100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Community > Posts By > iam_resurrected
|
Topic:
DOES GOD EXIST ? - part 2
|
|
in our own planet, static is lightning, spark, igniter of Life:
static is a viable Source!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
DOES GOD EXIST ? - part 2
|
|
and why we believe the Universe is expanding from Center out
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
DOES GOD EXIST ? - part 2
|
|
and Static would allow the energy from Mother Neutron to travel to the outer edges and return!!
so if anything, when the Dimensions of Space was full, Mother Neutron kept pumping it out and that created the Force of Annihilation!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
DOES GOD EXIST ?
Edited by
iam_resurrected
on
Tue 11/12/19 09:04 AM
|
|
look at the properties of Static:
those properties are the alternator, meaning, mother neutron would have been kept revived!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
DOES GOD EXIST ?
|
|
if Science is correct, then Space was a Dimension. it was when this neutron dies and the layers of energy gel and begin to freeze, Science wants us to believe Space was completely "Full" at this moment in the process.
the Blast is what expanded the Dimensions of the original Space. so by how Science explains, the energy is working Center outwards, not being drawn from outside in. if this is true, Static is their achilles heel!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
DOES GOD EXIST ?
Edited by
iam_resurrected
on
Tue 11/12/19 08:34 AM
|
|
mother neutron would have to die for static to stop in order for the layers to gel and form a mass to then freeze.
static would literally keep this process from happening. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
DOES GOD EXIST ?
Edited by
iam_resurrected
on
Tue 11/12/19 08:30 AM
|
|
The energy is created by the stresses in the fabric of matter, at the face of the void, by every deviation from flatness in the dividing meniscus; the void being the boundry, and the invagination of the face of the void becoming matter, which is energy. you are using "static" as this stance? not saying i don't buy it and it makes sense. but wouldn't static keep the process from becoming a solid to be blown into annihilation? static would create heat at all times and levels because new layers are continually being formed creating the process for static, in theory. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The ONENESS of God
|
|
and i will add, that even though (knowing because of proper/improper viewpoints) anyone can participate, it's a good fulfillment to be challenged.
to not just be accepted and to continue viewing things from one side is how we should desire to be, but to be literally transparent and open (even when opposing). and like myself, what confuses most, is my love for Mathematics and Engineering and the creative processes and then i have this wicked stance on my beliefs towards God. and all of my views pertaining to God i have shown the Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic to verify where i stand at. people believe it has to be 1 or the other; Science or God. but i see Science revealing God. even if it was by way of evolution and Adam was separate for the Messiah, evolution would explain how other people were already in existence for Adam's son to find a wife and Marry (not related) to them. and i've shown where God never asked for animal and sin offerings like Moses grew up Egyptian style. so there are many things i have revealed that goes directly against what has become tradition and wrong. God has literally been incorrectly portrayed for Centuries, and the God being preached on Sundays in America, is not even close to the God found in the Hebrew text!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The ONENESS of God
|
|
MK,
i agree!! but when the 4 of us came to Mingle, we only assumed it would be like at DH, just us 4 always discussing viewpoints. at DH, no nonbeliever ever chose to participate. here, we have learned, definitely much different!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
What is : Sin ?
|
|
why ask someone who does not believe in God concerning sin?
their answers won't be anywhere close to correct, only judgemental. religion is not God God is not religion the 2 of them do not go together...it's like trying to fit a square peg into circle. and sin is my ill will towards you in my thoughts, what i want to do as in hurt you, how i can get over on you, how can i steal from you, how can i manipulate you are what's constitutes sin!! it's the mean things you think towards another that would bring them harm, or the things you do to get the best of them, or to trick them, or anything that relates to you wanting to do someone else wrong is a Sin!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The ONENESS of God
|
|
actually, on the first 2 pages you see FOUR of US mostly posting.
all 4 of us come from another website and we had been discussing these things at the other site and just carried it over to Mingle. we had no idea NONE OF YOU others would be involved!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The ONENESS of God
|
|
hey Tom,
what does this mean? XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUUUXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXUUUUUUUXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The ONENESS of God
Edited by
iam_resurrected
on
Tue 11/12/19 06:50 AM
|
|
and WHY DO I NEED TO BOLD/CAP THE SCRIPTURES?
are you not aware when scripture is placed. i did MENTION in that Post, Tom, ALL of these verses are the SAME VERSE (1 John 5:6-8)... how did you MISS THAT between recognizing i BOLD/CAP?? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The ONENESS of God
|
|
I fail to understand why proof and evidence continues to be demanded. No proof or evidence will be forthcoming. NOT NOW. NOT EVER. Either believe or don't believe. Why bother yourself and other people with questions about proof and evidence? If you can't believe, then don't. Go fishing or something. I think it is important - essential, even - for believers to justify their belief by telling everyone else - even 'shouting' at them in capital letters - that what they believe is in some way 'correct' and that all the learned theologians of other faiths have got it all wrong, mistranslating the original text when showing what it meant in modern English. Of course it could be that there is no such thing as a god. That would be a really good explanation about why, for example, people argue about the Trinity, believed in by all Christians as it is a part of that belief, but doubted by a few people who consider themselves as having more intellect than the expert theologians among Christians. How arrogant! If there was a god, all the believers would believe the same thing, with only very minor variations between them. As my quote says, why bother to argue? If you're sure your own particular interpretation is correct and equally sure that everyone who disagrees with you is just 'wrong'- does it matter? Best to just go fishing! this thread was over something that Blake and i had discussed when we were at another website together. we have been doing this back n forth over scripture for almost 10 years now. so yours and Tom's assessment as per usual, have completely missed the mark, and is so far out in Right Field, that the only 2 who think they have a clue have removed themselves by their own ignorance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The ONENESS of God
|
|
I've noticed something about your personality. You bold and CAPS your comments but not the reference scripture you post. This indicates you might think what you have to say is more important than the scripture you use. Most people, when using bold, bold the quoted text or scripture then just normally type their own comments. This tendency to bold or cap your comments is similar to narcissistic behavior. You obviously copy and paste the reference scripture to your reply. Why do you not post the source? ~OMO~ (One Man's Opinion) yes, i do bold, but where i have it bold explains the differences. you may view this anyway you wish, but, if a Believer like Blake does not get it and it needs to be bold and highlighted for like Believers...THEN WHO ARE YOU to question since you DON'T BELIEVE?? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The ONENESS of God
|
|
Yeshua, after being asked by Philip to shew him the Father, responded with 2 very important clues. 1. Yeshua said, have I not been with you this long that you "DO NOT KNOW ME?"...when you [see] the Father you [see] Me...when you [see] Me you [see] the Father. 2. Yeshua furthered this statement with "I am not doing the works you [see]. the Father that LIVES INSIDE ME IS DOING THE WORKS [John 14:10 10 Don't you believe that I am united with the Father, and the Father united with me? What I am telling you, I am not saying on my own initiative; [[the Father living in me]] is doing his own works. so, outside of Yeshua explaining that looking at Him is looking at the FATHER Colossians 1:15 15 He is the [[visible image of the invisible God]]. He is supreme over all creation... He also makes it clear that living inside Him is the FATHER. which this is very important here. [[((if the SON was His own person))]] [then the FATHER would not dwell in Him]. I believe this is concrete proof that the flesh Yeshua was actually the FATHER all along. another key: what do we have living in us as believers? Holy Spirit [the Spirit of the Father][that connects us to the Father]. so Yeshua had the FATHER living in Him and we have the Spirit of the Father living in us. to me, this is proof of ONLY ONE GOD and Yeshua/Yahweh are the same being [as Spirit and in the flesh]. Colossians 1 explains that Yeshua created ALL THINGS. John called Yeshua the WORD. now, lets put this in biblical example: Genesis 1:2-3 2 The earth was unformed and void, darkness was on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God hovered over the surface of the water. 3 Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. Here the ((Creator)) [[is in Spirit form]] but we know this is actually Yeshua [the Father lives inside Me]. and verse 3 states God said [this is the WORD in action]. the entire Bible is a reflection of Yeshua/Yahweh, WHO is the ONE GOD!! this is why Catholics changed original Matthew 28:19...because Yeshua commanding to baptize in His NAME [is the authority of the FATHER]...and they changed it to create the unholy trinity!! this is why I am like the Messianic Jews = ONENESS!! another Catholic change for the trinity is the kjv states there are 3 in heaven. but the real translation DOES NOT STATE THIS: the original translation is speaking only about Yeshua here: 1 John 5:6-8 6 He is the one who came by means of water and blood, Yeshua the Messiah - not with water only, but with the water and the blood. And the Spirit bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 There are three witnesses - 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood - and these three are in agreement. the scriptures are clear that there is NO TRINITY!! this is an interesting thread especially the exchanges in the 1st five posts that particular poster refused to accept that his biblical translation should basically read the same as what it was translated from. and if he would take that into consideration, the originals are very clear about the only trinity existing is the demonic Moloch trinity. that posters biblical translation comes from the Latin Vulgate, which is a translation of the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. so whatever the Greek and Aramaic state, the Latin Vulgate should verify, and ultimately the English Bible should verify. but they do not. i will do comparison of the Greek, Aramaic, and Latin Vulgate scripture reference from 1 John 5:6-8. ^ then i will compare today;s English version and see how close it matches, and if it does not match, would it change the meaning of these 3 verses all together? GREEK 6 This is He Who is coming through water and blood and spirit - Jesus Christ - not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood. And the spirit it is which is testifying, for the spirit is the truth, 7 seeing that three there are that are testifying, 8 the spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are for the one thing." ARAMAIC ܗܢܘ ܕܐܬܐ ܒܝܕ ܡܝܐ ܘܕܡܐ ܝܫܘܥ ܡܫܝܚܐ ܠܐ ܗܘܐ ܒܡܝܐ ܒܠܚܘܕ ܐܠܐ ܒܡܝܐ ܘܕܡܐ 6 This is The One who came by means of The Water and The Blood; Eshu Meshikha {Yeshua, The Anointed One}. It wasn't of The Water alone, but rather, by The Water and The Blood. ܘܪܘܚܐ ܡܣܗܕܐ ܕܗܝ ܪܘܚܐ ܐܝܬܝܗ ܫܪܪܐ 7 And The Rukha {The Spirit} testifies; because that One, The Rukha {The Spirit}, is The Truth. ܘܐܝܬܝܗܘܢ ܬܠܬܐ ܣܗܕܝܢ ܪܘܚܐ ܘܡܝܐ ܘܕܡܐ ܘܬܠܬܝܗܘܢ ܒܚܕ ܐܢܘܢ 8 And there are three testifying: The Rukha {The Spirit}, and The Water, and The Blood. And these three are in One. LATIN VULGATE 6 hic est qui venit per aquam et sanguinem Iesus Christus non in aqua solum sed in aqua et sanguine et Spiritus est qui testificatur quoniam Christus est veritas This is he that came by water and blood, Jesus Christ: not by water only but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit which testifieth that Christ is the truth. 7 quia tres sunt qui testimonium dant And there are Three who give testimony 8 Spiritus et aqua et sanguis et tres unum sunt the spirit and the water and the blood. And these three are one. WHAT IS SPECIFIC ABOUT THOSE ^ TRANSLATIONS, VERSES 6-8 CLEARLY SAY IT'S ALL ABOUT JESUS... but READ THE ENGLISH VERSION THAT LITERALLY DOES NOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO MATCHING THE ORIGINAL TRANSLATIONS: ENGLISH 6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. the English translators completely changed those verses, that are clearly about Jesus, into the false doctrine of the Trinity. the English version is NOWHERE close to the Latin Vulgate, by which it was translated from. That is how people gain these false misconceptions of God, because of deliberate and malice intent, or, the dumbest translators on planet Earth!! but the first 3 versions all match and the English does not. Pretty obvious the English translation is wrong in some very important key areas of Doctrine!! and wrong enough to sway people to have a complete different view than what God wanted them to have!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
DOES GOD EXIST ?
Edited by
iam_resurrected
on
Mon 11/11/19 09:56 AM
|
|
I truly do believe that a thing called God COULD exist, if it were an advanced alien capable of time/space travel, and liked to set up colonies of creatures and plants, and microorganisms, maybe like terrariums and farms, and mess with them occasionally as they develop. Because it can time travel, God can seem to us to live forever, and this could explain apparent forgetfulness, and not showing up for long periods of Earth time. Only maybe occasionally sending a representative to check on the project and make suggestions. Apparently God is jealous, and wrathful, and loving, depending. But I'm not sure about a magical, invisible, omnipotent friend type god. first of all, we do not even know if we all are truly separate entities of Energy. that is a Scientific Guess to tie the Accident together in how they perceived the Universe began. but i feel my keyboard and when i get cut. those are not memories i am supposed to replay because that is the supposed natural reaction to feeling a knife's edge and seeing your blood escape. Energy would not feel. the keyboard may not feel me, but i can feel the keyboard. this is obviously more than just Energy here. why do i mention Energy in the manner i have? to me, the act of Believing in God, is a much easier pill to swallow than trying to claim Energy (which NEEDS a SOURCE) created itself and here we are. because now you must apply all facts of Energy to every living, created, and proposed idealism. and let's be honest here, the Energy facts required to operate as a battery that is the Source are significantly different than a human eating food for Energy!! not even the same concept or TRUTHS!! so, i believe to accept God or to accept Energy (which Needs/Requires a separate source) in the form of how the Universe began is FACTUALLY the very SAME CONCEPT!! and proof that energy is not its own source, the power given to the spark plug when the ignition draws off the battery and reserve support of the alternator still requires a Source of Fuel and air intake to combust. Energy in one form cannot combust, but it takes energy in several forms to combust. but, the battery is man made, fuel is natural, and the air is natural. none of them on their own could start a motor. So, how is it possible that only ONE FORM of ENERGY (Neutron) is the Cause to the Universe when alone it is DISABLED?? you know when Science is lying when they give a neutron dual plurality to produce both negative and positive integers to create its own battery. IT STILL REQUIRES FUEL AND AIR!! and a neutron cannot create fuel and air. What created the Universe is keeping the Universe still growing, but all within the Universe Life is DYING!! and it's a good thing that when the Bang happened and the Laws went into effect to keep the motion curent, or the Universe still in its original state of continual Expansion would be collapsing. whoa, Laws "after" the Bang. Laws before the Bang which annihilated would be Annihilated Laws. but Laws after the Bang, feeds Design, but the only way the Laws could be in existence now would be for them to have been FORMED after the Bang!! now, we are beginning to peel back the false layers of educated Guessing for Probable Fact!! Imagine that, thinking outside of the box, and a believer in God too!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
wisdom
|
|
Interesting that you breed such powerful dogs. The names Jigmay, Jampa, are to my knowledge generic sir names like Smith For example, in Ngapoi Ngawang Jigme, Ngapoi was his family name and Nga-Wang Jigmê his personal name. and jampa is a monastery. i asked the one who named them. sorry to interrupt but we have been studying the tibetan peoples for some time now and your article was uplifting them :) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
DOES GOD EXIST ?
|
|
I would go along with that 'alien' idea, can't wait for us to 'discover' them. Imagine what the religious nutters would have to say about that! A friend once suggested that we might be on this planet (and others?) like rats in a cage during an experiment. We might indeed! Isaiah 45: 11 Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. 12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. The journal Astrobiology reminds scientists that the presence of water, even if it’s in liquid form, isn’t enough for life to survive. 11 So said the Lord, the Holy One of Israel, and his Creator, "Ask Me about the signs; concerning My children and the work of My hands do you command Me? יאכֹּֽה־אָמַ֧ר יְהֹוָ֛ה קְד֥וֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל וְיוֹצְר֑וֹ הָאֹֽתִיּ֣וֹת שְׁאָל֔וּנִי עַל־בָּנַ֛י וְעַל־פֹּ֥עַל יָדַ֖י תְּצַוֻּֽנִי: 12 I made the earth, and I created man upon it; as for Me-My hands stretched out the heavens, and I ordained their host. יבאָֽנֹכִי֙ עָשִׂ֣יתִי אֶ֔רֶץ וְאָדָ֖ם עָלֶ֣יהָ בָרָ֑אתִי אֲנִ֗י יָדַי֙ נָט֣וּ שָׁמַ֔יִם וְכָל־צְבָאָ֖ם צִוֵּֽיתִי: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
DOES GOD EXIST ?
|
|
I would go along with that 'alien' idea, can't wait for us to 'discover' them. Imagine what the religious nutters would have to say about that! A friend once suggested that we might be on this planet (and others?) like rats in a cage during an experiment. We might indeed! Isaiah 45: 11 Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. 12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. The journal Astrobiology reminds scientists that the presence of water, even if it’s in liquid form, isn’t enough for life to survive. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
