1 2 5 6 7 9 11 12 13 16 17
Topic: proof
no photo
Fri 04/17/09 04:50 PM

just "one set" of equal eye's, or ONE TOTAL EYE, as each human being and voice be???

the heart that is free, is the one that fear not so pride not, so can hear and gather as the wise squirrel ALL THE NUTS, from all "eye's" equally, so for the winter it has "infinite nuts" to feed on indeed???

http://www.atlan.org/faq/


Thank you for sharing the Atlantis website. Very interesting to read. The lost continent gives so many possiblities. I have a Jacque Cousteau video where the French explorer and his son go all over the world in search of it. Very interesting documentary from the 1970s.


davidben1's photo
Fri 04/17/09 05:14 PM


just "one set" of equal eye's, or ONE TOTAL EYE, as each human being and voice be???

the heart that is free, is the one that fear not so pride not, so can hear and gather as the wise squirrel ALL THE NUTS, from all "eye's" equally, so for the winter it has "infinite nuts" to feed on indeed???

http://www.atlan.org/faq/


Thank you for sharing the Atlantis website. Very interesting to read. The lost continent gives so many possiblities. I have a Jacque Cousteau video where the French explorer and his son go all over the world in search of it. Very interesting documentary from the 1970s.




awh, the greatest good to come in short days, be beyond the present imagination for ALL to taste of, just as in the days when all things of the current cycle began...

so obscured be the natural sight, with so much less good presently lived out for so many, but indeed, it bring the only peace the heart have, when seeing so much personal devastation in the world for so many, that all shall see most good...

what human thing decided which nation or color or physical condition itself would be born into, which determine all that all things know and hear, so who shall or should not see most good is such a good relief.

peace to the "smile giver and wanter for all angel" called smiles.

Eljay's photo
Fri 04/17/09 08:13 PM





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.


That is hugely ironic coming from you.


Care to back up that statement with some sort of example.


Example:



I started reading all the responses to this great question before I gave up. These Christians avoided the question at all cost, until a few non-believers started voiceing their opinions. Then, quickly, the Christians ran to the defense of Christianity by saying it's not torture, with very little explanation. As an atheist, I would like to point out that Bible calls for a town to stone a child to death if s/he is disobediant. I consider stoning a form of torture, because you die slowly and it hurts. So do take this wonderful question a step further, how do Christians deal with verses that deal with stoning children to death if Christianity doesn't permit torture?


Christianity says nothing about stoning anyone. In 3,000 BC Judism this might have been the case - but you won't find it anywhere in Christianity. So, as I Christain - I might suggest to you that you learn about that in which you don't believe if you are going to commet on it, and at least get it right.


Directly from your Holy book:
Exodus 19:13 There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast or man, it shall not live: when the trumpet soundeth long, they shall come up to the mount.
Deuteronomy 13:10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
Deuteronomy 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
Deuteronomy 22:21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
Hebrews 11:37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;

Numbers 15:36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.

Joshua 7:25 And Joshua said, Why hast thou troubled us? the LORD shall trouble thee this day. And all Israel stoned him with stones, and burned them with fire, after they had stoned them with stones.

1 Kings 21:13 And there came in two men, children of Belial, and sat before him: and the men of Belial witnessed against him, even against Naboth, in the presence of the people, saying, Naboth did blaspheme God and the king. Then they carried him forth out of the city, and stoned him with stones, that he died.

need any more?



Interesting - all quotes from the Old Testament. Perhaps you are unaware that Christainity did not exist at this time.

Aren't you the one who claims to know all about Christainity. I asked you to show me where in the New Testament (The scriptures from which Christianity gets it's name) where stoning was mandated, and you quote me the Law!

So you've fallen short of your example of my not knowing about that which I discuss by demonstrating that you do not know about that which you talk.

Once again - making my point.

Inkracer's photo
Fri 04/17/09 08:21 PM






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.


That is hugely ironic coming from you.


Care to back up that statement with some sort of example.


Example:



I started reading all the responses to this great question before I gave up. These Christians avoided the question at all cost, until a few non-believers started voiceing their opinions. Then, quickly, the Christians ran to the defense of Christianity by saying it's not torture, with very little explanation. As an atheist, I would like to point out that Bible calls for a town to stone a child to death if s/he is disobediant. I consider stoning a form of torture, because you die slowly and it hurts. So do take this wonderful question a step further, how do Christians deal with verses that deal with stoning children to death if Christianity doesn't permit torture?


Christianity says nothing about stoning anyone. In 3,000 BC Judism this might have been the case - but you won't find it anywhere in Christianity. So, as I Christain - I might suggest to you that you learn about that in which you don't believe if you are going to commet on it, and at least get it right.


Directly from your Holy book:
Exodus 19:13 There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast or man, it shall not live: when the trumpet soundeth long, they shall come up to the mount.
Deuteronomy 13:10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
Deuteronomy 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
Deuteronomy 22:21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
Hebrews 11:37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;

Numbers 15:36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.

Joshua 7:25 And Joshua said, Why hast thou troubled us? the LORD shall trouble thee this day. And all Israel stoned him with stones, and burned them with fire, after they had stoned them with stones.

1 Kings 21:13 And there came in two men, children of Belial, and sat before him: and the men of Belial witnessed against him, even against Naboth, in the presence of the people, saying, Naboth did blaspheme God and the king. Then they carried him forth out of the city, and stoned him with stones, that he died.

need any more?



Interesting - all quotes from the Old Testament. Perhaps you are unaware that Christainity did not exist at this time.

Aren't you the one who claims to know all about Christainity. I asked you to show me where in the New Testament (The scriptures from which Christianity gets it's name) where stoning was mandated, and you quote me the Law!

So you've fallen short of your example of my not knowing about that which I discuss by demonstrating that you do not know about that which you talk.

Once again - making my point.


It's still part of you holy book is it not? If the Old Testament had nothing to do with Christianity, it wouldn't be a part of the bible.

Eljay's photo
Fri 04/17/09 08:21 PM












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.


davidben1's photo
Fri 04/17/09 08:29 PM
if one say to something, it is arrogant, prideful, spiteful, wishing good for itself alone, wishing but to prove a single reality as most good and real, and not seeking for any equal good for all else as equal to self, well, i "stone ye" with my words and all me energy???

the meaning of such things as spoken in time's past, as some tell of what is "real", to determine who and what is most "correct now", is but futile reality indeed, as real only be what anything "feel" itself as real to itself you see, and anything more real, be only seeuing and deeming what another see and feel now as real it's true good reality???

dueling definition's of words as reality's tell of greater reality, is but dueling futility indeed???

what become of futility, as what can it create but futileness as it's lone and only reality???




Eljay's photo
Fri 04/17/09 08:32 PM
Edited by Eljay on Fri 04/17/09 08:32 PM

James...

flowerforyou

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... :wink:

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?

huh

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 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?

Eljay's photo
Fri 04/17/09 08:42 PM







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.


That is hugely ironic coming from you.


Care to back up that statement with some sort of example.


Example:



I started reading all the responses to this great question before I gave up. These Christians avoided the question at all cost, until a few non-believers started voiceing their opinions. Then, quickly, the Christians ran to the defense of Christianity by saying it's not torture, with very little explanation. As an atheist, I would like to point out that Bible calls for a town to stone a child to death if s/he is disobediant. I consider stoning a form of torture, because you die slowly and it hurts. So do take this wonderful question a step further, how do Christians deal with verses that deal with stoning children to death if Christianity doesn't permit torture?


Christianity says nothing about stoning anyone. In 3,000 BC Judism this might have been the case - but you won't find it anywhere in Christianity. So, as I Christain - I might suggest to you that you learn about that in which you don't believe if you are going to commet on it, and at least get it right.


Directly from your Holy book:
Exodus 19:13 There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast or man, it shall not live: when the trumpet soundeth long, they shall come up to the mount.
Deuteronomy 13:10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
Deuteronomy 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
Deuteronomy 22:21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
Hebrews 11:37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;

Numbers 15:36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.

Joshua 7:25 And Joshua said, Why hast thou troubled us? the LORD shall trouble thee this day. And all Israel stoned him with stones, and burned them with fire, after they had stoned them with stones.

1 Kings 21:13 And there came in two men, children of Belial, and sat before him: and the men of Belial witnessed against him, even against Naboth, in the presence of the people, saying, Naboth did blaspheme God and the king. Then they carried him forth out of the city, and stoned him with stones, that he died.

need any more?



Interesting - all quotes from the Old Testament. Perhaps you are unaware that Christainity did not exist at this time.

Aren't you the one who claims to know all about Christainity. I asked you to show me where in the New Testament (The scriptures from which Christianity gets it's name) where stoning was mandated, and you quote me the Law!

So you've fallen short of your example of my not knowing about that which I discuss by demonstrating that you do not know about that which you talk.

Once again - making my point.


It's still part of you holy book is it not? If the Old Testament had nothing to do with Christianity, it wouldn't be a part of the bible.


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.

Eljay's photo
Fri 04/17/09 08:45 PM


ANYTHING IN THE UNNIVERSE CAN BE MADE A WEAPON, AND SO BE THE SAME FOR WORDS!!!???


It seems to me that the authors of the Bible were explictly telling their readers that God wants them to murder heathens and stone sinners to death. I don't see how that can be open to any other interpretations. It's pretty clear what the authors of the Bible were saying.

This idea that the reader can make anything they want from the text based on their own perceptions is silly.

I mean, if we were to allow for that, then my interpretation of the Bible is as valid as anyone's.

And my interpretation is that the Old Testament was clearly written by mortal men who were using the concept of God to brainwash their readers into siding with them in the event of wars or disputes.

My intepretation of the New Testament is that Jesus denounced the Old Testament as being grossly violent and nonconducive to productive and constructive life for humanity.

He also appears to have coincidentally taught the very same things as Buddha taught 500 hundred years earlier. Jesus most certainly did not agree with the teachings of the Old Testament. That should be obvious to anyone who can read.

~~~

Considering that even the Biblical text has Jesus basically missing from the time he was 12 until he was 30 and India (a Buddhist nation) was basically right next door (for all intents and purposes), it seems reasonble to me that at the very least Jesus learned of the teachings of Buddha, if not having actually traveled to India himself to be mentored for 15 years by actual Buddhist monks. There would be no reason for the Buddhists to have recorded the presence of Jesus since he would have been just one of many students. There would have been no reason to take note of him in India. He was there to learn, not teach.

Just the same, you and Creative both seem to keep talking about personal perceptions. My only point is that the religion called "Christianity" doesn't allow for personal perceptions, they have their own claim as to what the Bible is supposed to be saying.

In fact, I don't even see how the text supports their conclusions at all. I personally feel that my theory hold far more water.

And that's all I really claim.

I don't claim that I'm right. I just argue that my theory makes more sense than what the Christian theologians are attempting to claim. :wink:

I think my theory holds far more water than the Christian interpretations. And that's all I have ever claimed.

It's just food for thought for anyone who's interested. bigsmile

It seems that Christains are often attempting to 'prove' that Jesus was God and that the Bible is the word of God.

I'm just responding to their empty claims!

Usually their arguments go something like the following:

1. The universe is too complex to be random chance.
2. Therefore God exists.
3. Therefore the Bible is the word of God.

Or like the following:

1. No man can be moral without God.
2. Therefore God must exist.
3. Therefore the Bible must be the word of God.

Or the following:

1. I don't like atheism!
2. I don't understand patheistic religions!
3. Therefore the Bible must be the word of God!

Personally I feel that my arguments against the Bible being the word of God hold far more water than the reasons they give why it must be the word of God.

I'm just debating the best I can. :wink:



Where is this non-sense coming from. I've never seen these arguments from anyone, anywhere, who knows anything about Christianity. If your going to debate - at least don't build strawmen to debate with. They don't have a brain. Or have you never seen the Wizard of Oz?

Inkracer's photo
Fri 04/17/09 09:22 PM
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.

davidben1's photo
Fri 04/17/09 09:24 PM
Abra???

there is no reason for debate, as debate only come from one thinking and trying to prove one interpretation of words, as the only one in the universe possible???

this is futility in itself, as just the word "hot", can mean MANY different things to many people's???

it could mean, emotionally passionate as romance???

it could mean emotionally angered unto wrath???

hot under the collar???

hot under the sheets???

to hot to handle???

no breezes to cool of the hot sunshine???

damn Abra, i am surprised you are not more open to more things than just one definition???

this is not how any scientist see data???

did you even read the definition of "no forgiveness for blaspheme"???

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"???

give any interpretation you have, from anything, and i will give you another one, which must be deemed as equally possible???

for each definition of anything written as "prophecy", there is at least three first possible's, the words relating to either the past, present, or future, then as well, the physical/literal, or metophorical/spiritual, and then as well, any combination of the total five, which make for a ten possible interpretations as POSSIBLE???

HOW IS THIS NOT TRUE???

so how and why do you think two lone eye's in the universe, called "abra eye's alone", know the ONLY POSSIBITLITY???

something is amiss, and it sure ain't no open mindedness???

???

???

???

come one man, words are like sand, with as many definitions possible, as grains of sand held in the hand???








Dan99's photo
Fri 04/17/09 09:36 PM













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.



Abracadabra's photo
Sat 04/18/09 08:07 AM
Edited by Abracadabra on Sat 04/18/09 08:11 AM
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! laugh

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! laugh

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!

davidben1's photo
Sat 04/18/09 10:01 AM
if each speaker believe the hearer of itself as not hearing, faulty ears and reason it be so deeming, hearer as the one with no true understanding it seeming, the hearer as the faulty one with no good intelligence to seeing, then which speaker dig deeper in itselfing, and get better words to breach the dividing, which be but deeper and mo good than it be first seeming???

the speaker which deem all feedback as it's own total causing, words as sent directly back to create more perfect reasoning, learn more knowing with communication for revealing, the good reason for all things in the universe as being, and no defective is seen and left as the knowing, one side of the coin of only but self seeing, as two sides of a coin be the good and bad togethering, which be togathering two reasonings, wich always provide solutions versus winning???

if such be so, then the ear hear more to know, in all the words that all things sow, so then hear more in all things that grow, the good and first reason all words direct and flow, then one state the flow and sprout forth to grow, stand in the flow and stake in the sow, gather the effect and let the flow be so, and not the other way around, which be but wearing the singluar data frown of self wearing the crown???

knowledge tell what is wrong with belief, and all the bad things which made it so, but wisdom tell the rest of the story, why all that is believed is of glory, and the good reason if came to be so, the good reason be that which free anything that dislike what it sow???

if anything like what it now has, so what itself now is, so what itself now believe, then what now is there that need to be relieved, lest one is violating another human with intent to harm it bodily???

equal freedom to believe what one trust is but for all equally???

2 + 2 = 4 to one thing, what it know and trust and believe???

it be spoken, and the hearer hear it adding unto 2 + 2 = 5 ???

so now, 2 + 2 = 5 of the other to both???

the first one to figure out how and why and what and where, the 2 + 2 = 5 for the other was as perfect and good, then wisdom is added unto itself, more and greater than just knowledge, which only see how all things "different" do not fit with itself???

peace








Milesoftheusa's photo
Sat 04/18/09 10:16 AM
This is a little preposterous.

Yahshua came to show the law was not burdemsome.

The Law of Yahweh was is not the problem or Yahshua lied.

Matt 5:14-18

14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.

15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.

16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
KJV

Has all been fullfilled?

No. Yahshua says we are the light of the world. Was not Yahshua also?

Here is who you follow and these words were inspired for a warning to you.

2 Thess 2:5-12

5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason Yahweh will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
NKJV

The Lawless one.

Is that not oppisite of what Yahshua said on the mount?

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
KJV


He will send you strong delusion that you will believe a lie. Why?

Disobedience to the LAW OF YAHWEH is why so he just lets you go as he told the disciples to.

Matt 18:17-20
And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
KJV


What is this binding and loosing?

It is the Holy Spirit. It is bound by the layiong on of hands and loosed by agreement of the brethern that you say you do not have sin.

1 John 2:4-6

4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of Yahweh perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.
KJV


Again he tells us what Math 18 is saying and what wqarning thier is about the lawless one.

2 John 9-11

9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Messiah, hath not Yahweh. He that abideth in the doctrine of Messiah, he hath both the Father and the Son.

10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him Elohim speed.11 For he that biddeth him Elohim speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
KJV


What did Yahshua say in this matter?

John 7:16-19

16 Yahshua answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of Yahweh, or whether I speak of myself.

18 He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.

19 Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?
KJV

Yahshua is not Yahweh.

Get that lie out of your heads.

If he is not the Father but the son and Yahweh says he CHANGES NOT.

Then Yahshua keeping the law and doing away with the law of the religious elite which is exactly what the ministers of today do. They teach commandments which are against us, contrary to us.

Yahshua being an obedient son who can do nothing without the will of the father is the LAMB OF YAHWEH.

The perfect ONE. Who kept the law perfectly who tells us to strive for the same.

Thier is no OLD TESTAMENT LAW.

That is a lie.

The scriptures are the same from the beginning to the end.

The Law is in force but you are to do your best to keep the law.

Yahshua going to the father promiced to send us a comforter.

The Holy Spirit. Not to make things easy but that you with a pure heart for Yahweh would/will overcome the deception of the world.

It is not a happy go merry faith to do what you want.

You were bought with a very High Price.

Yahshua's Death.

Yahweh was married to Israel.

What had to happen for that to be over?

The death of Yahshua brought on a new bride he could marry in which all who had a Heart for Yahweh could come to him.

A Mystery 2 becoming 1 through the Holy Spirit.

When we hurt he hurts when we laugh he laughs.Our Husband to be for those who really want it.


He is our example.. FOLLOW IT.

The law of yahweh is not gone then or when Yahshua comes back for a 1000 years.

Zech 14:16-19

16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, Yahweh of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.

17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, YAHWEH of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.

18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith Yahweh will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.

19 This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all nations that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
KJV


The very 1st act after Yahshua sets up his throne in Jerusalem is the LAW.

To keep the feast of Tabernacles. Notice thier are people who survived who still will disobey Yahweh.

The Law of Yahweh is not the Law Yahshua and the Disciples talk about being done away.

It was the Law of men who is not fair and is respectful of stature.

Is that what your kingdom is a kingdom that is like right now.

Where the rich get by with Murder and the poor get thrown in to prison for anything?

Is that the PROOF YOU ESPOUSE?

I hope not. May Yahweh Bless Us and let some See..Shalom...MIles


Abracadabra's photo
Sat 04/18/09 11:14 AM
Thier is no OLD TESTAMENT LAW.

That is a lie.

The scriptures are the same from the beginning to the end.

The Law is in force but you are to do your best to keep the law.


Well, if what you say is true then the Old Testament should be denounced as the 'word of God' since it clearly has God giving people commandments and directives that he expects them to obey!

Not the least of which is to murder heathens that teach against those directives!

When the Jews had Jesus crucified they merely OBEYING the "word of God", the Old Testament.

You people are really weird.

On the one hand you want to claim that these texts are the 'word of God', and then on the other hand you want to claim that they aren't.

Make up your mind.

What point is there to claiming that a very confused and conflicting book is the 'word of God' and then turn around and claim that to believe that it is the word of God is a lie?

That's ridiculous.

It's either the word of God, or it's not.

Milesoftheusa's photo
Sat 04/18/09 11:24 AM

Thier is no OLD TESTAMENT LAW.

That is a lie.

The scriptures are the same from the beginning to the end.

The Law is in force but you are to do your best to keep the law.


Well, if what you say is true then the Old Testament should be denounced as the 'word of God' since it clearly has God giving people commandments and directives that he expects them to obey!

Not the least of which is to murder heathens that teach against those directives!

When the Jews had Jesus crucified they merely OBEYING the "word of God", the Old Testament.

You people are really weird.

On the one hand you want to claim that these texts are the 'word of God', and then on the other hand you want to claim that they aren't.

Make up your mind.

What point is there to claiming that a very confused and conflicting book is the 'word of God' and then turn around and claim that to believe that it is the word of God is a lie?

That's ridiculous.

It's either the word of God, or it's not.



I do not believe i have wavered from what i believe and read the scriptures for with help.


Tell you what I have always seen where children were to be stoned for disobeying parents.

can you show me 1 instance where this was carried out?

Ever think Abra all this from the beginning has been a learning process for us to really become the children of Yahweh?

Look at us now we can never have level ground.

Either barbarism on one side with off with your head or anything goes on the other side we make up laws as we go for the riches power grab? Shalom...Miles

Abracadabra's photo
Sat 04/18/09 12:22 PM
Ever think Abra all this from the beginning has been a learning process for us to really become the children of Yahweh?


Become the children of God? huh

Like Jeanniebean has already pointed out, if we're the children of God then so be it, that means that we are all Gods, just like Jesus was quoted as having said.

But why call God Yahweh?

That's just an egotistical name that attempts to give one culture's dogma precedence over the spiritualities of other cultures.

If humans are the children of "god" then so be it. Surely the Jews have no claim to being special.

Most pantheistic views of life do indeed see humanity as the child of "God". But we don't need a 'savior' to save us from God's wrath, and we certainly don't need a single bigoted and arrogant man-made religion to claim to speak soley for God in an attempt to convert 'beleivers' for politically motivated agendas.

I have no doubt that I am a child of God. That doesn't make me believe that the Jews spoke for God! The book they wrote contains many things that I seriously doubt God would even support much less inspire.

You suggested before that when people face hard times they turn to 'God'. Well, that may be true, but what does that have to do with the Bible? Many people simply don't see the Bible as having anything to do with our creator.

The facts should be clear.

1. Jesus did not even agree with the teachings of the God of Abraham.
2. Jesus taught the moral values that parallel what Buddha taught.
3. The vicious vengeful jealous male-chauvinist God described in the Old Testament is not a pretty picture of a God.
4. The persona of Jesus and the persona of the God of Abraham simple don't match at all.

You don't need to have a personal opinion on this, just look at the text. It's written down in words.

I don't deny spirituality. I never have. What I deny is the idea that the Jews speak for God. They do not. And neither does Christianity which is even more absurd, not to mention highly divided and confused even among themselves.




davidben1's photo
Sat 04/18/09 01:44 PM
Edited by davidben1 on Sat 04/18/09 01:51 PM
what needs to try to love, if it love???

what needs a "law" to tell itself what love is, as god was called unconditional love???

is it not also written, the laws of god are written upon the heart of man???

there is only ONE law written upon the hearts of all human things, and that is the recognizing, and seeking, and knowing love???

so is not and was not "love" as the divine law of god???

then if one see and know and love other's, what outside belief or law does it need to dictate it's own actions unto good and bad???

it would only seek or need this, if itself did not love, but only sought for love, or to be loved by someone else most, or to be loved by some god in the sky???

yes, this is indeed a law of trying to make self good, or the mark of the beast, the mark in the forehead and hands, that make all self actions only but seek to be loved by someone or something else, and not seeking at all to love without anything in return???

if one believe in love, then it but give to all other's the law of love, which be to give and be all itself is, with no pretense or fake or tryiung to be good, with nothing expected in return, as to try to do good, only make one expect good to be returned???

making and defining each thing it meet with the self expectation and in time even dictation, of all things that do not give back to self as it see fita, as evil???

such is indeed to love under the law, and indeed can make humans to come to act like wild beasts, that can kill another if it does not make self happy, the mark of the beasts of the lessor good, the one prone to doing evil, that all are naturlly born into, as it cannot be missed, such thinking and expectations of good returned to self from other's, and other's being there for soley for the satisfaction and dictation of self, is what create all evil in the world???

what can do evil, that wish nothing from anything else???

the same exact reason, it was spoken, that anything that "live by the law, die by the same law"???

even paul said with good wisdom, "when i will to do good, evil is present"???

to will oneself, to try to be good, show there is no real good intent, or there would be no need of trying???

only an intention of scoring points with some thing called god in the sky, which is for self alone, and bring but to seeing other's outside of one's belief as barely even subhuman, or not even remotely like self???

if one has to try to love, then how is there any love at all???

to keep trying then, simply carry further into using belief to convince self that itself love, when it love nothing but what it gets for itself in return from it's belief, the most from what it say it love???

such is as the gospel of religion, or to live by a law, or under the mark of the beast, of seeing and dividing all things into good or evil as peoples, which simply make one not hear other's words, and only look to see how all words that come to self are faulty words indeed, if one can find fault in the speaker that speak, so few other's words come to be actually heard or truely believed, except of course for the good words of self vanity returned to self, which are gulped like sweet honey, but turn to bitter in the tummy, lol???

Milesoftheusa's photo
Sat 04/18/09 01:51 PM

Ever think Abra all this from the beginning has been a learning process for us to really become the children of Yahweh?


Become the children of God? huh

Like Jeanniebean has already pointed out, if we're the children of God then so be it, that means that we are all Gods, just like Jesus was quoted as having said.

But why call God Yahweh?

That's just an egotistical name that attempts to give one culture's dogma precedence over the spiritualities of other cultures.

If humans are the children of "god" then so be it. Surely the Jews have no claim to being special.

Most pantheistic views of life do indeed see humanity as the child of "God". But we don't need a 'savior' to save us from God's wrath, and we certainly don't need a single bigoted and arrogant man-made religion to claim to speak soley for God in an attempt to convert 'beleivers' for politically motivated agendas.

I have no doubt that I am a child of God. That doesn't make me believe that the Jews spoke for God! The book they wrote contains many things that I seriously doubt God would even support much less inspire.

You suggested before that when people face hard times they turn to 'God'. Well, that may be true, but what does that have to do with the Bible? Many people simply don't see the Bible as having anything to do with our creator.

The facts should be clear.

1. Jesus did not even agree with the teachings of the God of Abraham.
2. Jesus taught the moral values that parallel what Buddha taught.
3. The vicious vengeful jealous male-chauvinist God described in the Old Testament is not a pretty picture of a God.
4. The persona of Jesus and the persona of the God of Abraham simple don't match at all.

You don't need to have a personal opinion on this, just look at the text. It's written down in words.

I don't deny spirituality. I never have. What I deny is the idea that the Jews speak for God. They do not. And neither does Christianity which is even more absurd, not to mention highly divided and confused even among themselves.






The Jews mainly were the chosen people.

This being through the tribe of Judah Yahshua would come.

The scriptures are thier for our own good .Period.

The Testament shows how to treat others and the penalty thier of for breaking it.

You choose to say Yahweh is wrong in declaring his name and his sons name.

Why? Whats in a name?

To say who you are. If i see all the living Presidents and say Mr. President which one am i talking to?

Yahweh declaring his name as the only name that created the heavens and the earth. tells us who to believe. tells us who is an imposter and who isn't.

Names are very important in all realms of reality and if you don't believe this do away with your own name and see who knows you.

You like to slam what you call the OT and Yahshua you want to make him like budda.

Why?

Cause you want to?

Thats your own denial of individualism which I would think you would highly praise.

You contradict yourself.


Yahshua gave us the OT. He said he is the word.

You want to believe spritualism is not akin to the physical.

It is actually the same.

Men without rules and punishments. what kind of world would we live in?

Chaos?

Yahweh is not chaos.

What he is, is Loving that he did send a savior . Not that you personally asked for it. But because the time had come for the world to see what men in High Places place on the people.

Power is one of the strongest evil instints men have. To rule.

You would have us rule. But who the big chief?

No Abra Yahweh is concise in what he has inspired to be written down and even though men have tried through the centuries to change it and got by with it as we are learning.

The time has come in this generation that we can find the purposefull misrepretations in the scriptures to lead men astray and call the scriptures boloney as you do.


You spit off alot of how the bible contradicts itself but what makes you think you can understand it's true meaning and where we are going if you refuse to openly study it just as you have science?

You spit out jibberish that you find someone has written or made a video on the internet then 10 people start claiming this as truth.

When all it is ,is a deceptful lie.

Thier are not contradictions in the scriptures you just are not a student of the field.

If i started telling you about splitting atoms as a athority because i found it in Wikipedia does that make me right?

Makes me a fool is what it makes me.

Do your homework and stop saying the same old script i have heard forever.

The word has not stood the test of time like no other because man made it so.

You are a mathimatian do the math.

Whats the probaballity billions of people would hold on to one book as sacred and no other religion is known in the world like this one for thousands of years.

Your probability test would say it is impossible. And you know it.

Not that I am saying that the interpretation of it is in the least bit reliable but that the words are thier for our study and for our lifestyles.

Thats what it is all about our lifestyles.

Yahshua put it in just a few easy to understand words and to grow from thier those who seek wisdom.

Matt 22:37-40

37 Yahshua said to him, "'You shall love Yahweh your Elohim with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets."
NKJV

Thier we have it the OT done away. Right?

1st notice he does not say Love ME.. No Love Yahweh because if you love Yahweh you will love your nieghbor that is why it is like it.

He did not just say something new here. It is a quote.

Deut 6:5-9

5 And thou shalt love Yahweh thy Elohim with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.

6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:

7 And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.

8 And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes.

9 And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.
KJV


Here Yahweh is telling us how to keep the peace amoung the people and to love one another.

Deut 10:18-19

18 He doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow, and loveth the stranger, in giving him food and raiment.

19 Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
KJV

james 1:25 -27 says the same thing. To love all people. He gives us promices

Deut 11:13-14

13 And it shall come to pass, if ye shall hearken diligently unto my commandments which I command you this day, to love Yahweh your Elohim, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul,

14 That I will give you the rain of your land in his due season, the first rain and the latter rain, that thou mayest gather in thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil.
KJV


He promices rain in due season. LIFE.

He never changes as i posted before what happens to those who will not love?

Zech 14:17-18

17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, Yahweh of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.

18 And if the family of Egypt go not up, and come not, that have no rain; there shall be the plague, wherewith the Lord will smite the heathen that come not up to keep the feast of tabernacles.
KJV


The same promice is taken away if you will not love and if you can not love your existance who was given you as a gift from Yahweh. Then the rain that breeds your food will be taken away.

Not a death penalty even though these people will not believe but a life lesson for rebbellious children who think they know more than the one who bore them.

Just like in our own families today.

You think these words of wisdom and what happens in families is a fairy tale some Ape made up!!

Here is Yahshua

Deut 5:10

10 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.
KJV

Commandments, rules for children. They are harsh huh?

How this for taking on the sins of the world and loving the ones who kill you?

Luke 23:34-43

34 Then said Yahshua, Father, forgive them ; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.

35 And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Messiah, the chosen of Elohim.

36 And the soldiers also mocked him, coming to him, and offering him vinegar,

37 And saying, If thou be the king of the Jews, save thyself.

38 And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Messiah, save thyself and us.

40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?

41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.

42 And he said unto Yahshua, Master, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.

43 And Yahshua said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
KJV


Forgiving them as he is being murdered and then the thief promicing eternal life for just saying. I BELIEVE YOU.


No Abra. No man would or could make up the philosophy of the bible the good the bad and the ungly they can not do it now with SUPER COMPUTERS. Make a book so perfect and loving as this.

If we will only quit believing we are G-ds already and in control of our lives then we could really live.

Who amoung us could live a life devoted to your fellow man and then have him torture you and while this is being done as you are getting ready to die say.

It's ok. I forgive you. Blessings...Miles

1 2 5 6 7 9 11 12 13 16 17