I got so riled up - yes, irritated - some time ago that I reacted rather impatiently because I find it hard to stomach nonsense most of the time. It's difficult standing fools, so to speak.
The following is one of my time-capsule posts - those that I consider timeless and relevant to current lifestyles and that also qualify as a teaching aid.
This post shows clearly how a devout Christian could allow the sin of anger to cloud his judgment in a meaningful religious debate that may seem incredulous but real.
As you can see below, the question asked of me by somebody online was apparently unbelievable, "Does God exist?"
That type of question and the overwhelming host of negative posts about religion - and Christianity especially - at one particular somewhat close-knit blogging platform at that point in time inspired me to reply whole hog.
The relevant data, in terms of page views since the first of August, 2007, is located below the original title to the post - along with the tags and labels introduced at the time by myself, writing under the pseudonym Bronx, and the contributors. Enjoy the religious debate....
THIS IS FOR ALL THE EDGY ANTI-BIBLE PSEUDO-CHRISTIANS OUT THERE
Bronx posted on Aug 01, 2007 | views: 1682 | Tags: proof, Bible, Book of Jeremiah, evidence God exists, art imitates life, believe, god is you and me, religion, Biblical Truth, belief, jesus is human, there is no god
Are you anti-religion, atheist, and/or what have you? You may get to like this, Christian or Nada!
Hello everyone, the following is up for your contribution but I must ask for controlled thoughts and reasoning in your responses.
Anyway, the long and short of the gist is that there is now concrete - or is it clay-tablet - proof that the Book of Jeremiah was written exactly as the events unfolded: and was not written decades or even centuries later.
This should not be surprising because the Book of Chronicles always seems to end its long listings of events and genealogies with something like, "....the rest of this....can be found in the records of the city of...."
Do you believe in the Bible now, just a little bit, or still working on it?
WHO KNOWS WHAT WILL TURN UP NEXT FROM THE PRICELESS ANCIENT HAUL OF THE BRITISH MUSEUM?
Hello everyone, the following is up for your contribution but I must ask for controlled thoughts and reasoning in your responses.
Anyway, the long and short of the gist is that there is now concrete - or is it clay-tablet - proof that the Book of Jeremiah was written exactly as the events unfolded: and was not written decades or even centuries later.
This should not be surprising because the Book of Chronicles always seems to end its long listings of events and genealogies with something like, "....the rest of this....can be found in the records of the city of...."
Do you believe in the Bible now, just a little bit, or still working on it?
WHO KNOWS WHAT WILL TURN UP NEXT FROM THE PRICELESS ANCIENT HAUL OF THE BRITISH MUSEUM?
Comments
· wordman said on Aug 01, 2007....
Every Religion has it's own Bible and interpretation of it. A word is changed here and there to fit into the belief of that particular religion. So then, what Book is one to read as the true translation?
· Bronx said on Aug 01, 2007....
wordman: hello.....WELCOME TO MY BLOG!
As far as the Bible is concerned, and IMHO, the closest to a 'true translation' is the King James Version (KJV) - primarily because its origin was founded on the Protestant need to bring out the truth in the ancient scrolls, which the Catholic Church had no natural inclination to do or read out loud to anyone's hearing.
As far as the Bible is concerned, and IMHO, the closest to a 'true translation' is the King James Version (KJV) - primarily because its origin was founded on the Protestant need to bring out the truth in the ancient scrolls, which the Catholic Church had no natural inclination to do or read out loud to anyone's hearing.
· wordman said on Aug 01, 2007....
I was leaning toward your response as, I believe, the KJV has no 'religious' affiliation. Thank you, and I will be reading you again. Perhaps, if I have a query or two, to help me along my journey, you wouldn't mind?
· Bronx said on Aug 01, 2007....
wordman: not at all - a query is always welcome here. Till then, cheers.
· beyondtheveil said on Aug 01, 2007....
bronx- I believe the greatest of finds would be that one piece of irrefutable archealogical evidence that Jesus existed. Not for me, because I believe He did. It would be for the many who do not.
I wonder if they have that little piece of clay stored somewhere just waiting to be found.
I wonder if they have that little piece of clay stored somewhere just waiting to be found.
· Bronx said on Aug 01, 2007....
beyond: I think that landmark was achieved last year or so.
· beyondtheveil said on Aug 01, 2007....
bronx- If that is the one I think it is, it was proven a hoax. I saw it on the History channel.
· Bronx said on Aug 01, 2007....
beyond: yes, that's right - it proved to be a hoax: you'd need the original DNA to compare with the one in the tomb, wouldn't you?
BTW, there is no doubt that Jesus existed - the Muslims also acknowledge him in the Quran - but the main issue for doubting Thomases/Thomesses is whether or not he was the son of God!
BTW, there is no doubt that Jesus existed - the Muslims also acknowledge him in the Quran - but the main issue for doubting Thomases/Thomesses is whether or not he was the son of God!
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 01, 2007....
Having faith in God is rewarded more than believing in Him after finding archaeological proof, you know? Jesus said as much to doubting Thomas himself after He was risen from the dead: "Blessed are those who do not see and still believe."
I believe the Koran does not have the full picture. Muhammed gleaned it from the Bible 600 years after Christ, and many claim the final book of the New Testament, Revelation, was written around 100 or so years within Jesus' time. Muhammed brought about a religious revival for the descendants of Ishmael, whom the Bible said was a wild donkey of a man who would be at odds with himself and his brothers and everyone. Many claim this is referring to the entire Arab nation that adheres to Islam, and the small number of which who terrorize the western world.
Jesus did exist, but His divinity is what we really must have faith in! It's best to face Jesus when we die and say we believed by what His believers did and what His Word said, rather than saying we believed in Him only after somebody dug up unmistakable proof.
I believe the Koran does not have the full picture. Muhammed gleaned it from the Bible 600 years after Christ, and many claim the final book of the New Testament, Revelation, was written around 100 or so years within Jesus' time. Muhammed brought about a religious revival for the descendants of Ishmael, whom the Bible said was a wild donkey of a man who would be at odds with himself and his brothers and everyone. Many claim this is referring to the entire Arab nation that adheres to Islam, and the small number of which who terrorize the western world.
Jesus did exist, but His divinity is what we really must have faith in! It's best to face Jesus when we die and say we believed by what His believers did and what His Word said, rather than saying we believed in Him only after somebody dug up unmistakable proof.
· travelr712 said on Aug 01, 2007....
So because the quran references that christ is the prophet of the christians equates to the yeshua existing? If what you are saying is true, then logically that makes the quran a devine document so you should believe everything it says also, and that muhammad is a true 'prophet of the one true god'. There is no proof in either of your statements, so the christian bible is still fully in the realm of belief only.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 01, 2007....
What my point is, is simply this: the Koran does not have the whole story. It speaks of Jesus without recognizing His Divinity, or His Resurrection, two cornerstones of the Christian faith. Without those two characteristics, Jesus is merely a teacher, not the savior of the world. And Jesus Himself said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one can come to the Father (God) except through me." The man's words themselves debunk what Islam says about Him, and makes the Koran less than truthful.
· Bronx said on Aug 01, 2007....
lidstrom82, travelr712: WELCOME TO MY BLOG!
God Himself promised Ishmael's mother that He would make her son the father of ONE NATION when she cried out to Him in the wilderness after Abraham drove them away from his house at his wife's insistence, while having promised previously that Isaac would be the father of MANY NATIONS.
Just as every subsequent branch of knowledge or literature - holy or mundane - draws from or makes reference from a longstanding authority, so did the Quran/Koran make reference to the Bible.
There are many meeting points or unification points among the truly World Religions but most people/believers choose to ignore them.
Isaac and Ishmael were both present at Abraham's burial and Mohammed's/Muhammad's wife had been a Catholic but both sides tend to conveniently forget these facts of life.
Instead, many Muslims/Moslems call Christians 'infidels' who must be tamed/subjugated, while many Christians refer to Muslims/Moslems as 'unbelievers' who would never enter into Heaven, etc.
It's really sad that intolerance and religious bigotry has made many people to live only within their own chosen religious 'boxes' - incapable of looking neither sideways nor backwards.
I've often had cause to speak to the perpetual Bible-carriers that there should come a time in a Christian's life when reading the Bible always should give way to actually doing what is written inside always!
God Himself promised Ishmael's mother that He would make her son the father of ONE NATION when she cried out to Him in the wilderness after Abraham drove them away from his house at his wife's insistence, while having promised previously that Isaac would be the father of MANY NATIONS.
Just as every subsequent branch of knowledge or literature - holy or mundane - draws from or makes reference from a longstanding authority, so did the Quran/Koran make reference to the Bible.
There are many meeting points or unification points among the truly World Religions but most people/believers choose to ignore them.
Isaac and Ishmael were both present at Abraham's burial and Mohammed's/Muhammad's wife had been a Catholic but both sides tend to conveniently forget these facts of life.
Instead, many Muslims/Moslems call Christians 'infidels' who must be tamed/subjugated, while many Christians refer to Muslims/Moslems as 'unbelievers' who would never enter into Heaven, etc.
It's really sad that intolerance and religious bigotry has made many people to live only within their own chosen religious 'boxes' - incapable of looking neither sideways nor backwards.
I've often had cause to speak to the perpetual Bible-carriers that there should come a time in a Christian's life when reading the Bible always should give way to actually doing what is written inside always!
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 01, 2007....
Haha, very true. Living out the Bible is more important than knowing what it says.
God promised that all nations would be blessed, even that of Ishmael. It must be said that if the Bible is true, the Koran doesn't have the whole story. That is just a simple point: anyone who takes Jesus' words seriously in the Bible knows that He doesn't fit into the Koran's description of Him. Making that assessment does not equal intolerance or bigotry. Muslims will get to Heaven the same way anyone else does - professing Christ as savior. Sadly, they face persecution from fellow Muslims for abandoning Islam, excommunicated and threatened with death in many cases according to Islamic law.
You are right, bronx, in that we will get further toward harmony and peace between mankind when we focus on the similarities and the unity we share, instead of harping on the differences. Even though through Ishmael the Arab nation has been at odds with itself and others, God has blessed that nation as well (oil, anyone?). I believe eventually all children of Abraham (Jewish, Christian, Arab alike) will remember God's words and eventually embrace Jesus Christ as the Son of God.
God promised that all nations would be blessed, even that of Ishmael. It must be said that if the Bible is true, the Koran doesn't have the whole story. That is just a simple point: anyone who takes Jesus' words seriously in the Bible knows that He doesn't fit into the Koran's description of Him. Making that assessment does not equal intolerance or bigotry. Muslims will get to Heaven the same way anyone else does - professing Christ as savior. Sadly, they face persecution from fellow Muslims for abandoning Islam, excommunicated and threatened with death in many cases according to Islamic law.
You are right, bronx, in that we will get further toward harmony and peace between mankind when we focus on the similarities and the unity we share, instead of harping on the differences. Even though through Ishmael the Arab nation has been at odds with itself and others, God has blessed that nation as well (oil, anyone?). I believe eventually all children of Abraham (Jewish, Christian, Arab alike) will remember God's words and eventually embrace Jesus Christ as the Son of God.
· kelly said on Aug 02, 2007....
"Blessed are those who do not see and still believe."
Yes, for they are more easily led.
· anonymous said on Aug 02, 2007....
I just can't believe what I am reading. 21st century human beings discussing such "important" subjects as whether Jesus was God, son of God or whatever. Shame on you. With words from books written by people long time ago, you try to prove the existence of something that, should it exist, would be impossible to prove with only words from books written by people long time ago. Man he was. Human like you and me. What else could he possibely have been ? An alien or so ? And God ... does God exist ? Yes : he's you and me, my cat and willowtree. God is just a name invented by people to name all that was and is and ever will be, including conscience, thoughts and dreams and more immaterial things like that. By jove, what am I doing now ? Participating in this nonsense ? Help me, please, Get me out of here ! Namaste !
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 02, 2007....
Hello again, Kelly :)
May I ask what your background is with religion? More specifically, what led you to conclude that religion, or more specifically, Jesus and Christianity, was not true? Or, at least, not for your life?
Anonymous - If you're going to go on a rant, the least you can do is stand by your opinion and make your screenname known :)
What you both must understand is that the Bible explains the danger that Satan presents. It's an enemy no one on Earth is strong enough to overcome. Only the salvation from Jesus Christ gives us power and authority over the devil's workings. Those without it are too often a slave to their own impulses and vices, or at the very least do not acknowledge the God who created them and sustains their life every day. So in effect, it would be easier to follow God with your life than be hoodwinked by the devil. That is a nutshell view of the Christian belief. If there are unseen spiritual forces in this world, it is much better to follow Jesus Christ as a known spiritual power, than to dismiss it all and be oblivious to the spiritual powers that can influence our lives.
If you see a car careening toward you, putting up your windshield sun visor won't make that car go away. It's the same with us and the spiritual world. The Bible says that Christians do not struggle solely against earthly people or authority, but spiritual powers that oppose God.
What does that mean to a realistic, practical person? Not a whole lot. It's a stretch. you know it, and I know it too, because I rejected such stuff for 17 years. But while I think all religion aside from Christianity is misled, I believe knowing Jesus Christ is a relationship, not mere religion. And that's what sets it apart.
May I ask what your background is with religion? More specifically, what led you to conclude that religion, or more specifically, Jesus and Christianity, was not true? Or, at least, not for your life?
Anonymous - If you're going to go on a rant, the least you can do is stand by your opinion and make your screenname known :)
What you both must understand is that the Bible explains the danger that Satan presents. It's an enemy no one on Earth is strong enough to overcome. Only the salvation from Jesus Christ gives us power and authority over the devil's workings. Those without it are too often a slave to their own impulses and vices, or at the very least do not acknowledge the God who created them and sustains their life every day. So in effect, it would be easier to follow God with your life than be hoodwinked by the devil. That is a nutshell view of the Christian belief. If there are unseen spiritual forces in this world, it is much better to follow Jesus Christ as a known spiritual power, than to dismiss it all and be oblivious to the spiritual powers that can influence our lives.
If you see a car careening toward you, putting up your windshield sun visor won't make that car go away. It's the same with us and the spiritual world. The Bible says that Christians do not struggle solely against earthly people or authority, but spiritual powers that oppose God.
What does that mean to a realistic, practical person? Not a whole lot. It's a stretch. you know it, and I know it too, because I rejected such stuff for 17 years. But while I think all religion aside from Christianity is misled, I believe knowing Jesus Christ is a relationship, not mere religion. And that's what sets it apart.
· kelly said on Aug 02, 2007....
"May I ask what your background is with religion? More specifically, what led you to conclude that religion, or more specifically, Jesus and Christianity, was not true? Or, at least, not for your life?"
I'm not sure what you mean by the word "true" here. It seems as though a person named Jesus Christ did in fact once live. That would be true. Christianity does in fact exist. That would be true. What has not been ever demonstrated to be true is that there is indeed some god that started everything and is omniscient, etc.
"But while I think all religion aside from Christianity is misled, I believe knowing Jesus Christ is a relationship, not mere religion. And that's what sets it apart."
How convenient. You weren't, by any chance, brought up as a Christian were you? Someone on the other side of the world could say almost the same sentence as yours, only about Allah instead. And he would also be right.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 02, 2007....
I guess more to the point, what are your views on religion? The reason I ask is to understand where you're coming from. For the record, I became a Christian at age 17. It wasn't fed to me from birth, and based on my experience with some who did grow up in the church, I'm kinda glad I broke the mold. I understand that the region and the family a person is born in or raised around can largely determine what they believe. But I came to the conclusion about religion for me because Jesus is a relationship, not religious customs or hoops to jump through. I also came to that conclusion by looking at other religions, and concluded that they either paraphrase the Bible without as much truth or purpose, or they call for worshipping something or someone that isn't actually worthy of worship. There is obviously more to it than that, but for the sake of space, let's just say my faith is accompanied by seeking answers to pressing questions, not a blind faith that has me play the part of a Lemming walking off a cliff. Man, I loved Lemmings for the Super Nintendo :)
· silverwhisper said on Aug 03, 2007....
i'm just curious why anonymous didn't sign a name.
ed
ed
· Bronx said on Aug 03, 2007....
SW: hi.....some pseudo-Christians probably often need to be anonymous.
Anonymous: actually, Jesus's given name, Emmanuel, which really means 'God with us' or 'God among us', reveals, kind of, the fact that he was more like an 'alien' living on Earth then than just another human being!
IMHO, if these topics are not discussed openly, we would all have our own private/rigid thoughts and would fail to learn from each other or see each other's point of view.
That's why Paul - or was it Peter - noted that the Bible is to be used as a reference for debating and discussing things concerning/relating to the Kingdom of God.
Anonymous: actually, Jesus's given name, Emmanuel, which really means 'God with us' or 'God among us', reveals, kind of, the fact that he was more like an 'alien' living on Earth then than just another human being!
IMHO, if these topics are not discussed openly, we would all have our own private/rigid thoughts and would fail to learn from each other or see each other's point of view.
That's why Paul - or was it Peter - noted that the Bible is to be used as a reference for debating and discussing things concerning/relating to the Kingdom of God.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 03, 2007....
Right on bronx...we need community with other people to survive. And we need open sharing of ideas to keep our ideas and learning fresh and continuous, to keep from closemindedness. It's funny that our Savior was God in human flesh. Great point, Bronx. His very name revealed the nature of His existence with us. If He was true man and true God, which I believe He was, then He was truly of an existence beyond this Earth. You'll also see cars with "NOTW" bumper stickers, that is - Not Of This World - and it refers to being God's children, set apart from the rest of the world to be a light to a place rife with sin. It's not favoritism by God, and it's not holier-than-thou talk from Christians - it is a position of responsibility to bring that blessed truth to everyone, in the hope of bringing the lost into true freedom. The kind of freedom Paul enjoyed in Christ, even as he was chained to a wall in a prison in Rome. Freedom is not just what your legal rights are, or your country's governmental authority; it is knowing that no matter what you experience in life, to live is to know Christ, and to die is to gain the blessed reward of Heaven.
· Bronx said on Aug 03, 2007....
lidstrom: that's great stuff you've said right there.
A Sunday School class I participated in once threw up two questions from the congregation: 'must every Christian go through persecution?' and 'why hasn't God destroyed the world, seeing so much evil unraveling almost daily?'
The latter was from a young college student then; it threw me for a while but then I replied that it was probably because there are still more good people than evil ones alive today - Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because not even TEN 'good' people could be found/named by Abraham, even after including his cousin Lot's family.
On the issue of Christian persecution - yes, every Christian is literally 'born again' to suffer persecution sooner or later because he/she has become a new 'creation' and sees his/her old ways in a new way: from the eyes of a spiritual being shorn of earthly desires.
In fact, by his/her new nature a Christian recognizes neither parent nor sibling when it come to castigating evil or unjust deeds - hence, of course, for example, he/she should be prepared to be shown the way out of the family house, if the others there are resistant to change for the better.
A Sunday School class I participated in once threw up two questions from the congregation: 'must every Christian go through persecution?' and 'why hasn't God destroyed the world, seeing so much evil unraveling almost daily?'
The latter was from a young college student then; it threw me for a while but then I replied that it was probably because there are still more good people than evil ones alive today - Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because not even TEN 'good' people could be found/named by Abraham, even after including his cousin Lot's family.
On the issue of Christian persecution - yes, every Christian is literally 'born again' to suffer persecution sooner or later because he/she has become a new 'creation' and sees his/her old ways in a new way: from the eyes of a spiritual being shorn of earthly desires.
In fact, by his/her new nature a Christian recognizes neither parent nor sibling when it come to castigating evil or unjust deeds - hence, of course, for example, he/she should be prepared to be shown the way out of the family house, if the others there are resistant to change for the better.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 03, 2007....
Great points again, Bronx!
I have learned that to live in Christ is also to share in His sufferings. He says that "in this world you will face many troubles. But take heart! I have overcome the world." So signing up for the Christian jubilee, as it were, isn't just putting a target on our backs for the devil or humanity to persecute us with. That is part of it, because we face that scorn BECAUSE of Christ. Yet if He overcame death itself, paving the way for us to live freely as a child and friend of God, then not even torture and death can tear away the faith of a Christian. Just as Americans should be grateful for those who fought and died for our country's freedom, Christians must recognize the martyrs that risked everything to spread Jesus' love to remote villages, communist countries, the common people in defiance of the roman catholic church, the chief priests of New Testament times, empires such as the Romans, or even their neighborhood. Such faith is to be commended.
As for the evil in the world, God promised Noah - and us - that He would never again seek total destruction of the human race, and that promise is signified by a rainbow which appears after the rain. It's interesting that the Bible explains where rainbows come from and why they exist, but I appreciate it!
So no matter how horrible things get, God will not wipe mankind from the face of the Earth. Jesus as Savior has also sealed that agreement. Too many people criticize the idea of a good God letting things go to Hell down here on Earth, when in reality is is His patience that keeps us from being completely annihilated. He is waiting for the whole world to hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ, that as many hearts will return to Him as are willing, for that is the great reward for all suffering in life.
I have learned that to live in Christ is also to share in His sufferings. He says that "in this world you will face many troubles. But take heart! I have overcome the world." So signing up for the Christian jubilee, as it were, isn't just putting a target on our backs for the devil or humanity to persecute us with. That is part of it, because we face that scorn BECAUSE of Christ. Yet if He overcame death itself, paving the way for us to live freely as a child and friend of God, then not even torture and death can tear away the faith of a Christian. Just as Americans should be grateful for those who fought and died for our country's freedom, Christians must recognize the martyrs that risked everything to spread Jesus' love to remote villages, communist countries, the common people in defiance of the roman catholic church, the chief priests of New Testament times, empires such as the Romans, or even their neighborhood. Such faith is to be commended.
As for the evil in the world, God promised Noah - and us - that He would never again seek total destruction of the human race, and that promise is signified by a rainbow which appears after the rain. It's interesting that the Bible explains where rainbows come from and why they exist, but I appreciate it!
So no matter how horrible things get, God will not wipe mankind from the face of the Earth. Jesus as Savior has also sealed that agreement. Too many people criticize the idea of a good God letting things go to Hell down here on Earth, when in reality is is His patience that keeps us from being completely annihilated. He is waiting for the whole world to hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ, that as many hearts will return to Him as are willing, for that is the great reward for all suffering in life.
· shiningstar said on Aug 03, 2007....
Yeshua ben Joseph was a common name in the times of Jesus. the ben means son of. Son of Joseph. These names of ben and bint, ben, son of, bint, daughter of are still used in Egypt, Arabia and other places.Jesus came to free the people from the prophets and priest that represented Jehovah because he took their freedom to choose how to live their lives away from them. The people were told what to do, how to do it, where to do it and when todo it every moment of their lives. This is not the way to live. It is not natural. If the animals lived this way they would be in the shape that humans find their selves in today. My idea of freedom is not like the pictures seen where hundreds of behinds are up in the air and the face on the floor. Freedom is the bird soaring in the air able to do what he wants to do, go where he wants to go, eat what he wants to eat. He is free and until we are able to free ourselves of these religious teachings we cannot be like the bird. Rather we are like the ostrich. Head in sand butt in air.Easy targets.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 03, 2007....
So in order to attain true freedom, we must do what we need to do at all times, without the religious customs and rigidity? I totally agree. The Gospel of Jesus Christ gives us a real relationship with a real Savior, and Jesus explained what would bring blessing and what would bring judgment. I can follow instruction from a God who gives me limits to keep me safe. If I'm a bird, and I fly straight into a windshield, then freedom doesn't do me much good. There has never been, nor ever will be, anyone like Jesus. He's got my vote!
· shiningstar said on Aug 03, 2007....
And you will have his if you stop separating yourself from him by worshipping him and seeing him as bigger and better than you are. And if you do as he did, live as he lived and accept that you too are god as he said. How will you ever do the greater things that he said you could do if your rearend is up in the air, face on the floor and not up on your feet BEING like him?
· Bronx said on Aug 04, 2007....
lidstrom: yes, I agree with you - but God actually promised not to destroy the world ever again with water.
You may be right in the end though - after all Sodom and Gomorrah had been destroyed with fire and brimstone ('burning sulphur/sulfur').
Heehee - what next for the rest of us leftovers?
You may be right in the end though - after all Sodom and Gomorrah had been destroyed with fire and brimstone ('burning sulphur/sulfur').
Heehee - what next for the rest of us leftovers?
· Bronx said on Aug 04, 2007....
shiningstar: hi....I like your analogies about freedom and flying, hypocrisy and the ostrich.....
Yes, Jesus named us all as his co-heirs in the Kingdom of Heaven, worthy to inherit God's free gift of grace only if we follow his example - not necessarily in his footsteps.
There is a great difference right there. Otherwise, there would be no Yale after Harvard, nor Cambridge after Oxford, etc.
I think the right principle is, 'to each, his own'. Nobody should judge another by his/her faith, diet, appearance, etc.
Separate individual lives working together for the good of all is the ideal - such a pity that the weakness of the flesh and human foibles limit/hamper us sometimes.
If everyone drove a Mercedes Benz, who would drive the other vehicles - or, more bluntly, if everyone was called 'boss', who would answer 'Sir'?
Man was created in God's own image, superior to even the angels - themselves seen only as God's messengers, not like us, God's own children.
Yes, God created us and gave life to us with His breath - and so we all have Him in us, apart from the presence of the Holy Spirit guiding our conscience!
I think that the main point here is that Jesus was telling us indirectly that we can all do much more working together under God's guidance than separately and uncoordinated.
Yes, Jesus named us all as his co-heirs in the Kingdom of Heaven, worthy to inherit God's free gift of grace only if we follow his example - not necessarily in his footsteps.
There is a great difference right there. Otherwise, there would be no Yale after Harvard, nor Cambridge after Oxford, etc.
I think the right principle is, 'to each, his own'. Nobody should judge another by his/her faith, diet, appearance, etc.
Separate individual lives working together for the good of all is the ideal - such a pity that the weakness of the flesh and human foibles limit/hamper us sometimes.
If everyone drove a Mercedes Benz, who would drive the other vehicles - or, more bluntly, if everyone was called 'boss', who would answer 'Sir'?
Man was created in God's own image, superior to even the angels - themselves seen only as God's messengers, not like us, God's own children.
Yes, God created us and gave life to us with His breath - and so we all have Him in us, apart from the presence of the Holy Spirit guiding our conscience!
I think that the main point here is that Jesus was telling us indirectly that we can all do much more working together under God's guidance than separately and uncoordinated.
· shiningstar said on Aug 04, 2007....
Who needs someone to say Sir to? Jesus was directly telling us to follow his example and not follow the laws of Jehovah. If you have never been so shocked by what Jesus taught that you called him a devil, wanted to drag him out of the pulpit found him quilty of blasphemy and wanted to kill him for his beliefs, what he said and was teaching then I suggest that you have never heard what he taught. You have only heard what the religious teachers taught you.
· Bronx said on Aug 06, 2007....
shiningstar: actually, I'm finding it to be a real doozy figuring out on which side of the fence you're on - no offense meant, of course, but are you a Christian?
Jesus never said that we should not follow the laws of Jehovah - he was just showing us how the laws of Jehovah ought to be obeyed/followed.
Jesus never said that we should not follow the laws of Jehovah - he was just showing us how the laws of Jehovah ought to be obeyed/followed.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 06, 2007....
Do you adhere to any religious texts that anchor your position, shining? Because it seems like a mix and match of Christianity and New Age religions that you're professing, as if you created your own religion. Mixing and matching doesn't really help though, because without adhering to one set of beliefs, we could come up with countless pseudo-religious groups that spout their own truths. What this does is dilute the real truth.
· shiningstar said on Aug 07, 2007....
Bronx; I am not a Christian in your sense of that word. I deal in consciousness and Jesus and Jehovah are opposites in consciousness. Jesus did not follow the laws of Jehovah or teach what he taught. If he had done so he would not have been found guilty of blasphemy which is speaking against Jehovah.-----Lidstrom82-----I have read and rewritten all of the Bible many times and I simply discovered something far different in it than what you have yet to find. One does not need a book to know that Jehovah did horrible things and Jesus did not. To mix them together, which to me is proveable, created the confusion that creates all of the talk and Bible quoting. People just cannot seem to admit that when one murders whole nations, has their people makes slaves out of the survivors and creates caste systems that demean people and suppress them they are not wonderful loving gods or people even is it is their god or their people.Jesus called a spade a spade and was murdered for his effort to denounce this unholy god.Peace.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 07, 2007....
Thing is, what if imperfect people did the wicked things that God punished with death? What if wicked people got God's laws wrong and falsely accused and convicted Jesus on false charges. And lastly, what if imperfect people got the Bible wrong, labeled God a bully, didn't recognize Jesus' divinity, and concluded something entirely different from the Bible, which was God's Word passed down to Christians for instructions on living a life worthy of Christ?
I fear that you're in danger of missing the entire point of the Bible, and that doesn't harm other people so much, and it doesn't bother me a great deal, but the reason I persist, shining, is that you stand to lose the most by believing what you do, and I don't want this knowledge to divide you from knowing Christ or having community with believers.
I fear that you're in danger of missing the entire point of the Bible, and that doesn't harm other people so much, and it doesn't bother me a great deal, but the reason I persist, shining, is that you stand to lose the most by believing what you do, and I don't want this knowledge to divide you from knowing Christ or having community with believers.
· shiningstar said on Aug 07, 2007....
Go and look into a mirrow my friend and you will see god. If religion had not created judgement people would be allowed to express their feeling and grow instead of being surpressed and ending up doing ungodly acts that are so popular today. Suppression brings violence and horribleness to all people and we are reaping what we have sown by not learning what Jesus tried to teach us.Love Jesus by being like Jesus and you will not have a problem with any ones beliefs.Allow all people to be who they are, without judgement. Judgement hurts and judgement was not the gift that Jesus gave to the world. Allowing creates peace for do you not also want to be allowed to do what you want to do and believe as you choose to believe? Your brothers and sisters all want the same thing and who are you to say different for them?
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 07, 2007....
God created us in His image, this is true. Rigid rules do incite rebellion if love is not given with those rules. This is true of a teenager breaking curfew, or people rebelling against an oppressive regime.
Judgment is necessary for Jesus Christ, not for us. Jesus said His words would divide households, parent and child, brother and sister. His words are a double edged sword meant for bringing love AND conviction to people.
One of the Bible's uses is to share God's Word with a person to correct them. It is not our place to judge anyone. But then again, if someone is going against God, or believing falsehoods about Him, the Bible is there to set things right. Is that rigid? Only to the person in the wrong.
Judgment is necessary for Jesus Christ, not for us. Jesus said His words would divide households, parent and child, brother and sister. His words are a double edged sword meant for bringing love AND conviction to people.
One of the Bible's uses is to share God's Word with a person to correct them. It is not our place to judge anyone. But then again, if someone is going against God, or believing falsehoods about Him, the Bible is there to set things right. Is that rigid? Only to the person in the wrong.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 07, 2007....
God created us in His image, this is true. Rigid rules do incite rebellion if love is not given with those rules. This is true of a teenager breaking curfew, or people rebelling against an oppressive regime.
Judgment is necessary for Jesus Christ, not for us. Jesus said His words would divide households, parent and child, brother and sister. His words are a double edged sword meant for bringing love AND conviction to people.
One of the Bible's uses is to share God's Word with a person to correct them. It is not our place to judge anyone. But then again, if someone is going against God, or believing falsehoods about Him, the Bible is there to set things right. Is that rigid? Only to the person in the wrong.
Judgment is necessary for Jesus Christ, not for us. Jesus said His words would divide households, parent and child, brother and sister. His words are a double edged sword meant for bringing love AND conviction to people.
One of the Bible's uses is to share God's Word with a person to correct them. It is not our place to judge anyone. But then again, if someone is going against God, or believing falsehoods about Him, the Bible is there to set things right. Is that rigid? Only to the person in the wrong.
· shiningstar said on Aug 07, 2007....
Those are your beliefs not mine. Thank you for sharing them. Love and Peace.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 07, 2007....
They are not merely my beliefs...they are God's words, and I share them with you to show that you may be wrong about your perception of God and His Son Jesus. And if what the Bible says is entirely true, then you can stand to gain EVERYTHING by taking literally God's Word for it.
· shiningstar said on Aug 07, 2007....
You, my friend, stand to gain everything, if you stop believing in the duality of two opposites being one and taking your own power back as Jesus did and refuse to do the will of Jehovah.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 07, 2007....
Speaking from personal experience, I was much more understanding about life, love, and spirituality after Jesus than I was believing in myself.
· shiningstar said on Aug 08, 2007....
But I believe that that is programming. It feels so good to identify with others and share the companionship of those who all believe the same thing. It is this feel good feeling that draws us into religions.. But the truth is that we are born alone, live alone and die alone. It is set up that way because it is always about self, one self in the singular form. The suppression of the self brings about the social ills of societies becuase they do not honor and respect each self. Jesus walked a singular path and bade others to do so. It is not the aloneness it is indeed the power that knows it's own self, has confidence in it's self and create the wonderful things in life. To love Jesus is to love self and if you can find that self love that forgives and understands why you do the things that you have done or felt then you can love all people because you can then understand and love them. Jesus put no one down for anything. It is ironic that religion teaches that he will come back and punish people for what he found no fault with while he was on earth. Love heals all, it is said. Now is the time to try it instead of talking about it. If you can love self you can love anyone and that is the gift of all of the Masters.Peace
· shiningstar said on Aug 08, 2007....
But I believe that that is programming. It feels so good to identify with others and share the companionship of those who all believe the same thing. It is this feel good feeling that draws us into religions.. But the truth is that we are born alone, live alone and die alone. It is set up that way because it is always about self, one self in the singular form. The suppression of the self brings about the social ills of societies becuase they do not honor and respect each self. Jesus walked a singular path and bade others to do so. It is not the aloneness it is indeed the power that knows it's own self, has confidence in it's self and create the wonderful things in life. To love Jesus is to love self and if you can find that self love that forgives and understands why you do the things that you have done or felt then you can love all people because you can then understand and love them. Jesus put no one down for anything. It is ironic that religion teaches that he will come back and punish people for what he found no fault with while he was on earth. Love heals all, it is said. Now is the time to try it instead of talking about it. If you can love self you can love anyone and that is the gift of all of the Masters.Peace
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 08, 2007....
You preach love without accountability that comes from God, from community with other believers, and from Jesus Himself. I'll say again, you say much about Jesus but miss the most important aspects of His being from the Bible.
More to the point, what about your beliefs holds you accountable, shining? If we are truly only to live for the power of self, what keeps you from going down a bad path and believing the wrong thing? After all, you've mixed and matched a few religions it seems like. Which one's theology do you hold yourself to? From what you've said, it sounds like you don't limit yourself to that. But there is a dangerous flaw in not submitted oneself to SOME kind of morality.
I fear you've twisted the words of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He will come to judge according to our own lives. Can you consider the possibility that He will return and find that you've picked and chose what to believe about Him, instead of just trusting Him and God the Father? Or are those consequences something you've avoided? I would urge you to let go of faulty teachings on the Bible that have stripped it of its deeper meanings and put you out of reach of accountability.
More to the point, what about your beliefs holds you accountable, shining? If we are truly only to live for the power of self, what keeps you from going down a bad path and believing the wrong thing? After all, you've mixed and matched a few religions it seems like. Which one's theology do you hold yourself to? From what you've said, it sounds like you don't limit yourself to that. But there is a dangerous flaw in not submitted oneself to SOME kind of morality.
I fear you've twisted the words of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He will come to judge according to our own lives. Can you consider the possibility that He will return and find that you've picked and chose what to believe about Him, instead of just trusting Him and God the Father? Or are those consequences something you've avoided? I would urge you to let go of faulty teachings on the Bible that have stripped it of its deeper meanings and put you out of reach of accountability.
· shiningstar said on Aug 09, 2007....
How do you figure that a man of peace and love like Jesus who refused to judge anyone while on earth and taught the people to not judge will return to judge any/every one? That woould be like teaching everyone to feed the poor and doing so ones self as an example lived and then promising to come back and kill all of them. You appear to only know what the relgions teach and want you to know. Accountablitly to a big, mean god off somewhere in the sky is not my idea of accountability. That too is a teaching of religion not from Jesus. Accountability is an everyday thing and we alone judge our selves according to what we know and what we do , say and feel. We will only do what we know and until we grow in knowledge we will keep on doing only what we know. When we grow we do bigger and greater things. Jesus said we sowed and reaped and this is the karmetic justice that is the only righteous justice. Jesus did not advocate killing people or judging them for their lack of knowledge. That would be like a child being killed for what it does not know.
· shiningstar said on Aug 09, 2007....
How do you figure that a man of peace and love like Jesus who refused to judge anyone while on earth and taught the people to not judge will return to judge any/every one? That woould be like teaching everyone to feed the poor and doing so ones self as an example lived and then promising to come back and kill all of them. You appear to only know what the relgions teach and want you to know. Accountablitly to a big, mean god off somewhere in the sky is not my idea of accountability. That too is a teaching of religion not from Jesus. Accountability is an everyday thing and we alone judge our selves according to what we know and what we do , say and feel. We will only do what we know and until we grow in knowledge we will keep on doing only what we know. When we grow we do bigger and greater things. Jesus said we sowed and reaped and this is the karmetic justice that is the only righteous justice. Jesus did not advocate killing people or judging them for their lack of knowledge. That would be like a child being killed for what it does not know.
· shiningstar said on Aug 09, 2007....
How do you figure that a man of peace and love like Jesus who refused to judge anyone while on earth and taught the people to not judge will return to judge any/every one? That woould be like teaching everyone to feed the poor and doing so ones self as an example lived and then promising to come back and kill all of them. You appear to only know what the relgions teach and want you to know. Accountablitly to a big, mean god off somewhere in the sky is not my idea of accountability. That too is a teaching of religion not from Jesus. Accountability is an everyday thing and we alone judge our selves according to what we know and what we do , say and feel. We will only do what we know and until we grow in knowledge we will keep on doing only what we know. When we grow we do bigger and greater things. Jesus said we sowed and reaped and this is the karmetic justice that is the only righteous justice. Jesus did not advocate killing people or judging them for their lack of knowledge. That would be like a child being killed for what it does not know.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 09, 2007....
I admire your perspective on Jesus, at the same time look at what Jesus Himself said in the Bible:
"I have come to set the world on fire, and I wish it were already burning! I have a terrible baptism of suffering ahead of me, and I am under a heavy burden until it is accomplished. Do you think I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I have come to divide people against each other! From now on families will be split apart, three in favor of me, and two against - or two in favor and three against. 'Father will be divided against son and son against father; mother against daughter and daughter against mother; and mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother in law'
Then Jesus turned to the crowd and said, "When you see clouds beginning to form in the West, you say, 'Here comes a shower.' And you are right. When the south wind blows, you say, 'Today will be a scorcher.' And it is. You fools! You know how to interpret the weather signs of the earth and sky, but you don't know how to interpret the present times."
All from Luke chapter 12.
There we have it. Jesus knew His words and ministry would divide families and friends from then on. He also knew that some who appeared so wise were actually ignorant of what was really happening. He goes on to say "And you will perish, too, unless you repent of your sins and turn to God."
Jesus also says this of those who do not know better: "And a servant who knows what the master wants, but isn't prepared and doesn't carry out those instructions, will be severely punished. But someone who does not know, and then does something wrong, will be punished only lightly. When someone has been given much, much will be required in return; and when someone has been entrusted with much, even more will be required."
Thus, the Lord shows mercy to those who have not heard or understood Him, but to those that have heard the truth and do nothing with it, or reject it, or twist it to suit their own philosophy, they will be punished. That is what I'm trying to spare you of, shining. This is not what I'm saying, this is what Jesus said. I'm not saying you stop all your independent thought and attend a church so they tell you how to live. I'm a Christian and I don't even do that! I think for myself, and my personal beliefs about Jesus are what I'm ultimately responsible for.
Jesus also said in the Great Commission: "I have been given ALL authority in heaven and on earth. Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of t his: I am with you always, even to the end of the age."
Jesus was obedient to God, aka the Father. God is not the brute or the bully you believe Him to be, shining. Jesus said so Himself. If you regard Jesus highly, so must you God the Father, AND the Holy Spirit, because that is who Jesus highly regarded in turn.
Further, Jesus says this in Mark: "Go into all the world and preach the Good News to everyone (the Good News being that Jesus has conquered sin and death, and salvation is available to all). Anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved. But anyone who refuses to believe will be condemned."
It's clear as day: there are consequences to rejecting a sovereign God, and believing anything less than this: Jesus is the savior of the world, and He accomplished this by doing God's will.
"I have come to set the world on fire, and I wish it were already burning! I have a terrible baptism of suffering ahead of me, and I am under a heavy burden until it is accomplished. Do you think I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I have come to divide people against each other! From now on families will be split apart, three in favor of me, and two against - or two in favor and three against. 'Father will be divided against son and son against father; mother against daughter and daughter against mother; and mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother in law'
Then Jesus turned to the crowd and said, "When you see clouds beginning to form in the West, you say, 'Here comes a shower.' And you are right. When the south wind blows, you say, 'Today will be a scorcher.' And it is. You fools! You know how to interpret the weather signs of the earth and sky, but you don't know how to interpret the present times."
All from Luke chapter 12.
There we have it. Jesus knew His words and ministry would divide families and friends from then on. He also knew that some who appeared so wise were actually ignorant of what was really happening. He goes on to say "And you will perish, too, unless you repent of your sins and turn to God."
Jesus also says this of those who do not know better: "And a servant who knows what the master wants, but isn't prepared and doesn't carry out those instructions, will be severely punished. But someone who does not know, and then does something wrong, will be punished only lightly. When someone has been given much, much will be required in return; and when someone has been entrusted with much, even more will be required."
Thus, the Lord shows mercy to those who have not heard or understood Him, but to those that have heard the truth and do nothing with it, or reject it, or twist it to suit their own philosophy, they will be punished. That is what I'm trying to spare you of, shining. This is not what I'm saying, this is what Jesus said. I'm not saying you stop all your independent thought and attend a church so they tell you how to live. I'm a Christian and I don't even do that! I think for myself, and my personal beliefs about Jesus are what I'm ultimately responsible for.
Jesus also said in the Great Commission: "I have been given ALL authority in heaven and on earth. Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of t his: I am with you always, even to the end of the age."
Jesus was obedient to God, aka the Father. God is not the brute or the bully you believe Him to be, shining. Jesus said so Himself. If you regard Jesus highly, so must you God the Father, AND the Holy Spirit, because that is who Jesus highly regarded in turn.
Further, Jesus says this in Mark: "Go into all the world and preach the Good News to everyone (the Good News being that Jesus has conquered sin and death, and salvation is available to all). Anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved. But anyone who refuses to believe will be condemned."
It's clear as day: there are consequences to rejecting a sovereign God, and believing anything less than this: Jesus is the savior of the world, and He accomplished this by doing God's will.
· shiningstar said on Aug 09, 2007....
There is a big-g-g-g difference between what you read in the Bible and what it says. When you discover what that means do come back and talk with me. Love and Peace 82
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 09, 2007....
Do you mean, read it until I see the same thing you do? What I quoted was pretty cut and dry, bro. Not sure what you're getting out of those words...what do they say to you?
· shiningstar said on Aug 09, 2007....
The The "good news" was never that Jesus came to save you from what each has created in their lives by their very own personal choices.The "good news" was that Jesus came to teach a truth that would free the people from religious rule. He came to free them from Jehovah and his terribleness. Yes and IF you follow Jesus it will separate you from your family and most everyone else. The Christus path is an alone path and can be shared with no one because it is happening to personal self. Try going ONE DAY without judging anyone, without joining in the criticizm directed at others, not taking sides with anyone, not condemning anyone. People will run from you because all of a sudden you don't have anything to talk about with them because you no longer fit in with them. One does not turn from people just as what happened to Jesus the people turn from you and call you a devil and seek to do away with you. For your comptemplation 82.
· travelr712 said on Aug 10, 2007....
shining - and the catholic church says that the 'good news' is that he came to establish his 'kingdom' on earth, which conveniently, is the catholic church. interesting how one idea can be interpreted so many different ways depending on who's doing the interpreting, isn't it?
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 10, 2007....
Jesus preached the Kingdom of God and made it known to all people, not just the Jew, but also everyone else - the Gentile. The grace of God is not limited to one church or one people, and it certainly isn't limited to inner knowledge and hidden truth inside yourself. It's made plain for all to see in the Bible and that STILL isn't good enough for most people. But that is fully the fault of a flawed human race, not a perfect God.
And shining, community with fellow Christians can actually achieve a lack of judgment, condemnation, gossip, or taking sides. You should try it sometime :)
And shining, community with fellow Christians can actually achieve a lack of judgment, condemnation, gossip, or taking sides. You should try it sometime :)
· shiningstar said on Aug 10, 2007....
Which would a person consider to be good news? I have come to bring you a truth whereas you can learn that there is a power with in you that you can use to create any kind of life that you wish. You can do greater things than manifest food and wine or raise the dead or heal the sick. Which translates into never have to work for food, water or shelter so you would be truly free of that which chains humanity to the corporate, religious and government world. -----Or would the good news be that he came to establish "his kingdom" on earth, as religion, of course so all could bow to him and the leaders of his kingdom. True religious rule with all of the power. That is the dream of all of the religions. They at the top and you at the bottom forever looking up at them and doing their will never your own. Which picture represents the freedom that you would like to live in.?
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 10, 2007....
I'll only answer for myself on this one: I'd rather live for a loving Savior than try to tap an inner power that appeals to my pride and selfishness.
· shiningstar said on Aug 10, 2007....
That is a perfect example of a statement made from a person who is called "pecular" by Jehovah the creator of the "pecular" people. That amounts to his total number of any creations oh except wars, the condemnation of women, caste systems, coveting, murder. Too much to name.Peace
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 10, 2007....
Badmouthing Jehovah is probably the worst thing you could ever do, dude. Bully or not, if God created us all, then calling Him names or accusing Him of doing horrible things - when in fact He was punishing those who REALLY did the horrible things - is probably not the wise thing to do. But to each his own. I respect your search for truth, shining, even if I don't agree with it.
· shiningstar said on Aug 10, 2007....
I repeat, define the words and see who and what fit your definitions.
· Bronx said on Aug 10, 2007....
Whoa....I guess I've missed a lot since the last time I signed on here, haven't I?
lidstrom82, shiningstar, travelr712: hi, everyone.
jidstrom82: I congratulate you on your great spirit as a Christian.
shiningstar: congratulations, too, on your tenacity in your views.
However, even the great Apostle Paul came round in the end - after persecuting the Christians for years!
You seem to hold fast to certain pillars in your views and arguments here. First of all, you believe in the teachings of Jesus but you choose to ignore or appreciate the fact that he is The Christ.
Next, you say that Jesus is blameless in your eyes because he did not judge or condemn anyone - you may have forgotten that it was his criticism of their manner of worship and lifestyle that got them really riled up enough to put a bum rap on him, thorns and all, for blasphemy but actually for embarrassing them in public.
Yes, you are not a Christian, it is obvious - so, how did you come by your ideas expressed here - Scientology or Rosicrucian or something else?
It is important for you to tell us, if only to reassure us all that your aim is not to knock The Church from your position of anonymity - it doesn't really matter but it would also allow others to appreciate where you're coming from, spiritually.
You do not believe in Jehovah, God, or Yahweh and you take Jesus as one of the 'Masters' - your own word above.
That tells me that you do not belong to any faith-based group - you are familiar with a smattering of all the religions in the world!
Please, correct me, if I'm wrong about any of the assumptions made about you.
IMHO, you must belong somewhere, when it comes to matters of faith, because individualism may be great for freedom but a congregation of more than one person will bring you out of your shell - no matter how extroverted and knowledgeable you think you are.....
So, over to you now....
lidstrom82, shiningstar, travelr712: hi, everyone.
jidstrom82: I congratulate you on your great spirit as a Christian.
shiningstar: congratulations, too, on your tenacity in your views.
However, even the great Apostle Paul came round in the end - after persecuting the Christians for years!
You seem to hold fast to certain pillars in your views and arguments here. First of all, you believe in the teachings of Jesus but you choose to ignore or appreciate the fact that he is The Christ.
Next, you say that Jesus is blameless in your eyes because he did not judge or condemn anyone - you may have forgotten that it was his criticism of their manner of worship and lifestyle that got them really riled up enough to put a bum rap on him, thorns and all, for blasphemy but actually for embarrassing them in public.
Yes, you are not a Christian, it is obvious - so, how did you come by your ideas expressed here - Scientology or Rosicrucian or something else?
It is important for you to tell us, if only to reassure us all that your aim is not to knock The Church from your position of anonymity - it doesn't really matter but it would also allow others to appreciate where you're coming from, spiritually.
You do not believe in Jehovah, God, or Yahweh and you take Jesus as one of the 'Masters' - your own word above.
That tells me that you do not belong to any faith-based group - you are familiar with a smattering of all the religions in the world!
Please, correct me, if I'm wrong about any of the assumptions made about you.
IMHO, you must belong somewhere, when it comes to matters of faith, because individualism may be great for freedom but a congregation of more than one person will bring you out of your shell - no matter how extroverted and knowledgeable you think you are.....
So, over to you now....
· shiningstar said on Aug 11, 2007....
Bronx; Nice for you to add to post. I believe the Bible to be the recorded history of the Hebrew people and their god Jehovah.Yahweh is a different god than Jehovah. Pronounced Yea-wee. The name of Jesus was Yeshua ben Joseph. There is much to this story that you have not discovered yet but will come one day. A Christ is one who walks the Christus path and is not the last name of Jesus. I have never said that I do not believe in the Bible. My perspective is extremely different than most. I call a spade a spade and allow trut h to come through the power of perception. If it is "wrong" for one to do it , it is equally "wrong" for another to do the same thing and worse if they are bigger and have all of the power. That is the definition of a bully.Jesus and Jehovah are not one or father and son. Religion created that truth.
· travelr712 said on Aug 12, 2007....
lidstrom - yeshua did not preach to or teach gentiles. he went only to jewish villages around galilee, and dealt only with jews. in fact, when a gentile woman asked for healing for her daughter, he said it was not right to give the food for god's children to the 'dogs', and that he came only for the 'house of isreal', not gentiles. he did, however, heal her daughter because of the mother's faith.
none of the true apostles, the ones who had actually been disciples of him and heard his teachings, and were present at pentecost, thought this 'good news' should be extended to the gentile nations. it was at the council of jerusalem where paul, the actual perveyor of the gospel to the gentiles and not a true apostle, convinced them to include gentiles in the new religion. this council is responsible for the fact that new converts to the religion do not have to undergo actual physical circumcision, like james and peter wanted. these issues were decided by debate among those 'church leaders' at this council, and decreed afterward, not by 'specific revelation' from any god to any of these men. if you want to know the true history and foundation of your faith, look up the council of jerusalem and the council of nicea.
none of the true apostles, the ones who had actually been disciples of him and heard his teachings, and were present at pentecost, thought this 'good news' should be extended to the gentile nations. it was at the council of jerusalem where paul, the actual perveyor of the gospel to the gentiles and not a true apostle, convinced them to include gentiles in the new religion. this council is responsible for the fact that new converts to the religion do not have to undergo actual physical circumcision, like james and peter wanted. these issues were decided by debate among those 'church leaders' at this council, and decreed afterward, not by 'specific revelation' from any god to any of these men. if you want to know the true history and foundation of your faith, look up the council of jerusalem and the council of nicea.
· Bronx said on Aug 13, 2007....
shiningstar: sometimes, not everything is so well cut out and dried - Sunday School lessons are simply indispensible. Try it out sometime - just for 'kicks', if you like.
travelr: I think you've just hit the nail on the head!
travelr: I think you've just hit the nail on the head!
· shiningstar said on Aug 13, 2007....
Yes, I must indeed return to a childhood of sitting in a boring place being told stories of just how bad a "sinner" that I am and if I take absolutely no responsibility for my life but turn it over to "Jesus" I will be saved from my own horribleness by someone who lives far away in the unseen real estate of some place called "heaven". How terrible to teach children that they were born into sin, are sinners for nothing that they have ever done or thought. And you see this as a "good" thing that all children, all people should not miss. How deplorable. Let us teach our children of the wonder of what they are and the miracle of life that they are born into. Let us show them the world of imagination and of creativity. Let us tell them how much we love them and give them all of the uplifting inspiration that they want and need. Let us never shirk our duty to children by making them feel less-than, dirty, stupid, insecure or depressed. Let us show them love and never fail to make them feel loved.
· travelr712 said on Aug 13, 2007....
hey shining, you have successfully descerned the central message of the christian faith! well done! now add to that the fact that no mear 'lay' person can possibly comprehend the 'scriptures', and only the fully trained 'minister' can despense this specific knowledge as to how those 'sinners' should conduct their lives (including how much of their money should be deposited in the offering plates), and you've got a well rounded social program for helping people build larger, more expensive and more populated church buildings, wouldn't you say?
· shiningstar said on Aug 13, 2007....
Indeed I would say, my friend. Yet each to his own. But I disagree that a "lay" person cannot comprehend the scriptures. How much intellect does it take to know that a person who is a self-serving bully is not a man of love, foriveness and compassion? Two stories mixed into one. The old and the new will not mix yet religion did it and no one seems to notice. Peace
· travelr712 said on Aug 13, 2007....
it was not i that said a lay person cannot understand them, it was the church. to the point that for nearly 1400 years, the scriptures were only allowed to be written in latin because it was not a common language, and the only people allowed to read them were those 'approved' by the church, under the pain of death. if you control all the information, you can tell the masses whatever you want and they'll believe you.
· Bronx said on Aug 13, 2007....
shiningstar: let me see if I can make this point from the BIG PICTURE VIEW. It's like this: there are two kinds of parents - those with rebellious kids, and those with obedient kids.
Rebellious kids will always see their parents as monsters, while the odedient ones would usually look on their parents as models to emulate.
Same thing with God and all His creation!
So, what you're doing is not new - even the Prodigal Son returned home to roost once he realized that he was getting nowhere fast in his chosen path.
The message: we shouldn;t be afraid to return into God's protective fold, even when we think we are unworthy or despised by others, whether deservedly or unfairly judged, because God will forgive us EACH time.
All we need to do is ASK for His forgiven.....
Travelr: hi...yes, that was how it was before the Martin Luther phenomenon happened to create Protestantism.
'Babies' in the Christian faith definitely need guidance to prevent misunderstanding certain text because of contextual problems - but, God Himself adds His own meaning to each scriptural reading so that all hearers would understand exactly what each passage means, without an interpreter.
That's the secret of Speaking in Tongues - not the chant-like cacophony of gibberish that some modern/latterday pastors and priests spew out in the absence of any useful memory verse to complete a sermon!
Rebellious kids will always see their parents as monsters, while the odedient ones would usually look on their parents as models to emulate.
Same thing with God and all His creation!
So, what you're doing is not new - even the Prodigal Son returned home to roost once he realized that he was getting nowhere fast in his chosen path.
The message: we shouldn;t be afraid to return into God's protective fold, even when we think we are unworthy or despised by others, whether deservedly or unfairly judged, because God will forgive us EACH time.
All we need to do is ASK for His forgiven.....
Travelr: hi...yes, that was how it was before the Martin Luther phenomenon happened to create Protestantism.
'Babies' in the Christian faith definitely need guidance to prevent misunderstanding certain text because of contextual problems - but, God Himself adds His own meaning to each scriptural reading so that all hearers would understand exactly what each passage means, without an interpreter.
That's the secret of Speaking in Tongues - not the chant-like cacophony of gibberish that some modern/latterday pastors and priests spew out in the absence of any useful memory verse to complete a sermon!
· travelr712 said on Aug 13, 2007....
hmm, so these 'baby christians' who need no interpreter, need someone to interpret the scriptures for them at the beginning so they don't get it wrong, because there's too much danger that they won't believe the 'proper' way?
and if the texts need no interpreter, then why are they not still in their original hebrew and greek forms? in fact, why greek at all when yeshua spoke those words in aramaic? if 'god himself' speaks to the hearers so they understand what the passages mean, why do we need this book at all? can't 'god himself' just as easily say whatever 'he' wants to that person?
and if the texts need no interpreter, then why are they not still in their original hebrew and greek forms? in fact, why greek at all when yeshua spoke those words in aramaic? if 'god himself' speaks to the hearers so they understand what the passages mean, why do we need this book at all? can't 'god himself' just as easily say whatever 'he' wants to that person?
· shiningstar said on Aug 14, 2007....
Would it not make better sense to live our lives as best we can without relgion at all? How confusing it makes it for everyone to be told of a man of love who teaches love, forgiveness and compassion who will come one day and do just the opposite.. Is it any wonder that people live in such pain and confusion??Better to have no religion at all than to continue to teach and live such a duality. Love is known by it's feelings, it's works. Can any one read the OT and the Book of Revelation and feel Love???
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 15, 2007....
travelr/shining: you ask valid questions of the worst of Christianity, but in going further and judging the whole by corrupt Catholicism, or fire-and-brimstone preachers, is a bit like deeming water as bad judging solely by a stagnant bog. You decry the swamp but miss the oceans. The fact that you encourage each other in pointing out "flaws" say more about you than what you're talking about. That's not an insult, but rather it means to say something soured you both to the Word of God. No matter what you believe, it's simple that having a more open view of the Bible will benefit you in the long run.
· travelr712 said on Aug 15, 2007....
lidstrom - how is that different from the fact that almost all 'christian' churches condemn homosexuality? or heterosexual sex outside of marriage? or those who are not 'baptised'? should i continue with the list of items that 'christian' churches indescriminantely 'judge' other groups for?
perhaps if you had a more open view of how those documents were written and compiled, you might benefit in the long run.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 15, 2007....
If by "open view" you mean adopt a skeptical, cynical approach to it, I'm better off taking the Bible at face value.
The Bible is clear in counting homosexuality as a sin. You're right, many churches do take that to mean that being gay is a one-way ticket to hell. But that's not guaranteed - only God knows enough of a person to judge them accurately. Sin is sin, whether it's murder, lying, greed, laziness, excess, sexual promiscuity, whatever. Homosexuality, therefore, isn't a superbad, guaranteed way to the inferno.
Travelr, I understand better than most what you're talking about. I left a church that had been my only Christian experience since age 17, and one of the men I respected most in that denomination stopped just short of condemning me and my wife for having different beliefs on baptism and communion. This was the guy who married us one month before. Two years later, we're still at the same church, but the pastor's beliefs have driven a wedge between him and us.
Keep in mind that nonchristians judge just as much - the Christian church isn't the only source of intolerance, lest we forget.
Love the sinner, but hate their sin...that is a simple thing that many Christians miss. But do not judge Christianity by its worst examples - they come from people who have to answer for their own faith, and their own judgmental ways. There are many more who take their faith seriously, and who strive to love others no matter what their sin is. Because all of us sin and fall short. We can live pretty swell lives without God, that is definitely true - but nothing we do will last, or matter much, if it isn't done for God.
That is what unbelievers often find unacceptable, but were their parents any different in punishing or giving them limits when they grew up? If you hated on your parents, many of them would kick you out of the house, if you didn't leave first. God has the power to turn any of us into a grease spot where we stand for rebelling against Him, but He doesn't. That takes a lot of patience and love - there's plenty of people here on Soulcast that, if given the power, would zap people out of existence if they were in God's shoes.
What I would encourage you both to do is to not make God responsible for bad choices that religious people knowingly make. Further, God punishing those who rebelled the most doesn't make Him a bad guy; he's disciplining as a parent would - or, in the case of rebellious people in the Old Testament, punishing them with death if they oppressed or killed Israel. Again, if only God knows the hearts of men well enough to judge them, He knows better than us who is meant for death and punishment.
I am sorry if you've come across Christians who have judged you or your loved ones for any number of things. It is God's place to judge, not them. Even if some Christians go about it the wrong way, though, they are probably pointing to something that the Bible says is unhealthy for human beings, i.e. homosexuality, greed, sinful pride, idolatry, and so on.
The Bible is clear in counting homosexuality as a sin. You're right, many churches do take that to mean that being gay is a one-way ticket to hell. But that's not guaranteed - only God knows enough of a person to judge them accurately. Sin is sin, whether it's murder, lying, greed, laziness, excess, sexual promiscuity, whatever. Homosexuality, therefore, isn't a superbad, guaranteed way to the inferno.
Travelr, I understand better than most what you're talking about. I left a church that had been my only Christian experience since age 17, and one of the men I respected most in that denomination stopped just short of condemning me and my wife for having different beliefs on baptism and communion. This was the guy who married us one month before. Two years later, we're still at the same church, but the pastor's beliefs have driven a wedge between him and us.
Keep in mind that nonchristians judge just as much - the Christian church isn't the only source of intolerance, lest we forget.
Love the sinner, but hate their sin...that is a simple thing that many Christians miss. But do not judge Christianity by its worst examples - they come from people who have to answer for their own faith, and their own judgmental ways. There are many more who take their faith seriously, and who strive to love others no matter what their sin is. Because all of us sin and fall short. We can live pretty swell lives without God, that is definitely true - but nothing we do will last, or matter much, if it isn't done for God.
That is what unbelievers often find unacceptable, but were their parents any different in punishing or giving them limits when they grew up? If you hated on your parents, many of them would kick you out of the house, if you didn't leave first. God has the power to turn any of us into a grease spot where we stand for rebelling against Him, but He doesn't. That takes a lot of patience and love - there's plenty of people here on Soulcast that, if given the power, would zap people out of existence if they were in God's shoes.
What I would encourage you both to do is to not make God responsible for bad choices that religious people knowingly make. Further, God punishing those who rebelled the most doesn't make Him a bad guy; he's disciplining as a parent would - or, in the case of rebellious people in the Old Testament, punishing them with death if they oppressed or killed Israel. Again, if only God knows the hearts of men well enough to judge them, He knows better than us who is meant for death and punishment.
I am sorry if you've come across Christians who have judged you or your loved ones for any number of things. It is God's place to judge, not them. Even if some Christians go about it the wrong way, though, they are probably pointing to something that the Bible says is unhealthy for human beings, i.e. homosexuality, greed, sinful pride, idolatry, and so on.
· travelr712 said on Aug 15, 2007....
lidstrom - first, thank you for not taking my comments as hostile. i certainly do not, and have not, intended to convey that emotion. i wish to convey that i am as passionate about my beliefs as any 'christian' is about theirs, and i am glad you take this as just a debate of philosophies and ideologies, and not a personal attack on you or your beliefs, any more than i take you and others here calling my choices and beliefs 'sin' as an attack.
that being said, let me say this. if a person becomes a 'christian', they join a particular group. this group has a code of ethics, a social structure, a set of base common 'rules', et al, just as any other human organization has. when said person joins that group, they agree to live by that set of 'rules', if you will. that is just fine for those that are members of that group. if they want to judge and condemn each other for how well they do or do not live by those 'rules', as measured against their 'bylaws' document, then they are performing a correct and necessary function in their group. if a person agrees to live under these 'rules', then they are accepting judgment by these 'rules', and all is right with the world :-)
however
when those in a particular group, who adhere to a particular set of 'rules', try to apply those rules to people outside their group, people that never placed themselves under or accepted the validity of those 'rules', then the people in that group, and thus the group itself, is doing wrong, what is termed in your belief system as a 'sin'. in fact, in your 'bylaws' document, it commands your group not to apply those 'rules' to people outside the group, and not to expect people who have not joined the group to adhere to, or even respect those 'rules'. just as you would not want the rules of the muslims, or the budhists, or the masons applied to your life, and you would not want to be 'judged' by those 'rules'. you would think it wrong and terribly insulting to have it done to you. i.e. 'god says cows are sacred, so if you eat cow meat, you are a 'sinner', or 'god says that women are lesser than men, so a woman must walk 3 paces behind a man'. (i do not adhere to or agree with those 'rules' myself). i'm sure you get my meaning.
so, if 'christians' wish to hold each other to the set of 'rules' that govern their group, that's fine. if that was all they did, there would be as little objection to 'christianity' as there is to masonry. if you wish to think of what i do as a 'sin' by your 'rules', that is your right. however, if you tell me that what i am doing is a 'sin', then expect that i will feel insulted. if you try to stop me from doing what i believe is right because it goes against your 'rules', then you have very much overstepped your bounds.
that being said, let me say this. if a person becomes a 'christian', they join a particular group. this group has a code of ethics, a social structure, a set of base common 'rules', et al, just as any other human organization has. when said person joins that group, they agree to live by that set of 'rules', if you will. that is just fine for those that are members of that group. if they want to judge and condemn each other for how well they do or do not live by those 'rules', as measured against their 'bylaws' document, then they are performing a correct and necessary function in their group. if a person agrees to live under these 'rules', then they are accepting judgment by these 'rules', and all is right with the world :-)
however
when those in a particular group, who adhere to a particular set of 'rules', try to apply those rules to people outside their group, people that never placed themselves under or accepted the validity of those 'rules', then the people in that group, and thus the group itself, is doing wrong, what is termed in your belief system as a 'sin'. in fact, in your 'bylaws' document, it commands your group not to apply those 'rules' to people outside the group, and not to expect people who have not joined the group to adhere to, or even respect those 'rules'. just as you would not want the rules of the muslims, or the budhists, or the masons applied to your life, and you would not want to be 'judged' by those 'rules'. you would think it wrong and terribly insulting to have it done to you. i.e. 'god says cows are sacred, so if you eat cow meat, you are a 'sinner', or 'god says that women are lesser than men, so a woman must walk 3 paces behind a man'. (i do not adhere to or agree with those 'rules' myself). i'm sure you get my meaning.
so, if 'christians' wish to hold each other to the set of 'rules' that govern their group, that's fine. if that was all they did, there would be as little objection to 'christianity' as there is to masonry. if you wish to think of what i do as a 'sin' by your 'rules', that is your right. however, if you tell me that what i am doing is a 'sin', then expect that i will feel insulted. if you try to stop me from doing what i believe is right because it goes against your 'rules', then you have very much overstepped your bounds.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 15, 2007....
Thanks travelr, that was a really great sum-up of where you're coming from. It makes a ton of sense from your perspective and that's cool.
Let me give you a healthy picture of how Christianity works. A Christian is such because they have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It's not how much they tithe, how many ministries they're a part of, their church attendance, or how well they pray out loud in front of others. It's not merely words, it's not going on mission trips, and it's not burning yourself out.
And it certainly isn't making a habit of judging and condemning others.
Here is where it gets VERY dicey, travelr: The Bible explains that God created us and everything around us, so regardless of what we believe, we're all subject to God's law, and since we all fall short of that law, Jesus came and died on the cross to save us from our sins. That is what Christians sometimes don't know what to do with - do they urgently try tell the world about Jesus Christ, that He is the Savior everyone needs whether they know it or not? Do they cram it down people's throats? Do they judge and condemn people because they're prideful and lord the Bible over others in an effort to appear correct and powerful?
Well, what did Jesus do?
He spent all His time teaching others, loving others. He saved a woman who, by Jewish law, should have been put to death from being caught in adultery. He healed more people than the Bible could keep a record of, without extending the amount of pages (and people think the Bible is long now...). Everything He did in His life, even the Crucifixion, was a deliberate act of love for mankind. He did not bicker and argue with the priests of His day, but rather silenced them with Old Testament verses. He loved people by obeying God's Word, and silenced His enemies in the same way. That is the standard by which Christians are measured, and that is a collective group, travelr.
The true issue is what we do with that knowledge. And we must remember that just because some Christians use that knowledge to puff themselves up, that doesn't make that knowledge wrong. If the Bible teaches that all men, white and black, Jew and Gentile, Christian and Muslim, of all nations and all languages, and everyone within this Earth, will one day answer to God after this life, then everyone needs to consider that in their lifetime, no matter who says it or how it comes across in the wrong hands.
Let me give you a healthy picture of how Christianity works. A Christian is such because they have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. It's not how much they tithe, how many ministries they're a part of, their church attendance, or how well they pray out loud in front of others. It's not merely words, it's not going on mission trips, and it's not burning yourself out.
And it certainly isn't making a habit of judging and condemning others.
Here is where it gets VERY dicey, travelr: The Bible explains that God created us and everything around us, so regardless of what we believe, we're all subject to God's law, and since we all fall short of that law, Jesus came and died on the cross to save us from our sins. That is what Christians sometimes don't know what to do with - do they urgently try tell the world about Jesus Christ, that He is the Savior everyone needs whether they know it or not? Do they cram it down people's throats? Do they judge and condemn people because they're prideful and lord the Bible over others in an effort to appear correct and powerful?
Well, what did Jesus do?
He spent all His time teaching others, loving others. He saved a woman who, by Jewish law, should have been put to death from being caught in adultery. He healed more people than the Bible could keep a record of, without extending the amount of pages (and people think the Bible is long now...). Everything He did in His life, even the Crucifixion, was a deliberate act of love for mankind. He did not bicker and argue with the priests of His day, but rather silenced them with Old Testament verses. He loved people by obeying God's Word, and silenced His enemies in the same way. That is the standard by which Christians are measured, and that is a collective group, travelr.
The true issue is what we do with that knowledge. And we must remember that just because some Christians use that knowledge to puff themselves up, that doesn't make that knowledge wrong. If the Bible teaches that all men, white and black, Jew and Gentile, Christian and Muslim, of all nations and all languages, and everyone within this Earth, will one day answer to God after this life, then everyone needs to consider that in their lifetime, no matter who says it or how it comes across in the wrong hands.
· travelr712 said on Aug 15, 2007....
lidstrom - ok, let's take it from your example then. using your 'document', here is the measure of who has authority to 'urgently tell the world', and how to tell who is 'saved' and who is 'condemned':
mark 16:
15He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."19After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. 20Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.
mark 16:
15He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."19After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. 20Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.
that's very straightforward and unambiguous. if a person is a 'believer', and 'ordained' by god to carry this message to the world, then you will know that person has the authority to do so because he/she will 'drink poison and not be harmed, will 'pick up snakes with their hands', they will 'place their hands on sick people and the people will become well'. these are very obvious physical signs of supernatural ability, and the example is given so that humans can tell the difference between those who were 'sent by god', and those who were not, because it finishes by saying that those who were 'ordained', were confirmed by those signs.
now, you and every other 'christian' say that every word of this document is true, and your 'lord' himself in this document told the world how to recognize someone who has been given the authority to 'preach this gospel', in no less compelling terms than that document records the 'lord' condemning adultery, and yet those that do the preaching, and the condemning, do not show these signs. so by this document, they are condemned as non believers, because it clearly states that anyone who 'believes' and is 'baptised', will be confirmed by being vested with these supernatural powers, and anyone who does not have these supernatural powers is condemned. again, this is very straightforward, unambiguous instruction from this document of 'pure, ultimate truth'. so lidstrom, by your document, if you cannot perform these supernatural acts, you are not a 'believer', and you are condemned. if you are not condemned, then these statements by your 'lord' are false. if they are false, then this document is not 'ultimate truth', he is not a diety, and you have no reason, or right, to proclaim this religion to anyone.
extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, lidstrom, and your very own document provides the method of that extraordinary proof. now, when a human comes to me and actually drinks poison and is not harmed, or places their hands on a sick person and that person is supernaturally healed, then i will place my trust in the healer, and believe that they have the authority to subject me to their 'rules'. but as yet, not one single person in at the very least the least 1900 years, has been recorded as displaying any of those powers.
· shiningstar said on Aug 15, 2007....
Perhaps you look in the wrong places for the miracles of healing. They are seen and recorded every day all over the world.
· travelr712 said on Aug 15, 2007....
shining - it does not say in those scriptures that 'people will be miraculously healed as a sign of the power of god', it says 'you will know true believers when they lay hands on sick people and those people are healed'. two entirely different things. again, this document clearly states that if a human is a 'believer' and has been 'baptised', then they will themselves be vested with these supernatural powers, and anyone who does not display these powers is not a believer, and is condemned. if you can somehow show that the words of that document do not say that, i would like to see it.
but let's take your example one step further. if you can change the meaning from 'you will know them by their powers' to 'you will see the power of god by supernatural healing', then you can also change 'anyone who has sex and is not married is an adulterer' to 'anyone who is in love is married in their hearts, and therefore can have all the sex they want'. see how that becomes problematic when you start changing the meaning of the 'scriptures'?
but let's take your example one step further. if you can change the meaning from 'you will know them by their powers' to 'you will see the power of god by supernatural healing', then you can also change 'anyone who has sex and is not married is an adulterer' to 'anyone who is in love is married in their hearts, and therefore can have all the sex they want'. see how that becomes problematic when you start changing the meaning of the 'scriptures'?
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 15, 2007....
Wow travelr, I didn't think my comment was very divisive at all, but you've apparently got the dander up. What you quoted was in fact the Great Commission, in which Jesus commanded His disciples to go to all nations and to spread the Gospel. If you're not actively doing that, you're not going to see those things, are you? :) You won't believe your house is burning down unless you're actually at home. Jesus spoke to them of what signs would accompany them. But you cannot pigeonhole who is saved by what the Great Commission says. For example, the thief on the cross next to Jesus did none of those things while crucified, he only rebuked the other thief mocking Jesus and said, "This man has done nothing wrong." He asked Jesus to remember Him, and Jesus replied, "Surely today you will be with me in paradise." So you see? Miraculous signs are not the only requirement for being a believer. God is neither a liar by your case, nor am I condemned because I haven't spoken in tongues. What about a paraplegic who has barely any muscle control, has a weak immune system, and has trouble speaking...by your example, they'd be screwed: they can't pick up snakes, poison may likely affect them even more than it would a healthy person, they can't speak in tongues, and they can't easily lay hands on people to pray for healing, if at all. Yet all it takes is honest belief in Jesus Christ. The Bible also explains gifts of the Holy Spirit, and these include speaking in tongues, prophecy, and so on. Miraculous signs encouraged the disciples at the start of their ministry, but you're right to a degree: too much of today's church thinks that stuff doesn't happen. Travelr, people get miraculously healed at my church all the time. And if miraculous healing happens by God's power through His people, they won't be sitting around debating with you about it; they'd be in other countries using those gifts! I am continuing to learn about God's power in my own life, and I would hope to grow further into a role of serving God more and more miraculously.
· travelr712 said on Aug 15, 2007....
yes lidstrom, that's exactly my point. by this passage, those that cannot perform those supernatural signs are screwed, including you. there it is, in plain language, in this document that you say everyone should believe. you have to change the meaning of the text in order for it to align with the beliefs you put forth. i'll show you again...
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."
but just for the sake of argument, i'll go along with your statement of 'if you're not actively doing that, you're not going to see it'. let me put that in another way, 'if you're not able to do them, then you should not be preaching the 'gospel' to anyone.
you do have another point, paul does give a list of supernatural powers that those who 'believe' will be vested with, and there is no 'great commission' attached to them, and he also says that it is how you will know a 'true believer'. one that has these supernatural powers. in fact, in another passage, he lists his own supernatural achievements, a snake bite being one of them, to prove his own salvation.
lidstrom, i understand why you would want to change the meanings in this document to fit your personal view of how 'christianity' should function, it is in fact what every 'christian' does, and why there are so many divisions of the church. but here is the problem with doing that. if you can change the meaning from 'and these signs will accompany those who believe' to 'that only applies to those who are actively evangelizing in other countries' then you can change 'anyone who has had sex and is not married is an adulterer' to 'two people who are in love are married in their hearts and can have all the sex they want'. see how that becomes a problem?
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."
but just for the sake of argument, i'll go along with your statement of 'if you're not actively doing that, you're not going to see it'. let me put that in another way, 'if you're not able to do them, then you should not be preaching the 'gospel' to anyone.
you do have another point, paul does give a list of supernatural powers that those who 'believe' will be vested with, and there is no 'great commission' attached to them, and he also says that it is how you will know a 'true believer'. one that has these supernatural powers. in fact, in another passage, he lists his own supernatural achievements, a snake bite being one of them, to prove his own salvation.
lidstrom, i understand why you would want to change the meanings in this document to fit your personal view of how 'christianity' should function, it is in fact what every 'christian' does, and why there are so many divisions of the church. but here is the problem with doing that. if you can change the meaning from 'and these signs will accompany those who believe' to 'that only applies to those who are actively evangelizing in other countries' then you can change 'anyone who has had sex and is not married is an adulterer' to 'two people who are in love are married in their hearts and can have all the sex they want'. see how that becomes a problem?
· Bronx said on Aug 16, 2007....
Well, I can see how some roles have been switched - Travelr has taken over the baton from shining. Ha-ha. You know, God is Love because He stomachs all our nonsense! He gives us the freedom of choice to do and say whatever we like - but He also lets us know what He wants/expects from us and the consequences of doing otherwise. I'll just leave it at that, for now. Next, during Jesus' temptation by the devil, Jesus stated categorically that we can be deceived only when we fail to remember correctly what is in the Holy Scriptures. Travelr, the key phrase in that passage that you missed while trying to confuse the central issues in Christianity is "In My Name". Yes, IN THE NAME OF JESUS! That phrase, when used before an act of healing or any other compassionate act, gives the power to do it successfully - THE DEGREE OF SUCCESS DEPENDING ON THE LEVEL OF THE DOER'S BELIEF. Now, even Jesus Himself agreed that praying and fasting will greatly enhance the potency of a believer's acts of compassion, ON HIS BEHALF, IN HIS NAME. That is why the name 'JESUS' is referred to as 'the name above all other names - invoking it wholeheartedly in times of trouble/need brings instant succor/redemption to the speaker of the words therein.
· Bronx said on Aug 16, 2007....
What's going on now, does anyone know - the full options for text editing have vanished?
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 16, 2007....
Travelr - um, I used other passages of the Bible. How is that changing meaning?
I'm going to be direct here, to make my point clear (and to rhyme unintentionally): You completely overlooked the example of the paraplegic. That person can do none of those things you claim are a requirement of being saved (which you're wrong about, by the way). Does that separate them from the love of God? No! The Bible says so - you took one passage and made a mountain out of a molehill. You are claiming those who can't speak in tongues aren't true believers - and thus you've committed the mistake you accuse me of - changing the meaning.
Remember, Jesus didn't ask to see people speak in tongues or survive poisoning before healing them. To be touched by God is not something that happens after you jump through hoops. I admire the knowledge you have about the Bible in quoting it, but looking at Scripture as a whole, you'll find your theory is debunked by its own words - no changed meanings required.
Besides, Bronx is totally right - those who confess Jesus as Savior don't have to debate about condemnation, do they? We are saved by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ - not by ability to do miraculous signs. Additionally, the Greatest Commandment is to love the lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind. The next is to love one another as ourselves.
That is biblical, travelr. A paraphrase, but not a twisting of words. If the Bible is beyond your grasp of it, that doesn't make it faulty. If you're great at English but suck at math, that doesn't make English "good" and math "evil," though you might think so after bombing a calc test. What I'm trying to tell you with biblical truth is that the grace of God saves us through faith in Christ - and though miraculous signs accompanied the disciples, God does more through people than just the signs listed in the verse you quoted. The love of Christ is what really matters here.
I'm going to be direct here, to make my point clear (and to rhyme unintentionally): You completely overlooked the example of the paraplegic. That person can do none of those things you claim are a requirement of being saved (which you're wrong about, by the way). Does that separate them from the love of God? No! The Bible says so - you took one passage and made a mountain out of a molehill. You are claiming those who can't speak in tongues aren't true believers - and thus you've committed the mistake you accuse me of - changing the meaning.
Remember, Jesus didn't ask to see people speak in tongues or survive poisoning before healing them. To be touched by God is not something that happens after you jump through hoops. I admire the knowledge you have about the Bible in quoting it, but looking at Scripture as a whole, you'll find your theory is debunked by its own words - no changed meanings required.
Besides, Bronx is totally right - those who confess Jesus as Savior don't have to debate about condemnation, do they? We are saved by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ - not by ability to do miraculous signs. Additionally, the Greatest Commandment is to love the lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind. The next is to love one another as ourselves.
That is biblical, travelr. A paraphrase, but not a twisting of words. If the Bible is beyond your grasp of it, that doesn't make it faulty. If you're great at English but suck at math, that doesn't make English "good" and math "evil," though you might think so after bombing a calc test. What I'm trying to tell you with biblical truth is that the grace of God saves us through faith in Christ - and though miraculous signs accompanied the disciples, God does more through people than just the signs listed in the verse you quoted. The love of Christ is what really matters here.
· travelr712 said on Aug 16, 2007....
lidstrom - if you are going to use other evidence to support your claim, such as 'other scriptures', then you should in good conscience submit those references for anyone who wants to be able to cross reference their validity and relevance. i can claim that there are sentences in those documents showing yeshua sending a person straight to the fiery depths when that person did not show signs of supernatural powers to support my interpretation, and you would ask me for chapter and verse. i will also extend that to all the sentences that you reference in those documents as proof of your allegations, and i will pick them out individually if you wish. but keep in mind, i've read those documents from cover to cover more than once, and studied them in depth with trained, professional christian church ordained teachers, the same ones who trained men who hold christian pulpets now.
it seems as if we have begun to debate passages and relevances from those documents, which was not my intent. that has been done for thousands of years by millions of theologians, ministers, lay people, et al, and as yet there is no single interpretation that holds true for everyone. interpretations and applications are still hotly debated throughout the church structure, even to that point that the catholic, christian, greek orthodox and african orthodox churches do not have different canons, yet all claim christianity. that alone could stand as proof that no deity had any involvement in authoring those documents, because if they were written by a perfect deity, they would be perfect documents and there would be no debate whatsoever about their meaning or application, or which were and which were not authored by this deity.
all of your statements in the previous comment align with your particular belief structure, and you use sentences from those documents indiscriminately to prove the validity of those beliefs. but i can show you christian congregations that fervently believe if someone does not speak in tongues, they are not saved, and they have just as much proof from those documents as you have of your claims. you cannot both be right. but both of you believe you are right, and the other is wrong. both of you believe you are lead by 'god' in your beliefs. both of you claim christianity. confusion is not the work of a perfect deity. it is the work of humans.
it seems as if we have begun to debate passages and relevances from those documents, which was not my intent. that has been done for thousands of years by millions of theologians, ministers, lay people, et al, and as yet there is no single interpretation that holds true for everyone. interpretations and applications are still hotly debated throughout the church structure, even to that point that the catholic, christian, greek orthodox and african orthodox churches do not have different canons, yet all claim christianity. that alone could stand as proof that no deity had any involvement in authoring those documents, because if they were written by a perfect deity, they would be perfect documents and there would be no debate whatsoever about their meaning or application, or which were and which were not authored by this deity.
all of your statements in the previous comment align with your particular belief structure, and you use sentences from those documents indiscriminately to prove the validity of those beliefs. but i can show you christian congregations that fervently believe if someone does not speak in tongues, they are not saved, and they have just as much proof from those documents as you have of your claims. you cannot both be right. but both of you believe you are right, and the other is wrong. both of you believe you are lead by 'god' in your beliefs. both of you claim christianity. confusion is not the work of a perfect deity. it is the work of humans.
· travelr712 said on Aug 16, 2007....
my apologies, i meant to say that those churches 'have' different canons. it is late, i worked all day and went to school all night, and i wrote an entry in the other blog where i am debating these issues, so i had a slight slip of the fingers. please forgive me.
· Bronx said on Aug 17, 2007....
travelr: oh, wow....a chink in your armor, at last? Ha-ha.
Seriously though, the Big Picture view is what is important in Christianity - just as lidstrom pointed out above.
Remember that in following the niggling details, we may forget the real issues - my typing error in an earlier comment above, just seen now (lidstrom became 'jidstrom') , does not change his name or who I was referring to at all.
Jesus said as much when he stated that in following every detail of the provisions of the 10 Commandments, the Jews were running the risk of losing sight of the salient points that God wanted us all to observe: Love the Lord thy God with all thy might, heart, and soul; and to love your neighbor as thyself!
There is no condemnation, except for those who do not believe in God, even after hearing and seeing the power of His words and works.
That is exactly why it is never too late to receive God's salvation - even at the point of death or on your death bed.
I rest my case, for now.
Seriously though, the Big Picture view is what is important in Christianity - just as lidstrom pointed out above.
Remember that in following the niggling details, we may forget the real issues - my typing error in an earlier comment above, just seen now (lidstrom became 'jidstrom') , does not change his name or who I was referring to at all.
Jesus said as much when he stated that in following every detail of the provisions of the 10 Commandments, the Jews were running the risk of losing sight of the salient points that God wanted us all to observe: Love the Lord thy God with all thy might, heart, and soul; and to love your neighbor as thyself!
There is no condemnation, except for those who do not believe in God, even after hearing and seeing the power of His words and works.
That is exactly why it is never too late to receive God's salvation - even at the point of death or on your death bed.
I rest my case, for now.
· travelr712 said on Aug 17, 2007....
bronx - i suppose your characterization of my 'following niggling details' is in a way true. i was actually following the points that were made by others' comments and making counterpoints myself, but ok.
i have been debating this subject on 2 blogs for 4 days now, and have successfully showed why it is on faith alone, on pure belief only, that one must take the stories in this document, and the claims of its deistic authorship. there has as yet been no proof offered other than that belief by those who have commented on either blog.
in fact, in the article that you linked to that started this debate, it ends with an old testament history professor in a theological seminary, one who - if your assertions were true would certainly be on your side - stated that this 'find' proves nothing. i submit it here, for your inspection:
'However, Robert Coote, an Old Testament professor at the more liberal San Francisco Theological Seminary, disagrees. Most academics who regard Jeremiah as a polemic, he claims, would concede that it makes use of materials originally written in Nebuchadnezzar's age, so there is no reason for it not to include the name of a minor figure in his court. "The logical fallacy," says Coote, "is to say that this one corroboration makes the whole narrative true and accurate." '
a quote from your own article.
having said that. i will close my participation in this and the other debate. there is nothing more that can be said or gained here, and for my part, i believe i have unintentionally insulted a few people that i respect greatly, one of them being fearing. i am used to a rigorous debating style, and i'm afraid that some who are not can be offended by that style. so i will here and now publicly apologize to anyone i have offended, and ask forgiveness of them for doing so.
i would also like to ask all of the christians to understand something. calling people who do not believe as you do 'sinners' says to them that you believe you are superior to them, that you believe they are inferior and damaged in some way perceptible only to those who 'believe', that their lives are 'lost and hopeless', and that they are fit for nothing other than torment and misery for all eternity. now, if those ideas were applied to you, you would probably feel insulted yourself, would you not? those who do not 'believe', do not necessarily see themselves in that light, and can become very offended at being described in that manor.
thank you all who participated in this debate, and i wish you all a loving and happy life, whatever it is that you believe.
i have been debating this subject on 2 blogs for 4 days now, and have successfully showed why it is on faith alone, on pure belief only, that one must take the stories in this document, and the claims of its deistic authorship. there has as yet been no proof offered other than that belief by those who have commented on either blog.
in fact, in the article that you linked to that started this debate, it ends with an old testament history professor in a theological seminary, one who - if your assertions were true would certainly be on your side - stated that this 'find' proves nothing. i submit it here, for your inspection:
'However, Robert Coote, an Old Testament professor at the more liberal San Francisco Theological Seminary, disagrees. Most academics who regard Jeremiah as a polemic, he claims, would concede that it makes use of materials originally written in Nebuchadnezzar's age, so there is no reason for it not to include the name of a minor figure in his court. "The logical fallacy," says Coote, "is to say that this one corroboration makes the whole narrative true and accurate." '
a quote from your own article.
having said that. i will close my participation in this and the other debate. there is nothing more that can be said or gained here, and for my part, i believe i have unintentionally insulted a few people that i respect greatly, one of them being fearing. i am used to a rigorous debating style, and i'm afraid that some who are not can be offended by that style. so i will here and now publicly apologize to anyone i have offended, and ask forgiveness of them for doing so.
i would also like to ask all of the christians to understand something. calling people who do not believe as you do 'sinners' says to them that you believe you are superior to them, that you believe they are inferior and damaged in some way perceptible only to those who 'believe', that their lives are 'lost and hopeless', and that they are fit for nothing other than torment and misery for all eternity. now, if those ideas were applied to you, you would probably feel insulted yourself, would you not? those who do not 'believe', do not necessarily see themselves in that light, and can become very offended at being described in that manor.
thank you all who participated in this debate, and i wish you all a loving and happy life, whatever it is that you believe.
· Bronx said on Aug 19, 2007....
travelr: bless you....let's just wait for more findings to be unearth from the British Museum, shall we? Cheers.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 20, 2007....
Hey travelr, thanks for the insight...if you want quoted Scriptures, you could just ask nicely :) Of course, life happens and work runs long and it filters into our blog sometimes. That's cool.
I think in effect, you answered a question raised by the Bible's author. I believe it is the inspired Word of God, and I think that His perfect Word isn't the issue - it's imperfect humanity. You're right - confusion is something we bring to the table. Jesus was perfect, yet people just like us crucified Him - don't assume that perfection is flawed somehow, because WE'RE the ones with the flaws.
If the Bible claims everyone is sinful, why does it bother you to be counted amongst them, if you don't ascribe to it? Speaking bluntly, it could be that a part of you knows you're rejecting God, and you're not satisfied with that, AND you're not satisfied with any alternatives that have come up since. Why else would it bother you? It's like you're saying "believe whatever you want, as long as it doesn't involve me in a negative light." God spoke of your condition in the Bible; any Christian who claims to be so must take the Bible seriously, and part of that means that nonchristians are worse off. Can you consider that your real issue is with God?
I think in effect, you answered a question raised by the Bible's author. I believe it is the inspired Word of God, and I think that His perfect Word isn't the issue - it's imperfect humanity. You're right - confusion is something we bring to the table. Jesus was perfect, yet people just like us crucified Him - don't assume that perfection is flawed somehow, because WE'RE the ones with the flaws.
If the Bible claims everyone is sinful, why does it bother you to be counted amongst them, if you don't ascribe to it? Speaking bluntly, it could be that a part of you knows you're rejecting God, and you're not satisfied with that, AND you're not satisfied with any alternatives that have come up since. Why else would it bother you? It's like you're saying "believe whatever you want, as long as it doesn't involve me in a negative light." God spoke of your condition in the Bible; any Christian who claims to be so must take the Bible seriously, and part of that means that nonchristians are worse off. Can you consider that your real issue is with God?
· travelr712 said on Aug 20, 2007....
well lidstrom, i have considered that carefully, and questioned and studied many, many people of many levels of many diverse faiths, and each and every one give me an answer just like the one you gave me. an answer of 'i just don't understand', or 'i'm blinded to the truth and if i would just accept what they are saying, i'd be able to see'.
well, i can say the same to you. if you would just open your eyes and see that your faith is based on nothing but your own beliefs, and there is absolutely no substance to it, then you would stop leading other people down this worthless, empty path, encouraging them to give their money and allegiance to a host of fear and guilt mongers who use the inane concept of some 'invisible overlord' to line their own pockets and egos. if you don't ascribe to this view, why would you be offended to be counted amongst them?
but you see, you would take offense if i said that to you. you would think i've crossed a line. but because you believe this document of yours is 'the absolute authority', you believe it gives you the right to talk exactly that way to me and other 'non christians', who are, by your words, 'worse off than', or 'less than', christians. why would you think that talking to me the way you did would offend me any less? can you consider that this document gives you an excuse to feel superior to and judgmental of others around you?
oh, and if you read my post on my beliefs, you'll find that i have them and am quite comfortable with them. so, you believe what you want to, and i won't judge you for it and call you an arrogant ignoramous, and you let me believe what i want to and don't judge me and call me a worthless sinner. deal?
well, i can say the same to you. if you would just open your eyes and see that your faith is based on nothing but your own beliefs, and there is absolutely no substance to it, then you would stop leading other people down this worthless, empty path, encouraging them to give their money and allegiance to a host of fear and guilt mongers who use the inane concept of some 'invisible overlord' to line their own pockets and egos. if you don't ascribe to this view, why would you be offended to be counted amongst them?
but you see, you would take offense if i said that to you. you would think i've crossed a line. but because you believe this document of yours is 'the absolute authority', you believe it gives you the right to talk exactly that way to me and other 'non christians', who are, by your words, 'worse off than', or 'less than', christians. why would you think that talking to me the way you did would offend me any less? can you consider that this document gives you an excuse to feel superior to and judgmental of others around you?
oh, and if you read my post on my beliefs, you'll find that i have them and am quite comfortable with them. so, you believe what you want to, and i won't judge you for it and call you an arrogant ignoramous, and you let me believe what i want to and don't judge me and call me a worthless sinner. deal?
· shiningstar said on Aug 21, 2007....
Beliefs are a personal thing. Why is everyone expected to believe the same things. Even twins, born at the same time, feel differently about most everything. I rather believe that it is set up this way and what works for one person will not necessarily work for another. There are variations to every belief and each is given the right to believe and live as they choose. Someone else is not wrong because they do not believe as you do. Peace
· Bronx said on Aug 24, 2007....
travrlr, shining: hi, again. I hope no feathers are being ruffled here? Not the intention of this post at all.
Nobody should preach about what they do not understand fully - that was the original premise of this post.
travelr: anchoring your final conclusion on the words of a Catholic priest in a seminary in Frisco is not my idea of a sound argument. If from L.A.? May be better. ha-ha.
Seriously though, the real estate called Jerusalem is a perfect example of shiningstar's last points - three major Abrahamic religions claim it as God's gift to them.
That single act of faith is responsible for all the problems in the Midddle East today.
Now, these followers of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism - active or passive - are spread out all over this Planet Earth and probably make up about three quarters of the world's population.
All of them believe in the existence of the Almighty God! Please read about Ms Madeleine Albright's new book:Albright: Ignore religion 'at our own peril' - CNN.com
At her level of statesmanship and diplomatic attainment and exposure, she is loathe to question God.
Paul and the other Apostles/Disciples were as elite as they come in their own time - yet they believed in the existence and had faith in God.
Are these three sets of people ignorant fools, in your own opinion, travelr/shining?
Nobody should preach about what they do not understand fully - that was the original premise of this post.
travelr: anchoring your final conclusion on the words of a Catholic priest in a seminary in Frisco is not my idea of a sound argument. If from L.A.? May be better. ha-ha.
Seriously though, the real estate called Jerusalem is a perfect example of shiningstar's last points - three major Abrahamic religions claim it as God's gift to them.
That single act of faith is responsible for all the problems in the Midddle East today.
Now, these followers of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism - active or passive - are spread out all over this Planet Earth and probably make up about three quarters of the world's population.
All of them believe in the existence of the Almighty God! Please read about Ms Madeleine Albright's new book:Albright: Ignore religion 'at our own peril' - CNN.com
At her level of statesmanship and diplomatic attainment and exposure, she is loathe to question God.
Paul and the other Apostles/Disciples were as elite as they come in their own time - yet they believed in the existence and had faith in God.
Are these three sets of people ignorant fools, in your own opinion, travelr/shining?
· travelr712 said on Aug 24, 2007....
hmm bronx, i thought the original premise of this post was that somebody had found tangible proof of the validity of the bible on a piece of cuniform tablet. oh, and it wasn't my quote in that conclusion, it was a quote from the article you provided as proof of your assertions. so you only believe the part that supports your claim?
hmm, is it always your nature to take something out of context and make it into an object lesson? i did not say that anyone who believes in a higher power is an ignorant fool. i said i would not call linstrom an arrogant ignoramus if he didn't call me a worthless sinner. a much different concept. but then, christians have to take a sentence here and a sentence there out of context and put them together in order to make their doctrine work, so i'm not surprised by that.
you're right that multiple groups claim jeruselam as a gift from their god. on a side note, they all believe fervently in the validity of their religion, so how do we determine which one is right?
madeline albright is a politician, i would not trust her to state anything truthfully.
aside from the fact that outside the bible and later commentaries, there is absolutely no proof that any of the apostles you mentioned (paul not being an apostle, but that's for another discussion) ever existed, of course i can understand that they believed in these religions. they lived in a theocracy, as did every other culture until the greek and roman democracies were born, and even in those cultures deistic belief was a center point of all training and social order in their lives. it's not just christians, muslims, hebrews or budhists that believe, which is my point to you bronx. each of these religions believe in their own validity, and the folly of every other religion. as i said time and time again, just because the entire world believes something is true, that doesn't mean it actually is true. at one time it was widly believed, and taught by the religious order of the time, that the universe revolved around the earth, until galileo turned his telescope on jupiter and disproved that theory. a majority of the senators in this country believed that starting a war in iraq was a good idea. they almost all now say it was a bad idea. the egyptians had religious texts and doctrines that went back to 10,000 b.c. and centered their culture around those beliefs. do i need to keep listing the things humanity has believed to be true and fought bitterly to justify only to later find out that it was wrong? just because people believe in something that they were taught was true does not make it true. if that, in your mind, makes them ignorant fools, then that is really rather sad bronx. but then, you're taught by your religion to be judgmental, so you come by it honestly.
hmm, is it always your nature to take something out of context and make it into an object lesson? i did not say that anyone who believes in a higher power is an ignorant fool. i said i would not call linstrom an arrogant ignoramus if he didn't call me a worthless sinner. a much different concept. but then, christians have to take a sentence here and a sentence there out of context and put them together in order to make their doctrine work, so i'm not surprised by that.
you're right that multiple groups claim jeruselam as a gift from their god. on a side note, they all believe fervently in the validity of their religion, so how do we determine which one is right?
madeline albright is a politician, i would not trust her to state anything truthfully.
aside from the fact that outside the bible and later commentaries, there is absolutely no proof that any of the apostles you mentioned (paul not being an apostle, but that's for another discussion) ever existed, of course i can understand that they believed in these religions. they lived in a theocracy, as did every other culture until the greek and roman democracies were born, and even in those cultures deistic belief was a center point of all training and social order in their lives. it's not just christians, muslims, hebrews or budhists that believe, which is my point to you bronx. each of these religions believe in their own validity, and the folly of every other religion. as i said time and time again, just because the entire world believes something is true, that doesn't mean it actually is true. at one time it was widly believed, and taught by the religious order of the time, that the universe revolved around the earth, until galileo turned his telescope on jupiter and disproved that theory. a majority of the senators in this country believed that starting a war in iraq was a good idea. they almost all now say it was a bad idea. the egyptians had religious texts and doctrines that went back to 10,000 b.c. and centered their culture around those beliefs. do i need to keep listing the things humanity has believed to be true and fought bitterly to justify only to later find out that it was wrong? just because people believe in something that they were taught was true does not make it true. if that, in your mind, makes them ignorant fools, then that is really rather sad bronx. but then, you're taught by your religion to be judgmental, so you come by it honestly.
· shiningstar said on Aug 25, 2007....
Bronx; You seem to put much faith in the disciples but Jesus kept asking them"do you still not understand". After 3 yrs of one on one teachings with Jesus they still did not get it. They only focused on what their religion had taught them. The power over others. They fought among themselves to see who would sit on the right hand of Jesus and just knew this new world was happening to them now.What Jesus taught they never came close to understanding and the Bible makes this clear if one will look for it. Yet religion made them CEO's of their company but who else would do so after teaching a person for three years and all they could say about them was "do you still not understand?".Go figure---Travelr 712. I do so agree but if you say it enough people believe it is true and I believe that applies to religion and it's 2000 yrs of "teachings". But to undo what has been done does not mean one has to fight over whether it is truth or not one need only reveal what one does know for self and let it go.
· travelr712 said on Aug 25, 2007....
shining - to further your thoughts to bronx, the followers of yeshua after his death expected his return in his lifetime. many left their jobs, their homes, their lives to sit on rooftops and await his return. this put a tremendous strain on the newly formed churches to feed and care for them. that is why paul wrote 'if they do not work, do not let them eat'. an example of how the teachings of yeshua were modified by one who was not even among his disciples for the sake of convenience.
i understand the challenges involved in unraveling 2000 years of teaching and rigid social order. it cannot be done in one lifetime. all that can be done is to establish the truth where before there were lies, and then the next generation will be freed from the tyranny. the entire argument of the validity of the christian religion is based on the assertion that the 'bible' is the 'word of god, and ultimate truth'. show this to be false, or even that they cannot prove this to be true, and they have no basis for their religion, or validity to their arguments.
i understand the challenges involved in unraveling 2000 years of teaching and rigid social order. it cannot be done in one lifetime. all that can be done is to establish the truth where before there were lies, and then the next generation will be freed from the tyranny. the entire argument of the validity of the christian religion is based on the assertion that the 'bible' is the 'word of god, and ultimate truth'. show this to be false, or even that they cannot prove this to be true, and they have no basis for their religion, or validity to their arguments.
· shiningstar said on Aug 25, 2007....
Your "word of God" has so many contradictions how can anyone prove anything by it?? Jeshua ben Joseph was not understood by his disciples and theymissed hie message entirely just as , in my humble opinion, so have all of the religious folk. He came to set people free not to burden them down with more teachings of how and who to follow and more and more laws and rules. But they were free , thjey claimed so they refused to listen to what he was endeavoring to teach them.It appears to be so much easier to think that someone else is going to do the work for you than to have to do it for your self. That is why when the Hebrew people tried to take him by force and make him their King he told them it was just because they wanted him to do for them. The Bible is the writings of religious people and non-religious people who seek to control, by virtue of Jehovah, the common people. Peace
· travelr712 said on Aug 25, 2007....
of the 27 books of the new testament, only 10 were written by actual desciples of yeshua, and of those 10, there were only 5 authors. the rest were written by paul, save possibly hebrews who's author is doubtful and the gospel of luke and acts, written by luke, a desciple of paul, not yeshua. this means that christians are basing the bulk of their religious beliefs on the writings of a man who never witnessed any of yeshua's miracles, never heard any of his teachings, never had a single experience with their 'messiah', and was himself one of the people yeshua warned his followers about by calling them 'whitewashed tombs full of dead men's bones, do not believe what they say'. so it is no wonder it is full of contradictions.
· shiningstar said on Aug 25, 2007....
Going back to the orginal question I believe the Old Testament to be a record of the old God Jehovah and how he came to be the leader of a people. His intent, his rules and his ways are freely given. Whether it be true or not does not matter as one has to deal with what people believe and so many believe it.The New Testament is the story of a man who came to try and change the Jehovah regime but failed because no one wanted to stop doing what they were doing. But he brought the gift of love and showed people that the power could be used to do wonderful things not just for subversion of others rights. He offered to free the people but they claimed that they were free so he could not help them. The old was Jehovah. The new was Jesus. Never to be mixed but they were and still are.
· Bronx said on Aug 26, 2007....
travelr: ha-ha......I could say the same things about you, too. Determining which group is right is not the issue - the main issue is getting them all to agree that each group loves the same God equally.
Yes, the world was once thought to be flat....blah, blah,.....You have to remember that that was the original mistake of Science - that's why the modern rigorous Scientific Method was developed for establishing observed facts of Nature.
As for the proof of the existence of the Biblical characters - sorry can't help you there: no photos of them in my archives...ha-ha. However, I'm sure there is a validated/authenticated painting of Paul and Peter somewhere in The Vatican.
Have you visited Rome lately?
Yes, the world was once thought to be flat....blah, blah,.....You have to remember that that was the original mistake of Science - that's why the modern rigorous Scientific Method was developed for establishing observed facts of Nature.
As for the proof of the existence of the Biblical characters - sorry can't help you there: no photos of them in my archives...ha-ha. However, I'm sure there is a validated/authenticated painting of Paul and Peter somewhere in The Vatican.
Have you visited Rome lately?
· Bronx said on Aug 26, 2007....
shining: You've got to remember that the teachings of Jesus were considered radical - and ,hence, the charge of 'blasphemy'.
It's just like, as in travelr's own example, all the Senators denying President Bush now that Iraq may be turning into a veritable albatross around his political legacy.
It's just like, as in travelr's own example, all the Senators denying President Bush now that Iraq may be turning into a veritable albatross around his political legacy.
· Bronx said on Aug 26, 2007....
travelr, shining - you guys may still be missing the point here.
Jesus came to teach the Jews to take RELIGION as a way of life rather than an academic exercise - practice the content, not swot it as if it's an exam text!
Nobody has ever said that The Bible is a perfect 'document' - it only takes a spiritually prepared mind to receive the Good News, in faith, an open mind, and all honesty.
Elsewhere in Bronx, I've listed the contradictions inherent in the Bible - but then that does not make a beautiful bride less so because she wore a badly cut wedding dress, does it?
After all, who is PERFECT? Except God, of course!
Peace! ha-ha.....did I get that right, shining?
Jesus came to teach the Jews to take RELIGION as a way of life rather than an academic exercise - practice the content, not swot it as if it's an exam text!
Nobody has ever said that The Bible is a perfect 'document' - it only takes a spiritually prepared mind to receive the Good News, in faith, an open mind, and all honesty.
Elsewhere in Bronx, I've listed the contradictions inherent in the Bible - but then that does not make a beautiful bride less so because she wore a badly cut wedding dress, does it?
After all, who is PERFECT? Except God, of course!
Peace! ha-ha.....did I get that right, shining?
· travelr712 said on Aug 26, 2007....
bronx - yes, most christians say the bible is a 'perfect' document. it is the 'ultimate truth', and it is 'written by god', so it cannot have mistakes. if it is not a perfect document, then it is worthless. that is the entire premise of the christian religion.
there would not be paintings of peter and paul in their own time bronx, there would only be paintings created centuries after, such as divinchi's last supper. divinchi was not an eye witness of that event, and just because he painted that picture, does not mean the event actually took place.
rigorous scientific methods are exactly what i have been applying throughout this whole discussion, to which your document does not stand up. even by your own admission it is flawed, and thus it is invalid. if you cannot trust all of it, then you cannot trust any of it, because how do you know what of it is true and what is false? and if a perfect deity wrote that book, it would be by nature a perfect book, so if it is flawed, then it was not written by a deity. you need to study your apologetics bronx. these are arguments that have been debated for 1500 years. the official position of all churches is that 'the bible is the perfect, inerrant word of god', in other words, no mistakes, no contradictions. i did study apologetics.
there would not be paintings of peter and paul in their own time bronx, there would only be paintings created centuries after, such as divinchi's last supper. divinchi was not an eye witness of that event, and just because he painted that picture, does not mean the event actually took place.
rigorous scientific methods are exactly what i have been applying throughout this whole discussion, to which your document does not stand up. even by your own admission it is flawed, and thus it is invalid. if you cannot trust all of it, then you cannot trust any of it, because how do you know what of it is true and what is false? and if a perfect deity wrote that book, it would be by nature a perfect book, so if it is flawed, then it was not written by a deity. you need to study your apologetics bronx. these are arguments that have been debated for 1500 years. the official position of all churches is that 'the bible is the perfect, inerrant word of god', in other words, no mistakes, no contradictions. i did study apologetics.
· Bronx said on Aug 26, 2007....
travelr712: sorry to rock your boat.....but, you need to know that no real Christian would say that the Bible was written by God!
True, it is God's word - but inspired by Him.
If you did study apologetics, then my apologies to you - most people in your present frame of mind would probably argue that point forever, unless some visible/tangible proof is presented.
Even that may not really guarantee your faith, right?
True, it is God's word - but inspired by Him.
If you did study apologetics, then my apologies to you - most people in your present frame of mind would probably argue that point forever, unless some visible/tangible proof is presented.
Even that may not really guarantee your faith, right?
· travelr712 said on Aug 26, 2007....
bronx - christians often tell me that the document was 'written' by 'god'. there is a whole blog on my argument against that idea on lidstrom's site. i'll provide the link if you're interested. part of that argument is to nail down just exactly what 'inspired' means, because if it is similar to samuel clement's inspiration for 'tom sawyer' being his own childhood, then most of the facts and events in your document are just as fictitious. that document was totally and solely written by human men. as you've said yourself here, there is no visible, tangible proof that any deity had anything to do with it. so we're back to faith. you are telling me i must have faith in your word that what you say is true. muslims tell me i am to have faith in their word that what they say is true. bill clinton told me i was to have faith in his word that what he told me was true. why should i believe any one of them, including you? how do you know that i am not correct in my beliefs if you have no proof of your beliefs? or that muslims or buhdists are the ones that are correct for that matter? what makes your belief system so much more true and real than all the rest of ours, if your document does not have a deistic origin? if you truely understood the matters you were debating bronx, you would understand that as the fundamental question, and the one that has been argued by scientists and scholars for 1500 years. it was the reason for inventing apologetics in the first place, which was invented by one of the christian bishops as a way to answer that questions. all of the reasons you've quoted to me thus far for the validity of your belief system has come out of that debate. i know this because i have studied it. you do not know this because you have not studied it. which shows me you are a believer in 'blind faith'. study the origins of your own doctrins, and then come back and we will have a debate. until then, believe whatever you want to, but don't claim proof of anything.
· shiningstar said on Aug 26, 2007....
Bronx; Actually Jesus was one of the first Freedom From Religion Activist. He refused to follow Jehovah's laws or live by them. He refused to follow family as Jehovah decreed. He refused to do as the Priests said to do. He was hung for the religious sin of blasphemy which means to speak out against Jehovah. The scriotures are read as people have been taught to read them but when one changes to reading what they really say this new story comes forth. Peace.
· Bronx said on Aug 26, 2007....
travelr: you know, I wish you'd learned to use paragraphs - my eyes hurt a bit, so forgive me if I skipped some of your tirade.
Don't get me wrong, nobody, certainly not me, is trying to convert you to anything; and, I'm not holding brief for Christianity as a whole.
Or, are you imagining this post to be on the scale of a fight between good and evil or something?.Tell whoever sent you that I'm not home right now!
By the way, that was just a little foreign ethnic humor I picked up somewhere, some time ago..
If, after reading about - studying as you claim - the origins and history of all the religions on Planet Earth, you've not yet found your way out of paganism, then the more is the pity.
Or, did something get you so frustrated that you attack whatever you can't see? Paranoia? Or something like this:
{"I want my lawyer, my tailor, my servants, even my wife to believe in God, because it means that I shall be cheated and robbed and cuckolded less often. ... If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." [Voltaire]}
I hope you do not take offense at those words; however, let me enlighten you about your omissions.
First, I wish you'd identified yourself right from the beginning instead of sneaking into this blog like a wolf in sheep's clothing. What were you doing studying theology when you may have had an ungodly heart?
I do not know what you read but I'm sure it could not have been theology. If it was, then how did you get in?
Perhaps, that is the problem with Christianity - letting in all comers, good or bad, turning the cheek once more for a second dirty slap rather than punching out the lights of an ignoramus!
Kind of reminds you of Wikipedia's travails, doesn't it? It should, if you understand what I mean by that......
Secondly,God is a supernatural being; so His ways are mysterious, beyond human comprehension - so how can you or any other mortal understand Him?
Have you ever seen a ghost, an atom, or an electron? Yet you believe because electricity powers your PC to air insular views on the Internet and you've seen GhostBusters - not the movie, silly - in action on TV, with their sensors and other measuring paraphernalia.
Hocus-pocus, there are no ghosts in here, so I ain't 'fraid of no ghosts! Same with everything else your eyes can't see or understand! Ha!
See this Wiktionary entry for supernatural:
{Something for which there is neither ocular proof nor is measurable. For example, even though electromagnetic waves, subnuclear particles, et cetera may not be visible, yet they are measurable and their existence can be repetitively tested. However, we cannot either see or measure a ghost.}
Thirdly, for your information, and for the benefit of shining, Jesus was accused of blasphemy because He claimed to be the Son of God - not because he insulted God!
Let me explain, once more - I said it some days ago - Jesus' claim angered the Pharisees and other Jews because they felt it was an oblique insult for a supposedly illegitimate son of a carpenter to claim to be deity incarnate! Period.
Now, I must do like Paul did - my work here is finished, I have spent too much time here, I have run a good race with you guys, and won, IMHO. So, there!
P.S.: this is my Blog, so I can rig any argument in my favor, especially with the delete button - but darn it, I haven't done that yet, have I? Har-har, hearty....Cheers, guys.
Don't get me wrong, nobody, certainly not me, is trying to convert you to anything; and, I'm not holding brief for Christianity as a whole.
Or, are you imagining this post to be on the scale of a fight between good and evil or something?.Tell whoever sent you that I'm not home right now!
By the way, that was just a little foreign ethnic humor I picked up somewhere, some time ago..
If, after reading about - studying as you claim - the origins and history of all the religions on Planet Earth, you've not yet found your way out of paganism, then the more is the pity.
Or, did something get you so frustrated that you attack whatever you can't see? Paranoia? Or something like this:
{"I want my lawyer, my tailor, my servants, even my wife to believe in God, because it means that I shall be cheated and robbed and cuckolded less often. ... If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." [Voltaire]}
I hope you do not take offense at those words; however, let me enlighten you about your omissions.
First, I wish you'd identified yourself right from the beginning instead of sneaking into this blog like a wolf in sheep's clothing. What were you doing studying theology when you may have had an ungodly heart?
I do not know what you read but I'm sure it could not have been theology. If it was, then how did you get in?
Perhaps, that is the problem with Christianity - letting in all comers, good or bad, turning the cheek once more for a second dirty slap rather than punching out the lights of an ignoramus!
Kind of reminds you of Wikipedia's travails, doesn't it? It should, if you understand what I mean by that......
Secondly,God is a supernatural being; so His ways are mysterious, beyond human comprehension - so how can you or any other mortal understand Him?
Have you ever seen a ghost, an atom, or an electron? Yet you believe because electricity powers your PC to air insular views on the Internet and you've seen GhostBusters - not the movie, silly - in action on TV, with their sensors and other measuring paraphernalia.
Hocus-pocus, there are no ghosts in here, so I ain't 'fraid of no ghosts! Same with everything else your eyes can't see or understand! Ha!
See this Wiktionary entry for supernatural:
{Something for which there is neither ocular proof nor is measurable. For example, even though electromagnetic waves, subnuclear particles, et cetera may not be visible, yet they are measurable and their existence can be repetitively tested. However, we cannot either see or measure a ghost.}
Thirdly, for your information, and for the benefit of shining, Jesus was accused of blasphemy because He claimed to be the Son of God - not because he insulted God!
Let me explain, once more - I said it some days ago - Jesus' claim angered the Pharisees and other Jews because they felt it was an oblique insult for a supposedly illegitimate son of a carpenter to claim to be deity incarnate! Period.
Now, I must do like Paul did - my work here is finished, I have spent too much time here, I have run a good race with you guys, and won, IMHO. So, there!
P.S.: this is my Blog, so I can rig any argument in my favor, especially with the delete button - but darn it, I haven't done that yet, have I? Har-har, hearty....Cheers, guys.
· travelr712 said on Aug 26, 2007....
yeshua never claimed to be the son of god. others made that claim of him, just as the o.t. prophets and the angel that appeared to joseph said he would. yeshua called himself the son of man. read your bible.
true, this is your blog, and you can set any rules that you want. you can also delete any information you disagree with, as most christians do.
the pharisees cared not a whit for yeshua's claims of deity. what they were concerned about was that he was gaining followers, and taking the numbers away from their temples. again, read your bible.
i have not studied every religion on the planet, but apparently i've studied more of yours than you have.
your premise for this post was as follows: 'Anyway, the long and short of the gist is that there is now concrete - or is it clay-tablet - proof that the Book of Jeremiah was written exactly as the events unfolded: and was not written decades or even centuries later.'
you have failed to prove this. you loose.
true, this is your blog, and you can set any rules that you want. you can also delete any information you disagree with, as most christians do.
the pharisees cared not a whit for yeshua's claims of deity. what they were concerned about was that he was gaining followers, and taking the numbers away from their temples. again, read your bible.
i have not studied every religion on the planet, but apparently i've studied more of yours than you have.
your premise for this post was as follows: 'Anyway, the long and short of the gist is that there is now concrete - or is it clay-tablet - proof that the Book of Jeremiah was written exactly as the events unfolded: and was not written decades or even centuries later.'
you have failed to prove this. you loose.
· Bronx said on Aug 27, 2007....
travelr: er...the word is 'lose', by the way.
IMHO, I think you need to develop some spiritual depth - your arguments take things too much at face value.
Spiritual matters are not for the faint hearted - yes, I had been talking about the Book of Jeremiah as one more proof against the flailing and wild arguments of discordant, half-baked, pseudo-Christians like you.
Then, you generalized the topic to the entire Holy Book and other World religions - you escalated it out of all proportion.
Perhaps you got what you wanted - a platform to air/test your myopic and unreasonable/unwise views and opinions.
Well, good and great; but, I too, gained because I've been able to drag at least one of your doubting kind from the dark closet you normally shelter, to be ingloriously marveled at - as a perfect example of religious intolerance/bigotry and a showcase of radical spiritual emptiness!
So, I've won with a TKO, wouldn't you say? ha-ha.....
If you have no faith in something, why delve into it at all - that is, if you are not really a daughter/son of chaos? Would you marry an ugly girl/man you don't love?
From your arguments, and by analogy and extrapolation, you would, too - if you had some concrete/visible evidence or proof that her/his old folks were loaded or stinking rich!
What does that make you - a spiritual or religious gold digger? Have you heard the song - Jamie Foxx and Kanye West's version, I mean?
So, try and leave other people to worship as they please - at least, they have something to live, pray and hope for, which keeps them alive.
But you, what hope do you have - except to say that there is no God? That sounds like someone who is a mindless, walking corpse or morbid horde - a zombie, a lifeless vessel, a hopeless stiff,a divisive wreck.....
Get real, get organized, and, please, get a life,- in Jesus' mighty name I pray! Did I hear you say 'Amen'? Ha-ha.....just kidding.
Normally, I do not get so verbally heavy on people or my Blog visitors - it's just that I hate to see a good and great mind, like yours, go to waste, spiritually speaking, of course.
See ya, around. Namaste?
IMHO, I think you need to develop some spiritual depth - your arguments take things too much at face value.
Spiritual matters are not for the faint hearted - yes, I had been talking about the Book of Jeremiah as one more proof against the flailing and wild arguments of discordant, half-baked, pseudo-Christians like you.
Then, you generalized the topic to the entire Holy Book and other World religions - you escalated it out of all proportion.
Perhaps you got what you wanted - a platform to air/test your myopic and unreasonable/unwise views and opinions.
Well, good and great; but, I too, gained because I've been able to drag at least one of your doubting kind from the dark closet you normally shelter, to be ingloriously marveled at - as a perfect example of religious intolerance/bigotry and a showcase of radical spiritual emptiness!
So, I've won with a TKO, wouldn't you say? ha-ha.....
If you have no faith in something, why delve into it at all - that is, if you are not really a daughter/son of chaos? Would you marry an ugly girl/man you don't love?
From your arguments, and by analogy and extrapolation, you would, too - if you had some concrete/visible evidence or proof that her/his old folks were loaded or stinking rich!
What does that make you - a spiritual or religious gold digger? Have you heard the song - Jamie Foxx and Kanye West's version, I mean?
So, try and leave other people to worship as they please - at least, they have something to live, pray and hope for, which keeps them alive.
But you, what hope do you have - except to say that there is no God? That sounds like someone who is a mindless, walking corpse or morbid horde - a zombie, a lifeless vessel, a hopeless stiff,a divisive wreck.....
Get real, get organized, and, please, get a life,- in Jesus' mighty name I pray! Did I hear you say 'Amen'? Ha-ha.....just kidding.
Normally, I do not get so verbally heavy on people or my Blog visitors - it's just that I hate to see a good and great mind, like yours, go to waste, spiritually speaking, of course.
See ya, around. Namaste?
· travelr712 said on Aug 27, 2007....
oh, you wanna get nasty huh? that's another typical response of a christian when they lose an argument. so far, the only thing you've 'caught me' on is one single spelling error. go you!
let's see, my arguments take things at face value. well, hmm, maybe that's because i can prove what i'm alleging, unlike you?
actually, you're the one who generalized the topic to the entire document: 'Do you believe in the Bible now, just a little bit, or still working on it?'
you're really not very good at debating, are you?
i can understand why you would look at my points as 'analogy and extrapolation', because if you didn't do that by nature, you would have no basis for your faith at all. analogy and especially extrapolation is the only way you can use that document to form any sort of coherent doctrine. you certainly cannot use the document at 'face value'.
if you would have read my blog on my beliefs and thought about it for 2 seconds, you'd see how close our beliefs really are. well, i saw it anyway, you apparently are 'blinded' by your faith.
so, your final argument is 'let me alone to believe what i want'? well, i've said that numerous times in this very blog, but you keep bringing up points to debate. i did make another observation, if you are going to make fantastic public claims, be prepared to back them up with fact.
so, no, you don't win, because you have failed to prove the assertions of your post. i have spent much more time proving this to you and anyone else who cares to listen than i had intended, and i tire greatly of arguing with a closed mind. it's like trying to push a donkey uphill to water. so you can debate your own 'blind faith' with yourself now, have fun.
let's see, my arguments take things at face value. well, hmm, maybe that's because i can prove what i'm alleging, unlike you?
actually, you're the one who generalized the topic to the entire document: 'Do you believe in the Bible now, just a little bit, or still working on it?'
you're really not very good at debating, are you?
i can understand why you would look at my points as 'analogy and extrapolation', because if you didn't do that by nature, you would have no basis for your faith at all. analogy and especially extrapolation is the only way you can use that document to form any sort of coherent doctrine. you certainly cannot use the document at 'face value'.
if you would have read my blog on my beliefs and thought about it for 2 seconds, you'd see how close our beliefs really are. well, i saw it anyway, you apparently are 'blinded' by your faith.
so, your final argument is 'let me alone to believe what i want'? well, i've said that numerous times in this very blog, but you keep bringing up points to debate. i did make another observation, if you are going to make fantastic public claims, be prepared to back them up with fact.
so, no, you don't win, because you have failed to prove the assertions of your post. i have spent much more time proving this to you and anyone else who cares to listen than i had intended, and i tire greatly of arguing with a closed mind. it's like trying to push a donkey uphill to water. so you can debate your own 'blind faith' with yourself now, have fun.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 27, 2007....
Travelr, the beginning of the book of Mark clearly describes Jesus as the Son of God. In the transfiguration, God said, "This is my Son, whom I love, with him I am well pleased."
Further, when Jesus is brought before the Pharisees the night He was betrayed by Judas, when asked if He is the Son of God, He replies, "It is as you say." As well, as Jesus is praying in Gethsemane, He refers to God as "My Father." There is sufficient evidence in the Bible that Jesus is the Son of God. I just wanted to clarify that in regards to some earlier comments made.
Travelr and Bronx - nobody wins when you're sniping at each other. Present your points out of respect for each other, even if the other apparently doesn't deserve it. Jesus didn't die on the cross to see people drink their Hate-orade and yell at each other. Bronx, remember it's not you that others often blame...they ridicule you on account of Jesus, so remember these aren't personal attacks, and God is big enough to defend Himself.
And Travelr, there is an agenda of anti-Christianity in your words, which no one really has unless they have a reason. What's turned you so cynical toward God? Was it crappy Christians? Hypocritical Christians? Believers who otherwise didn't live out the Bible, or let you down somehow? No matter what, even Christians don't get it right all the time - trashing them or their God won't help you any. Find a better way to explain your points other than mudslinging.
Further, when Jesus is brought before the Pharisees the night He was betrayed by Judas, when asked if He is the Son of God, He replies, "It is as you say." As well, as Jesus is praying in Gethsemane, He refers to God as "My Father." There is sufficient evidence in the Bible that Jesus is the Son of God. I just wanted to clarify that in regards to some earlier comments made.
Travelr and Bronx - nobody wins when you're sniping at each other. Present your points out of respect for each other, even if the other apparently doesn't deserve it. Jesus didn't die on the cross to see people drink their Hate-orade and yell at each other. Bronx, remember it's not you that others often blame...they ridicule you on account of Jesus, so remember these aren't personal attacks, and God is big enough to defend Himself.
And Travelr, there is an agenda of anti-Christianity in your words, which no one really has unless they have a reason. What's turned you so cynical toward God? Was it crappy Christians? Hypocritical Christians? Believers who otherwise didn't live out the Bible, or let you down somehow? No matter what, even Christians don't get it right all the time - trashing them or their God won't help you any. Find a better way to explain your points other than mudslinging.
· Bronx said on Aug 27, 2007....
Whew.....That's certainly an anti-climax! (Bronx tip toes out of this Blog quietly before travelr sees him again and returns for more attempts to prove to Bronx that God does not exist!). ; - ))
· Bronx said on Aug 27, 2007....
lidstrom82: you, Sir, are an invaluable asset to SoulCast and all Christians everywhere.
Are you sure you're not an angel? I won't be surprised at all!
Honestly, I'd felt a kind of load on my back with this post - you've lifted it with your kind words..
I'm normally cool headed but stomaching what I know is nonsense is often so difficult that I lash out to press home my points.
Yes, everyone should learn to argue persuasively = from a reasonable stand point as the necessary basis or foundation with which to launch their 'debate'.
Once more, thank you, lidstrom, for saving me the trouble of saying more than this. God bless you, Sir.
Are you sure you're not an angel? I won't be surprised at all!
Honestly, I'd felt a kind of load on my back with this post - you've lifted it with your kind words..
I'm normally cool headed but stomaching what I know is nonsense is often so difficult that I lash out to press home my points.
Yes, everyone should learn to argue persuasively = from a reasonable stand point as the necessary basis or foundation with which to launch their 'debate'.
Once more, thank you, lidstrom, for saving me the trouble of saying more than this. God bless you, Sir.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 27, 2007....
Anytime, Bronx. You're an asset as well! I'm not an angel, but God gave me the ability to speak like one, apparently :)
I'm all about defending the Christian faith, and showing it as a worthwhile lifestyle to those who grew up in secular schools, or around pop culture that often makes fun of Christians. Everything we learn in school, and every popular show, movie, song, game, or web site in the pipeline, added together, will still fall short of what we need as imperfect people. That's why the entire world needs a Jesus who died for it. And it's great when people have your back in expressing that.
I'm all about defending the Christian faith, and showing it as a worthwhile lifestyle to those who grew up in secular schools, or around pop culture that often makes fun of Christians. Everything we learn in school, and every popular show, movie, song, game, or web site in the pipeline, added together, will still fall short of what we need as imperfect people. That's why the entire world needs a Jesus who died for it. And it's great when people have your back in expressing that.
· travelr712 said on Aug 27, 2007....
lidstrom - if you read what i said again, you will see that i very clearly stated that yeshua never called himself the son of god. others did, just as was predicted, but he did not.
he said jehovah was father to everyone, and he also said we were all sons of god when the pharasees asked him.
it was actually pilot asking him if he was the king of the jews when he responded 'it is as you say', not the pharisees, and not if he was the 'son of god'. read matthew 27:11-12 and mark 15:1-3. he was not brought before the pharisees, he was brought before the sanhedrin, and all of the 'gospels' record that before the sanhedrin, he kept silent. none of what you have said is irrefutable truth, it can be interpreted several ways just as i have done, and most of your arguments are just plain wrong. i suggest you look it up and refine your doctrin. this is another point that i have been trying to make. much of what christians believe to be the truth is just plain wrong, misinterpretations and outright fabrications, just as your belief that yeshua admitted to being the 'son of god' before the pharisees, an event that never took place.
to answer your question, i am not slinging mud, i am asking for proof of extraordinary assertions. my point is that if you do not first believe that the 'bible' is a divine document and that 'god' exists, there is no validity to these assertions. they are not self evident, they require proof. i ask for this because this post claimed to offer proof, which ended up being unsubstantiated even in the article cited. if you can provide proof of your claims, please do so and i will believe all of your assertions. if you cannot, i will not believe them, and no one else should either. let me put it this way. if i told you i could walk on water and heal sick people by just touching them, you would require that i provide some type of proof of my extraordinary claims before believing me. i am only asking for the same from you or bronx, none of which either of you has provided.
bronx - i have never once tried to prove that 'god' did not exist. i have only asked you to prove your claim that 'god' does exist. you have failed to do so. instead, you have called my arguments 'nonsense', without providing one shred of credible evidence that i am wrong and you are right. you are, of course, entitled to your opinion however.
he said jehovah was father to everyone, and he also said we were all sons of god when the pharasees asked him.
it was actually pilot asking him if he was the king of the jews when he responded 'it is as you say', not the pharisees, and not if he was the 'son of god'. read matthew 27:11-12 and mark 15:1-3. he was not brought before the pharisees, he was brought before the sanhedrin, and all of the 'gospels' record that before the sanhedrin, he kept silent. none of what you have said is irrefutable truth, it can be interpreted several ways just as i have done, and most of your arguments are just plain wrong. i suggest you look it up and refine your doctrin. this is another point that i have been trying to make. much of what christians believe to be the truth is just plain wrong, misinterpretations and outright fabrications, just as your belief that yeshua admitted to being the 'son of god' before the pharisees, an event that never took place.
to answer your question, i am not slinging mud, i am asking for proof of extraordinary assertions. my point is that if you do not first believe that the 'bible' is a divine document and that 'god' exists, there is no validity to these assertions. they are not self evident, they require proof. i ask for this because this post claimed to offer proof, which ended up being unsubstantiated even in the article cited. if you can provide proof of your claims, please do so and i will believe all of your assertions. if you cannot, i will not believe them, and no one else should either. let me put it this way. if i told you i could walk on water and heal sick people by just touching them, you would require that i provide some type of proof of my extraordinary claims before believing me. i am only asking for the same from you or bronx, none of which either of you has provided.
bronx - i have never once tried to prove that 'god' did not exist. i have only asked you to prove your claim that 'god' does exist. you have failed to do so. instead, you have called my arguments 'nonsense', without providing one shred of credible evidence that i am wrong and you are right. you are, of course, entitled to your opinion however.
· lidstrom82 said on Aug 28, 2007....
Hey there travelr,
That's the most constructive post you've made yet. I commend your civility.
Matthew 26:57: "And those who had laid hold of Jesus led Him away to Caiaphas the high priest (which is the Sanhedrin, travelr, you're quite correct - but remember that the Sanhedrin arguably consisted OF Pharisees), where the scribes and elders were assembled."
A few verses later:
"And the high priest arose and said to Him, 'Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?'
But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, 'I put you under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!'
Jesus said to him, 'It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.'"
So actually travelr, my words were sound. Pilate also asked Jesus if He were King of the Jews, like you mentioned.
Now, where is the controversy about whether Jesus was the Son of God? If Caiaphas said it himself, where's the doubt? If God Himself said it was so, and Mark, one of His own disciples, addresses Jesus as the Son of God, and of course John 3:16, and others...at what point do we say it's good enough to believe? I keep refining my doctrine, and what I said was correct, lined up with Scripture.
Travelr, you are asking valid questions, but your exchange with bronx earlier, if not mudslinging, was still destructive. Bronx took my words of correction better than you did, simply put. If you want to ask questions, don't put Christians under the gun, because you don't learn much that way.
What proof is, depends upon the person. For someone who has earnestly sought God and received an answer in the form of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, that's all the proof they need. If you want God to show up in front of you, that's not going to happen - no one can look upon God and live, because of His power. So unless someone wants to drop dead, it's best to wait until death to be face to face with God.
So how do we relate to Jesus Christ? By establishing a relationship with Him. Travelr, if you know someone who has a best friend you've never met, they're not exactly your best friend, too. You don't know what a relationship with someone will be like until you actually meet them. You can ask Christians questions about who Jesus is, but it's not the same as seeking God yourself. That's why no definitive, physical proof will just fall into your lap. You have to be a part of another's life to have a relationship with them, and so it is with God. The Bible is more than good enough to confirm my faith when lined up with how God has worked in my life, and the same is offered to everyone. If anyone wants to know the Creator of the Universe, the least they could do is to meet God on His own terms - in prayer and study of the Bible, community with Christians, and living a life as Christ did His.
If you want to learn about God, ask me or Bronx or truthsayer anything you want, about how God relates to us. Testimonies can be inspiring when they're about a life touched and healed by God.
But nothing beats praying to God, asking Him to be real to you, giving Him your hurts, and receiving direction and healing for them.
That's the most constructive post you've made yet. I commend your civility.
Matthew 26:57: "And those who had laid hold of Jesus led Him away to Caiaphas the high priest (which is the Sanhedrin, travelr, you're quite correct - but remember that the Sanhedrin arguably consisted OF Pharisees), where the scribes and elders were assembled."
A few verses later:
"And the high priest arose and said to Him, 'Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?'
But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, 'I put you under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!'
Jesus said to him, 'It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.'"
So actually travelr, my words were sound. Pilate also asked Jesus if He were King of the Jews, like you mentioned.
Now, where is the controversy about whether Jesus was the Son of God? If Caiaphas said it himself, where's the doubt? If God Himself said it was so, and Mark, one of His own disciples, addresses Jesus as the Son of God, and of course John 3:16, and others...at what point do we say it's good enough to believe? I keep refining my doctrine, and what I said was correct, lined up with Scripture.
Travelr, you are asking valid questions, but your exchange with bronx earlier, if not mudslinging, was still destructive. Bronx took my words of correction better than you did, simply put. If you want to ask questions, don't put Christians under the gun, because you don't learn much that way.
What proof is, depends upon the person. For someone who has earnestly sought God and received an answer in the form of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, that's all the proof they need. If you want God to show up in front of you, that's not going to happen - no one can look upon God and live, because of His power. So unless someone wants to drop dead, it's best to wait until death to be face to face with God.
So how do we relate to Jesus Christ? By establishing a relationship with Him. Travelr, if you know someone who has a best friend you've never met, they're not exactly your best friend, too. You don't know what a relationship with someone will be like until you actually meet them. You can ask Christians questions about who Jesus is, but it's not the same as seeking God yourself. That's why no definitive, physical proof will just fall into your lap. You have to be a part of another's life to have a relationship with them, and so it is with God. The Bible is more than good enough to confirm my faith when lined up with how God has worked in my life, and the same is offered to everyone. If anyone wants to know the Creator of the Universe, the least they could do is to meet God on His own terms - in prayer and study of the Bible, community with Christians, and living a life as Christ did His.
If you want to learn about God, ask me or Bronx or truthsayer anything you want, about how God relates to us. Testimonies can be inspiring when they're about a life touched and healed by God.
But nothing beats praying to God, asking Him to be real to you, giving Him your hurts, and receiving direction and healing for them.
· Bronx said on Aug 31, 2007....
lidstrom: thank you for that post. Yes, one should not knock what one hasn't tried.
I am reminded of a recent post I read, in which Microsoft's Bill Gates had scheduled only a 30-minute meeting with fellow billionaire, Hathaway's Warren Buffet, because he had thought that they had nothing at all in common.
However, when they finally met, both spent practically the whole day together - and Bill Gates was thoroughly won over by Warren Buffet in the end!
And so, without much further ado, I would like to make a humble suggestion to all those who, through no fault of theirs, do or can not understand God and/or Christianity: please, read the online ILUMINA BIBLE - it is a unique project with so many virtual, audio-visual, and search capabilities inbuilt.
I'm sure that a simple Google search would locate the website for your personal enlightenment.
Cheerio, everyone....
I am reminded of a recent post I read, in which Microsoft's Bill Gates had scheduled only a 30-minute meeting with fellow billionaire, Hathaway's Warren Buffet, because he had thought that they had nothing at all in common.
However, when they finally met, both spent practically the whole day together - and Bill Gates was thoroughly won over by Warren Buffet in the end!
And so, without much further ado, I would like to make a humble suggestion to all those who, through no fault of theirs, do or can not understand God and/or Christianity: please, read the online ILUMINA BIBLE - it is a unique project with so many virtual, audio-visual, and search capabilities inbuilt.
I'm sure that a simple Google search would locate the website for your personal enlightenment.
Cheerio, everyone....
· unique1 said on Mar 03, 2008....
don't knock what you haven't tried? i haven't tried poison and i'm knockin' it. got a problem with that?
if all your answers are in a book
it may be time for another look
· Bronx said on Mar 05, 2008....
unique1: WELCOME TO MY BLOG!
Everything can be defined as a poison - even water is toxic in excess.
No, believe me when I tell you that I've read a lot of 'other' books. Learning never stops. I get my answers from a myriad of sources.
I read the Bible with a questioning mind set not just blind and un-objective faith or by external influence, like St. Paul did.
In fact, just today, I read about a 'loony' Israeli researcher who claims that his stint with drugs made him to think that Moses was also high on biblical times drugs and imagined all he saw in the Bible.
Everything can be defined as a poison - even water is toxic in excess.
No, believe me when I tell you that I've read a lot of 'other' books. Learning never stops. I get my answers from a myriad of sources.
I read the Bible with a questioning mind set not just blind and un-objective faith or by external influence, like St. Paul did.
In fact, just today, I read about a 'loony' Israeli researcher who claims that his stint with drugs made him to think that Moses was also high on biblical times drugs and imagined all he saw in the Bible.
· lidstrom82 said on Mar 06, 2008....
haha, leave it to a childish rhyme by unique1 to make us wonder if skepticism is really the answer.
· lidstrom82 said on Mar 06, 2008....
· Bronx said on Mar 08, 2008....
lidstrom82: thanks, yes.....ha-ha....good to hear from you again.
Stumble It!
Seed Newsvine
0 comments:
Post a Comment