are here for a good time not a long time, so have a good time the sun can't shine everyday.Oh I apologize! You're right... I mixed you up with A troubled Man. He is always shooting me down for every positive belief I come up with. I was commenting on the fact that there are four books of the bible explaining the resurrection of Jesus, so it is a high probability that it happened. You, for some reason, don't want to believe in the bible's legitimacy. Has religion done something bad to you? If so what. How is believing in the bible (NT) bad? Maybe wrong interpretation and attempts to indoctrinate false beliefs is bad. If we examine the true message of what this enlightened master had to say in the pure light of reality could we benefit? He came with a new understanding of God and a new hope for the human psyche. He just said God loves you! What could be wrong with that message? What could be wrong believing that message? Did he really say anything that does not jive with the state of human happiness?
Well we don't really know what he said do we? You have four different example, which one is correct? They can't all be correct if they are all different. Remember they were not all written at the same time, as much as 70 years may have past between them and most likely each had read it's predecessor.
That being said, getting to your question "What could be wrong with that message?" Well does the message supply false hope? Did the message lie? Can we move mountain with prayer as he indicated? Does the message start wars? Did that message support slavery? Did that message create the middle/dark ages. Would many Christians like to go back to the dark ages where there was no separation between church and state. All these question will not be answered in a favourable way for your question.
Remember the bible says Jesus said mountains can be moved with prayer but with prayer cancer can not be cured. Is this false hope. There are people how pray instead of get treatment then die. Was giving the message of the NT a positive one? Not if it supplies false hope and that is does.I understand your view point. Many feel let down by religion for good reason. I believe in scientific spirituality instead. Jesus talked about having faith. In my opinion, faith is based on absolute Knowing. How else could Jesus have walked on the water. He knew way more than we know! Apparently He knew what God knows.
I do not believe in giving up one's own will (even if it is to Jesus). But if one does it through love,( in connection to ones own will) I know they will receive redemption and salvation.
I believe, that By gradually embracing and realizing our true Selves, we can become one with the omnipotent spirit of God, as Jesus did. Some Christians probably think I am going to hell with this belief.
But look at Katy Perry who is going wild with her own will. Why? I have come to the conclusion that mistaken religious beliefs in her upbringing somehow took it away. She has been on a wild quest to be in touch with her own will. "The heart is to the body what the will is to the psyche." I am convinced that God wants us to have our own wills. Most importantly he wants us to stay in touch with the Joy Of Life we came to earth with. That's why He sent Jesus to tell us that He loves us no matter what. If we want to change, he will forgive us, so we can. He wants us to be on a path toward our own true (true versus deviated) sense of happiness.
This is just one person's viewpoint. I thought it might be interesting. Don't bother arguing. I am just sharing. I know what the argument is: There is no proof that Jesus even existed. You are just wasting your time writing all this.. Sorry, but I cannot NOT believe in Jesus. Some of us Know that Jesus and God do exist.But what about false hope? Was Jesus lying or were they not his words? Ever ask yourself why some of you believe in Jesus and God exists? Perhaps is wishful thinking. But I wish for the existence of a loving God, but just because I wish doesn't make it so.
I said I KNOW. It ain't a false HOPE... it is my truly perceived Reality!
Have you tried to move a mountain or end all cancer with prayer yet? Jesus apparently said you could. Go ahead I'll wait...
I am not that in touch with God yet. It takes lifetimes if you are not focusing 100%. I am not because I don't need to, I guess. Most progress is made through need.
Do you know anyone who has ever moved a mountain or cured the human rase from cancer? If it has not been done by now than it can not be done.
Moving mountains was not meant to be taken literally. God can help us do His will even if it seems to beyond our capabilities. What can one do if there is a cure for cancer but it is being withheld from us? Ought we hold scientists at gunpoint if we believe they might know?
...or if they could tell us how to prevent it? Macrobiotics explains that cancer can be caused by wrong eating habits: Too much sugar, heated oils, overeating, chemicals in our food... It involves how we create our own blood supply and its quality. Even the ph balance of the blood comes into play. We have to create a ph balanced blood supply. This balance is created through eating ph balanced foods, like millet and brown rice. legumes, vegetables, sea foods, etc. Cancer is the result of an overly acidic blood stream.(Processed sugar causes an acidic condition.) Are the scientists looking into well known (to the Japanese) macrobiotic principles? Some cases of cancer were cured by stabilizing of the ph balance of the blood through certain types of food. See works by George Osawa, author of many Macrobiotics Books. (Michio Kuchi, and Noburo Muromoto as well.) the problem with western ways is that we focus little on self discipline. Also we have few support systems for fighting or better yet, preventing cancer.
PS I like your " Moving Mountains" interpretation.What cancers were cured by stabilizing ph in the blood?
Steve Jobs had a cancer that was caught early and could have been easily treated, but he thought that if he just ate right it would go away on its own. Now he's dead.
I don't want to make it sound like we shouldn't be trying to eat right. We absolutely should. There are way too many artificial ingredients and chemicals in our food, it's not good for the body no matter what certain groups want to say. But let's be realistic. My wife would not still be alive if we had simply shifted dietary focus. Her cancer was not caught early enough.
When cures for cancer come they are used because money can be made from it. Prayer has no power. No mountains have been moved.
In Matthew 17:20 Jesus says:
For truly, I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.
In Matthew 21:21:
I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.
The message is reiterated Mark 11:24:
Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.
John chapter 14, verses 12 through 14,
"I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."
Well, he seems to say you have to believe, so I'm out, but perhaps one of you can pray for all cancer to be cured by the end of the day. I'll wait. No excuses please. If it doesn't work you've been lied to.Prayer has power! I know that personally!
You really don't think the mountain thing is literal? Did Jesus do it?
You have a complete misunderstanding of God. Jesus only healed those who He knew had faith in Him. Healing them would confirm their faith. He would not heal those who saw Him as a genie because they did not have faith.
Often in order to be physically well, one has to be spiritually well, as well. Many people get cancer, and I have examples of this in my family, because they are spiritually sick. They harbour bitterness and unacceptance of their suffering and situation. God can give us the strength to cope with any situation. Jesus prayed that if it was possible that the Lord would save Him from death. It didn't happen. Why? Else we'd have no salvation.
There are people out there that say if they never suffered they'd never be the strong and wise person they are today. The person who has never suffered in this life are usually the lowest kind because they have no empathy for others.
On a practical note, can you imagine what the world population would be like if we were continuously healed and all lived to eighty years old? You'd be the first to cry when there is not enough food and other resources. Even with our current population, there is not enough.
I don't believe factual claims for any particular purpose or goal; I believe them because I have concluded that they have the largest percentage chance of being true.
Why is life only about "staying positive and keeping your chin up?" Is that reality? Or are most people holding on tightly to the "beautiful" things that give them an emotional high and keep them from seeing the big picture, because the world may just not be as full of rainbows and sunshine as they want it to be? There may be a "God" of some sort, but it's highly unlikely it's the one of the Bible. Just someone taking off their rose-colored glasses would come to that conclusion. If there is a God who supposedly cares for humanity, why is there continuous suffering? The excuses like "we couldn't know sympathy/empathy without suffering," and things of that nature are pointless, and don't deal with the reality at hand. Why would a loving God create the world just to ultimately destroy it? He's supposedly omniscient, so who knew what could/would happen. He's "omnipotent," so He could've stopped it. A caring/personally involved "God" makes no sense in the real world, but it's a nice idea because it feeds our ego and makes us feel like we're more important individually than we really are. Not saying that people aren't important. But what most people don't seem to get is that in this vast Universe our importance in teeny-tiny and insignificant. We are not more important than anything else that shares this planet with us, and it is because we think too highly of ourselves and our wants and desires, we are destroying this planet and ruining it for ourselves as well as the other beings that inhabit it along with us.
Now a greater being/source of light/darkness/everything that is in and a part of everything that exists that can be observed in all facets of nature and the natural world in general and for that reason "connects" us, but isn't necessarily actively involved in anything makes more sense. It is a neutral source that makes the most sense. Read about the Tao. It is not "God," but it's just an interesting way to look at the Universe, and how something "transcendental" could exist but is not separate from the Nature of the Universe itself.Devotion to the Creator of ourselves and the universe would take us away from our own self-absorption. We would Want to cooperate with Our Creator. It would make us work with love instead of greed. Can you not say that Nature is amazing? That Humans are amazing? There is nothing so perfect as the child at birth. Sometime mistakes happen. Usually due to some Karmic influence. We Ourselves are the Cause of All Human Misery.
Would you get pregnant if you had no way to take care of your child? Or you did not believe your man would love and stay with you for the rest of your life?? If you would, then YOU would contribute to human misery, not God!Forgive me, but your statement is narrow minded. Stating that we cause ALL human Misery show your lack of understanding anything from out side your own environment. I can show you many many things that cause human misery that are not of our doing.
Cancer,
Filarial Worms, and other parasites that are just part of nature to which humans have no exception.
Earth quakes,
Hurricanes,
Tsunamis,
Need I go on?
Just how would a single mom contribute to human misery?Um, I believe you may just live on a different planet. o.O If my father sees me about to rape my friend, if He loves that friend, should He not intervene in order to protect him/her? Or should He be more conscious of my free will? Which is more important? Who's rights should've been protected? He does not choose inaction. In a "Creator in the sky" sense, he does not exist in order to act. But, people do. People cause suffering, and they also save and bring joy other people. We don't hear about a huge hand extending from Heaven to strike down the men who take girls as sex slaves, so that these "precious" girls can be saved. No... the ones who don't OD or die while trying to escape, if saved, are saved by other human beings.
( No, I am not an alien)
O.K. If your Father sees you about to rape your friend and he does not intervene it means he cares more about your free will... bingo. bingo absolutely bingo. but then oops...you say he doesn't exist. Otherwise a huge hand would extend from the sky. This makes me want to cry. I am so sorry that you really think this is the way it should work. I am so sorry that it doesn't. Santa doesn't exist but God does. Santa is a made up story. God isn't. I am sorry that he works on an invisible level. He doesn't reach down from the sky to extend a real hand because He has given us the responsibility to solve the problems that WE have created. We MAKE our problems... We SOLVE them. It is all about increasing our awareness on both an individual level and societal level. God will help us if we ask Him for help.
Here is an example of the potential we have to help each other increase awareness:
I personally believe that every mother should show not only her daughters, but her SONS as well, the videos now available on You Tube exposing the reality of abortions. One 3 part video shows a fetus in the womb squirming away from the metal instruments coming to tear him to pieces. ( In the "Silent Scream" an abortion doctor explains how first its little legs are ripped off and pulled out, then its arms and body and finally, its little round head... which is not at all easy to retrieve.) By exposing her children to the reality of the consequences of sex and unwanted pregnancy, a mother could make her children aware that sex:
1. produces a little human. ...
2. produces a little human who comes into the world with a Right to Life!
Mothers can teach their children that the egg and sperm should NOT (as in NEVER, EVER for ANY REASON,) come together unless a baby is consciously, absolutely desired by both mother and father. This is an example of how we humans can help increase awareness. If every mother or father showed their teens these videos... I really think abortion clinics would start shutting down due to way fewer clients... thanks to the increased awareness promoted by parents who acted in a proactive manner, (by exposing their children the reality of pregnancy and the worst case scenario, abortion. They should also mention to their children that death is a risk in any abortion procedure. Its all on You Tube.)
The evil men who take girls as sex slaves should be dealt with by the righteous law makers in the society where they exist. Women need to take a strong strong stand to protect their young from this kind of evil. If they cannot... they really need to begin a sweeping campaign to STOP producing young. If women cannot protect their offspring from the Man Made (literally in this case) evils of the world... Then stop having them! Run from men! unless they agree to tackle the sexual predator issues! You don't think society could come together on this issue? They could and they have. Because no, God will not intervene. We do have to solve the problems of mankind. God did not cause them!!!!!! It is up to us to control through love, the sex urge. those who misuse sex have NO LOVE in their hearts what so ever.What's more important, a girl being violated and raped, or a rapist's free will? If that isn't a clear answer, then I don't know what is...
Your God and Santa are equally as probable...
Plenty of people ask for help from him, and don't get it. Think about sex trafficking. Yea, someone may eventually receive help, but do you think the months, sometimes years of asking for God's help (anyone's help) doesn't cause one to raise an eyebrow? It does for me. As if abuse and rape is acceptable once...
You're right, we do solve and create our own problems. No God is needed in this realization.
I agree and disagree. Most abortions are done before the fetus even reaches those developmental stages, so that's really propaganda, but I do believe in raising awareness not only of the fact that abortions are unnecessary, and possible dangers, but the responsibilities that come with children and why one should not have one until ready and able to consciously make that choice, as you say. Awareness I always agree with. But scaring people into a false awareness is something else.
LoL, do you know how and where most girls are abducted? If not, look it up. And how dare you believe that your so special a mother that your own children would somehow be completely safe from such a risk at all. Many women do their best as mother's and the one second out of many that they don't pay attention, their child is gone.
That's funny. Again, I agree we make our problems and need to solve them. Again, there is no personal God needed in that scenario.
True... Or rather, it's certainly repressed, or seen as as irrelevant...ummm, a good father would stop his son from hurting a girl. A good person would intervene. Sorry that's beyond you.
She was talking about God as Father.... Her question was... why in the world, if he exists, doesn't he just somehow stop bad actions, such as rape. I say, just because he doesn't extend a hand out of the sky doesn't mean he doesn't exist! He doesn't work in that manner!
WE want free will and he grants it to us. Why is that so hard to get? If we stayed with our parents our whole lives we would not become independent of them.. He has given us that... Independence to find our own strength and the happiness of being in command of our own lives.
He helps us when we want His help... in His way and in His time.
Just understand that He exists beyond the physical realm.
( I wish we had a voting system to see how many people agree with this way of believing. Im sure its in the millions. My son is working on programming the ability to vote on his political debate site. Maybe HubPages could implement it in the forums.)
Who agrees that our Father ( omnipresent spirt and creator of all) exists on the Metaphysical plane?
Meta= Beyond
Physical = Earthly lifeThe whole notion of God not violating our free will is false, actually. First of all, we are created and that is not of our own will. We are placed in situations that are not our will. "God" supersedes our will all of the time. Isn't that why people came up with the quote "want to make God laugh, tell Him about all of your plans?"
Since when does He care about what "WE want?" His will is supposedly greater than ours, so if and when what we want doesn't line up with what He wants, He wants us to change our will, no? (This is talking from the perspective of Christianity, I don't actually believe in Him, so that you don't get confused)
"the happiness of being in command of our own lives." He sucks that away with the threat of Hell/eternal separation... so, I doubt He actually cares about that. I would say that if He was real, He'd only want us to feel that way, so that it would be easier to see Him as benevolent. Also, as mentioned previously, how can we be in command of our own lives when we are expected to live them according to [i]His[i] will, or face the consequences? That is some freedom with conditions, not true free will, anyway.
"He helps us when we want His help... in His way and in His time."
So, in other words, He helps us when he feels like it, and we just have to take what life dishes us in the mean time. Uh, yeah, thanks, but no thanks.
You never answered my question. What's more important?
Saving a girl from unnecessary suffering?
or
Letting the person who causes her suffering continue to follow their own free will at her expense?How can God stop bad things from happening if He exists on the spiritual realm?
He will not reach a hand out of the sky to stop all the individuals around the world who are at this moment forcing other humans to do unspeakable things, ( which they do for either lust or power.
Others do terrible things for the sake of revenge, greed, blind ambitions, money, hatred, or anger, etc.)
Injustice is happening constantly, every where.
He waits for those who want to do something about it. Then He guides or acts in an invisible/ spiritual way. (But, I have heard stories, supposedly true, about angels appearing to warn people or to scoop them off their motor cycles that are about to crash, and land them on their feet. That happened to my brother-in-law. There are many people who speak of supernatural events they experienced, which seemed like divine intervention to them.)
I believe, (based on personal experience,) that whoever decides to help either themselves or someone else, and asks for God's help, will get it. (Just saying "Help me, God!" brought God's response to me. Events unfolded in a way that showed me how to fix what I had been doing wrong... It seemed to me, that He knew how to help me, without me even explaining it. My explanation? He is omnipresent and has the awesome power to know every person in spirit, at any point in time.
Also, consider the word Karma. It refers to the spiritual law of cause and effect. What you do will come back to you. An individual who tyrannizes over another, will someday also be tyrannized. ( Conversely, If you do something good for another, someone will do something good for you.)
God exists in the realm of spirit: (Jesus gave a prayer that begins with, "Our Father, who art in Heaven...") Since we too are spiritual beings (even though we are in the physical realm within physical bodies,) we can commune with Him...Jesus said, "Know Ye not That Ye are gods?"
( We are like drops in the ocean of spirit.)
I have heard that we scramble (not a good word here) and fight to get into a fertilized egg. The strongest soul makes it in. (So, the soul exists within the beginning embryo, immediately, as soon as one strong sperm unites with the egg.) This indicates a strong desire for the soul to manifest in the physical realm. We chose the parents and environment we ended up with... and we do receive a particular "deck of cards." No situation is ideal.
We come back to earth life-time after life-time because we have desires to fulfill. I think I came back to eat tortilla chips! Also, I think we come following those we love and want to work with or learn from. I know God is spirit and has great love for us. What father would not love his children? And He sure has a lot. It is really amazing to me. I also realize that it is all really beyond human comprehension. One must unify one's sprit with His to understand. That will happen eventually when one loves God with body mind, soul and spirit. That is how Jesus became a "begotten Son."
Jesus would want us to intervene and stop a rape if we are capable of doing so. He did not respect the free will of those money-changers in the Temple. He came there and stopped them with a whip.
Yes, God wants us, as Jesus did, to stop evil...(which results from the MIS USE of free will. In this case, one's free will is unwisely guided... It is a mistake to think that happiness can be had when the price of that happiness causes others to suffer. When injustice is committed, it must be stopped by We The People. Did Jesus ask, "When will the hand of God come and knock over the changing tables? (Did he use a whip? I thought he just knocked them over!)" No, He just went ahead and knocked them over... (or whatever he did.)
And He was angry! Anger is a good thing when it is used for the power to bring about what is right.
The following is what I believe:
1. Boundaries help us act against blind passions. The Ten Commandments are those boundaries.
2. Jesus brought us the law, "Do unto Others as you would have Others do unto You". This is why Jesus came... to teach us the right use of our Free Will and to teach us how to guide that Free Will.
3. Our Father allows us to GUIDE our own Free Will every moment of our existence for ever and ever.
We alone GUIDE our own lives and our own choices and our own decisions.
4. Jesus came with a path to follow so that we could guide our lives toward true happiness...through love of God.
You think that the Vedas, the Book of the Dead, the Enuma Elish, the I Ching, and the Avesta constitute evidence, too?
By the way... evidence of what?
Somewhere along the line it seems I have offended you. Either that or you are a little late for SNL. I'm also not very good at reading between lines, please come back with something, I with my limited abilities, might be able to respond.
(No, I am on the west coast. SNL is starting in an hour. Thanks for reminding me. I am always disappointed by that show which Iv'e been watching since the 70's. I still watch it because every once in a while it's hilarious. Ok back to the topic at hand.) I was just saying I really don't think Jesus ever talks about God punishing anyone in the NT. I would be interested in reading a passage if He does. You did not offend me. Are you Jewish? Do you not read the NT? If not, pardon me. Actually, I was just being literary and imaginative. Sorry if I seemed to be otherwise.
Jesus talked about it in parables. The Straight and Narrow Road. Lazarus and the Rich Man. The Parable of the Talents. The one about the man who goes off to be made king and his head servant runs amok.
It's really hard to distinguish emotions here. And Yahusha (Jesus) does speak of punishment. No, I am not Jewish, nor Christian, merely a servant of the Most High, as all believers ought be.
No it does not. There are a few words that are translated in english to "Hell" in the Bible. They are not all Hell though. Jesus refers to a real place that is like Hell, and refers to eternal solitude. To choose Hell is to choose to be eternally separated from God, and the Bible hints everybody else. To be eternally separated from everyone.
There is of course the parable with Lazarus, but I recommend reading each occurrence of the word Hell in the New Testament and looking up the verse in a Greek Bible to fully understand what the verse is speaking of.
I believe that the fiery Hell we always hear about is of Pagan influence, and that is not the Hell that is actually described in the Bible.Eternal destruction is the everlasting lake of fire. The richman in the parable of Lazarus was in another place called Hell. He had not yet reached his eternal destiny.
Alright Aug, I'm game, let's see if we can come to an agreement or agree to disagree. Where?
Then He would not be a loving God. But God did not say that. So He is a loving God.
Its like asking "What if you were a dog?" The answer is then you would be behaving like a dog. But you are not a dog and so such questions are meaningless.Well, in the OT God would talk to certain people, right? Apparently at some point He stopped talking to people. He got pretty pissed off at people in general when he made it rain for 40 days and nights. And then He felt sad at the extreme measures he took and he said He would never do that again. Since he promised that, he sent Jesus.
BTW Jesus, whether you believe any of this or that he came here for sure, had amazing things to say, according to what was written in the Bible. Why does Claire keep discussing Revelations?? We will never know what the heck that is all about! But if you look at the things "Jesus" was "saying" it is really pretty interesting. Also one must consider the context of what was written as far as society in those times. I have lost my Bible so I can't start.
Also I do believe, Claire, that there was technology in the distant past. I believe there was a nuclear war in ancient days and India blew up. The important thing, is to know how to focus on the third eye at the time of the next nuclear explosion, stay calm and be with You No Hoo.
P.S. I have a life, but not late at night.You are plain ignorant and arrogant. You mis-portray God in your ignorance?
You assume that. You dot realize that at different times He spoke in different manner.
You assume that is the reason why He made it rain.
Did He?
You assume again. How are you sure of this?I think you would benefit from reading a hub of mine, I wrote it to fellow Christians in regards to threatening hell and not showing love through their posts. Give it a read Augustine, I find your posts very disheartening as a Christian. If you go to my profile you will recognize the hub I am asking you to read immediately.
You are correct. That's what I said. Only man would say that, not the loving God of the NT.
But Jesus did teach about hell. This is what I don't get. Unless you're saying we're putting words in His mouth, God did teach that if we don't follow Him, we go to hell.
Most Christians believe in a loving God. Not a vengeful God. Christians should be aware that the God they believe in is not a loving forgiving God. They should know what the OT says about Rape, Murder, Slavery and War.
My understanding: This is where karma and the law of Justice fits in. What we do, bad or good comes back to us. If not instantly, later... perhaps even in another life time. Our own conscience will land us in either heaven or hell... it is our own making. Have you ever done something you regretted for the rest of your life? You will probably never repeat that action again because of your own suffering. We learn lessons by making mistakes. We have the opportunity to correct our mistakes and change our ways. God sent Jesus to give us that leeway. Sorry if these words are not welcome. I'm just sharing another viewpoint on the whole matter. It is based on the SRF teachings. Thank you for letting me share.
We do know about God? Its you who do not know the meaning of mercy.
We do know what it says about those things which is why we believe in a loving, forgiving God.
I mean, c'mon! You read my hubs!
Pain and fear, anything that so much as wrinkles the nose of a man, are powerful agents employed in superstitious beliefs, inducing people into embracing them. To said end, It's almost impossible to imagine something pleasant that would appeal to everyone in general. As an example, the notions of heaven and paradise are vague and varied, from places with rivers of wine to that inhabited by a certain number of virgins (women?). It all comes down to subjectivity.
That's a pretty debased way of looking at the conversation we're having.
I see your point. By this time, I think you know what I think, that I take the whole Bible literally (although there is certainly allegory and poetry in the Bible, on the whole I believe the history.) And God is certainly a loving God, I experience His love on a daily basis. And there's a danger in presenting God as merely an object of fair, a la the priests in Ulysses.
But Jesus told parables about how people who only did their required minimum because they feared, yet resented, the King were in for punishment. It's the ones who truly love Him who are in for actual rewards.
But I still stand by the point. What I was specifically responding to was that posting and others I have seen by people who somehow think that, even if they were still alive when it happened, that if God showed Himself and was exactly as powerful and as angry as has been claimed, that they would somehow just say, "No thanks, you don't deserve it" and go about their business like nothing's changed.
I was once in conversation with a Belgian kid who understood that perfectly. He doesn't believe in God, but if he did he understood that he better fall on his face!I do agree most would side with God if he made himself know and if not doing so would cause endless pain. But as I said that's extortion.
Maybe, maybe not. It's a moot point if He exists, though.
You do not understand it the right way. Or you don't want to.
http://atheistpill.blogspot.in/p/god-do … -hell.html
Let this one educate you" A loving god would say follow me or you will no longer exist."
um, not my definition of love. A loving god would say: I love you. I will always be there for you. When you fall I will catch you. When you pray for strength, I'll give you opportunities to be strong. I will never push you harder than you can take. I won't do you the disservice of treating you as less than you are. I will rejoice in your triumphs. I will ally your sorrows. I will, above all else, strive to empower you. And I will never, never leave you.
That's a loving god. Love me or you will cease to exist? That is the greatest threat and the greatest act of hate I've ever heard of.
cheersum, "That's a loving god. Love me or you will cease to exist? That is the greatest threat and the greatest act of hate I've ever heard of."
I don't know, I think ceasing to exist is much better than burn for ever, so it can't be the greatest act of hate you've ever heard of.I think God wanted to make it clear that He wants us to follow Him. If the alternative is simply cessation of existence a la` the Jehovah's Witnesses, then who cares? Live how you want now and suffer nothing later on? He is a God of love but He is also a God of Justice.
Just how is eternal burning hell for the skeptical justice? A simple told you so should do.
I try not to be argumentative but that one just boggles my mind. A simple told you so? On your way to not knowing anything about anything any more? And you got away with whatever you wanted to do in life? That, dear Captain Kirk, does not compute.
Oh please, I've never killed anyone or committed adultery or any other major offence. Would simply being a non believer have me put in the fire?
That does indeed seem disproportionate punishment.
And my point is the same. Whether we, as human beings, think it's disproportionate or not (and I'm not saying I've never wrestled with it,) if God exists then that's the choice. And He does exist.
Okay, I'm not just talking about you, specifically. I'm talking about everyone. And my point stands. Yeah, you never killed anyone or committed adultery, and I'm the first in line to say that's great! But if the idea is to get people motivated to follow God, at least those who are more likely to be motivated out of fear, then what's the point in eternal cessation? They still got to do what they wanted, they thumbed their noses at God and got away with it. If you ask the majority of them, they would probably say that they would prefer it anyway.
" it's recently been found that love in actually not an emotion it's an addiction."
um, it has recently been SURMISED that love is an addiction. Scientists and philosophers alike struggle to define what ANY emotion is.
What we believe to be true tells us much more about ourselves than it does about the truth.
cheers
Blaise Pascal employed a wagering system, named after himself, in a logical attempt to justify the act of embracing God's existence by weighing the gain and loss of doing so (or in this case, not doing so). Pascal presented four possible scenarios: if you believe in God, and he does not exist, nothing happens; if you don't believe in God, and he does not exist, nothing happens. On the other hand, if you believe in God, and he exists, you get to enter heaven, if you don't believe in God, and he exists, you get to enter hell. The idea is that regardless of God's existence, or non-existence, it's still a much safer bet to believe in him, let alone get down on all fours and grovel before him.
Sure, to ensure the continued sanctity of one's eternal soul, one would view such an act as logical. For a slave, anyway. It's pretty pathetic, living one's life in subservience to the tyrannical whims of a deity, way more so than living as though one's life holds no purpose whatsoever. If it was up to me, I think I'd choose the less saner choice of being subjected to pain and torture for all eternity. My money's on the horse that says I'd probably get a bit bored about it in the span of a few years.Less sane is the exact correct phrase. And your money is counterfeit, because if you really understood what being in the eternal presence of God was, you'd know what a foolish choice hell would be.
But, it's your choice to make. You should just try to be more informed before making it.
Not likely. Fellows like you will continue be as you are till you reach your eternal destiny. In fact it is the other way around. You don't drop your belief when He comes and thereby he takes you. But He takes those who had already believed in Him.
Hi Every one,
Atheism is the belief that God doesn't exist.
Therefore atheism is false.
There you go atheists, a simple logical, reasonable proof that you're wrong. What are you gonna say now?An atheist is most commonly a former theist. A theist is a nothing less than practicing pagan.
Show me a single g/God that exists and I will show you the pagans who worship it/them.
There are no g/Gods unless the ego/s of man is now called such.
James.Your question is not phrased very well. Are you telling me that if a pagan was to worship God then this proves that God does not exist?
Please reword.Was not a question, but a statement.
Every pagan worships a g/God. Is where the term originates.
A g/God is designed by man, created in mans image, does what man believes/disbelieves.
Anything created can be named, titled, etc.
James.That is a claim. Okay where is the evidence?
Hi ITcoach,
Perhaps you missed something between "Atheism is the belief that God doesn't exist." and "Therefore atheism is false." because you have not proven God exists.
I submit if God exists why didn't he help you make a complete and compelling argument? I submit if God exists he would have helped you make a coherent statement.
Therefore no God exist and theism is false.You are blinded. You are don't eat to see the truth.
http://atheistpill.blogspot.in/p/why-no-evidences.html
This article has your information for the correction of your blindness. If you want to know the truth you can see it there.I'm not sure I understood your first sentence. Also, I find it self-contradictory to define something as beyond humanity and then outlining its disposition in real-world terms.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2s14T6x5AM
Please watch the video above before you start stating your beliefs.
It is only 9:15 long.
If you have any answers to the questions Dr. Zakir Naik asked, please write them.
Thank YouAny way other than Islam - complete submission to God - can land you in hellfire - being an atheist will definitely land you in hellfire - I'd spend the nine or so minutes to see what can possibly save you from eternal damnation if I were you... BTW I've seen so many of Dr Naik's lectures, and they're great - I learned so much. I was Christian and confused. By the grace of God the message of Islam reached me and I accepted it. Worshipping none other than God will get you into heaven - if God has mercy on you - if you give Him a reason to have mercy on you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5upXp-8xH…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1aXR7ejw…Thereby ensuring your eternal damnation. I wonder if you really studied your Bible?
I don't think IT Coach is a Christian, so he wouldn't adhere to actual Biblical principals.
It states in the bible that Satan, the Devil was a murderer and a liar from the beginning. It also states that Satan was cast down here on Earth, and that he has power over all kingdoms and nations. So therefore he is in control of everything including our brainwashing through the education system, government and media. We have all been conditioned to believe a lie. And the biggest lie is the name of the Almighty Yehowah and of his son the Messiah (not Christ) Yehowshuwa.
We are to seek the Almighty Yehowah first, the rest will fall into place. The Almighty Yehowah is truth, therefore we must seek him to find the truth. That is the ONLY way. If you seek, you shall find.The problem I see with both Christians and Atheists is, that they both believe that the Almighty is cruel. So the Atheists stops believing but yet are still searching for something, and the Christians turn to Jesus Christ (which is not the true Hebrew name of the Messiah). Jesus Christ becomes their new god with their adopted trinity doctrine.
But it states in the bible that our Father Yehowah is loving and merciful. But Satan who was created perfect, went astray, wanting the worship only due to our Creator Yehowah, and sought to take man down with him. And all this starts in the garden of Eden when that Old Serpent lied to Eve, which in turn Adam and Eve disobeyed Yehowah and was cast out of the Garden.....The Almighty set up a way that all those that do love Yehowah can have back their eternal life by believing on his Son Yehowshuwa who sacrificed himself for his Father Yehowah to redeem us all back to the Father who Satan, the Devil try to steal away.The OT supports, teaches and condones rape, murder and slavery. That seems cruel to me, unless of course you think those things will only be done to others, which means you lack empathy and compassion as well.
Sure it does.
Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT
Anyone who is captured will be cut down—run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked, and their wives will be raped.
“Look, I will stir up the Medes against Babylon. They cannot be tempted by silver or bribed with gold. The attacking armies will shoot down the young men with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for children.”I'm keeping this one filed away to get back to later.
I don't know about anybody else but I do not believe in a cruel God.
Chris, then you must believe in another God other than the Christian one. The Christian God is horribly cruel, as demonstrated clearly by the Bible.
So ridiculous Now why is ridiculous spelled with a i instead of an e??? after r??? That is also rediculous.
BTW Brian, You really should back up your statements with passages from the Old or New Testament (or where ever they are from) to prove and clarify what you are saying. Please enlighten us, as we are obviously truly stupid, dumb and uninformed people!
No, He's not.
I know that sometimes I come at people with these soundbite answers. The response is really more deep than that. And frankly, I don't expect you to come around to my way of thinking just because I say so. But the fact is that the "Christian God" (He is, in fact, the only God,) is not horribly cruel. Don't make the mistake of thinking that just because something is printed in the Bible means that God thinks it's wonderful and everybody should act like that at all times in all circumstances. More often than not, people in the Bible do things they've been specifically told not to, and people suffer the consequences thereof.
It is how we deal with all those situations. Faith in God will pull us through any natural disaster. Death is not a misery, it is a blessing. Healing is a blessing. Ever break your leg? It heals. Cancer I have had. I believe it was caused by working teaching swimming for hours in chlorine water. Most cancers are caused by self inflicted reasons of some type. Cancers are evidence of a lack of health on some level. The medical profession and my over all health otherwise, saved me. Just stay away from situations like where worms are, We are smart enough to live healthy lives. Aids was caused by unhealthy sexual practices. A single mom with out a means of making a living... is in the MOST MISERABLE of situations.
Again very narrow minded. Not all cancers are the result of our mistakes. Neuroblastoma is a prime example.
Your faith is God does not pull everyone through those natural disasters. Some die and some are left with children or spouses. Healing is not a blessing because everyone one heals from cuts and bruises, bot just the faithful.
A single mom with out a means of making a living... is NOT in the MOST MISERABLE of situations. A single mom put in her situation from rape and having to raise the child is in a more miserable situation. A single mom with a child with cancer is in a more miserable situation.
Your problem is you're not expanding your vision. You're not seeing beyond what you can immediately see.All disease is has a cause. Some health problems are caused by Karma. Sometimes it happens that people willingly take on problems to set examples of bravery and strength.
And you have the better outlook on life? Why do you want to change my outlook. I live in la la land. Oh well! I stay away from Africa and India. It was not my choice to be born there. Do you live in a cold climate? I do not. I guess I've just got too much sunny weather where I am and no worms, I might add.
We have to have faith in the metaphysical world. THAT is our destiny. We are here to get out of here. The spiritual realm is where we hang out in between lifetimes. We come back into the world with desires to be here. We choose our situations. We choose our challenges. People in India understand the bigger picture I am talking about here. Divine Mother will only give us what we can handle. You have a narrower mind."Divine Mother will only give us what we can handle. You have a narrower mind." Really, I was just the funeral of someone who jump of the 9th floor of a building because it was confirmed he has Huntington's disease. Obviously Divine Mother have him more that he could handle, so you are wrong once again.
It's cruel to suggest one has had it coming to them if they get sick. Look up Huntington's disease. All it does is blame the victim and cause guilt. I know someone personally that feeds the same lies until her daughter had kidney failure. It's easy to spout lies until it hits close and you realize it had nothing to do with you.If someone had told him, "You can handle your disease... I will be with you..." he might not have jumped. Perhaps he had no real support system. He could have gotten that response from God had he tried to contact him through faith, prayer and meditation. But this does take take cultivation. One must get into the habit of contacting the source of love in this world through devotional practice. None of us is going to live forever but, We can still find love and Joy of Life. Unless some one like you prohibits it.
I do not dwell on the gutters. I look up at the beauty of the mountain tops where the rainbows, clouds, blue sky, birds and orange sunsets might be seen. It is a matter of not dwelling on the negative.
Even people sick and dying find Joy of Life. Go to hospitals and check it out!
I was just visiting my poor mother with a broken hip... In much pain.. in the hospital... she can't move. She is stuck in bed for who knows how long... her heart is weak. but she noticed my outfit and complimented me on it. It gave me great joy. In her condition she contributed to my happiness! and then my happiness became hers. God sent each and every one of us into the world with this Joy of Life. It is the spark of His divinity within us.
You cannot convince me otherwise. I think I am getting addicted. I really enjoy counteracting your devil's advocate position! Thanks for the fun.Disease always occurs due to something going wrong in the body. Well guess what, even Death can be the result of the heart getting tired of pumping. The body was not designed to last for ever, anyway. Eventually things start going wrong in any body... sometimes it is just a matter of aging. We are here to get out of here.( But NEVER by suicide. Never.) It is a temporary show.
We volunteered to come. We wanted to experience having a body for a while. Some people won't stay as long as others. If they came and enjoyed life a little bit, it was still a worthwhile trip.
I do not believe in suicide. I have heard that the karma for suicide is a deformed body when you reincarnate. This makes sense. You must learn to appreciate the body temple and life which you have been given.... which you were given because you wanted it... But then you forgot you wanted it
and ruthlessly destroyed the gift.
We must transcend the body. We can. it takes 100% focus. Jesus did it on the cross. He was in great pain, but when he said," It is done," His spirit joined with God's. This is how I understand it. I'm just sharing my understanding in case anyone is interested. Not arguing... sharing. It is a tough issue that has been brought up. Pain is a really really tough issue.Sounds like a cruel believe system you have. Blaming peoples misfortune for something they must have done in past life when there is no evidence of a past life. I certainly have no memory of a past life and the ones who say they do are lying. A guy get hit by a car and is paralyzed and you blame his past life. I know people like you, all is fine as long as it's not you who is hurt. Right. That's why you said "just stay away from india to stay away from parasites". You don't care about others suffering, you only care about yourself.
"Just stay away from situations like where worms are" that's your narrow minded answer? So we should just clear all of India and Africa of people?
What do you mean 'everyone realized he is the son of God'? What events would take place that would make someone believe Jesus' claim? That must be answered before contintinuing with the fantasy.
I don't know what event would happen but my question would be what if it was indisputable that Jesus is the son of God and we wouldn't be possibly deceived.
Likewise then, I don't know. It is such a fantastic, unprecedented hypothesis. In fact, I would not trust any assertion of understanding offered by anyone.
I think that most people would give up their free wills and follow like devoted dogs. There would be no reason for our lives any more. We would all follow Him unquestioningly to heaven. It isn't supposed to be like that. He wants us to come back through our own love of Christ (Consciousness) with our own "begotten" awareness of Him. Jesus had become His Father's only begotten Son through his desire to be with His Father.. We have to have the same desire... We are all destined to be Begotten Son's and Daughters. We will all eventually want to go home... in our own time. Again, I am just sharing what makes sense to me. take it or leave it... I am not looking for an argument. Just sharin...
When Jesus comes back to earth the way it predicts in Revelation, then there will really be no question.
Look at what happened to the Jews in Judah who witnessed the miracles of Christ, but still condemned him.
There will be many who will find any excuse not to believe.
Why? Ego.
Even if you hit them over the head with proof, they will resist changing their mind, because it would bruise the ego to admit they were wrong.
Some believe miracles are fictitious, so even if one confronted them, they would remain in denial or attempt to explain it away. Even if Jesus were to walk on water in front of them, they would suspect some trick. Even if you were able to show that no trick was possible, they would harbor the idea that there must be a trick that no one has yet thought of that would disprove the miracle if ultimately found.
Some feel that the Bible advocates genocide, murder, hatred and child abuse, but they aren't willing to investigate deeper meanings based upon love. Ego gets in the way. Also, they come with fixed ideas like, "Homo sapiens bodies are what are important." But, though God created us in His image and likeness, He is not Homo sapiens. So, that means...Hubpages still hasn't created a "like" button. Tsk tsk.
Yep, and I should state that the book is written based upon pure scientifically valid and proven facts.
How about the book, " The God Reality ?"
@LifeHP Please stop notifying of this thread. I sincerely apologize for ever responding to it.
Just click unfollow at the top left of the page.
Why in the fuck am I notified of this thread when I indicated otherwise? Just idding....
A long, long time ago...
I can still remember
How that music used to make me smile.
And I knew if I had my chance
That I could make those people dance
And, maybe, they’d be happy for a while.Bye bye American Pie? Is that the mood your in? Well I did mention, We The People! Would a shift to politics be better? We could get it to fit in with the topic at hand pretty easily, I would say. What is your Intelligent response to Claire's question since you don't like what you see??
True, but that's not what he did here. He made a broad statement that categorically dismisses one third of the world's population as 'non-thinkers' based on the fact that they hold a world view that differs from his. That is not a very well thought out statement. Generally, thinkers are careful not to make such broad statements because, if you take a minute to think about it, it's probably not true.
About half, estimated at roughly 1.1 billion. A large chunk of the other half originally came from Protestants who thought and read the bible for themselves and questioned Catholicism. And while I am not a fan of Catholicism in and of itself for many reasons including the one you mentioned, I have known many Catholics who were very intelligent and very knowledgeable of the bible.
The bible doesn't condone those things. In fact it pretty clearly states that no one outside of God has the authority to take anyone's life and it says to love and respect one another. You're talking about a particular portion addressed to a particular group of people in a particular situation. These people had to make a life in a very barbaric time and place. Clearly, making a statement like 'the bible condones hate, murder, rape, genocide' is absolutely false.Okay okay okay. I do see what you are saying and I do agree. I'm surrounded by Catholics and many are very bright people, but many have never picked up the bible or giving it much thought at all. Many refer to themselves as Catholic, but never show up for mass. But that is irrelevant.
I will rephrase my statement given your advice.
The God of the OT under certain circumstances condones and orders hate, murder, rape and genocide.
I guess what your saying is that these things are okay if one feels God has given permission.Today's news "Chanting "death to America," hundreds of protesters angered by an anti-Islam film have stormed the U.S. Embassy compound in Yemen's capital and burned the American flag, the latest in a series of attacks on American diplomatic missions in the Middle East."
You see the people of Islam feel that can protest and kill Americans because they were told by God to do so. So since the bible and the Quran describe when and where it's okay to murder it can be said that these two books advocate murder under certain circumstances.Yet the Bible says, "Do not commit murder."
And Jesus clarified, saying that we were not even to get angry. It is for God to avenge.But in the OT God tells his people to do the killing of men, women and children. God doesn't do the killing himself. The people of Islam are no different. They feel they are following Gods orders.
But it is different. In the OT, in specific places and under very specific and extreme circumstances, what God told people to do was wipe out people groups who were occupying land He had set aside for the Israelites. Now so far, I understand what late 20th century/early 21st century people are saying. The logic is that God wanted these people set entirely aside for Him, because if they intermingled with other peoples, the Israelites would follow other gods. In fact, this is exactly what happened time after time (after time after time...) I remember being quite shocked the first time I read this and thinking it was pretty extreme. It's worth remember a couple of things:
A) The Israelites didn't exist in a vacuum. What I mean by that is that the time and place they lived in was hardly some sort of BrianfromCanada-esque time of peace, love and brotherhood. Large numbers of people were regularly wiped out, subjugated, and enslaved by larger, tougher nations. The best way to ensure that didn't happen to the Israelites was to have them be preemptive. Remember, they were a relatively small group of people with no military history, going into an area with peoples who did have military history (they didn't win every battle.) From my 20th century American perspective, it seems pretty harsh, I'll admit. I often wonder how either of us would feel if we were alive five thousand years ago in that place.
B) If you accept that God knows everything (and I do) then you have to take into account that God knew ahead of time that they wouldn't follow that command to the letter. And they didn't. Whole groups of people either didn't get wiped out or they made treaties. And the predictable result was the introduction of paganism into Israelite society.
Also, the Bible as a whole is unified, although there are many who don't believe that. What was true at one time, in one place, for one group of people (the OT) is not what Jesus told all of humanity to practice. Even if (and I repeat, 'if') you're right about the 'God of the OT,' that doesn't mean that God wants people to kill. He doesn't.Or, this group of people justified there atrocities by saying they were told by a God to do them. The vengeful manor at which were described doesn't appear to come from a loving God at all. Instead of instructing them to kill and murder and rape for land, he could have told them to build boats and sail to remote islands or he could have built the boasts for them. It really matters not how barbaric the times were. The God of the NT would not have instructed even his favourite people to commit these acts. And don't have me started on the favourite or chosen people...
How do you know? If the circumstances had been different, would God have truly not told them to do things we think are bad?
Hear me out, Jesus was talking to a specific group of people in a specific time at a specific place (gosh, where have I heard that phrase before?) Yes, His teachings apply to everyone everywhere across time, but when He walked the earth He was there for the Jews first and that's who He was talking to. They were already under Rome's thumb, and Rome had proven both willing and able on several occasions to squash any rebellion the Israelites could muster. The mere fact that Israel was a vassal state of Rome at this point could legitimately be seen as a sign of His punishment upon Israel for their historic disobedience. So God was allowing the people to be punished but at the same time He was showing them that what was important was not that Israel be the strongest country in the world but the people be right with Him. And don't forget that the 'God of the NT' who, if I read you correctly' you think of as so pacific is in fact the same God who demanded the bloody, protracted and humiliating sacrifice that He demanded of His own Son. It was the only way that people all over the world could be right with Him.Forgive me Chris, but I think you may be unable to get my message because it conflicts with the perfectness of the bible.
If one stops and look at it from an angle that is NOT trying to justify these acts one can see that the God of the OT is unjust.
God has favourites and to preserve genetic purity he tell them to murder and rape? He loves some more than others or is that just what the Jews would tell themselves. Which is the most likely scenario?That's a good point, Rad man. But here's the thing. Chris starts with the notion that it isn't God who has humanly characteristics, but man who has some of God's characteristics. As such, if you try to attack this God's character, he thinks you are wrong in your objections, because it's perfectly acceptable for God to have what humans would see as bad qualities in other humans. That's not good enough for me, but it is good enough for Him. Knowing such, Rad, your questions might be moot. If God's "chosen" people were indeed chosen by THE true God, then who are we as mere small-minded humans to ask why it's so important for them and their line to be preserved over all the other people God supposedly "loved," too, who (out of love?) he ordered the Jews to slaughter and enslave, if possible...
God didn't have a problem hardening Pharaohs heart in Egypt, but he couldn't, in order to avoid war back then, soften the hearts of the men in the right positions to bring peace instead of so many wars. This God is so absent in history, it's ridiculous. At least the actions of a loving God, who cared about the well-being of ALL of humanity, including those who didn't want to do His bidding, anyway.
In my own opinion, God is an uncompromising, contradictory tyrant. But I'm supposed to just accept that because He is God. It is as you say, though, Rad. It also sounds to me that it's simply Jews seeing themselves as the center of the Universe, which is a trait found across the board for many societies.I just wish he could see the irony. A loving God who answers all prayers and loves us all, but loves Jews more, but allowed Jews to keep slaves and were themselves slaved by pharaohs for about 400 years. God then allowed Hitler to murder about 6 million of his chosen people. Clearly only the Jews thought they were the chosen people and because Christianity started with Jews some feel Jews are chosen people.
The Jews were supposed to have believed in Jesus. They did not believe he was the Messiah. They reaped their Karma for that through Hitler. I heard that theory somewhere. Sorry nothing provable.
Are you espousing this theory.... I can't quite believe my eyes. Some people don't believe a guy is the son of god therefore God kills six million of their descendants in the most brutal fashion possible... What a wonderful loving god you have.
Jesus was the Messiah. How could they not accept that..?. They brought the Karma upon themselves. Karma is the law of cause and effect. It is spiritual justice... It provides spiritual boundaries. It tells us how much God cares and how much stake he has in his creation.
It makes sense to me because I believe in Karma... which comes from eastern philosophy.
I feel sorry for people who have been so turned off by what Jesus revealed. Perhaps they completely misunderstand Him.
He said he would return. Do we have to wait until then to find out what he meant by all the "unacceptable or un-understanable" things He said??? " When the student(s ?) is ready the teacher will appear." I wish sooner than later!
God has tremendous faith in mankind. I do not doubt this. He will wait til every last one of us wants to come home. He does not like to see us suffer, Boundaries to guide our free will is what will save us today. Is this one boundary such a horrible boundary? Are these words so evil, Brian In Canada: "Do unto Others as You would have Others do unto You." ?
But before we can follow this precept we need to answer these questions first...
1. Who am I?
2. How do I want to be treated?
Some people can't answer these questions. Especially those who have been forced asleep by false religious doctrines that are created out of (in?) any religion.
Those who killed the four Americans in Egypt for the sake of their " religion" are very lost. They are the very bitter extremists. They do not know reality and they do not know themselves. They were never taught how to play Frisby, I guess.Your karma is coming to bite you in the butt. Justifying Hitler's genocide because God let Jesus die on the cross.
Wow, you figure that God L E T Jesus die on the Cross...?
It was more than that, buddy... He planned for Jesus to be crucified... It was prearranged. Jesus was to be the last sacrificial lamb. "Forgive them they know not what they do!" and then... "It is done": Mission ( as in prearranged) complete. Don't forget Jesus came with a distinct purpose: to set people straight! Why do people not believe in God who sent Jesus to explain the nature of human existence and the ultimate goal of life? He loves us for heavens sake! What is so hard to accept about that???
Read this first
http://atheistpill.blogspot.com/2012/09 … ipped.html
Well, at least you actually read what I write. You still didn't quite get my point, but at least you actually read me.
That is the correct notion.
Answer this question for me, God is our creator. How can man use his law of right or wrong to judge God's character?
Here is a question. Answer me if you can. You love your entire body. Why then do you slice out and throw away {kill) part of your body (that you supposedly love) if is affected by cancer?
Why does God not soften the heart of the Atheist like you to accept Him? Because you don't want that to happen. That is the answer to your argument.
Yes he does not compromise with sin.
No so.
I disagree.
No. You are not supposed to accept the wrong idea of yours. But you need the have the correct idea of God before making your choices.
A group of people who were slave in a foreign land for generations seeing themselves as the center of the universe and come out of the slavery and create such a big religion!! You really think that makes any sense?
Genetic purity has NOTHING to do with it. If you actually read the OT, you find Rahab and Ruth are not only accepted into the fold, they actually are in Jesus' bloodline! And that's no small thing. Talk about diluting the gene pool!
God does not need me to justify anything He's done. I'll admit to finding the cruelty of some of the things the ancient Israelites were told to do rather breath-taking on first read. But if you look at it both from a perspective of history and from a perspective of the Bible fitting together, it makes a lot of sense. You need to bring other factors into consideration, but it still makes sense. That doesn't mean that I think I could have run out and done it if I were there, nor do I think anybody is called upon to perform those same acts now. Separating the "God of the OT" from Jesus or the "God of the NT" is an artificial separation.Keep up the Good Fight, Chris! Reality is what we are after.
Yes, keep fighting, keep the conflict going, forever if you can. Reality will keep showing us the damage and destruction caused by continuous fighting.
I think the genetic part in front of the purity may have been the wrong choice of words. Change that to "spiritual" purity, and then to me his argument is pretty valid. He told them to murder other people simply because they believed other things in a "world" where "free will" is laughably considered.
And what makes you think that this is a very harmless crime? What do you know about the consequences of the contrary?
Your point about genetic purity is solid, I'm not sure that Rad meant that or not. Spiritual purity was extremely important, yes to God, and also to all the other religions as well. Any group that ran roughshod over some other group took it as a sign that their gods were stronger than the gods of whoever they beat. And these people killed, raped and enslaved. Which is why it beggars the imagination that everyone holds God responsible for these things. The fact is that the Israelites did less of it than surrounding groups.
And Rad's argument that God should have ordered His people to jump in a boat and sail off to some uninhabited island is historically false as well. The point of all of it is so that everyone can come to God. If the Israelites had simply isolated themselves from the rest of humanity, not totally unlike the Qumran community, then prophecy could not have been fulfilled and God would have had to choose some other people group to work through.
Plus, when other groups found the Israelites (as they eventually would have) the same things that the Bible records would have happened anyway.
I don't understand everything in the Bible, but what I do understand points to that things had to happen the way they did. God works through history. And a lot of the bad stuff in the Bible (not everything that people consider bad, but a lot of it) happened in spite of what God said, not because of it.
if one is not respecful to others's holy valuable thing , he deserves what happens to him, American soldiers killed many innocent people and babies under the name of peace. most poors around world are muslims because superior counties set colonies in their country and got their language.. God will punish himself the person, it is not religious issue, as a human, respect is the most important thing.
Okay fine, but the people they are attacking are not the people who made the film. They are starting a religious war rather than bringing the makers of the film to justice.
those people who made this film, try to provoke muslims to show them as murder, it is their play, this has been made for years. this scene has been displayed many times, people show their anger by doing it, of course ı dont support them, maybe it is possible way of how much the holy prophet was insulted by them.
were you there while god was telling them to do it?
I saw them reading the Quran. What kind of question was that? Please justify why they are attacking innocent people and destroying the property of those who did not make a film.
to prevent such bad problems, they must learn not to abuse people's sacred religion in not suitable way in their film or etc..
Yes but once again the "they" you are referring to are not the people who created the film. Do Christians attack all muslims for saying Jesus was not God?
"they" that ı refer "film makers" and people who serve for this aim. the person that was killed is sacrifice of American film makers
That is a good way to start a war. Kill an innocent person. Is that what the Quran teaches you?
ı do what quran teaches me, everyone is responsible for what he does, if he does wrong,you cant blame quran for it. there is already war, if they kill you,you can kill them too, you have to protect yourself. how can you know that he was innocent? if quran taught us to kill innocent people,we would be superior powerful countries like America and ısrael. if a real muslim kills your babies or women, then ı can agree with you.
You asked how can I know he was innocent. I know he did not make that film. He is innocent of that. If your Quran is teaching you to kill and you kill, you are correct you can't blame the Quran for your cruelty. It just shows you that your Quran is wrong in it's teaching. Was the person killed trying to kill anyone? If he was well then you can protect yourself, but if not then it's the murder of an innocent person. So because some moron in the U.S. makes a film muslims kill someone on the other side of the world.
Why are we not blaming the person behind the film, instead of someone who had nothing to do with it?
Nope...
Same as many others...Can't see the forest for the treesWhat is the name of the film? I have been ignoring the posts from this thread but it is starting to get interesting. I
I'm just going to randomly reply to someone's comment regarding this subject but it's possible that this who blasphemous film is a red herring. It's fake.
More info:
http://www.infowars.com/is-muhammad-mov … ved-fraud/
I will say that the fact that Middle Eastern muslims, taking the fact that one guy made a video and deciding to paint all of America as feeling exactly the same way and exact revenge, worries me. I'm not one of the End Times Fanatics, but it does fit in with prophecy.
It actually reminds me of an interview I heard back when the Belgian cartoon controversy was breaking in the Middle East. An Imam actually said that he had commissioned cartoons to add to the Belgian ones when they were run in Arabic newspapers that were worse than the actual Belgian ones. He said there was nothing wrong with this and it was not lying.I don't want to speak about Islam. But you want to hold on to the mistake you are making. May be you even know that you are making error. I had presented a link to show God or the does did not advocate murder.
I would also like to add that The Bible does record situations when God tells the Israel people to battle against certain countries and wipe them out. But you don't want to acknowledge that you understand that those instructions were to a
particular people of a particular generation,
during a particular point in time,
in a particular situation,
for a particular purpose.
It is not advocated as a general rule or as a thing that is okay.Does it matter if he only commands murder, rape and slavery sometimes? It must be sad for you to not be one of the chosen people for he only allows them to commit atrocities.
Augustine72, first of all advocating genocide, murder and rape is never good at any time. God is clearly evil and the examples in the Bible explain this without doubt. Secondly, how do know you the people of modern times who commit these acts under the banner of religion are not doing so at Gods command? You dont know this. God could be instructing them to do this, couldn't He? How do you know He is not?
Deleted
You just don't understand the Bible. God will never command such thing and you will know this if you know the nature of God.
No, the Bible does advocate all of those things I mentioned and saying 'These people had to make a life in a very barbaric time and place' is not only horrible but immoral! Under any circumstances genocide and murder are immoral and despicable. There are no exceptions. Only a hateful, insecure, tyrannical and immoral God would command people, such as God commanded Moses, to commit genocide on the Amalaketies - men, women and children - even babies! Here is hate pure and simple and just one example of how the Bible and Christianity is an immoral doctrine. To say this is out of date is false as murder and genocide have been perpetrated under the name of Christianity and religion many, many times since.
Lastly, you posted a graph stating that 35-percent of the world are Christian. I am not sure how accurate that really is but lets say it is accurate. That means 65-percent of the world are NOT Christian. So, you are ineffect stating that 65-percent of the world is incorrect and you are smarter then them because you are Christian? That is the exact same logic you used to attack me. In other words, your argument is pathetically weak."And the Lord said unto Moses, write this for a memorial in a book and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven." (Exodus 17:14). Genocide advocated.
This is not in the context of the history of the times Moses was dealing with. There is no advocaton of killing anybody in this passage. Who were the Ameleks and what did they do? I do not have a Bible at present.
Besides Jesus came with a new way. Why go back to ancient, ancient days. This is like a half fact or more like a tidbit which proves Nuthin' Not even close and absolutely no cigar.Kathryn, it is in context and I suggest you go and read the Bible. Is there any reason why genocide is justified? You mean you believe in God and have never read the Bible? By the way, the New Testmanet is more immoral than the Old and since you have not read the Bible and I have you will either have to blindly believe me (something you have practice in already) or go and read it for yourself, my dear.
Proof, we need proof. This is a writing forum. Many people use it to practice writing. It is not just about spouting whatever we feel like spouting with few words and unsupported statements. Thanks for Nuthin'
Kathryn, I would site more but I do not want to offend you by 'thinking too much' like you mentioned earlier. Go and enjoy your puppies.
I have read the bible of course, but my current one has been borrowed.
BTW
One should not use a condescending tone with one' s reader and then finish off with "my dear." It makes you sound arrogant! (on top of your other endearing qualities) Give me one example of immorality in the New Testament. ONE! A quote in context, including background explanations. Please. I am willing to have my eyes opened if you can. So far they are indeed still closed.
Lol, the New Testament more immoral than the Old Testament?
I asked him for proof, but all he gave was unwelcome flattery.
Oh, I stand corrected. Thanks. I should be up there, hold on..
Yes, the New Testament is far for immoral than the Old Testament. In the Old Testament a man is subject only to the great dictator in the sky during his life. However, a man can escape this horrible servitude of a murderous (Numbers 16 32:36), pathetically jealous (Deut. 6 - 14:15; 13 - 6:10), merciless (Deut. 7:2, 13:15, 19:21, 20:13) who commands his followers to commit genocide and rape ( Leviticus 17-18) by dying. At least in the O.T. you are relieved of this totalitarian, tyrannical authority nightmare with death. At least a man has that.
Not in the New Testament where good ol' Jesus 'meek and mild' (he's not, Matthew 10 14-15, for example) comes along and introduces Hell, which is never introduced in the O.T. Jesus, most wicked man in the Bible. So, not only is one a slave in one's thoughts and actions during one's life, but now one is tormented and threatened with torture in the afterlife. Even worse, to tell children they will go to hell is child abuse (not to mention mutilating their genetalia when they are young and cannot make a decision of their own, but that is getting off topic) An immoral and hideous doctrine! Who else but someone who wishes to be a slave to a cold, heartless master who has you under complete serveillance around the clock; who can convict you thought crime and subject you to his will before your born, during your life and now, thanks to Jesus, after you die. Who would want this for themselves? Only someone who wishes to be a slave - who desires to live under such misery. A celestial North Korea, in fact! This is not love - it is a terrible slave-master relationship of the most immoral sort with a ghastly fate.
Thankfully, God does not exist and none of this invention is true. However, if you want to be a slave to a murderous master and mind controller, it is your right. Just keep your sadistic tendancies out of our schools, public places, laws and foreign affairs. Good luck and all the best!Show us the passage where Jesus speaks of Hell.
Oh, I see you did. I loaned out my Bible, darn it.
Could some one quote it, please? Matthew 10 14-15So just because it is not in the OT does not mean it doesn't exist. First of you need to know the definition of Hell. It is the complete separation from God. I don't think the people in the OT knew this. People think of hell fire and burning but it actually is just the separation of God and everything that is good. Imagine being exposed to the first kind of evil for eternity. When Jesus spoke of hell, He was warning people of the consequence of sin and CHOOSING it. What is God to do with someone who doesn't repent of evil? He has to part with them and that is Hell. Hell is self-inflicted punishment and by taking on the penalty of sin, us sinful people can be forgiven. Do die on behalf on another and take on their sin and punishment is the ultimate act of love.
Where did Jesus tell children they are going to hell? Won't you please provide me for the chapter and verse?
It's sad that you have a warped idea of Jesus. It's due to ignorance and I don't hold that against you.Claire, He said it was Matthew 14 10-11. I have lent out my Bible. Can you quote this passage here? and explain it? I would love to hear your interpretation.
It means that if someone repeatedly refuses to listen to what you say then just leave it and move somewhere else. I have stopped corresponding with many people here on Hubpages because they won't listen no matter how much you reason with them. So why bother?
I don't know the background to what this town supposedly did to make Jesus so angry. I think it is because those people persecuted Jesus' followers because they hated Jesus. That is worse than Sodom and Gomorrah because the wickedness there was not a direct rejection of Jesus. The next verses suggests that the followers of Jesus were arrested and tortured because they witnessed for Jesus.
It doesn't say how Jesus punished the wicked in that town However, nowhere in these passages does it suggest Jesus threatens children with hell.I think it's fair to say that both of you are devoid of reason, and I wonder if you guys live in the same fantasy Universe? You sound as though you are kindred souls.
So, I just read that you think Claire and I are Kindred souls. That is a very interesting observation. She lives in South Africa and I live in LA! How could we be Kindred souls? She is probably about 30 years younger than me as well. She and I have differing view points and experiences in life. So I would have to say you are wrong. As far as I can see she is a lovely person who is concerned about humanity. How can you be so spiteful? Also I see you think we live in the same fairy tale universe. Also that we are devoid of reason. It sounds like you value having Reason and having a sense of Reality. That is a very worthwhile goal in life. I have nothing bad to say against you. But why did you go off on me when I was just trying to comfort Ms. Unitify? I found that very hurtful to me and her.
We are all entitled to our points of view. Thank you.What's your interpretation of Matthew 10: 14-15?
Oh for crying out loud. Do a google search would you?
That was my first thought too lol biblegateway.com Ms Hill all the passages you need in any translation.
She wants to hear my interpretation. You can't google my interpretation.
She continues say she lent out her bible and asks people to look stuff up for her. This time she also asked for you spin.
I only trust my King James Version bible. Who knows what is sent via PC?
I highly recommend Biblegateway.com. You can read it in King James, 21st Century King James, NIV, Common English, and numerous others. You can even have 2 or 3 different translations side by side at the same time. Or, if you really want to get crazy, you can read the OT in the original Hebrew here ... http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInte … _Index.htm
Oh, I really appreciate this information. Thank you.
My idea of Jesus comes directly from the Bible and I dare say he is the wickedness man in the Bible. One of the few Ten Commandments worth know is "Honour thy Mother and Father". Look at these living words of Jesus in the Kings James Version: (Luke 14:26) 'If any man some to me, and hate NOT his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethern, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.' What a wonderful, loving example of morality Jesus is. He even contradicts the holy Ten C.! Really, the wickedness man in the Bible. Such immorality!
By the way, it is "If any man *come* to me, not *some*. My typing error.
Do you have a sense of the truth of life and how we should live to be happy?? I get that you hate the idea of there being a God , already. What should we believe and how should we be?
Just listen to ourselves? Are we wise enough??
For instance, I made a serious mistake in raising my child... I had to be made conscious of what I was doing wrong by someone with more understanding than I had. I did not tune in to my common sense.
Some people do not use common sense. Some people are unconscious of what makes themselves and others truly happy! Without a sense of purpose in life some people would be happy collecting welfare and food stamps, watch their flat screes, drink beer and philosophize all day. or they might be doing amazing things as well.. but anyway all will pass and in the end what will it have all been worth?
I would like it to mean something.
Would you?I know this, I do not get my morals or philisophy of life from the Bible. That would be a huge, horrible mistake considering how evil the book is and the nature of religion. So, I look for happiness and advice in other forms, like art, literature and life experience. A beautifully writtien book like 'Middlemarch' by George Elliott or 'Crime and Punishment' by Dostoyevsky or '1984' by George Orwell is far superior in morality and integrity than anything the Bible or Christianity can offer.
The NT was not written in English. It was written in Greece so this is a translation issue. The Greek AND Hebrew equivalent to hate is love less.
Numerous Greek scholars have added their combined years of study to the discussion to testify that the word “hate” (miseo) in Luke 14:26 does not mean “an active abhorrence,” but means “to love less.” E.W. Bullinger, in his monumental work, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, described the word “hate” in Luke 14:26 as hyperbole. He rendered the word as meaning “does not esteem them less than me” (1968, p. 426). W.E. Vine, the eminent Greek scholar, said the word miseo could carry the meaning of “a relative preference for one thing over another.” He listed Luke 14:26 under this particular definition (1940, p. 198). Lastly, A.B. Bruce, in The Expositor’s Greek Testament, stated that “the practical meaning” of the word “hate” in this verse is “love less” (n.d., p. 575).
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apconte … rticle=781
Here's the Hebrew explanation:
"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26)
Talmudim, 'students' of Jewish rabbis were taught to place their affections for their teachers higher than that for their fathers, for:
"his teacher has priority, for his father brought him into this world, but his teacher, who has taught him wisdom, brings him into the world to come".
But 'hatred'? Surely that is taking loyalty to your teacher too far - even if your teacher is God in human form. For another commandment is that of honouring ones parents - which itself cannot be contradicted. Indeed, this verse in Luke has caused much anguish and pain between zealous Christian sons or daughters and their parents, who believing they were expressing their devotion to Jesus, had no regard or worse still, hatred, for their parents.
But what we have here is another Hebrew problem. Biblical Hebrew lacks the necessary language to exactly define the comparative sense, i.e., 'more than' or 'less than'. Instead it tends to express two things which may be comparatively of different degree like 'first' and 'second' as extremes such as 'first' and 'last'. In this way love and hate whilst appearing as opposites may in fact be related but lesser terms such as 'love more' and 'love less'.
"If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his." (Deuteronomy 21:15-17)
A Jewish man was not allowed to abandon a 'hated' wife's son's rights of inheritance. But more than this, the Deuteronomy passage describes favouritism between two wives, not absolute love and hatred, for the man bears children by both. Hence, different Bible versions struggle with the phrase "hated" and some adopt "unloved" or "disliked", as softer phrases. However, the Hebrew word used in the second phrase is sânê' (Strong’s #8130) which in its more than 140 uses is always translated by 'hate' or by words indicating 'foe' or 'enemy'. Literal versions cannot soften the apparent invective, only an idiomatic understanding or paraphrase can explain the metaphor.
The Hebrew sânê' is the opposite of love which could mean 'non-election'. This contrast is the same in Genesis 29:31 between Leah ('hated' senû’âh from sânê’) and Rachel, who in the previous verse is described as "loved more than Leah", a contrast of degree not of absolute love and hate. Compare also the passages in Deuteronomy 21:15-17 above; 1 Samuel 1:5; Proverbs 30:23; 2 Samuel 19:6; and even Exodus 20:3 which speaks of preferring others gods as equivalent to hating God (cf. Matthew 6:24 on serving God and mammon, loving one and hating the other).
The Jewish midrash on Exodus describes God as hating the angels, and not just the fallen ones. It does not mean he dislikes Michael and Gabriel! It means that he chooses to give man the Torah, rather than the angels:
"By three names is this mount known: The mountain of God, Mount Horeb and Mount Sinai. . . . Why The mountain of God? (Exodus 18:5). Because it was there that God manifested His Godhead. And Sinai? Because [it was on that mount] that God showed that He hates the angels and loves mankind." (Exodus Rabbah 51.8, Soncino edition)
There is actually a Hebrew wordplay here, for Sinai sounds like the Hebrew for hate, although it begins with a different Hebrew letter and may mean 'thorny'. Similarly, Malachi speaks of God's preference for Jacob over Esau:
"... yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau..." (Malachi 1:2-3)
But Esau, like Ishmael instead of Isaac, was not hated absolutely, only "rejected" as the Aramaic targum (paraphrase) prefers to render it. In Aramaic sanah can mean 'to hate' and 'to separate', so the gospels could be saying separate yourselves from your parents if you want to follow me. This is a possible interpretation, but still against Jewish and biblical culture which is very supportive of family. Apart from Jesus' 'separating' and staying behind in the temple when he was younger he was a very dutiful son."
http://www.biblicalhebrew.com/nt/lovehate.htm
Jesus was saying that He must be put first before one's parents. People must love their parents less than Him.
This can be backed up by:
"He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me." (Matthew 10:37)
So be sure to do some research into the Gospels because accusing Jesus of being wicked.
This is not in context. Who were the Ameleks and what did they do? I do not have a bible at present.
Besides. Jesus came with a new way. Why go back to ancient ancient days?You need to read this link
http://atheistpill.blogspot.com/2012/09 … cruel.html
You can put your sword and shield down, I'm not attacking you. And I never said that everyone who sees the world differently than I do doesn't think. That was what you said and what I was pointing out. Let's not get confused.
Again, here, you're throwing around these absolutes like 'under any circumstances' and 'no exceptions'. I don't know how well you know the climate of that point in history, but I don't feel you grasp the situation fully. It's easy to sit in our modern homes, kicked back, arguing in these forums about the moral implications of this and that in ancient history from our comfy chairs. There was no law of the land then outside of the budding civilizations in Sumer and Egypt. You seem to know the story so maybe you'll also recall that the Amalekites repeatedly attacked the Israelites while in the wilderness, attacking them from the rear "smiting the hindmost, all that were feeble behind,". This was no civilized mini-nation of wrongfully accused victims.
And in that age, though I know what is described seems barbaric to you now, there were no jails to hold your attackers or courts to prosecute them. In fact, many wars were fought, many people killed, just so you and I can know the luxuries of safety and security we so casually enjoy now. There was no sitting around a negotiation table finding consensus in that time. The standard procedure amongst all the peoples and budding nations of that age and region, when securing land so that you could protect and keep your people safe from barbaric attacks out in the open, was to kill the men, keep or kill the women, enslave or kill the children.
This was a violent age. And I don't mean a natural progression of violence that's to be expected in a densely populated region of level-headed, good-natured people in the face of inevitable conflict. This age, throughout the 3rd Millennium BC, is noted archaeologically and historically as an incredibly violent time. These nomadic tribes, like the Amalekites, they weren't only written about in the bible. They're spoken of in Egyptian and Arabic texts as well. Egyptian written history begins against the backdrop of a growing desert and the arrival of semetic-speaking nomads. This was the climate that the first human civilizations were born in. Utter turmoil in a lawless, cruel landscape.
And yes, you're right, many people have done truly ugly things in the name of the bible throughout human history. And people have done truly ugly things because they were inspired by a book, Marilyn Manson, or the neighbor's dog. Things like wrongly interpreting ancient passages and speaking about them out of ignorance can incite reactions, for example. That kind of thinking might lead you to make sweeping declarations like saying a third of the world's population doesn't think."This was a violent age' has got to be the worst excuse for the atrocities of the Bible I have ever heard. I'm sorry, there were no unprecedented acts of violence in the 20th Century? The 20th Century is arguably the most violent century in history. How many acts of genocide were perpetrated in the 20th Century? Many! We are still in violent times. What is more, the Bible is rife with God commanded violence. What can someone possible learn that is moralist from stories like this:
(Number 15 32:36) A man is found by chldren to be collecting sticks on the sabbath. The man is confined until it can be decided what should be done with him. 'And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death'. The hapless man was stones to death at the order of God. What a wonderful, loving God this is - he had a man murdered for collecting sticks. Sticks! Its not like the man stole a loaf of bread or raped a woman. The man might have been collecting them to keep himself and his family warm at night. Why murder him for this? What a tale of morality and love! Why didn't God just appear before the man and scare him into not collecting sticks instead of having him murdered in such a barbaric manner? You know, its tales like this that make me wonder if Lucifer isn't the more sane one and wasn't in fact kicked out of heaven for possibly being moral and good. God surely is not!To be fair, it's not proof that God is evil, it's proof that God doesn't exist.
Actually, it is the opposite of what you stated.
No, I think God is evil but it is not proof that he does not exist. I wish it were but it isn't.
Of course it's proof that the bible was written by people and not God. Without the bible you have no Christian God or Muslim God and no Jewish God.
OK, I understand what you mean now. Look, either God does not exist or he is a cruel, murderous, mind-controling tyrant and master.
If He is evil, tyrannic, etc. no one would believe in God at all. End of story. Perhaps we should only study and observe that which is discernible in nature. Brian, do you believe that Mother Nature is like the God you describe? (Actually, now that I think of it, Mother Nature produced Tyrannosaurus Rex and sharks and the worms and parasites in Africa and India. Not to mention flies, mosquitos and cockroaches. and tasmanian devil bats and pythons. In all this discussion we have not mentioned Satan. Maybe Brian is referring to Satan. It is all becoming confusing. Thanks for nothing, Claire.
However, if God of all creation does not exist then either does Satan... so if there is no God, there is no Satan and if there is no good or evil, then we are free of either. I kind of like that. It is also a relief to not believe in anything which is not provable. Thank you for you input, Brian.
But to continue... Strangely enough, there are so many things in my life, that have happened for good, beyond my actual doing... Most of the bad things occurred BECAUSE of my actual doing. Maybe I am bad.
But, there is some invisible force beyond me that is good. That force cannot be logically denied in my life. It just can't. I do not need Jesus to show up, Claire. I am already convinced. You can go to ANY of the prophets and saints of ANY religion and discover that they also found God as an undeniable force in their lives. If everyone could understand this, there would be peace in the world... and the guys in the embassy would still be alive! Christians should not insist that God IS Jesus...Jesus is a Son of God as we ALL are! ( Jesus was the only BEGOTTEN Son)
I also understand why extremist Muslims are so upset with Christianity, because Jesus becomes tyrannic through typical Christian indoctrination.
By reading the NT anyone can see that Jesus taught the Love Of God and furthermore said, Know Ye not that Ye are gods? We are all Drops in the Ocean of God. Jesus came to the Aid of all people, no matter what their religion!
He wants us to Cease with the Separatism and embrace the Oneness of all religions and all people. Every Person on Earth, no matter what their religion, can recognize the invisible force of Goodness that keeps this world and their own lives going in a positive direction.
P.S. Keep in mind that Neither God nor Jesus is tyrannical... I have it from good authority.
So you do believe that God exists, even though you think He's evil?
No, I do not think he exists. God is a childish myth.
If the bible is a fraud, you are left with no word of God. No word of God because there is not God. The bible would be perfect if a perfect loving God wrote it. A perfect loving God did not write the bible therefore you have no God.
How do you go from God not writing to the Bible to that meaning He doesn't exist? Everybody knows people wrote it.
If it's fraud then it can not be inspired by God. Without that inspiration you have nothing.
huh? How could Moses have received the Ten Commandments?
If only people would follow them! I wish the world would read Adultery as: living together and having sex outside of marriage... (as in should not be done) When people accept Adultery in that light the world will be a much better place Boundaries I say! And so did God!!!Modern scholarship has found likely influences in Hittite and Mesopotamian laws and treaties, but is divided over exactly when the Ten Commandments were written and who wrote them. From wikipedia. JS.
Further more do you have any evidence of what God gave Moses? Once again the evidence is not there. Just like the shroud.
It is in the Bible, a book cherished and handed down through the c e n t u r i e s. You can say is was not passed down accurately, but you can also say it is pretty intact. The book is w a y, w a y older than any of us. It is pretty amazing.
We cannot understand much but we can be amazed. What baffles me the most is that stupid story of Noah's Arc! I do not get that one at all. How did they save all the animals??? Or was it an exaggeration. Had to have been, which tells you you have to comprehend the Bible in an un-literal way... some history, some diluted history, some fable... Like Adam and Eve... So Adam and Eve were the first two people and had two sons. Where did the additional females come from? and then all of the sudden there were lots more people in the world begetting all over the place???? They must have been symbols for the first human types, or something. In fact the bible had originally been passed down through poetry and song. But back to Moses. I choose to believe that most of that account was accurate history. But the parting of the red sea happened through nature... that part was exaggertated. So we cannot really know for sure anything about the OT. All we can do is take what will BENEFIT us. or not. Thanks for the topic.Deleted
I think you've got the wrong person again. It was not me that posted the Hate your parents stuff. And I don't appreciate the threats and blasphemy.
I am sorry you can't see the irony though.
Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
Luke (14.26) "Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple."
Ironic.I do not have a problem with Canadians My problem is that you guys are being so disrespectful of the idea of God. Why do you fight so hard against the Idea of God? If we cannot know God directly an idea will have to suffice. Without God either real or imagined how are we to guide our lives? We naturally want what is good, but what about when hurt emotions get the better of us... when the rational part of our beings is NOT in control? And how do we know what the rational is even based on if it is not based on some sort of reality beyond us and connected to that which created us?
You completely edited your comments to (never mind). It's one thing to edit a spelling error, but deleted what YOU after I called you out on it. I believe you were making fun of Brian being from Canada. Claire's done that to me once, I find it dishonest and a deliberate attempt to cover up for yourself and make me look bad. You and Claire have much in common.
Please, Rad Man. I completely refuted you on that one but you don't want to listen.
No Claire, I'm listening, but what your saying makes little sense. She just did the same thing you did. You said you couldn't, but if she can do it you can.
I never said the whole Bible is a fraud. There are corrupt people, who weren't inspired by God, and there are fallible beings who make mistakes who were inspired by God. What matters is the death and resurrection of Jesus which is validated to those who love and know Him.
How do you know the difference? I mean, from reading the Bible it is clear God is evil and Jesus was a wicked mad man. The Bible is not a book to receive morals from, that is for sure.
The Holy Spirit will show you the difference. Yes, "God" is evil in the OT but most Christians will not condemn this God who instructs others to slay a man collecting sticks on the Sabbath. Is this Jesus' Father? Are they not one? How can people equate the two! What God is "guilty" of, Jesus is, too. This is what upsets me. People won't condemn evil in the OT and thus by default say Jesus is guilty of it, too.
I don't know what your definition of wicked is. You have not proven that.
******If the bible is a fraud, you are left with no word of God. No word of God because there is not God. The bible would be perfect if a perfect loving God wrote it. A perfect loving God did not write the bible therefore you have no God.********
Bible is written by man but message in it given by God. Since the message is perfect, God exists.
It's not an excuse, it's history. And I never said anything about the 20th Century lacking in violence, though only advances in technology would warrant any of it being 'unprecedented'. The key to the age of the books of Moses is that violence was a rather new development in human behavior and was for the most part unchecked, especially outside the boundaries of the established city-states of Sumer and Egypt.
Imagine you're a man with a family living in a modest village in Africa. There's a small machete-wielding army in the region attacking every settlement they encounter, killing the men, raping and maiming the women and little girls, and kidnapping and brainwashing the young boys, forcing them to join the slaughter. There is no law, no police to call, no military to protect you. Just you and your family, huddled together, hoping your baby doesn't cry and alert the mob in the nearby woods of your presence.
This kind of thing still happens. It never happened before 5000 BC, but it started not long after, right there in that region, and it continued to happen all the way up to today. The civilizations that you and I came from did it. I'd venture to say there are very few people in these forums now currently inhabiting their native land. We're all living on land taken from somebody else. And when these people were displaced, they weren't kept alive and provided for.
This is what those first books of the bible are describing. These are the same things every other written history of the cultures in that region and beyond are talking about. A fundamental change in human behavior...
Christianity/Judaism ... Adam/Eve eat from tree of knowledge, gaining knowledge and an enhanced self-awareness as the first thing they realized was that they were naked and covered themselves immediately.
Hindu/Indian Mythology ... In Mahabharata it says that the "holy men of old" were "self-subdued and free from envy," suggesting a lack of self-awareness and self-assertion.
Chinese Mythology ... In the 'Age of Perfect Virtue', when human beings fell out of the Tao they developed a new kind of individuality and self-sufficiency. They started to live by their own will rather than the will of nature.
In that age, when humans developed a much more defined sense of self/ego, when the desert was growing and resources were diminishing, there were two kinds of people ... 1) those who managed to carve a niche out for themselves, secure land, dispose of the inhabitants in whatever fashion, and successfully defend their people, 2) those who didn't. The ones that didn't are gone. If you're here, you're here as a direct result of the very same things you find so despicable, like it or not.
The stick-collecting scenario is a whole other matter that had everything to do with preserving the bloodline that the savior was to be born of. This required protection and discipline to ensure the bloodline did not get compromised. If you know the story then you know God did everything from raining mana from heaven and providing water from rocks to striking people down in front of the multitudes to get these people to do what they needed to do. But they had free will and repeatedly failed to do as they were told.
For humans to be what we are, to have our own minds, the ability to create cities and literature and the internet and a rover on Mars, for you to even have the choice whether or not to accept or reject God, this is what had to happen. Because with the capability of creation also comes the capability for destruction. We make our own misery. We're children wielding an incredibly powerful gift, learning how to use it. God is a patient and loving parent who wants us to have this gift, even if it means many will choose to reject Him. To me, that's a tale of morality and love.Well this is completely incorrect. There is archeological evidence of tribal warfare in Australia 35 000 years ago (which you may note is before 5000 BC) .
Right, and you'll find that it's the only example of anything remotely war-like. And you'll also notice that they didn't spawn civilization in the process. They didn't even take ownership of land. The descendants of those very same tribes still to this day find the very idea of land or property ownership completely foreign.
I'm not alone in this....
"it is an error, as profound as it is universal, to think that men in the food-gathering stage were given to fighting... All available facts go to show that the food-gathering stage of history must have been one of perfect peace." - Archaeologist WJ Perry
"For the first ninety-five thousand years after the Homo sapiens Stone Age began (until 4000 BCE), there is no evidence that man engaged in war on any level, let alone on a level requiring organized group violence. There is little evidence of any killing at all." - Anthropologist Richard Gabriel
"As Professor Mark Grimsley noted in his response, human warfare had a starting point in history. Anthropological evidence agrees with him; the vast majority of human history has gone on without tribal, inter-state, organized conflict...or war. Humans have always had a capacity for violence, but we haven’t always had war."
"John Horgan’s post ”Quitting the Hominid Fight Club” expands this idea, showing that human warfare had a starting point around 10,000 years ago. There is evidence of violence in archeology, but organized warfare has a starting point in the fossil record. This means--since homo sapiens evolved between 400,000 and 200,000 years ago--humans have “always” fought wars for about ten percent of our time on this earth. "
http://onviolence.com/?e=481
It's only an assumption that primitive humans were natural fighters or that it's in our in our inherent nature to wage war. War is a very recent development, and it coincides with the emergence of male-dominance, social stratification, and desire for individual possessions. We're not some enlightened society trying to fight the urges of our inner cavemen. War and violence is a symptom of a pronounced ego. Something that happened not that long ago.
It's ironic that passage you posted...Jesus and the disciples broke the Sabbath. I mean, they picked the ears off the corn. How different is that from collecting sticks? When Jesus was confronted about this, He replied, "Sabbath was made for man, not man for Sabbath." Jesus even healed on the Sabbath!
I wonder why God didn't strike Jesus down?Wow!! What a wonderful way of showing us that you are deluded by Satan. That evil spirit is working in you. I don't intend to offend you. But Let me show you.
Eve knew that God had instructed them not to eat of the tree. But Satan came and deceived Eve. He took her attention from God and put it on the fruit of the tree. That is the same thing that "Brian in Canada' is doing. Let me quote here again what he wrote. I am adding some emphasis to show the point.
What about the disobedience to God that he was doing? Where is that featuring in his argument?
'Brian in Canada" (like Satan) has taken all our attention from God and placed it on ----sticks----.
That man was punished for disobedience to God and if you want to know weather that is so big an crime then you need to do some good bible study.
The Koran is just as awful as the Bible, if not worse! At least in the Bible Jesus isn't having sex with a nine year old - he's too busy spreading other kinds of wickedness.
Furthermore, the more I read the Bible and listen to heads of churches speak about God the more I realize what an evil, wicked belief this is. It attacks our very integrity as a human being - the utter ownership of our entire personality. A most wicked doctrine!
Radman, not only did The National Socialists led by Hitler kill 6 million Jews, they had the full support of the Catholic Church before, during and after the atrocities. The Catholic Church have paid close attention to the teachings on the Bible, it is clear.
They also had support from Italia. Anti-jewish propoganda was alive and strong during WW2. My father is law will give anyone his two cents on what he was taught about Jews during WW2. To be fair Italians of that generation were an easy target. They don't/didn't like anyone. The italians of another provence were idiots. The Italians from the next village are cheep. The Italians from the next street are nasty. For anyone to be okay they have to be from the same street and cousins.
Catholics may have supported Hitler but Catholics are not Christians..
http://atheistpill.blogspot.com/2012/09 … ty-is.html
and they did not pay attentions to the Bible. As far as God allowing something..
http://atheistpill.blogspot.com/2012/09 … llows.htmlAs if the (real christians) were helping the jews.
Uhg this atheist pill site is terrible. Some sound logic, terrible grammar and spelling and a complete lack of respect.
Bonhoeffer
That's the very definition of cherry picking your history. Yes, the official church supported Hitler, but not all Christians. And although some Protestant churches went along, Martin Neimoller and Deitrich Boenhoffer started a church that was opposed to Hitler on specifically Biblical grounds.
He was a mini anti christ, NO? a very hateful deluded person... a lesson for us all, And the world did learn from the school of hard knocks he brought forth. We have much more acceptance of each other today. Shame on the "skin heads" grrrr.
May be God wanted to do the justice with the killers of Jesus. When Pilate washed his hands, All the people answered, "Let his blood be on us and on our children!"
I think in this way they brought the curse upon themselves...Can you just feel the forgiveness when people who would not be born for going on two millennium are murdered for the sort of crime of their long gone ancestors?
Is this Christ killer lunacy really still around?my son is dead in the flesh. i believe he was murdered and on this earth i still haven't seen justice. but i have to forgive. God said vengeance is mine. so be it. so i have to have faith and forgive and trust in the lord. Lucky for the killer. cause they don't know what a mother can do when they mess with her kids. the devil children will loose in the end. thank be it to god that he restrains me. or all hell would break loose.
Seems like yesterday we used to rock the show
I laced the track, you locked the flow
So far from hanging on the block for dough
Notorious, they got to know that
Life ain't always what it seem to be
Words can't express what you mean to me
Even though you're gone, we still a team
Through your family, I'll fulfill your dream (that's right)
In the future, can't wait to see
If you open up the gates for me
Reminisce some time, the night they took my friend (uh-huh)
Try to black it out, but it plays again
When it's real, feelings hard to conceal
Cant imagine all the pain I feel
Give anything to hear half your breath
I know you still living your life, after death
Every step I take, every move I make
Every single day, every time I pray
Ill be missing you
Thinking of the day, when you went away
What a life to take, what a bond to break
Ill be missing you
Its extremely hard with you not around (yeah)
Know you in heaven smiling down
Watching us while we pray for you
Every day we pray for you
Till the day we meet again
In my heart is where I'll keep you friend
Memories give me the strength I need to proceed
Strength I need to believe
My thoughts big I just can't define
Wish I could turn back the hands of time
Us in the 6, shop for new clothes and kicks
You and me taking flicks
Making hits, stages they receive you on
I still can't believe you're gone
Give anything to hear half your breath
I know you still living you're life, after death
somebody tell me why
One black morning
When this life is over
I know
Ill see your face
Every night I pray, every step I take
Every move I make, every single day
Every night I pray, every step I take
every day that passes
Every move I make, every single day
is a day that I get closer to seeing you again
Every night I pray, every step I take
[puff] we miss you big... and we wont stop
Every move I make, every single day
and I wont stop, cause we can't stop... that's right
Every night I pray, every step I take
Every move I make, every single day
ill be miss you babeSeems like yesterday we used to rock the show
I laced the track, you locked the flow
So far from hanging on the block for dough
Notorious, they got to know that
Life ain't always what it seem to be
Words can't express what you mean to me
Even though you're gone, we still a team
Through your family, I'll fulfill your dream (that's right)
In the future, can't wait to see
If you open up the gates for me
Reminisce some time, the night they took my friend (uh-huh)
Try to black it out, but it plays again
When it's real, feelings hard to conceal
Cant imagine all the pain I feel
Give anything to hear half your breath
I know you still living your life, after death
Every step I take, every move I make
Every single day, every time I pray
Ill be missing you
Thinking of the day, when you went away
What a life to take, what a bond to break
Ill be missing you
Its extremely hard with you not around (yeah)
Know you in heaven smiling down
Watching us while we pray for you
Every day we pray for you
Till the day we meet again
In my heart is where I'll keep you friend
Memories give me the strength I need to proceed
Strength I need to believe
My thoughts big I just can't define
Wish I could turn back the hands of time
Us in the 6, shop for new clothes and kicks
You and me taking flicks
Making hits, stages they receive you on
I still can't believe you're gone
Give anything to hear half your breath
I know you still living you're life, after death
somebody tell me why
One black morning
When this life is over
I know
Ill see your face
Every night I pray, every step I take
Every move I make, every single day
Every night I pray, every step I take
every day that passes
Every move I make, every single day
is a day that I get closer to seeing you again
Every night I pray, every step I take
[puff] we miss you big... and we wont stop
Every move I make, every single day
and I wont stop, cause we can't stop... that's right
Every night I pray, every step I take
Every move I make, every single day
ill be miss you babeSeems like yesterday we used to rock the show
I laced the track, you locked the flow
So far from hanging on the block for dough
Notorious, they got to know that
Life ain't always what it seem to be
Words can't express what you mean to me
Even though you're gone, we still a team
Through your family, I'll fulfill your dream (that's right)
In the future, can't wait to see
If you open up the gates for me
Reminisce some time, the night they took my friend (uh-huh)
Try to black it out, but it plays again
When it's real, feelings hard to conceal
Cant imagine all the pain I feel
Give anything to hear half your breath
I know you still living your life, after death
Every step I take, every move I make
Every single day, every time I pray
Ill be missing you
Thinking of the day, when you went away
What a life to take, what a bond to break
Ill be missing you
Its extremely hard with you not around (yeah)
Know you in heaven smiling down
Watching us while we pray for you
Every day we pray for you
Till the day we meet again
In my heart is where I'll keep you friend
Memories give me the strength I need to proceed
Strength I need to believe
My thoughts big I just can't define
Wish I could turn back the hands of time
Us in the 6, shop for new clothes and kicks
You and me taking flicks
Making hits, stages they receive you on
I still can't believe you're gone
Give anything to hear half your breath
I know you still living you're life, after death
somebody tell me why
One black morning
When this life is over
I know
Ill see your face
Every night I pray, every step I take
Every move I make, every single day
Every night I pray, every step I take
every day that passes
Every move I make, every single day
is a day that I get closer to seeing you again
Every night I pray, every step I take
[puff] we miss you big... and we wont stop
Every move I make, every single day
and I wont stop, cause we can't stop... that's right
Every night I pray, every step I take
Every move I make, every single day
ill be miss you babeI guarantee if that murderess atheists beeash was in my face. she would be on her knees praying to god for forgiveness.
No not my mom. My mom is a pretty decent person. She but a law unto her self. I'll just keep on praying.
Sorry... that would have been quadruple awful. Also that strange response from A Thousand Words was directed toward me. I keep talking about Karma and she does not believe in it. She writes too well to be young, just very bitter. I was suprised she was talking like that to me when all I had done was respond to you. I cannot imagine loosing my child. You are coping with the help coming from the spiritual realm. How could they not get how it helps you? But, she thinks that I have the Fairy tale world. Just steer clear.
God sees to Justice. He does. Your ability to forgive saves not only you.
i hear you. that is why I pray every day. I listen to greg laurie every morning on my way to work. One day at a time. That is how I live my life. Read scripture every day. Love my kids, pray for them cause i know they grieve daily. As most women know , when you give birth, it changes you instantly. When your child dies, it does the same. life and your whole world changes. I did not want to think about God for a year. People would say pray. I was not ready. It was time to morn. When I did, I asked (demanded) where is the better good in his death. I got my answer. Not that this is why he died, but as you KNOW God works everything for the better God. I understand now. I still hurt everyday. I still fight the good fight everyday. I still pray everyday. With out God. I would not be here today. I am at peace in the storm. I still love Jesus, not because i choose to, but because he choose me.
Thank you for sharing. Your strength is inspiring. I was also touched by your poem.
Maybe in your world of fairy tails. Tell that to the millions who suffer unjustly every day. The toddlers who starve to death, the men who got put on death row, were killed, and later found to be innocent, the 100-150,000 sex slaves located in the US alone, etc, etc, Oh wait, in your world, everybody did something to receive what they get, even on a "karmic" level. Little Sally's dad rapes her because her past self was a selfish, self-absorbed materialistic whatever. Your world is a perfect one for not questioning anything in a real world sense because you've got a cosmically large, but just as equally unprovable explanation for everything.
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." - John F. KennedyThat is a wonderful and apt quote. Brilliant thoughts from a brilliant man!
Now isn't that quote much more elegant, realistic, moral and beautiful than the murderous, immoral trechery of the Old Testament and the words of the most wicked man in the Bible, Jesus Christ?
You must be very young. First of all you don't know my world. I don't know where you came up with the idea that I believe "everybody did something to receive what they get, even on a "karmic" level.'' Bad things happen to good people all the time. You would have to be blind not to see that. Further more, you think that you can read a paragraph or two of something I wrote and all of a sudden you know me. You don't know nada about me or who I am or what I believe or thing or what I do in my world. So back off. You don't even know what I believe as a christian because it is obvious you don't know Christ. I will pray for you. A
That was directed toward Kathryn HIll, not you... Unless you guys are the same person, I don't see how you even thought this was a response to anything you've said... You must be looking at the thread version and not the chronological version. Switch it up, it's way easier not to post to the wrong person, or to think that someone posted to you... when they didn't.
Sorry you got offended for nothing?
Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. 7 And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. Philippians 4: 6-8
Paul preached of a Universal Church...That is what Catholic means...Universal...
Paul was a Roman Citizen (place of birth) and a Jewish (Parents) Pharisee.
A few of the Ten Commandments are commendable and definitely worth following, but a lot of them are absolutely ridiculous.
"Thou shalt have no other Gods" more evidence of an insecure and jealous God.
"Thou shalt not make any graven images" Thankfully Christians ignore this or we would be robbed of lovely Christian art.
"Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord God in vain" - aren't there better things in life to worry about?
"Remember to keep the Sabbath Day holy" read Number 15:32 about a moral tale concerning the loving God who has a man murdered for simply collecting sticks on the sabbath. A wonderful moral God we have here!
"Love and honour thy Mother and Father" - I like this one, actually. However, Jesus (the most wicked man in the Bible) said something quite different on Luke 14:26 "If any man come to me, and hate NOT his mother and father, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." What a contradiction to the holy T.C.!*For one's own good: one God... the REAL and invisible spiritual God.
*Icons are not graven images. Christian art is not about worshipping the art at all!
*Taking God's name in vain... If one says "God" , one should have the proper Reverence one has for a Father (Especially who Art in Heaven!!)
*Devotion to God takes 100 % focus. He did not use the word Hate. i just looked it up.
*For one's own good, one day free to contemplate spiritual matters.Yes, he did. King James version. You're not going to change the words of the Bible to suit your argument. Its clear in black and white what Jesus said. You said you didn't have a Bible and now suddenly you do?
"Thou shalt have no other Gods" more evidence of an insecure and jealous God.
"Thou shalt not make any graven images" Thankfully Christians ignore this or we would be robbed of lovely Christian art.
"Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord God in vain" - aren't there better things in life to worry about?
"Remember to keep the Sabbath Day holy" read Number 15:32 about a moral tale concerning the loving God who has a man murdered for simply collecting sticks on the sabbath. A wonderful moral God we have here!
"Love and honour thy Mother and Father" - I like this one, actually. However, Jesus (the most wicked man in the Bible) said something quite different on Luke 14:26 "If any man come to me, and hate NOT his mother and father, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." What a contradiction to the holy T.C.!*********"Thou shalt have no other Gods" more evidence of an insecure and jealous God.***********
Yes He is a jealous God. You obviously don't understand what that means.
******Thou shalt not make any graven images" Thankfully Christians ignore this or we would be robbed of lovely Christian art.*******
So what is the problem you have with that commandment.
**********"Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord God in vain" - aren't there better things in life to worry about? ************
You don't believe that a God exists so you think that commandment is useless. But a God exists and violation of this commandment leads you to hell. That's how serious the commandment is.
**********"Remember to keep the Sabbath Day holy" read Number 15:32 about a moral tale concerning the loving God who has a man murdered for simply collecting sticks on the sabbath. A wonderful moral God we have here!*************
You need to read my previous posts to have your ignorance washed away.
**********"Love and honour thy Mother and Father" - I like this one, actually. However, Jesus (the most wicked man in the Bible) said something quite different on Luke 14:26 "If any man come to me, and hate NOT his mother and father, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." What a contradiction to the holy T.C.!**********
You just don't understand the scripture. That is the simple and plain fact. If you find Jesus by your rotten standards that does nothing to the truth of who is. You can keep believing whatever you want. In the end you reach hell don't say God sent you there.
Kathryn, I only site from King James Version of the Bible. It was given to me from a Catholic priest who is a friend of my fathers.
Jesus did come to earth in the flesh. He was crucified, His body laid in a tomb, and He left the tomb. People didn't believe Him then when He was here in the flesh. If He comes back every other Friday, many will not believe. There is history to prove that Jesus was crucified and on the 3rd day His tomb was emptying. There were many eye witnesses.
As I had devotion just now I thought
1) Do atheist believe there is NO god OR
2) God is irrelevant
I've noticed that many people are able to paraphrase the Bible which means they have read/heard something about it. If it is baloney, why even refer to it?
Peace and love!They want to prove that there is no God. They think the Bible proves there is no God at all. It is a better life to not believe in God. It is better to not love what cannot be loved because it does not exist. It is better to just love what can be loved. That is o. k., If that is o.k.
Either the BIble is correct or incorrect. There are things we don't understand; however, there are real clear passages. I often think of
Romans 1:20 New International Version (NIV)
20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.Excuse the capitals hubPage editors but I have to say
VOTING UP!Invisible, Eternal and Divine. Manifesting in what has been made! This is called hitting the nail on the head. So many will not get this, will not want to get this. It is so clear, to me though. The proof of God is in everything seen. We have no excuse to not believe and love God. He loves us! He is us. We just have to realize it. Meditate, Pray. know that heaven is within. There is hope in the words of Jesus... listen and look carefully, quietly and realistically in positivity. He is here now, Claire! I am now finished with writing here, as far as I am concerned Diane, you have freed me from this Forum! Thank You so Much.
Peace and love 2 U 2.
God is evil. Am I supposed to sing the praises of Hitler? No. Well,why should I sing the praises of God? Both Hitler and God commanded people to commit genocide. The only difference is that Hitler is real and God is a childish myth.
Brian so you do believe there is a God. So you are not an atheist ... right? But you believe God is evil. How can God be evil and a childish myth at the same time?
One must pretend to go along with those who believe in childish myths as if the myth were real. It's like discussing Santa with a child.
Or the Tooth Fairy. There is as much evidence that Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy exist as there is any of the axis of evil Gods: Christianity, Islam or Judaism.
So Troubled Man, God is not really evil because there is no God?
Does the Pope make the world safe for pedophiles?
Well he certainly is putting his best effort in.
Rev. Benedict Groeschel
“Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him,” Father Groeschel, now 79, said in the interview. “A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer.”
He added that he was “inclined to think” that priests who were first-time abusers should not be jailed because “their intention was not committing a crime.”Rad, this is deplorable, yes. BUT, be fair. Fr. Benedict Groeschel is NOT the Pope. He alone is responsible for the statements he makes - not the leadership of the Church.
Yes, he is not the Pope, but he is directed by the Pope. Do you really want to get into what the Pope has done to prevent pedophile either before or after he became Pope? Let's see, well for starters he has himself set up as the head of a country with diplomatic immunity and before he became Pope his job was to move pedophiles around so as not to get caught and he did a pretty good job.
So as you can see I have no problem with what the church tries to teach, but a problem with what they do.
Related Discussions
- 56
Research says Atheists are smarter than Theists. What do you think?
by Dattaraj 10 years ago
I have read some articles that suggest Atheists are generally smarter than Theists. Someone shared a link in an Indian Facebook group and Atheists were like; "Theists are dumber because their minds are occupied with fear all the time, and they can't concentrate on studies......." These...
- 28
Theists/Atheists: Can you compliment the opposite belief system?
by M. T. Dremer 10 years ago
Theists/Atheists: Can you compliment the opposite belief system?If you're a theist, what's something positive you could say about atheists? If you're an atheist, what's something positive you could say about theists? Please no sarcastic or passive-aggressive responses.
- 285
How can the Bible be considered proof
by Elizabeth 10 years ago
How can the Bible be considered proofI would say that 8 out of ten times when discussing proof of god with a theist, they quote the Bible. In my perspective, the Bible is the collection of claims about the christian god, not the evidence for it - and all claims require...
- 198
Asking hard questions of Atheists.
by Christina 13 years ago
I have been noticing that Theists are usually stuck with the burdan of proof when it comes to their beliefs. This thread is about asking Atheists what they believe respectfully. It is for theists to get a better understanding of the views of Atheists. Remember the questions being asked are from...
- 16
If scientists found proof that God existed, would you atheists then believe it?
by John Harper 10 years ago
If scientists found proof that God existed, would you atheists then believe it?http://witscience.org/first-scientific-proof-god-found/
- 30
Can only Christians and those who accept Jesus Christ go to heaven?
by Charlie 15 months ago
Can only Christians and those who accept Jesus Christ go to heaven?According to Christianity, only those who have openly accepted Jesus Christ and the Christian faith may go to heaven. If that is the case, what about the African tribe who has never heard of of Jesus? Even if they are good people,...