100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Untitled (God Died) | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I read the poem as written by some one who has freed himself from religious dogma and is now able to find a spirituality free from narrowly defined concepts of a universal conciousness. The athiest having no need for "god", is now able to fully evolve into the spiritual being he was born to be. Interesting. I can relate to the concept of one having 'evolved', but I fail to recognize how it is possible to comprehend a spirituality when spirituality is defined as the realm of influences externally exhibited upon the soul. My understanding of atheistic comperhensions is that inner voices are merely random thoughts and not influential in scope. If guidance is autonomous, then guidance is merely social deference and pragmatism at play influencing the choices of personal will and endeavor. In that regard, it is plausible that governance is entirely man's responsibility, but still accountability must exist, evebn in social interactions. I disagree with the concept that spiritual influence do not also bear responsibility for being held to account by the judgement of the individual. Coherence only supercedes incoherence through understanding the nature of that which is influential. It is either random white noise or truly voices of governance that influence one's soul. My conclusion is that there must be coherence to spirituality and not anarchy. Anarchy and spirituality are oxymoronic when compared to one another. It is one or the other, not both. Finding a spirituality free from anything defined, be it narrow or wide, as a conscious reality is a contradiction in and of itself. Either God is or is not. Even Jesus recognized that when it is said that He remarked, " Let the dead bury the dead. Follow me." Not to preach, but the point is made that alternative realities are respected, even with God. In so far as God can respect personal renunciation of His influence for one's good, doesn't necessarily imply that God condones such a perspective, but it does imply that God is pragmatic concerning the will of those that would choose otherwise for themselves. In that regard, atheism validates itself as being a potential aspect in the will and judgement of mankind, but it doesn't give credibility to the concept that spirituality is an autonomous random influence. Atheism and spirituality are incongruent concepts, in my judgement.    |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism exists because God exists. If there was not really God there would not be the need to say I don't believe in God because the concept of God would not even exist in the very first place.
Therefore, it follows that atheism is just a confimation of God's existance. Then again as I have always sais atheists are good servants of God. Denying him they confirm His existance. TLW. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism exists because God exists. If there was not really God there would not be the need to say I don't believe in God because the concept of God would not even exist in the very first place.
Therefore, it follows that atheism is just a confimation of God's existance. Then again as I have always sais atheists are good servants of God. Denying him they confirm His existance. TLW. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism exists because God exists. If there was not really God there would not be the need to say I don't believe in God because the concept of God would not even exist in the very first place. Therefore, it follows that atheism is just a confimation of God's existance. Then again as I have always sais atheists are good servants of God. Denying him they confirm His existance. TLW. I have to say Miguel that this is certainly on par with the kinds of arguments religious people typically come up with as confirmation for their beliefs. That's for sure. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism exists because God exists. If there was not really God there would not be the need to say I don't believe in God because the concept of God would not even exist in the very first place. Therefore, it follows that atheism is just a confimation of God's existance. Then again as I have always sais atheists are good servants of God. Denying him they confirm His existance. TLW. I have to say Miguel that this is certainly on par with the kinds of arguments religious people typically come up with as confirmation for their beliefs. That's for sure. could be or could not be. yet is fairly logic if there is an opposite if follows by necessity the existance of the thing that is being opposed. simple logics. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism exists because God exists. If there was not really God there would not be the need to say I don't believe in God because the concept of God would not even exist in the very first place. Therefore, it follows that atheism is just a confimation of God's existance. Then again as I have always sais atheists are good servants of God. Denying him they confirm His existance. TLW. I have to say Miguel that this is certainly on par with the kinds of arguments religious people typically come up with as confirmation for their beliefs. That's for sure. a nice way of saying it sounds nuts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sorry I wasn't able to get in here until now. I read all the post and thought it was cool. I have to make clear that I did not write this poem it just spoke to me.
I think that so many of the people on here that speak out against Christianity were once Christians. We look back on that religion like it is our brother and we have such high hopes for it. Breaking away from religion,(Christianity for me)is a scary process were you literately think you are taking chances with your soul. Once you get past that point and realize you are more happy and more content then you ever where under religion, you know then it was all worth it. I see this poem as very uplifting and encouraging. I think the writer has stepped into a whole new world of possibility. the fact that so many Christians see only negative in it makes me think that negativity is all they have. I hope everyone can see the light and offer of true happiness in that poem. It is there for the taking. All you need to do is be truthful. Do you really hear voices? Do you really see miracles every day? Just answer truthfully to those two questions and you are on your way. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
wouldee
on
Sun 05/04/08 01:37 PM
|
|
Rabbit.
That you have escaped churchianity does not mean that you had been apprehended of Christ at all. I am glad, if you have escaped the errors of the falsehoods that parade as Christianity. Like wise for the author of the poem you cited. That, however, does not qualify that Christianity is the that depicted by the churchianity that feigns authenticity. I, too, do not have any affinity for churchianity, but do in fact rejoice in the truth of Jesus Christ and have found Him faithful to abide where invited wholeheartedly. I remain hopeful that others may also find the joy that I have found in the midst of all the distraactions that parrot the faith, miserably so. peace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Breaking away from religion,(Christianity for me)is a scary process were you literately think you are taking chances with your soul. Once you get past that point and realize you are more happy and more content then you ever where under religion, you know then it was all worth it. Yes, freeing oneself from superstition and myth is a very liberating feeling. And one that brings great peace. Actually this particular poem talks about god dying, but for many the liberation process actually brought them to a place where they feel closer to god in a very real sense. It’s just a god that is totally different from the myths of the biblical picture. A much more loving god. Or as some prefer to call it, a much more embracing spirituality. In truth, it would be impossible for anyone to rebel against a real god and actually end up feeling better about themselves, their lives, and more at peace in their hearts. Such a scenario would be impossible. If the god were real and they were genuinely rebelling against they would absolute feel dis-ease in their spirit. They would feel empty like they had abandoned something. But in truth they never rebelled or abandoned anything other than a bunch of empty superstitious fabrications created by man for the express purpose of burdening them with guilt in the first place. While I think the poem is good, and I can certainly identify with it, because, as Reverend Rabbit says, most of us were Christians at one time, and I’m certainly no exception to that by far. However, I still have faith in spirituality. I have always innately known that I am eternal. I knew this long before I was old enough to even understand what religion was. I knew this when I was a toddler. I didn’t come into being when I was born, and I won’t cease to exist when my body dies. I’ve also come to realize that time is in fact an illusion of spacetime. I actually understand Einstein’s Theory of relativity and I know how time works. There is no time for ‘god’ or us really. All that exists is the eternal now. If you exist now, then you will always exist because there is no other time in which to cease to exist. Well, I’m getting side-tracked there,  , but my point is that just because I realized that the religion I was taught as a child turned out to be a falsity that didn’t cause me to become an ‘atheist’. I knew the spirit before I knew religion, so the death of religion did not equate to the death of God for me. God is real, he just has nothing to do with ancient dogma (at least no more so than the fact that he did create the men who fabricated those stories). Some of it may have been spiritually inspired, other parts are clearly demagoguery. So for me, even though I now recognize the difference between religion and god, I don’t view god as being dead. I simply realize that god is totally different from what those stories described. And my saving grace is the simple faith (and innate feeling) that god surely must be more compassionate than me. As long as that’s true, then I’m in great hands. If it’s not true, then nothing really matters. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I, too, do not have any affinity for churchianity, but do in fact rejoice in the truth of Jesus Christ and have found Him faithful to abide where invited wholeheartedly. Wouldee, with all due respect, all you are really doing here is formally denying Christianity whilst trying to salvage Jesus. A LOT of people are in that boat Wouldee!!! A lot of people would love to save Jesus from the biblical picture. The problem is that it can’t really be done. At least not in totality. The only way Jesus can be saved from the biblical dogma is to recognize that his death was not preplanned and cannot have been for the propose of man’s salvation. Only then can you save Jesus from the rest of the biblical dogma. The reason being that the very proclamation that the crucifixion of Jesus was a sacrificial lamb to God to appease the sins of man requires that you accept the entire dogma of the old testament. That’s precisely the churchianity that you’d like to denounce. You really aren’t any different from me Wouldee. You’re just clinging to Jesus whilst denouncing Christianity by fancifully referring to it as churchianity. Trust me, I tried to save Jesus from “churchianity” myself. It’s an impossible goal. It can’t be done. Many have attempted this including the great Isaac Newton even he resigned to its impossibility and finally denounced the whole picture. You either have to accept the whole kit and caboodle or forfeit the idea that Jesus could be the salvation of your ‘sins’. No middle of the road will actually suffice. That doesn’t mean that you can’t personally save Jesus. I certainly did. Jesus is my best friend, but he’s definitely not the savior of my soul. That is impossible for a myriad of reasons not the least of which is that I won’t even permit it. I wouldn’t even allow him to die for my sins by simply refusing to accept his offer to do so. To accept his offer would be the same as nailing him to the cross myself. Not to mention the fact that it would imply that God is a bloodthirsty sadist who is appeased by blood sacrifices. So you assertion that you can accept Jesus whilst denouncing “churchianity” is really a denial. You’re simply rejecting the religion and clinging onto Jesus. But why? What’s your motivation? Is it your love for him???? Is that your sole reason? Or do you need what he has to offer? Do you need to know that you’ll live forever? Do you need someone else to tell you that you’re forgiven of your sins? What is it that you need from Jesus? Jesus lives in my heart as a spirit from the past. I believe he was a real man who lived and preached the many of the things that were said that her preached. I don’t accept the superstitious dogma that he was born of a virgin, died for my sins, and rose from the dead, from my point of view THAT is “churchianity” Jesus taught us to love one another and to have faith that god loves us more than we can know. That was his message. If you take that message into your heart what more do you need? Promises of eternal life? Promises of forgivenss? I accept Jesus without any strings attached. No promises required. Not churchianity necessary. No blood thirsty crotchety old judge to appease. Just pure love with no need to coerce me by offers of eternal life or forgiveness for the sins of mankind. Sins I’ve never even committed. The crotchety old judge would really have to be a strict to expect appeasements for my level of imperfection. That’s not an egotistical statement Wouldee, it’s just the downright truth. If God expects that kind of perfection what good would it do to go to his heaven anyway? Why should I feel I’d be any less perfect there (and still be me!) I mean seriously, if God is going to change me into a ‘prefect’ being when I go to heaven then I won’t be who I am any longer. It would be like a rerun of the Stepford Wives. It just sounds to me like you’ve already rejected the religion - “churchianity”. You’re just in limbo with a Jesus hanging on a cross with no crotchety old judge to appease. You’ve just rejected the religion and stole Jesus. That’s all you did as far as I can see by what you are saying. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
wouldee
on
Sun 05/04/08 02:36 PM
|
|
I, too, do not have any affinity for churchianity, but do in fact rejoice in the truth of Jesus Christ and have found Him faithful to abide where invited wholeheartedly. Wouldee, with all due respect, all you are really doing here is formally denying Christianity whilst trying to salvage Jesus. A LOT of people are in that boat Wouldee!!! A lot of people would love to save Jesus from the biblical picture. The problem is that it can’t really be done. At least not in totality. The only way Jesus can be saved from the biblical dogma is to recognize that his death was not preplanned and cannot have been for the propose of man’s salvation. Only then can you save Jesus from the rest of the biblical dogma. The reason being that the very proclamation that the crucifixion of Jesus was a sacrificial lamb to God to appease the sins of man requires that you accept the entire dogma of the old testament. That’s precisely the churchianity that you’d like to denounce. You really aren’t any different from me Wouldee. You’re just clinging to Jesus whilst denouncing Christianity by fancifully referring to it as churchianity. Trust me, I tried to save Jesus from “churchianity” myself. It’s an impossible goal. It can’t be done. Many have attempted this including the great Isaac Newton even he resigned to its impossibility and finally denounced the whole picture. You either have to accept the whole kit and caboodle or forfeit the idea that Jesus could be the salvation of your ‘sins’. No middle of the road will actually suffice. That doesn’t mean that you can’t personally save Jesus. I certainly did. Jesus is my best friend, but he’s definitely not the savior of my soul. That is impossible for a myriad of reasons not the least of which is that I won’t even permit it. I wouldn’t even allow him to die for my sins by simply refusing to accept his offer to do so. To accept his offer would be the same as nailing him to the cross myself. Not to mention the fact that it would imply that God is a bloodthirsty sadist who is appeased by blood sacrifices. So you assertion that you can accept Jesus whilst denouncing “churchianity” is really a denial. You’re simply rejecting the religion and clinging onto Jesus. But why? What’s your motivation? Is it your love for him???? Is that your sole reason? Or do you need what he has to offer? Do you need to know that you’ll live forever? Do you need someone else to tell you that you’re forgiven of your sins? What is it that you need from Jesus? Jesus lives in my heart as a spirit from the past. I believe he was a real man who lived and preached the many of the things that were said that her preached. I don’t accept the superstitious dogma that he was born of a virgin, died for my sins, and rose from the dead, from my point of view THAT is “churchianity” Jesus taught us to love one another and to have faith that god loves us more than we can know. That was his message. If you take that message into your heart what more do you need? Promises of eternal life? Promises of forgivenss? I accept Jesus without any strings attached. No promises required. Not churchianity necessary. No blood thirsty crotchety old judge to appease. Just pure love with no need to coerce me by offers of eternal life or forgiveness for the sins of mankind. Sins I’ve never even committed. The crotchety old judge would really have to be a strict to expect appeasements for my level of imperfection. That’s not an egotistical statement Wouldee, it’s just the downright truth. If God expects that kind of perfection what good would it do to go to his heaven anyway? Why should I feel I’d be any less perfect there (and still be me!) I mean seriously, if God is going to change me into a ‘prefect’ being when I go to heaven then I won’t be who I am any longer. It would be like a rerun of the Stepford Wives. It just sounds to me like you’ve already rejected the religion - “churchianity”. You’re just in limbo with a Jesus hanging on a cross with no crotchety old judge to appease. You’ve just rejected the religion and stole Jesus. That’s all you did as far as I can see by what you are saying. Abra, Understandably, I am aware of your lack of perspective, and know full well that you never had entered into Christ, nor ever worn the Holy Spirit, with the cognizance it merits. Precisely that is why you never comprehend me at all. Precisely that is why you assume to pontificate so fractionally in every case. But then, you are not aware of that which has not appreheded you for your good and fullness of joy. There remains so much that you and others do not know. But one must go to God for such knowledge, Abra. Please be less conclusory in your contempts and you and i will not collide. You are blind to the things that I share and suppose my points are designed to discredit you. Not so. My point is to remind you that you speak of things that you know nothing about as though you do. The delusion is the violence and abuse tat has spawned your contemptibility of Christ and the true church. But that just remains my opinion in your heart, so long as you assume that it has not escaped your perspective as credibly real. That's the rub, Abra. You have never known that which you judge and do great harm in the lack of discernment that has clouded your objectivity. The only assurance that you have in not being abusive is assuming the perspective that you just really aren't certain in your judgements about Christianity in truth, and that is well enough in tempering your opinions, which are greatly respected where they aren't at the expense of the truth of the Christian way of life and true faith. It would be better for God to reveal to you directly that which has escaped you, but short of such an event, you can control your discourse with much more sensitivity and out of a willingness to remain openminded enough to respect that not all things are known to you. As I have numerous other times tried to offer you, it would be far more respectful and dignified of you to refrain from pontificating about Christianity being that you have no comprehension of its veracity, in fact. The signs are everywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You must have missed the post a few minutes back, where I mentioned my best friend is a Christian. Several of my other close friends are, as well. To assert that I "view all Christians in the same negative tense" is absurd and demonstrably untrue. If it helps you to ignore the parts of my posts that don't agree with your assertions, feel free to do so. If it helps you to take things I wrote and interpret them in ways which are clearly contradictory to what I actually said, that's OK, too. I am seeing the same thing, Lex. Apparently I have meant a lot of things that I have not actually said. I have been accused of "bashing beliefs" but not one iota of evidence has been produced, despite my repeated requests. If someone felt "bashed", I would have liked to know what it was I said that made them feel that way so that I could apologize. I wait still. There is no evidence because I challenged no one's beliefs. As I said elsewhere, if you slap my face and I take issue with that, will you say I am bashing your beliefs? That is how it feels to me. Apparently intellignent discourse is not welcome here. Well if you need to have the hypocrisy that you keep peeking around moved closer so you can see it let's begin with this one. http://www.justsayhi.com/topic/show/113509 You clearly started this one for the purpose of gathering for the most part an unwitting army of people who unwittingly complied with your "stroke me, I feel inferior" ploy. It was your intention that Rapunzel would see that and realize how nice you are? Low-down back stabbing childish behavior and I personally would have brought it to the attention of the mods after I brought that behavior that I have not seen since high school to your attention. Standby for more. You have many posts to go through. You ask and you shall receive.   Furthermore, Lex was talking to me and our discussion is not to become part of your pity party. I have carried our discussion into e-mail to avoid boring those not involved.  You can't have a private conversation in a public forum. If you post, I can reply no matter who you are speaking to. And even though I can see why you think what you do, that post wasn't even about Rapunzel. There are other two faced people on here, and I was reacting to them. I understand why you would think that it was about her, though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Understandably, I am aware of your lack of perspective, and know full well that you never had entered into Christ, nor ever worn the Holy Spirit, with the cognizance it merits. Well, I see you’re still in defense mode. Please be less conclusory in your contempts and you and i will not collide. My previous post was not intended to make conclusions about you. I was simply trying to express what I perceive you to be saying in your posts. You seem to always be denouncing an idea of ‘chruchianity’ whilst still trying to push “Christianity”. I guess you’ve lost me then. I only know that the Bible must be taken as a whole, or not at all. It can’t be made to work half-heartedly. You either must accept that God is appeased by blood sacrifices, or toss in the towel. There’s just no other choice. Personally I don’t believe that God is appeased by blood sacrifices. That pretty much destroys any possibility of me ever believing in the biblical picture of God. That’s where I’m at. If anyone expects me to believe in the biblical picture of God they’re going to have to convince me why an all-loving God would design a universe in which he gets his rocks off by being offered blood sacrifices. And if you think that’s an abrasive comment about the biblical picture then take it up with the biblical God because that’s his fetish not mine. You absolutely must believe that God is like this if you are going to believe in the Bible. I don’t believe that God is appeased by blood sacrifices. Pure and simple. End of Story. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism exists because God exists. If there was not really God there would not be the need to say I don't believe in God because the concept of God would not even exist in the very first place. Therefore, it follows that atheism is just a confimation of God's existance. Then again as I have always sais atheists are good servants of God. Denying him they confirm His existance. TLW. I have no intent to offend you but to me that is like saying that Santa Claus must exist because some people don't believe in him??!!?? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You must have missed the post a few minutes back, where I mentioned my best friend is a Christian. Several of my other close friends are, as well. To assert that I "view all Christians in the same negative tense" is absurd and demonstrably untrue. If it helps you to ignore the parts of my posts that don't agree with your assertions, feel free to do so. If it helps you to take things I wrote and interpret them in ways which are clearly contradictory to what I actually said, that's OK, too. I am seeing the same thing, Lex. Apparently I have meant a lot of things that I have not actually said. I have been accused of "bashing beliefs" but not one iota of evidence has been produced, despite my repeated requests. If someone felt "bashed", I would have liked to know what it was I said that made them feel that way so that I could apologize. I wait still. There is no evidence because I challenged no one's beliefs. As I said elsewhere, if you slap my face and I take issue with that, will you say I am bashing your beliefs? That is how it feels to me. Apparently intellignent discourse is not welcome here. Well if you need to have the hypocrisy that you keep peeking around moved closer so you can see it let's begin with this one. http://www.justsayhi.com/topic/show/113509 You clearly started this one for the purpose of gathering for the most part an unwitting army of people who unwittingly complied with your "stroke me, I feel inferior" ploy. It was your intention that Rapunzel would see that and realize how nice you are? Low-down back stabbing childish behavior and I personally would have brought it to the attention of the mods after I brought that behavior that I have not seen since high school to your attention. Standby for more. You have many posts to go through. You ask and you shall receive. Furthermore, Lex was talking to me and our discussion is not to become part of your pity party. I have carried our discussion into e-mail to avoid boring those not involved. Off to work hiker, I will help you locate said comments that you asked to be pointed out this evening. Though you asked publicly I would prefer to point them out to you privately. It is not my intention to hang you on a cross (pun intended), but to simply point out the "double sidedness" of your reasoning. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism exists because God exists. If there was not really God there would not be the need to say I don't believe in God because the concept of God would not even exist in the very first place. Therefore, it follows that atheism is just a confimation of God's existance. Then again as I have always sais atheists are good servants of God. Denying him they confirm His existance. TLW. Do you believe in Santa? If I say that I do not believe in Santa Claus is that proof of his existence? Just curious. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Atheism exists because God exists. If there was not really God there would not be the need to say I don't believe in God because the concept of God would not even exist in the very first place. Therefore, it follows that atheism is just a confimation of God's existance. Then again as I have always sais atheists are good servants of God. Denying him they confirm His existance. TLW. I have no intent to offend you but to me that is like saying that Santa Claus must exist because some people don't believe in him??!!?? Oops, I used your example before reading all the way through the rest of the posts. Great thought, though!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have no intent to offend you but to me that is like saying that Santa Claus must exist because some people don't believe in him??!!?? Let's not forget Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster. Unicorns? Fire-breathing dragons? Zeus!!! How about the fact that I'm going to have wild and crazy sex with the sexiest woman on earth tonight! If I can find someone who doesn't believe that then it must be true! Yippeee!!!! Surely someone must believe that I'm not going to have wild and crazy sex with the sexiest woman on earth tonight. Please!!!! Someone tell me they don't believe it so it will be TRUE! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have no intent to offend you but to me that is like saying that Santa Claus must exist because some people don't believe in him??!!?? Let's not forget Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster. Unicorns? Fire-breathing dragons? Zeus!!! How about the fact that I'm going to have wild and crazy sex with the sexiest woman on earth tonight! If I can find someone who doesn't believe that then it must be true! Yippeee!!!! Surely someone must believe that I'm not going to have wild and crazy sex with the sexiest woman on earth tonight. Please!!!! Someone tell me they don't believe it so it will be TRUE! I don't believe it! And I can't wait! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
wouldee
on
Sun 05/04/08 03:51 PM
|
|
Understandably, I am aware of your lack of perspective, and know full well that you never had entered into Christ, nor ever worn the Holy Spirit, with the cognizance it merits. Well, I see you’re still in defense mode. Please be less conclusory in your contempts and you and i will not collide. My previous post was not intended to make conclusions about you. I was simply trying to express what I perceive you to be saying in your posts. You seem to always be denouncing an idea of ‘chruchianity’ whilst still trying to push “Christianity”. I guess you’ve lost me then. I only know that the Bible must be taken as a whole, or not at all. It can’t be made to work half-heartedly. You either must accept that God is appeased by blood sacrifices, or toss in the towel. There’s just no other choice. Personally I don’t believe that God is appeased by blood sacrifices. That pretty much destroys any possibility of me ever believing in the biblical picture of God. That’s where I’m at. If anyone expects me to believe in the biblical picture of God they’re going to have to convince me why an all-loving God would design a universe in which he gets his rocks off by being offered blood sacrifices. And if you think that’s an abrasive comment about the biblical picture then take it up with the biblical God because that’s his fetish not mine. You absolutely must believe that God is like this if you are going to believe in the Bible. I don’t believe that God is appeased by blood sacrifices. Pure and simple. End of Story. Abra, Peace is not appeasement. But God dwelling in flesh as a man and death not holding that man down and ending his truth and influence has more merit than you have considered, apparently. What can stand against such a feat as overcoming death and the grave and become an advocate for man as having been a partaker of man's condition? Not any angel or spiritual entity can claim such a victory in having overcome such a fate, and that establishes the pre-eminence of the one that has done so by leaving one state of being, partaking of another state of being and returning as supreme over both, unquestionably. That shoulld be sufficient to marginalize any blood sacrifice and brutal sacrifice by extant. But it is the minutia of the symbolisms that escapes the discernment of those that choose to wrestle with the paradox and not wrestle with the conscience in grasping that man has been deceived, yet offered every opportunity to overcome death and the grave equally and priorily. the offer had been present, veiled only by the lack of discernemnt of the ends justifying the means. It is still possible today for any person to do the same, but pre-eminence has already been established. It's best that the author and finisher of such things did it personally first. But then, that's what you escapes your judgement. Wrestling with the pre-eminence of one with stinging words and tough sayings attached to his person leaves little room but to embrace that which is given, in any case. So, see it as folly and foolishness. it is still wiser than man. Which reminds me, what then about all the other voices and entities that exist and touch man? That certainly must also bow to the pre-eminence of the Victor. And the Bible is clear that many did try to do just that thousands of years ago, and that one will attempt to do that anti-thetically and unsuccessfully too one day in the future. Even the angels sought to accomplish this for themselves, but only one has come from their world into this and gone back again. get it? N'est pas?
|
|
|
|
|
