100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: proof | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
anyone who wants to see a documentary on what is going on by very respected people you probally won't believe are actually saying this then watch this video. Then see if what it is saying has a hint of truth and this is from 4 years ago.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6737097743434902428&ei=9jDrSfOOD5zE-gG39uxx&q=outfoxed Blessings...Miles |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Foliel
on
Sun 04/19/09 09:13 AM
|
|
We as adults can say we know right from wrong. Where did that come from? Are you saying your parents and society did not show you what was right from wrong? Your child learning years came from yourself? You need nobody but yourself? How crazy can we be. We are influenced in our morality by society. It changes we change. The scriptures you want to call as a set of laws/rules that are not good. Have they changed? No ..we have changed them. does that make it right. Do we not hold sacred certain family traditions that are within our families which are very important to us they are passed on throughout generations of our own to adheed to? Of cource we do. The scriptures are an example for us to teach us. Yahweh tells us as i have posted to teach these for a long and happy life. is this not true? Eph 6:1-4 6:1 Children, obey your parents in Yahweh: for this is right. 2 Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise ;) 3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. 4 And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of Yahweh. KJV is this not true? Yet our society says spoil the child that the state take control of your child to learn who really is the authority. Men in high places.Is who. So if you may as an adult growing up in a time where children ran the streets without fear. At least I did. What has happened since then? parents have become the villian who should be watched by our govt. Is this not true. You kid yourself you are being decieved and controled as i post this. Your rights have been taken away. What has happened in direct correllation with this? the scriptures are fairy tales. Hitler said give me the children and in a generation i will have a nation. Oh how true. Change is good but not principles. We quarrenteen the Amish when they get measles and protect deadly diseases people have where others have no idea a person may be sick. Upside down politics. A purpose to control us and they have done a darn good job of it by making us think we have choice when we have none anytime they decide. And you love it. Ps 19:7-9 7 The law of Yahweh is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of Yahweh is sure, making wise the simple. 8 The statutes of Yahweh are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of Yahweh is pure, enlightening the eyes. 9 The fear of Yahweh is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of Yahweh are true and righteous altogether. KJV Can we say that of our society that claims a fairy tale is Yahweh? We have laws we have fears. But only to the law breaker. If no, what are societies laws you obey for? Blessings..Miles My mom taught me everything she could but when push came to shove and I was presented with a moral dilemma it was me that made the judgement call. As for my father...i never knew him tome he is nothing more than a sperm donor. My mom never forced morals on me, she let me make my own decisions and watched carefully and was ready to jump in if I made a bad choice. She didn't punish me for it cuz i usually punished myself enough. (Unless i did something really wrong.) Humans will inherently need other people as we are social beings, but I do not need someone to tell me whether or not I am leading a moral life. I do not obey rules and laws because I fear some higher power, I obey them because it is the right thing to do. See, I got my "proof" when I was 7 years old and in a coma from being hit by a car, the religious people told my mother to pray and to start to let me go....thankgully she didn't listen 
The "good" christians were all set to have a funeral for a 7 year old boy that wasn't even dead. Had they had their way i wouldn't be here today. If this is the kind of god that people worship I will say Thanks but no thanks. My mom consulted my pediatrician and he told her that I would come out of the coma. Need more? how about being raped 7 times between the ages of 9-12. I prayed for it to stop, did it? no it didn't. My mother prayed for it to stop, it still didn't. We went to church and prayed, yet again it didnt stop. Sorry but that is all the proof I need, I had to take matters into my own hands and stop it. This was not the work of god working through me, this was the work of an angry, hurt, devastated child. I am now 32 and have spent the last 20 years piecing my life back together. I did this without religion and will continue to do so without religion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The scriptures you want to call as a set of laws/rules that are not good.
As long as people use them to harbor hate and harrassment against people who happen to love someone of their own gender then, no they are not good. As long as people use them to denounce others and pass moral judgements on them simply because they don't believe that the Jews speak for God then, no they are not good. There are many things in the scriptures of the OT that I feel are highly immoral, especially with respect to what the Jews claim about God's view of women. I don't believe the Jews speak for God, or ever spoke for God. I don't believe that God hates 'heathens' where a 'heathen' is simply defined as anyone who refuses to believe that the Jews speak for God. No Miles, the Bible is a predjudiced book that was used by a culture who wanted to claim that only THEY speak for God! And now the Christians stole their act and over the course of history make that attitude even more blood stained. The whole religion is just arrogance gone wild. It has nothign to do with any God. In fact, I see nothing moral about a story of a God who instructs people to murder heathens and then sends his son into that crowd to be murdered as a sacrifical lamb to APPEASE God so he can forgive the sins of man. It doesn't even make any SENSE! It would be like God saying, "Here! If you murder my Son I'll forgive you of your sins!" What sense does that even make? 
What kind of a God need to be pacified with a blood sacrifice before he can forgive people?
The whole concept is a grossly immoral concept as far as I can see. The Bible is all about a confessed jealous God who lusts to become the King of King and Lord of Lords of his very own creation, and he threatens to unleash his wrath on anyone who doesn't play by his rules. What kind of a lesson is that to teach children. Do you really want your children to apspire to grow up to be like that God! I sure hope not! To solve all their problems using viloence and threats just like God does?
The biblical picture of God is the PERFECT EXAMPLE of what NOT to aspire to become! It's also a PERFECT EXAMPLE of how NOT to be a parent! The Biblical God demonstrates the most horrific mentoring skills possible! I would never dream of asking my children to make blood sacrifices to me to pay for their disbehavior. Even as a mere mortal I can come up with FAR WISER and more productive and constructive solutions to these kinds of problems. I don't see where the Bible is wise at all. Possibly in some of the things that Jesus taught, but certainly not from the things that the God of Abraham taught and DID! His examples are HORRIBLE! He even takes Satan up on a bet, and BETRAYS his loyal worshipper JOB! Thus proving that even the most devout followers of the God of Abraham can't trust him to be TRUSTWORTHY! It's a HORRIBLE BOOK! Why you keep saying that it's "perfect" is beyond me. I see this God's behavior as an example of how NOT to behave. I certainly wouldn't use it as an example of how we should behave. The only good things are some of the things that Jesus taught, but those can also be traced to precisely the same things that Buddha taught! So why not just go with the moral values of Buddha and toss the OT in a lake of fire where it belongs? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is a shifting middle to the argument you are attempting to make. You claim that stoning is part of Christain doctrine - it's not. It might have been part of the mosaic Law - but then your problem is with Judism - not Christianity. And any attempt to equate the two would swiftly be shot down by any inquiry of a Rabbi.
So I repeat - Christianity says nothing about stoning anyone. You chose a bad example to attept to support your earlier post. I'll just assume that you spoke prematurely on your claim about my posts. I have little need to post on topics that I have not researched or studied - and your claiming that I have without providing references is only proving my point. You can't sit there and make the claim that Old Testament =/= Christianity, when so many Christians out there use it to infringe upon the rights of others. Like I said before, If the Old Testament truly and nothing to do with the Christian religion, it would not be a part of the bible. The Old Testament and Christianity is not equal in the sense that you are trying to demonstrate it too. I thought you were familiar with Christianity. Surely you are aware of the numerous references in the New Testament that Christians are not to follow the Law, but under the grace of the finished work of Christ - who is the fullfillment of the Law. You claim to be well aware of what a Christian believes, and I have no reason to doubt you - so why this game of twisting what is in the bible to serve your pretext's? The idea of a christian stoning anyone could never be concluded from contextual content of scripture - even for a casual peruser. So, it makes me wonder just how familiar you are with Christianity when you fight for this frivilous argument. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do you even care?What is the point of debating if you are just going to say stupid things?Seriously either debate me with facts backing up what you say or this conversation is pointless. You said millions of people saw him. i asked you how millions of people saw him? Thats a perfectly valid question. Nothing YOU said contained anything which is a fact. OK, some books were written, thats a fact. Books do not prove anything do they? Some historical events, people and places mentioned in the bible as well. And what? Thats not proof of a thing either. If you dont like my questions, or my style of writing, please just ignore me rather than getting all pissy. Jesus walked the earth for 3 years and spoke to millions of people.The bible says many times that so many people were following Jesus that you could not count the numbers.The original intent to kill Jesus was that the Romans saw that Jesus had a army of millions that would do anything he told them to and easily wipe out the Romans.One of his disciples even suggested that they wipe out Rome but Jesus said that is not why he is here. Where is the proof that Jesus did this? In the bible? Do you really think that is proof? Where is the proof that Thomas Jefferson wrote the declaration of Independence? Now don't make the mistake of saying we have the original document - as there is as much validity to that being genuine than there is the dead sea scrolls. And you have no more reason to believe those who witnessed the document, or claimed that Jefferson wrote it - than you do the writers of the gospels, who make the exact same claims. Now - if you can somehow convince me that the Declareation of Independence is not someone's mythical document - or that Thomas Jefferson existed and actually is the author - and provide "proof" of it... Well , maybe you'll get the point. I dont get your point. Maybe i am just not bright enough, but i have absolutely no idea why you have brought this up. The declaration is a real valid, and legal document, whoever it was that actually penned it, jefferson or not, and im pretty sure that there is no doubt that Thomas Jefferson was a real person, which can be proved(but not by me, i dont have this proof to hand or a desire to search for it). He never made claims of being able to walk on water, or being the son of god. You dont need faith to believe in the declaration. Please please, give me something more tangible. Ive already stated that i know next to nothing about religion, so surely you must beable to come out with something to shut me up? All i have is common sense, but all im getting in reply is weak arguments, nonsense and randomness. So why is it that you believe Thomas Jefferson existed and not Jesus? If you apply the same reaoning you use to assess your belief in the existance of Jefferson, to the existance of Jesus - you should arrive to the same conclusion. If you are basing your belief of Jesus on what "He" believed - than nothing tangible is going to convince you - as your approach to the topic is illogical and defies common sense. The question of "proof" lies in the testamonies of eyewitnesses, and in the Archeological finds which corroberate the accounts. This is done for every individual known in history. There is no better "proof" of who Shakespeare was and what he said and believed, than there is for Jesus. Yet, does anyone doubt there was a Shakespeare? So the point is - what denotes "proof"? You are really clutching at straws now. Nobody doubts there was a Shakespeare, because there are countless plays written by him. These plays do not contradict eachother, they are very well written peices of art. I would bet that there are some original pieces still in existence and that it can easily be proved that they were all penned by the same person. Shakespeare isnt asking anyone to live their lives differently, nor does he claim to be the son of God. There is no need for anyone to have made up his existence, whereas for Jesus and Christianity, there are a whole host of reasons why people might have done this. Maybe shakespeare was really a bloke called Bob, it doesnt really matter if we cant prove his entire existence. Someone wrote those plays. Why i am even bothering to respond to such a ridiculous argument is beyond me. I have to whole heartedly agree with your last statement, as you demonstrate a serious ack of having educated yourself on what the bible actually says. There's nothing like holding a stance from pure ignorance of a topic. So please - take your own advice and stop commenting on topics you're uneducated about. Well done Sherlock. I have already stated, plainly, in this thread that i dont know very much about religion. But that doesnt mean either that i have pure ignorance on the topic. Even if i did, that doesnt mean i cant join in the discussion. Just because you think you are so much more highly educated on the subject doesnt intimidate me in the least. I cant believe you are resorting to that tactic so quickly. For all your education on the bible, whatever that may be, all you have offered in reponse to me so far is random clap trap about Jefferson and Shakespeare, and then followed it up by calling ME ignorant. I know so little in terms of facts about the bible, and thats all you have got?? Surely, with all your education, you must beable to put my views to shame? And anyway, why should i educate myself on what the bible actually says, when there is plain proof(to those of us not blinkered to reality) that it is not the word of God. I would consider that a waste of my time. And anyway, you cant use the bible to prove the bible, that is just plain silly. So whatever it is exactly that the bible does say, is irrelavent in this topic. I'm not claiming your ignorance - I'm quoting you on it. You've already demonstrated by your own words that you are not familiar with the bible - so I ask you this. What proof that it is not the word of God? Someone else's opinion? I would suggest that if you want proof that it is not the word of God - then you read it for yourself and make your own decision about it, and not rely on what someone else thinks about it - as you are likely not aware of their bias' about it - or if in fact they know enough about what they're saying to be even qualified to give evidence of proof that it is NOT the word of God - when that is only something that God himself could do. Again - it's a matter of what the criteria for "proof" is. You did claim my ignorance very blatantly but we can move on from that. Granted, i have not read the book myself. But i have read commentaries from people that back up what they say with evidence and logic. I dont take anyones word as being the gospel truth but rather analyse what i read and THEN make my own decisions on what i think is true. If it is not acceptible to look at other peoples opinions and derive your own from them, then its equally not acceptible for any Christian to seek opinions from their priest/pastor/vicar etc It would also be pointless reading any other book on the subject other than the bible. Nobody has completely made up their own mind on the subject completely independantly of other peoples opinions. One day i do intend to read it. But to study it? Nah. Plenty of far more intelligent people than me have already done that, its far easier and far more worthwhile making sense of what these people have to say about it. I read these threads and read all kinds of opinions from both sides of the argument. I am open to change my current opinions if i am given any information to justify it. But so far, in terms of the topic of this thread, nothing has been offered. All i have been given is that the Bible is true because the bible itself says so. I cant buy that. And you shouldn't buy that. Nor should you formulate your opinion on commentaries about it by people who you really can't access their bias - not knowing the original material yourself. I'm not saying that you should "study" the scriptures, my caution is that if you want to determine the truth of scripture for yourself, I would think reading it for yourself will get you better results than reading someone else's interpretation - especialy if it is one based on Pretext, and not Context. Hard to tell the difference when unfamiliar with the actual document itself. I wouldn't change this caution if you had decided to read a commentary about the bible from Billy Graham, and decided that everything he said about it were the truth as well. You are correct, i really should read the scriptures myself. Like i said before, i do intend to. But its not high on my priority list to do it at any point soon. The best i will allow myself right now is other peoples commentaries. If i did read them, and especially if i 'studied' them a little, i would be in a much better position to argue what i believe. But reading them isn't going to change my opinions of them. I would bet that the more i know, the more i will disbelieve in them. There is no chance that i will become enlightened and start believing in them. I cant ignore things that other people seem ok about ignoring. My only point i am making here, is that even with my limited knowledge on the subject, it is still valid for me to be in this discussion. My limited knowledge should just make it easier for you to put my way of thinking down. Im just here to take part, and to learn. I dont close myself off to anything you put before me, its just what you have put before me hasnt got enough backbone to constitute a proper argument(on the subject of proof). The only thing my ignorant and naive brain can conclude is that there is NO proof. I need SOME. I'm not putting you down Dan - just trying to get a better idea of how you are drawing some of your conclusions - obviously, a few of which I don't agree with. That having been said - I fimely agree with you on the need to have some sort of proof to alter an opinion that I've no doubt you've reasoned out for yourself. I hold the same stance when it comes to the claims of Evolution, I await the answers to the questions I pose about these "obvious proofs" of the age of the earth, common ancestory, etc. So - I read what is available to me, and offer my opinions on those threads as well, and I'm certainly no expert on each of the sciences involved in the threads. And I have no desire to persue Evolutionary idea's, and more than I believe you may have in studying Christianity. So, I'm not attempting to have you not respond to threads on Christianity given whatever level of understanding you have - but I will challenge claims you make about it if it goes contrary to what I've learned through studying it - as that is the nature of posting on the forums. And that's pretty much where I'm coming from. No intention of putting you down is intended - I hope you have not thought this was the case. I may attack an idea you have - but it's not an attack on you. If I thought you weren't even capable of offering anything to the thread - I wouldn't bother to respond. That is the nature of how I post. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We as adults can say we know right from wrong. Where did that come from? Are you saying your parents and society did not show you what was right from wrong? Your child learning years came from yourself? You need nobody but yourself? How crazy can we be. We are influenced in our morality by society. It changes we change. The scriptures you want to call as a set of laws/rules that are not good. Have they changed? No ..we have changed them. does that make it right. Do we not hold sacred certain family traditions that are within our families which are very important to us they are passed on throughout generations of our own to adheed to? Of cource we do. The scriptures are an example for us to teach us. Yahweh tells us as i have posted to teach these for a long and happy life. is this not true? Eph 6:1-4 6:1 Children, obey your parents in Yahweh: for this is right. 2 Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise ;) 3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. 4 And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of Yahweh. KJV is this not true? Yet our society says spoil the child that the state take control of your child to learn who really is the authority. Men in high places.Is who. So if you may as an adult growing up in a time where children ran the streets without fear. At least I did. What has happened since then? parents have become the villian who should be watched by our govt. Is this not true. You kid yourself you are being decieved and controled as i post this. Your rights have been taken away. What has happened in direct correllation with this? the scriptures are fairy tales. Hitler said give me the children and in a generation i will have a nation. Oh how true. Change is good but not principles. We quarrenteen the Amish when they get measles and protect deadly diseases people have where others have no idea a person may be sick. Upside down politics. A purpose to control us and they have done a darn good job of it by making us think we have choice when we have none anytime they decide. And you love it. Ps 19:7-9 7 The law of Yahweh is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of Yahweh is sure, making wise the simple. 8 The statutes of Yahweh are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of Yahweh is pure, enlightening the eyes. 9 The fear of Yahweh is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of Yahweh are true and righteous altogether. KJV Can we say that of our society that claims a fairy tale is Yahweh? We have laws we have fears. But only to the law breaker. If no, what are societies laws you obey for? Blessings..Miles My mom taught me everything she could but when push came to shove and I was presented with a moral dilemma it was me that made the judgement call. As for my father...i never knew him tome he is nothing more than a sperm donor. My mom never forced morals on me, she let me make my own decisions and watched carefully and was ready to jump in if I made a bad choice. She didn't punish me for it cuz i usually punished myself enough. (Unless i did something really wrong.) Humans will inherently need other people as we are social beings, but I do not need someone to tell me whether or not I am leading a moral life. I do not obey rules and laws because I fear some higher power, I obey them because it is the right thing to do. See, I got my "proof" when I was 7 years old and in a coma from being hit by a car, the religious people told my mother to pray and to start to let me go....thankgully she didn't listen
The "good" christians were all set to have a funeral for a 7 year old boy that wasn't even dead. Had they had their way i wouldn't be here today. If this is the kind of god that people worship I will say Thanks but no thanks. My mom consulted my pediatrician and he told her that I would come out of the coma. Need more? how about being raped 7 times between the ages of 9-12. I prayed for it to stop, did it? no it didn't. My mother prayed for it to stop, it still didn't. We went to church and prayed, yet again it didnt stop. Sorry but that is all the proof I need, I had to take matters into my own hands and stop it. This was not the work of god working through me, this was the work of an angry, hurt, devastated child. I am now 32 and have spent the last 20 years piecing my life back together. I did this without religion and will continue to do so without religion. It is sad what you had to endure. religion is just that a social club. Prayer is nothing like what we have been told. It is ever ceasing beliving. At 7 you were showed people of no faith. You and your mom had more than all them put together because you never gave up. My main point is we fear the law if we break it. The laws of the land. So why are laws and penalties any different with Yahweh? The book is a book of right living.He promices to not give us more than we can bear (sp?) You are just like alot of people. I ran from religion and found I could not run from Yahweh. I have seen the oppisite of what you experienced in that Drs. and even the company I worked for to this day have no Idea how I am alive. I know.As I was dieng I thought the name or cried out the name Yahshua help me in my head as i was unable to speak or see. I was electricuted during the flood of 93 in a Electrical substation that the equipment failed instead of me I was the path for the current and of 14 thousand volts on a 99 degree day. I saw my life flash before my eyes from my earliests memories. All I could here was the crackle of electricity as a 230 pound me was being wipped around like a ragdoll. I could do nothing but think in my head Yahshua help me.bamm a insolater went to ground and took the sub out and let me go. I should of been like a piece of metal to a cutting torch compared an insulater that vis made to keep the electricity from the ground grid. When I stumbled out a lineman felt my heart and told his boss he had never felt anything,my heart beat so fast in his life. The Burn unit at mercy Hospital in Jefferson City mo had no answers they were sure when i was brought in i was cooked on the inside and would not live long. I went home with a clean bill of health the next morning and my superentent wanted me to take a less dangerous job because i acted as if i had no idea what had just happened. i am still the only one in at that time a 8000 employee company to survive let alone walk away from it in thier 105 year history. Miracles happen. I have no doubt when you were 7 you were a miracle. You and your mom could not believe what they were being told. Yet still you have your reasons and they were harsh way worse than anything i have experienced because mine were short lived. We wonder why. Why would a creator allow a child to go through this. We do not know. But your testimony right here may save someone from taking thier own life because of your strength. It is possible we do not know. When I was in the Air Force I tried out for para Rescue. The AF elite. I think i may of made it i passed the 1st day the 2nd day video's scared me to death watching them go down a cable to rescue a downed pilot while you could see machine gun fire going all around him as another one manned a m 50 trying to protect him. I left. chicken i guess. Thier motto. That Others May Live. That video proved that to me. You have alot of strength. Remember the scriptures this book as it is being caled alot. says thier are only 144000 in the world who truely believe and part of them are dead already. Leaves few true believers who Yahweh works through. So what you see and everyone else sees is a social club after money power or fame. People say alot of things. But what do they do and profess till death. Times are coming I believe to where those who confess will fall away and those who don't believe will believe. Because they are for real not the fairy tale. Cinderella had to have that other shoe you know. Blessings and Shalom My Friend..Miles |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hell is nothing but a scare tactic devised by satan himself.
The ministers of his proclaim it. they are the angels of light he has. You're as bad as Eljay, just making up your own religion and claiming that you got it from the Bible. So just because you do not understand the scriptures does not make them untrue.
Just because you make-up stuff doesn't make it true. 
Besides, this argument that certain humans don't understand the word of God is extremely lame. Do you realize that all you are doing is claiming that for some reason I should be unable to understand my creator, whilst you are privileged to have a perfect understanding. That very argument holds no water. If a supereme creator had intended a text to be for all his creation, then anyone should be able to understand if they truly want to. To suggest that I don't want to understand would be a huge personal insult against me that would be totally uncalled for. I want nothing more than to understand the truth of my existence. I don't see where the Bible even addresses these questions much less does it with any clarity or even in a postive way. The book is FOCUSED ON SIN and REPENTANCE! It's more concerned with condemning heathens than addressing good people! It clearly wasn't written for people like me.
Moreover, it's obvious that nobody can make sense of the book! The Jews denied that Jesus was "the Christ". Why would they have done that if they understood that he was?
Clearly the book is unclear. The Christians even disagree with each other. The Catholics have their thing going, the Protestants protested against the Catholics interpretations. Then they continued to protest against each other's interpretation until they ended up with more denominations than there are hairs on the head of a monkey. Islam took basically the same mythology and went off on a completely different tangent altogether. ALl of these religions are not at each other's throats in the name of the SAME GOD even though they have given him different NAMES! So your accusation that I don't understand scriptures is silly! Just look around! NOBODY understands the stupid book! It a nonsensicial book! And that's all I'm pointing out. The TRUTH. It's a nonsensical book! Just look around and you can see this FACT as clear as day! Did somebody call my name? Ah, Abra - you really are a joy. Rarely do you fail to entertain. I'm often amaised by how you view Christianity, and the train of thought behind it. Though I don't agree with it - I'm impressed by it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is a shifting middle to the argument you are attempting to make. You claim that stoning is part of Christain doctrine - it's not. It might have been part of the mosaic Law - but then your problem is with Judism - not Christianity. And any attempt to equate the two would swiftly be shot down by any inquiry of a Rabbi.
So I repeat - Christianity says nothing about stoning anyone. You chose a bad example to attept to support your earlier post. I'll just assume that you spoke prematurely on your claim about my posts. I have little need to post on topics that I have not researched or studied - and your claiming that I have without providing references is only proving my point. You can't sit there and make the claim that Old Testament =/= Christianity, when so many Christians out there use it to infringe upon the rights of others. Like I said before, If the Old Testament truly and nothing to do with the Christian religion, it would not be a part of the bible. The Old Testament and Christianity is not equal in the sense that you are trying to demonstrate it too. I thought you were familiar with Christianity. Surely you are aware of the numerous references in the New Testament that Christians are not to follow the Law, but under the grace of the finished work of Christ - who is the fullfillment of the Law. You claim to be well aware of what a Christian believes, and I have no reason to doubt you - so why this game of twisting what is in the bible to serve your pretext's? The idea of a christian stoning anyone could never be concluded from contextual content of scripture - even for a casual peruser. So, it makes me wonder just how familiar you are with Christianity when you fight for this frivilous argument. Surely you know that the Disciples kept the law and you can show nowhere where they did not. What do you think Yahshua being our example means any way? You are part of the problem that people run. You think Yahweh made a mistake and have no idea what Law was against us. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eljay wrote:
Did somebody call my name? Ah, Abra - you really are a joy. Rarely do you fail to entertain. I'm often amaised by how you view Christianity, and the train of thought behind it. Though I don't agree with it - I'm impressed by it. Well based on what you have just posted it would seem that you are in far more agreement with me than you realize: The Old Testament and Christianity is not equal in the sense that you are trying to demonstrate it too. I thought you were familiar with Christianity. Surely you are aware of the numerous references in the New Testament that Christians are not to follow the Law, but under the grace of the finished work of Christ - who is the fullfillment of the Law. You claim to be well aware of what a Christian believes, and I have no reason to doubt you - so why this game of twisting what is in the bible to serve your pretext's? The idea of a christian stoning anyone could never be concluded from contextual content of scripture - even for a casual peruser. So, it makes me wonder just how familiar you are with Christianity when you fight for this frivilous argument.
I'm afriad that would go over like a lead balloon in most orthodox Christian organizations. According to you even mainstream Christianity has it all wrong. I think you're on a lone war path to be quite honest about it. What you are attempting to call "Christainity" would not pass the test of most mainstream Christian organizations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Wrote:
it seems you are only seeking most but to prove one singular definition, YOURS, as the only possible one, which is the exact same thing you hold against the "christian's"??? why do you not respond to any other definition given as possibilities??? seems you only try to refute all possibilities??? anything except what you deem and read as "the only meaning possible"??? This is entirely your perception David. Why do I not respond to other definitions given as possibilities? Actually I do. For example, Eljay is in far more agreement with he than he realizes. Eljay states: Interesting - all quotes from the Old Testament. Perhaps you are unaware that Christainity did not exist at this time.
Eljay simply denies that the Old Testament has anything to do with Christianity! 
That’s how he solves the conflict. He simply rejects the God of Abraham before he even begins! I too might profess to preach Christianity if I could take Jesus down from the Cross of the Old Testament. But I don’t see that as being possible. Jesus is nailed to the Old Testament more firmly than he was ever nailed to the cross. For Eljay to dismiss the Old Testament as not being part of Christianity is ludicrous. To do such a thing would be called heresy by any mainstream orthodox Christian organization. I recognize that Eljay is a designer Christian. But I also recognize that his definitions of “Christianity” don’t fly in the face of the actual recognized mainstream organized Christian religions. He’s just using their label and redefining it for his own purposes! Here’s his stance: I think that you have touched on something quite profound here C.S., as most people have a tendency to judge Christianity by the actions of those who profess it, rather than the testamony of those who witnessed Jesus living it. It is essentially judging the bible by those who's actions contradict it - thereby attempting to claim that the life of Jesus is discredited by those who cannot live up to the standards set by him. Yet - the bible itself states that this will be the case. Jesus himself says that "man does not seek God - not one", and that even those who see themselves as the greatest of the self-rightious will fall.
So - while it is Christianity that gets attacked - and not those who abuse it, are there any who can see the forest from the tree's? All Eljay is doing is pretending that Jesus = Christianity. But that’s not true! Jesus can’t = Christianity on his own! It’s impossible! And this is what I’ve been trying to get Eljay to see for over a year now, but he refuses to see it and so I gave up on him. You can’t rip Jesus out of the Bible (i.e. toss out the Old Testament as not being part of “Christianity”). Because Jesus has no feet of his own to stand on! As soon as you toss out the OT you must also toss out the virgin birth, the idea that Jesus is the Son of the God of Abraham, and the idea that he is the Sacrificial Lamb of God sent to die to appease God for our sins! All of that must be tossed out if you want to become a Jesus Freak and toss out the Old Testament as being irrelevant to Christianity. Once you do that you end up with Jesus being nothing more than a mortal man teaching moral values. But Eljay wants to keep BOTH concepts! He want to DENY the Old Testament and pee on the God of Abraham, yet KEEP Jesus as the Sacrificial lamb of salvation! It can’t work that way! It just makes no sense to claim that Jesus is the sacrificial lamb of the God of Abraham whist denying that the Old Testament has anything to do with Christianity! As soon as you cast the Old Testament asunder you’ve taken Jesus off the shoulders of the God of Abraham and placed him on his own mortal feet! He’s no longer a God then. He becomes nothing more (and nothing less) than a mere mortal man with an opinion. So Eljay doesn’t speak of “Christianity”, he simply changed the label to mean something that the orthodox established organized regions would never stand for. Eljay wants to simultaneously dismiss that OT as having nothing to do with Christianity whilst maintaining that Jesus is the sacrificial lamb of the blood-thirsty God of Abraham. In other words, Eljay knows that the actions and behavior of the God of Abraham is indefensible! So he wants to sweep that part of the mythology under the carpet and just worship Jesus as his “Savior”! But without the nasty God of Abraham there is nothing to be ‘Saved’ from! Jesus is supposedly saving us from the wrath of the God of Abraham! Christianity cannot even work without the Old Testament! I would love to start a church of Jesus tossing out the Old Testament as being totally irrelevant! But keep in mind also that at this point we’d also have to toss out the writings of Paul in the New Testament since Paul only serves to dredge up all the crap from the Old Testament! That would reduce the size of the New Testament by about 75%. You’d be left basically with the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But even then you’d need to remove any references in those texts that USE the Old Testament to support the idea that Jesus was the “Christ” (or messiah) sent by the God of Abraham as a sacrificial lamb! But the time you got done removing the Old Testament and every reference to it you’d end up with Jesus sitting all alone reciting the 12 laws of Karma from Buddhism!
Modern organized “Christianity” is not about to dismiss the Old Testament as not being foundational to their religion. In fact, it’s the Old Testament where they get all their bigotry from! Jesus never taught bigotry! The bottom line is that the ‘Christianity’ that Eljay has made up has nothing to do with the formally recognized religion. However, I would like to add that there are many people in this world who are indeed Jesus Freaks and somehow feel that Jesus can stand on his own two feet without the God of Abraham from the Old Testament. In fact, I would venture to say that the vast majority of people on this planet that check the boxed marked “Christianity” on surveys actually think this way. Most Christians are ‘Designer Christianity” that don’t truly understand the connection and dependency that Jesus has on the God of Abraham and the Old Testament. They just accept Jesus as their Savoir. They denounced orthodox Christians like Eljay does: Eljay wrote:
So - while it is Christianity that gets attacked - and not those who abuse it, are there any who can see the forest from the tree's? My question to Eljay is this: Why doesn’t HE and the other so-called real Christianity speak out against those who abuse Christianity as he defines it? I’ll tell you why! Because if he dared to speak out against them they would quickly denounce his “Christianity” and point out that he doesn’t even recognize the Old Testament as the “Word of God”! Mainstream Christianity knows better than to try to dismiss the God of Abraham. Because as soon as they do that, this leaves Jesus standing alone on his own to feet as a mere mortal man! You can’t dismiss the God of Abraham and simultaneously claim that Jesus is the sacrificial Son of that God! That’s absurd! To claim that Jesus is the SON of the God of Abraham is to also claim that the God of Abraham is indeed GOD! They go hand-in-hand and cannot be separated. It makes absolutely no sense for Eljay to try to claim that Christianity did not even exist in the days of the Old Testament! Christianity absolutely depends on the Old Testament being TRUE! Christianity depends on the Old Testament being the ‘Word of God’. Christianity can in no way dismiss the OT and continue to claim that Jesus is the Son of the God of Abraham. Eljay just makes no sense at all based on what the biblical picture has painted. Eljay is trying to make up his own little imagined religion and call that “Christianity” He’s a ‘Salad Bar Christian', he just takes what he likes and ignores what he doesn’t. But the religion can’t stand that way. The Biblical picture of God must be taken in its entirety or not at all. Without the OT Jesus is reduced to a mortal man standing on his own peronal opinions. In that sense Eljay is actually agreeing with me! Jesus can not have been the Son of the God of Abraham! This is so obviously true that even Eljay dismisses the Old Testament as not being relevant to Christianity! Hmmm... Ive never been so confused about how I think than I have after reading this post. Is there another Eljay on this site? I'm not going to respond to all of the attempts to define how I think here Abra - but I will attempt to clarify a couple of points where you've truely mis-represented me. For one - Christianity is absolutely dependent on the Old Testament. You cannot have one without the other. But one does not get their "definition" of Christianity from the Old Testament - for the O.T. only forshadows that which was to come. However, I think that contextually, they are not interchangable. For instance - I don't think that God is going to send someone to hell because they decide not to stone their unruley son to death. However - I'm not going to argue for the case that there might not be a consequence for NOT stoning them to death. I can see as easily as you can what is written in Leviticus - I just don't stop my reading there. I examine the story of Jesus and the adulterous woman where he says "Let him without sin cast the first stone". Now he doesn't say "We don't do that any more" - he just qualifies the intent behind the practice, giving it more than just a legalistic understanding. That is not "dismissing" the O.T., as you put it - just wondering how to interpret it. As to making up one's "own religion"... I've read enough of your posts on Pantheism to know that you speak from experience. Not only do you make up religions - you give a whole new meaning to those that have existed for millenia. And you are also quite right when yu claim that you and I agree on more than people may percieve by reading our posts. Over the past two years (My heavens, it's really been that long) we have often been in agreement to how Christianity is abused, and despite your challenging question - I DO go after those who abuse Christainity. I just have not found the need to do it here, as most of the threads center on attacking Christianity - not Christians misrepresenting it. But I have gone after a few posts professing to be representing Christianity, that are nothing more than legalistic interpretation from what wuld be called "false teachers". There just isn't a lot of occasion for it. Anyway... Suffice it to say that I find nothing else you've said in common with the way I think Christianity was either derived - or continues. I would simply say you're reading a little too much into my posts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is generally taught in christianity that god is infallible. So was the god of the OT wrong in his way of doing things? Is that why he had to send his son to clean up his mess?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As to making up one's "own religion"... I've read enough of your posts on Pantheism to know that you speak from experience. Not only do you make up religions - you give a whole new meaning to those that have existed for millenia.
I'm in total agreement with you on this Eljay. Pantheism is a very loosely defined abstract yet divinely powerful concept. This is one of the reasons I find it so attractive. It's not divisive at all, on the contrary it view all of nature as one. This allows a person to embrace many spiritualities as all having some relavence to the divine. Buddhism has many different forms. Then there's Taoism, which also has many other forms. In fact, even Wicca allows for pantheistic forms in their traditions as well. That's what I love about pantheism, it allows you to commune with God in a way that embraces many concepts and ideas. It's not a rigid dogma carved in stone at all. Don't let anyone tell you that it is.
I also don't proselytize pantheism as the "only authorative word of God". So it doesn't matter that it's abstract and unique to the individual. It's a spiritual experience, not a religious dogma. The Jews wrote a very authorative dogamatic book based on the idea of a jealous vengeful God that can be appeased by blood sacrifices. They demand that anyone who doesn't believe them is rejecting this egotistical jealous God and will make him angry and have to face his wrath. Then some guy came along and said that God proabably isn't like that. They nailed him to a pole and then the Christians used that to keep the dogma going. They still claim that the Jews speak for God, but that Jesus trumps the Jews in certain situations, unless of course they want to be bigoted about something, then the flip back to the OT. 
They can use Jesus to support the OT or not at their whim. In fact, they are extremely whimsical about it. They use the OT to denounce same-gender love. Yet they totally ignore the OT when it comes to matter of women speaking out on religoius matters.
It's an authoritarian religion that has become a whimsical crutch to use "God's Word" to beat people over the head with whenever it's profitable to someone's lust for bigotry. Yes panthesism is abstract and thus it has many forms. But the Bible is SUPPOSED to be the authoritative word of God! Yet look at the religions that are based on it! They are as diverse as the pantheistic ones!
We have the Jews, the Muslims, the Catholics, and a myriad of confused and protesting protestants that protest against everything including each other. All in the name of a book that is supposed to be the ULTIMATE FINAL AUTHORITATIVE WORD OF GOD! Do you see something wrong with that picture?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is generally taught in christianity that god is infallible. So was the god of the OT wrong in his way of doing things? Is that why he had to send his son to clean up his mess? Truly! Not only that, but like I said in my last post, if the book is the infallible word of God then why to the Jews, Muslims, Catholics, and the many demoninations of Protestanism all disagree on what it says?
It's ridiculous! It's anything BUT infallible! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Human's use of language has enabled the expression(s) of more and more ideas, fostering and enabling complexities layered upon complexities. It is the exchange of old for new, each transition of which must either solve or dissolve old issues, either with the given jargon or a new and improved set of terms which renders the old as inaccurate and/or incompatible with the newfound conceptual understanding(s).
Such is the case with good and evil. The moral/ethical standards which help to define acceptable behaviour, which was based upon good and evil is completely contained within the collective conscience... the collective sense of ought. This has and will continue to change along with our knowledge base, as has been displayed through mankind's history. Pure brute force always held the title of king in days of old, and the morals/ethics of he who happened to be king ruled as well... by brute force. It just so happens that in recorded history, the Roman Empire converted to Christianity and this religion was held in high regard in respect to truth for centuries to come - because there was no knowledge to contradict it. This event had many contributing factors including the awe that the Roman population and emperors had concerning the impervious hope/(faith and peaceful acceptance that the individual Christians had, even in the face of certain death. The above is a very rough outline which lends, I would hope, a little understanding to why the violence is naturally (as a result of the collective conscience) encrypted within the Bible. It was widely accepted in the collective conscience as a necessary evil. As barbarianism gradually gave way to intellectual discourse, he who could effectively inspire people to a common goal through a common language instead of violence, began to gain value within the collective conscience, and violence began to take a back seat to intelligent discourse. The use of language to reflect morals and ethics in a more complex and accurate way began to replace the rulers' brute force as a motivational means. As our knowledge base grows and old knowns are replaced with new ones, the entire conceptual understanding begins to transform... necessarily so. The flat earth society had proven that violence births more of the same. That which we focus upon, gains a hold in the collective conscience by replacing old constructs through a painfully slow adaptation. We can no longer accurately represent that which we have come to know with language and reasoning of old. That is the foundational problem at hand. Some choose to use an old construct in an attempt to define new and ever-evolving constructs. The Bible is incompatible with our present understanding. Good and evil are just as man-made as any other concept. The collective conscience has grown beyond such black and white concepts as 'God' and 'Satan'. The problem of evil is not a refutation for the existence of 'God', it is a refutation for the language which has described 'God' for centuries...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We as adults can say we know right from wrong. Where did that come from? Are you saying your parents and society did not show you what was right from wrong? Your child learning years came from yourself? You need nobody but yourself? How crazy can we be. We are influenced in our morality by society. It changes we change. The scriptures you want to call as a set of laws/rules that are not good. Have they changed? No ..we have changed them. does that make it right. Do we not hold sacred certain family traditions that are within our families which are very important to us they are passed on throughout generations of our own to adheed to? Of cource we do. The scriptures are an example for us to teach us. Yahweh tells us as i have posted to teach these for a long and happy life. is this not true? Eph 6:1-4 6:1 Children, obey your parents in Yahweh: for this is right. 2 Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise ;) 3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. 4 And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of Yahweh. KJV is this not true? Yet our society says spoil the child that the state take control of your child to learn who really is the authority. Men in high places.Is who. So if you may as an adult growing up in a time where children ran the streets without fear. At least I did. What has happened since then? parents have become the villian who should be watched by our govt. Is this not true. You kid yourself you are being decieved and controled as i post this. Your rights have been taken away. What has happened in direct correllation with this? the scriptures are fairy tales. Hitler said give me the children and in a generation i will have a nation. Oh how true. Change is good but not principles. We quarrenteen the Amish when they get measles and protect deadly diseases people have where others have no idea a person may be sick. Upside down politics. A purpose to control us and they have done a darn good job of it by making us think we have choice when we have none anytime they decide. And you love it. Ps 19:7-9 7 The law of Yahweh is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of Yahweh is sure, making wise the simple. 8 The statutes of Yahweh are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of Yahweh is pure, enlightening the eyes. 9 The fear of Yahweh is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of Yahweh are true and righteous altogether. KJV Can we say that of our society that claims a fairy tale is Yahweh? We have laws we have fears. But only to the law breaker. If no, what are societies laws you obey for? Blessings..Miles My mom taught me everything she could but when push came to shove and I was presented with a moral dilemma it was me that made the judgement call. As for my father...i never knew him tome he is nothing more than a sperm donor. My mom never forced morals on me, she let me make my own decisions and watched carefully and was ready to jump in if I made a bad choice. She didn't punish me for it cuz i usually punished myself enough. (Unless i did something really wrong.) Humans will inherently need other people as we are social beings, but I do not need someone to tell me whether or not I am leading a moral life. I do not obey rules and laws because I fear some higher power, I obey them because it is the right thing to do. See, I got my "proof" when I was 7 years old and in a coma from being hit by a car, the religious people told my mother to pray and to start to let me go....thankgully she didn't listen
The "good" christians were all set to have a funeral for a 7 year old boy that wasn't even dead. Had they had their way i wouldn't be here today. If this is the kind of god that people worship I will say Thanks but no thanks. My mom consulted my pediatrician and he told her that I would come out of the coma. Need more? how about being raped 7 times between the ages of 9-12. I prayed for it to stop, did it? no it didn't. My mother prayed for it to stop, it still didn't. We went to church and prayed, yet again it didnt stop. Sorry but that is all the proof I need, I had to take matters into my own hands and stop it. This was not the work of god working through me, this was the work of an angry, hurt, devastated child. I am now 32 and have spent the last 20 years piecing my life back together. I did this without religion and will continue to do so without religion. Good job on using "common sense" methods and seeing that it can be possible to live a life without the use of religion. I wish more people will see that it is possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elijay said:
Interesting - all quotes from the Old Testament. Perhaps you are unaware that Christainity did not exist at this time. So basically, what I am gathering from this quote is that the OT cannot be taken into account for the beliefs of Christians. Then you say: For one - Christianity is absolutely dependent on the Old Testament.
Which flies in the face of almost everything you have said on this forum. Either the OT has nothing to do with Christianity, and it should be removed from the "Buy Bull", or it is dependent on it, and the points that many of us have made against portions of it, are valid arguments. But, I'm sure you will twist the meaning of the words so that your words are all in agreement... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James...
Upfront side note [your dark poem had me a little worried about your wellbeing] I am glad to read you. Just a little thought experiment...
The OP asked if there was proof that Jesus lived. I suspect that the reason for asking is connected to the recent documentaries and such which pose the very same question. Some of these films attempt to discredit all of Christianity by effectively refuting the notion of Jesus' very existence. There are different approaches being taken to warrant this this doubt. To doubt everything is to know nothing, therefore it is reasonably impossible to doubt everything. It is a matter of certainty. The Roman records - which do not mention Jesus nor his execution - are often used as evidence to make a case that his existence is a complete fabrication. This does not logically follow, for there may have been any number of reasons for not documenting such a thing. They most certainly did not record every crucifixion. Therefore, one cannot safely say that the omission in the Roman records warrants a belief in the complete fabrication of Jesus' existence. I would venture to guess that most scholarly-minded people would attribute this as evidence which directly reflects Jesus' importance to the Roman society's collective conscious at the time of his death. I think that it is much more likely that he lived and died the same as many others who also did not make the Roman records. Some of the more compelling evidence(in my opinion) revolves around the gospel problem - the actual dating and authenticity of those texts - and warrants further consideration concerning any direct eye-witness accounts. If the gospels are proven to have been written by someone other than the disciples, then those accounts can be dismissed as hear-say. Eljay has mentioned a valid point though, if those books were written after 70AD, then why did they not mention the fall of Jerusalem, which is contained in the Roman records? This alone does not prove their authenticity, however, it does lend some loose support to the Christian argument of pre-70AD dating. The fact that Jesus did not pen the words accredited to him necessitates the claim that all attributions about what he said are at least second-hand knowledge. With that being said, it is quite profound how much influence those words still have upon people and their thoughts. The installation of a previously absent hope for themselves and their future added to the message that ascribes a negative value to the concept of worrying has very practical use in the development of a positive mind-set. I would venture to claim that if the focus of the religion reflected this most profound property, the world could be a different place and the intention of empathetic enlightenment would have been realized, but instead we have the following, which is much more indicative of the path that Christianity took - from one who claims to be Christian... Sharp wrote... However, will be fun to watch when he returns and the jaws drop and naysayers quake.
Fun?
If one claims to believe and follow the teachings of Jesus, one must understand them. It seems that I am reminded of the parable which speaks of eyes that do not see and ears that do not hear. It seems that I am reminded of the recognition of a tree by it's fruit. It seems that this is a fine example of why the religion itself is under fire, and risks losing the profound enlightenment which comes from only looking within one's self. What a shame. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James...
Upfront side note [your dark poem had me a little worried about your wellbeing] I am glad to read you. Just a little thought experiment...
The OP asked if there was proof that Jesus lived. I suspect that the reason for asking is connected to the recent documentaries and such which pose the very same question. Some of these films attempt to discredit all of Christianity by effectively refuting the notion of Jesus' very existence. There are different approaches being taken to warrant this this doubt. To doubt everything is to know nothing, therefore it is reasonably impossible to doubt everything. It is a matter of certainty. The Roman records - which do not mention Jesus nor his execution - are often used as evidence to make a case that his existence is a complete fabrication. This does not logically follow, for there may have been any number of reasons for not documenting such a thing. They most certainly did not record every crucifixion. Therefore, one cannot safely say that the omission in the Roman records warrants a belief in the complete fabrication of Jesus' existence. I would venture to guess that most scholarly-minded people would attribute this as evidence which directly reflects Jesus' importance to the Roman society's collective conscious at the time of his death. I think that it is much more likely that he lived and died the same as many others who also did not make the Roman records. Some of the more compelling evidence(in my opinion) revolves around the gospel problem - the actual dating and authenticity of those texts - and warrants further consideration concerning any direct eye-witness accounts. If the gospels are proven to have been written by someone other than the disciples, then those accounts can be dismissed as hear-say. Eljay has mentioned a valid point though, if those books were written after 70AD, then why did they not mention the fall of Jerusalem, which is contained in the Roman records? This alone does not prove their authenticity, however, it does lend some loose support to the Christian argument of pre-70AD dating. The fact that Jesus did not pen the words accredited to him necessitates the claim that all attributions about what he said are at least second-hand knowledge. With that being said, it is quite profound how much influence those words still have upon people and their thoughts. The installation of a previously absent hope for themselves and their future added to the message that ascribes a negative value to the concept of worrying has very practical use in the development of a positive mind-set. I would venture to claim that if the focus of the religion reflected this most profound property, the world could be a different place and the intention of empathetic enlightenment would have been realized, but instead we have the following, which is much more indicative of the path that Christianity took - from one who claims to be Christian... Sharp wrote... However, will be fun to watch when he returns and the jaws drop and naysayers quake.
Fun?
If one claims to believe and follow the teachings of Jesus, one must understand them. It seems that I am reminded of the parable which speaks of eyes that do not see and ears that do not hear. It seems that I am reminded of the recognition of a tree by it's fruit. It seems that this is a fine example of why the religion itself is under fire, and risks losing the profound enlightenment which comes from only looking within one's self. What a shame. I think it will be more interesting to see what happens if he never comes... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the question begging to be ask of all religions is most will it accept "jesus" as jim cary's "mask", as this is indeed what it shall be to the exact degree???
mixed with "mad max and the thunderdome", which no electricity shall create??? along with "ghost rider" in the flesh, but divinity never need touch anything, it just melt all that have "hidden data" into an emotional helpless puddle, lol??? all by nine oh nine oh nine, or there is no divine. peace |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not putting you down Dan - just trying to get a better idea of how you are drawing some of your conclusions - obviously, a few of which I don't agree with. That having been said - I fimely agree with you on the need to have some sort of proof to alter an opinion that I've no doubt you've reasoned out for yourself. I hold the same stance when it comes to the claims of Evolution, I await the answers to the questions I pose about these "obvious proofs" of the age of the earth, common ancestory, etc. So - I read what is available to me, and offer my opinions on those threads as well, and I'm certainly no expert on each of the sciences involved in the threads. And I have no desire to persue Evolutionary idea's, and more than I believe you may have in studying Christianity. So, I'm not attempting to have you not respond to threads on Christianity given whatever level of understanding you have - but I will challenge claims you make about it if it goes contrary to what I've learned through studying it - as that is the nature of posting on the forums. And that's pretty much where I'm coming from. No intention of putting you down is intended - I hope you have not thought this was the case. I may attack an idea you have - but it's not an attack on you. If I thought you weren't even capable of offering anything to the thread - I wouldn't bother to respond. That is the nature of how I post. You can challenge anything i say, that is fine. Im not even fussed if you try to put me down either, i have a real thick skin and i dont take these discussions particularly seriously. You did tell me to 'stop commenting on topics i am uneducated about' though, so i was compelled to stand up for myself. Partly because i enjoy confrontation, partly because the fact is none of us really have any clue what is true. As much as you have studied or as much as i haven't, at the end of the day we both don't know a thing(even if we think we do), and therefore our opinions are as valid as eachothers. You have faith in the Bible and Christianity. I have faith that the Bible and Christinity is not the word of God. Faith is simply an opinion that is not based on proof. I cant prove what i believe and neither can you. Its completely pointless us trying to convince eachother of anything anyway, but its still fun trying. |
|
|
|
|
