Here's one referrence to Jesus in Genesis and many more before.

Genesis 2:4
4These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens



It's not that he didn't agree, he fulfilled the prophecies, completed the covenant.

Matthew 5:17

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

What?

Because the bible is being held up by Christians as being the "Word" of the creator of all humanity. They constantly proclaim that "All men are sinners! All have fallen short of the glory of the creator, and all men must accept that Jesus is the sacrificial lamb of the creator of all humanity. And failure to accept this will not only supposedly result in the spiritual death of the non-believer of these claims, but the Christians will also socially brand such people as having "rejected God" and refuse to "obey God", blah, blah, blah.

Who are you kidding Cowboy?

You go around making these very accusations yourself.

Here you just did it in your previous post:


You just personally made a blatant accusation toward "Every single other person that has or ever will walk this Earth"

Well, I got news for you bud. I walk on this Earth. So you are making blatant accusations about me personally.

Don't think for one second that you aren't.

And I don't care if you want to claim that "You personally" aren't making these accusations, but rather a religion is making them".

That's perfectly find with me. In fact, that's precisely what I'm addressing. The very RELIGION that makes these outrageous claims toward everyone. Including me.

That gives me the right to join in conversations about "Christianity".

It's not required to be a "believer" in Christianity in order to address the claims and accusations that this religion makes toward all of humanity

~~~~~

As a human being, I reject these claims as being nothing more than superstitious rumors, or potentially the outright underhanded unethical brainwashing scam of ancient men whose purpose was to create a religion that could be used to get people under the thumb of the church to gain political power in the name of religion.

That is a very real concern Cowboy.

~~~~~

I voice my views and opinions on this matter because I feel it's important.

You might think that when I call this religion 'Emotional Terrorism' that I'm just trying to insult it, or something superficial like that.

But no, Cowboy, I'm dead serious.

If this religion is indeed a scam deviously created by men thousands of years ago, then it has indeed been a very hateful and nasty deed played on humanity.

~~~~

Sure Cowboy, I'll be the first to agree with you on the high moral standard that Jesus himself supposedly stood for.

However, as soon as Jesus is being held up as a weapon to belittle, degrade and insult people for not climbing on board a religion that itself supports far greater bigotries and hypocrisies than even the Pharisees were guilty of, then I will indeed speak out against it.

You don't hold up Jesus and praise Jesus.

Not in the slightest. You USE Jesus as an excuse to support the whole biblical cannon and the whole Christian theological monster.

That's where I totally leave you in the dust.

I want absolute no parts of using Jesus to spread religious bigotry and hatred toward non-believers.

As far as I'm concerned that's what makes this religion so hateful.

Hell's bells, if Christianity was truly about Jesus and the things he taught it could potentially be a really great religion. But it's not about the teachings of Jesus AT ALL. It's entirely about uses Jesus as a battering ram to shove bigotries from the Old Testament and other parts of the New Testament down people's throats in the name of Jesus!

Christianity is about becoming as hypocritical as the Pharisees who were ultimately responsible for having Jesus nailed to a pole.

Christianity is the antithesis of Jesus, IMHO.

Especially in the hands of Christian fundamentalists who basically go around insinuating that anyone who refuses to climb on board the Christian Bigotry Wagon in Jesus' name is "out to lunch with Satan".

That's utter hogwash.

It's basically hateful emotional terrorism and social execution of anyone who refuses to support the bigotry wagon in Jesus' name.

~~~~~

That's how I view it Cowboy.

You really should listen to MorningSong.

There are righteous ways of evangelizing Christianity. And if Christianity were truly evangelized in righteous ways it wouldn't be emotional terrorism, or even bother anyone. Like Jesus Taught a righteous Christian evangelist would meekly walk away from anyone who is not interested in hearing what the evangelist has to offer. Righteous evangelists would seek out people who are interested in learning about Jesus, etc.

The emotional terrorism proselytized by relentless Christian fundamentalists who practice "IN YOUR FACE" accusatory evangelism is not only unhealthy and emotionally damaging to society, but it's also spitting in the very face of Jesus himself, and what he stood for. Divine or not.

It's hypocrisy on a level greater than the Pharisees.

So yes, even non-believers of this religion have very legitimate grounds for wanting to expose the flaws and fallacies associated with this highly proselytizing and insinuating religion.

You can't accuse the world of being "sinners" and "turning from God" and then act like they have no right to question the validity of these accusations and to voice their sincere opinion of why they feel that these charges are totally without any merit whatsoever.

I stand firmly behind my conviction that these ancient stories have no merit.

And at the very LEAST, it makes perfect sense to doubt them, question them, and even dismiss them as unreasonable superstitious rumors.

The very charge that to not believe in these rumors constitutes a blatant refusal to "obey" God is utter nonsense.

That is a lie that must be stopped.

It simply isn't true. There are very sound and rational reasons for dismissing these ancient myths as being nothing more than unreasonable superstitious rumors.

Telling people otherwise is truly "emotional terrorism".

The word "LORD" is used all through the Old Testament. The word "LORD" does not refer to Jesus in the Old Testament. That's just the word they used for "God".





I don't care what this verse says. The FACT of the matter is that he totally disagreed with the immoral teachings of the Old Testament and replaced them with sane teachings.

Besides, why should anyone believe Matthew?

This is just hearsay rumors anyway. It's actually a lie on the part of Matthew to be quoting Jesus like that. There is absolutely no way that Matthew could have preserved every verbatim word that Jesus ever spoke. That is unrealistic right there.

Matthew is just claiming that Jesus might have said something along those lines. Maybe he did, and maybe he didn't. We can never know.

Moreover, if Jesus didn't come to "destroy" the law then the old laws would still be in effect. Otherwise he would have "destroyed" them by replacing them.

He also supposedly said:

Matthew 5:18

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.

So there you go. Untill heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Jesus didn't write anything down. And the New Testament certainly hadn't yet been written when Jesus was supposedly speaking these words. Therefore, if Jesus was referring to written laws he could have only been referring to the Torah. Jots and tittles refer to written words.

~~~~~

Moreover, if you accept these writings as they are actually written here, then you've got a huge contradiction, because Jesus did indeed change the laws. He rejected the previous law that God had people judging each other and stoning sinners to death. He also rejected the law of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, and instead he taught to forgive and turn the other cheek.

So actually you've just pointed out some gross contradictions in these stories.

That's all you've done here.

Cowboy...which of those Satan websites do you go to get your mis-information

since no one supposedly existed before creation then why would God be called "Lord God"...exactly what would he be Lord over?...exactly who or what would worship him as Lord

this is why God is only referred to as being "Lord God" after he began to create that which could refer to him as Lord

proof of this is in the first line in Genesis which states:

In The Beginning "God" created The Heavens and the Earth

it doesn't say

In The Beginning "Lord God" created The Heavens and the Earth

this is why, when the bible in Genesis use God and Lord God, it is only making reference to one God not two seperate Gods or Jesus

one of the goals of this thread is to display how The Old Testament use logic to make it impossible for anyone to label any other Gods as the creator but the one Jewish God Jehova

now all you have to do is prove that Jesus was Jehova in the beginning....but even attempting that would make you a Jehova Witness ...even they don't make claims that Jesus is God but only the son ...but if you are a Jehova Witness...can you please stop ringing people's doorbell so early in the morning

Abra wrote in reply to Cowboy:









Once more.....

EXCEPT GOD FIRST DRAW MAN UNTO HIM, NO MAN WILL BELIEVE !!!!

NO man can choose on his own to believe...man can't and won't do

that...except GOD DRAW him FIRST !!!

That's certainly an interesting take on Christianity MorningSong.

Of course, if this interpretation of the religion is correct. Then proselytizing and evangelizing the religions is totally misplaced.

The very idea that someone could choose to turn to God on their own would be a totally unacceptable idea. Only God could draw them in. It could never be their decision to turn to God first.

That pretty much flies in the face of Christian evangelism where the preachers are asking everyone to "Come to God", and acting like as if it's a FREE WILL choice that the individual person must make.

To hold out that only God can draw them in, and that no man can choose to believe in God without God taking action first, is the absolute complete opposite of Cowboy's evangelical agenda to convince everyone that it's entirely up to them to choose to acknowledge and obey this God.

So here we are getting extremely contradicting views from two different people who both claim to understand what these scriptures are trying to say.

~~~~~

This only serves to verify that even the people who think they understand these scriptures clearly don't. At least some of them don't, and that begs the question, "Who truly understands these things and who doesn't?"

Moreover it begs the question, "If even devout believers can't agree on what their religion is about, then how could the scriptures that their religion is based on possibly be coherent?"

~~~~~~

I still feel that the bottom line reveals the absolute truth.

~~~~~~


If a person does not believe that they have made a conscious free will choice to reject their creator.

And a particular religion claim that they are making such a free will choice.

Then clearly there's either something drastically wrong with the religion, or there is something drastically wrong with the concept of "free will".



You can't very well be making a "free will decision" without even being aware that you are making it. There would be nothing "free" about that.

Even ignorance or misunderstanding could not be used to used to support that idea. Especially when it supposedly concerns the rejection of an all-powerful creator. If a person wasn't making a conscious "free will choice" knowingly, but instead was just mistakenly ignorant due to some failing of their intellect, or whatever. That very fact could only be the fault of the creator for not having given the person the intelligence and knowledge required to make a well-informed decision.

~~~~~

And 'well-informed', is the key issue here.

The Bible cannot possible be held up as a collection of documents that has 'well-informed' anyone.

Why? Well, for the very obvious reason that no two people can even agree on what it has to say. The Jews and Muslims don't even believe that Jesus was the promised messiah or the son of God.

The Christians who do accept the writings of the New Testament to be a valid part of the Bible don't even agree with each other on what the story is actually trying to say.

And then we have Buddhish, Atheists, Wiccans, Hindus, etc, who don't even believe in anything the ancient Hebrews had to say. They all probably view the Hebrews God-myths to be not all that much different from the Greek God-myths.

I have personally looked at the Abrahamic religion over the course of my life and I'm totally unconvinced that it represents the words and directives of any all-wise supreme creator. In fact, as I'm sure you are well aware, I'm totally convinced that it's definitely not the thoughts, actions, and directives of some all-wise supernatural being.

And clearly there are a lot of brilliant minds who feel the same way. Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein (two of the greatest minds in all of humanity) both reject the Hebrew stories as being totally unbelievable and without merit.

Albert Einstein actually agrees with my point of view that Eastern Mysticism is a far more reasonable approach to viewing spirituality. And he specifically points to Buddhism as his reference for Eastern Mysticism.

~~~~~

Still, I wish more Christians believed like you, and would take a stronger stand against the hardcore fundamentalists like Cowboy who continually try to convince people that they are rejecting God if they fail to believe in Christianity.

It is solely that aspect of Christianity that I speak out against.

It's the intrusive aspect of religious proselytizing and evangelizing that I find so objectionable in terms of being socially disruptive and destructive.

Anytime we end up having people running around accusing everyone of being sinners who are willfully making a "FREE WILL CHOICE" to reject the creator of humanity and join forces with a demonic fallen idiot, that's going to be the source of animosity, disrespect, and social tension.

Nothing good can come from of that kind of "accusatory" approach to proselytizing religion.

That is the problem with these kinds of religions right there.

~~~~~

If everyone believed like you, MorningSong, that only God can call people in and no one could possibly make their own free will choice to simply believe in God on their own, then the very idea of proselytizing or evangelizing the religion would be senseless.

Just leave it up to God to call people in when he's ready. No need for preachers, or evangelists, or anything like that.

That's the complete opposite of accusatory evangelism where everyone is being accused of making their own free will choice to reject God.

By God DRAWING man unto Him FIRST, will a man then

take time to HEAR THE WORD BEING PREACHED....


Hearing the Word then brings forth FAITH to Believe.


"Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God."


BUT again, unless God first DRAWS man unto Him, man will never

even bother taking time to HEAR the Word at all.

Question: "What does it mean that God draws us to salvation?"



Answer: The clearest verse on God’s drawing to salvation is John

6:44 where Jesus declares that “No one can come to Me unless the

Father who sent Me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last

day.” The Greek word translated “draw” is helkuo which means to

drag (literally or figuratively). Clearly this drawing is a one-

sided affair. God does the drawing to salvation; we who are drawn

have a passive role in the process. There is no doubt that we

respond to His drawing us, but the drawing itself is all on His

part.



Helkuo is used in John 21:6 to refer to a heavy net full of fish

being dragged to the shore. In John 18:10, we see Peter drawing his

sword and in Acts 16:19, helkuo is used to describe Paul and Silas

being dragged into the marketplace before the rulers. Clearly the

net had no part in its being drawn to the shore, Peter’s sword had

no part in being drawn, and Paul and Silas did not drag themselves

to the marketplace. The same can be said of God’s drawing of some to

salvation. Some come willingly and some are dragged unwillingly, but

all eventually come although we have no part in the drawing.



Why does God need to draw us to salvation? Simply put, if He didn’t,

we would never come. Jesus explains that no man can come unless the

Father draws him (John 6:65). The natural man has no ability to

come to God, nor does he even have the desire to come. Because his

heart is hard and his mind is darkened, the unregenerate person not

only doesn’t desire God, but is actually an enemy of God (Romans

5:10). When Jesus says that no man can come without God’s drawing

him, He is making a statement about the total depravity of the

sinner and the universality of that condition. So darkened is the

unsaved person that he doesn’t even realize it: “The heart is

deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?”

(Jeremiah 17:9). Therefore, it is only by the drawing of God

through His mercy and grace that we are saved. In the conversion of

the sinner, God enlightens the mind (Ephesians 1:18), He inclines

the will toward Himself, and He influences the soul, without which

influence, the soul remains darkened and rebellious against God.

All of this is involved in the drawing process.



There is a sense in which God draws all men. This is known as

the “general call” and is distinguished from the “effectual call” of

God’s elect. Passages such as Psalm 19:1-4 and Romans 1:20 attest

to the fact that God’s eternal power and divine nature are “clearly

seen” and “understood” from what has been made, and that there is

no excuse for denying these facts. But men still do deny God and

those who acknowledge His existence still do not come to a saving

knowledge of Him outside of His drawing them. Only those who have

been drawn through special revelation—by the power of the Holy

Spirit and the grace of God—will come to Christ.



There are tangible ways in which those who are being drawn to

salvation experience that drawing. First, the Holy Spirit convicts

us of our sinful state and our need for a Savior (John 16:8).

Second, He awakens in us a previously unknown interest in spiritual

things and creates a desire for them that was never there before.

Suddenly our ears are open, our hearts are inclined toward Him, and

His Word begins to hold a fascination for us that is new and

exciting. Our spirits begin to discern spiritual truth that never

made sense to us before because we were in a natural state: “The

man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from

the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot

understand them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1

Corinthians 2:14). Finally, we begin to discern new desires which

He has created within us. He places within us a new heart that

inclines toward Him, a heart that desires to know Him, to obey Him

and to walk in the “newness of life” (Romans 6:4) which He has

promised.



gotquestions.org

What "Word" are you talking about?

You say: "Hearing the Word then brings forth FAITH to Believe.

But we see countless examples of people who are well-versed in the biblical scriptures who do not believe they are the word of any God.

I've explained myself countless times over, two very important things concerning FAITH and the biblical cannon.



1. I most certainly see no reason to believe these stories as they are written verbatim.


How would that equate hearing the word brings forth faith?

I've heard it. It hasn't cause me to believe, nor has it caused me to even want to place faith in it, which is my next point.


2. Even if I thought the stories were true it wouldn't be because I wanted to place FAITH in them. On the contrary, the only way I would accept these stories as being true is if I felt there was no other choice.


So again, having heard the stories wouldn't case me to want to have FAITH in them even if I thought they were true.

If I was convinced that the biblical stories were true simply because I felt there was overwhelming evidence for them, or something along those lines, I would still be thoroughly depressed and disappointed that our creator had created such a nightmare.

~~~~~

I mean, seriously MorningSong. If I thought these stories were true and I had no choice but to believe them. Then the best I could do is to offer to accept Jesus as my 'savior' NOT out of love for this God, but simply because that would appear to be the only way to escape condemnation and potential everlasting punishment.

In fact, if I thought these stories were true, and I also believe that this God was simply offering to become his eternal servant or simply face a peaceful spiritual death of ceasing to exist, then I would be incline to choose the latter.

Seriously, I would.

Especially if this could be done in a polite way without this God getting all bent out of shape because I'm not interested in becoming his eternal servant and doing everything he says.

I mean think about it for a moment MorningSong.

This biblical cannon has God creating woman as an afterthought. He also then curses women with sorrowful conception and childbirth, and proclaims that they will forever be ruled over by their husbands.

I'm already not happy with an entity who thinks like this and solves his problems in this way. So even if the biblical cannon were true, that wouldn't change. I'd still be faced with a God that I'm not happy with.

If this God feels this way about things on Earth, then he probably also feels the same way about things in his Heaven. Why should I think that he would behave any differently there?

According to this cannon, he seems to solve all his problems in crude and violent ways. Do I really want to serve a supreme being who solves all his problems via violent crude and rude means?

Like I say, if this is typical of his behavior why should I think he would be any different in the way he rules his Heaven?

This is all I have to go by. I have no choice but see the behaviors being attributed to him in the Bible as being representative of what this God is actually like.

He has this problem where his creation isn't doing as he would like them to do. From my perspective, as far as I can tell from reading this cannon of stories, his REAL PROBLEM is lack of communication and good mentoring.

But instead of addressing this fundamental basic problem he decides to send his son to be butchered on a pole to become the "Symbol of Salvation" and the only way to attain the grace and love of this God is to CONDONE that this horrific violent act was done on your behalf!

If you refuse to accept this and condone it, then pee on you, you'll be cast into eternal damnation.

Do I really want to worship and serve a God like this?

No, I don't.

If could just politely ask to be excused into the oblivion of non-existence, that would gladly choose that fate over having to agree with this God and his totally violent, rude, and crude ways of dealing with things.

If this God doesn't have the wisdom to solve his problems via supreme mentoring skills, and through perfectly crystal clear communication, then to be perfectly honest with you MorningSong, I would view this God as being extremely dangerous to be around.

In short, I could never TRUST this God to do the right thing.

~~~~

In my humble opinion, MorningSong. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever why anyone should have to GUESS whether or not a supreme creator exists. Or merely have "FAITH" that one might exist.

I see absolutely no value in that at all. Especially if this creator supposedly wants to have a relationship with people and wants them to do as he says.

He should just show up, and be omnipresent FOR REAL. No question at all whether or not this God exists.

Then if someone wants to be like Satan and challenge this God's authority, more power to them. Let them have it out with God.

But this nonsense of trying to make out like everyone is automatically taking that stance with this God is utter nonsense.

Disbelief an invisible God does not constitute rebellion.

And reading the biblical cannon has neither convinced me that it has merit, nor has it inspired me to want to serve this God.

On the contrary, it has only served to convince me that even if the stories are true, I would much prefer to simply cease to exist than to serve this God.

I don't personally approve of the way this God deals with his creation and with the problems he has with his creation.

That's my truth.

Read the post right above your last post above , Abra.

I don't see where this apologist's views should cause me to change my views. Nor do I see where they address any of the concerns that I bought up.

Allow me to address these issues:


The Apologist's Claims:


The apologist claims the following:

"Finally, we begin to discern new desires which He has created within us. He places within us a new heart that inclines toward Him, a heart that desires to know Him, to obey Him and to walk in the “newness of life"

He places within us a new heart that inclines toward him?

What could that possibly mean? What was wrong with our original heart?

I have huge problems with these kinds of apologetic explanations. From my perspective they are nothing more than extreme desperation on the part of apologists to try to make sense of nonsense.

What could this explanation possibly imply?

First of, if God has to change the "heart" of a person in incline with God what could that mean other than he is basically turning the person into a puppet and changing their entire point of view.

For example, what could that mean for me?

God would have to say, "Ok Abra, you don't like men ruling over women, and you don't care for the use of violence and punishments to be the basis of solutions of problems, and you have a problem with the way I communicate with my creation? No problem! I'll just transform you into someone who is inclined to agree with all these things."

Then God waves his magic heart wand and I am transformed into a person who is inclined to agree with his way of doing things.

Sure sounds like God would be doing nothing more than making me into a puppet who now agrees with him and I no longer have any values of my own.

Secondly, if this God seeks to change people's hearts so that they are incline to agree with him, (thus making them into puppets), then why even both with the whole salvation scam in the first place? Why not just create a species of puppets who are inclined to agree with God from the get-go?

~~~~

I mean, seriously. This apologetic "explanation" does nothing for me at all. All this guy is doing is creating even more contradictions that don't solve a single thing, IMHO.

There is nothing in that apologetic explanation that does anything for me at all.

~~~~

From my perspective this would be like people objecting to the behavior of Aldolf Hitler. And Hitler supporters saying to them, well don't worry, once Hitler decides to take you on he will transform you into someone who will be inclined to totally agree with everything he does.

That's supposed to be an inviting apologetic argument?

I don't see it.

That statement above is incorrect .



Jesus just had not become Incarnate yet in the old

testament......but Jesus has ALWAYS been....Jesus is I AM....



In Genesis 3:15 , He is the remedy for the sin which caused adam

and eve to fall.... As the Savior to come, He would be the one to

bruise the head of the serpent, signifying the ultimate victory

over sin which He would accomplish through His death and

resurrection, and ascension back with the

Father..... where He always was....right from the very beginning.

(Father,Word, Holy Spirit was the "we" mentioned in Genesis.

Before Jesus became Incarnate,He was known as the WORD. )


Genesis 3:15: "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and

between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou

shalt bruise his heel."



Jesus is found all thruout scriptures..not just in Genesis.

(Jesus is not only in the new testament, but there are types

and shadows of Jesus , all thruout the old testament also).


“And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, [Jesus] interpreted

to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” (Luke

24:27)

.........

Jesus Is :


In Genesis, He is the Seed of the Women.

In Exodus, He is the Passover Lamb.

In Leviticus, He is our High Priest.

In Numbers, He is the Pillar of Cloud by day and the Pillar of Fire

by night.

In Deuteronomy, He is the Prophet like unto Moses.

In Joshua, He is the Captain of our Salvation.

In Judges, He is our Judge and Lawgiver.

In Ruth, He is our Kinsman Redeemer.

In I and II Samuel, He is our Trusted Prophet.

In Kings and Chronicles, He is our Reigning King.

In Ezra, He is our Faithful Scribe.

In Nehemiah, He is the rebuilder of the broken down walls of our

human life.

In Esther, He is our Mordecai.

In Job, He is our Dayspring from on High and our Ever-Living

Redeemer.

In Psalms, He is the Lord our Shepherd.

In Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, He is our Wisdom.

In the Song of Solomon, He is our Lover and the Bridegroom.

In Isaiah, He is the Prince of Peace.

In Jeremiah, He is the Righteous Branch.

In Lamentations, He is the Weeping Prophet.

In Ezekiel, He is the Wonderful Four-Faced Man.

In Daniel, He is the Fourth Man in the burning furnace.

In Hosea, He is the Faithful Husband, forever married to the

backslider.

In Joel, He is the Baptizer with the Holy Ghost and Fire.

In Amos, He is our Burden-Bearer.

In Obadiah, He is the Mighty to Save.

In Jonah, He is our Great Foreign Missionary.

In Micah, He is the Messenger of Beautiful Feet, of carrying the

Gospel.

In Nahum, He is the Avenger of God’s elect.

In Habakkuk He is God’s Evangelist.

In Zephaniah, He is the Savior.

In Haggai, He is the Restorer of the lost heritage of Israel.

In Zechariah, He is the Fountain opened in the House of David for

sin and uncleanness.

In Malachi, He is the Son of Righteousness, rising with healing in

His Wings.

In Matthew, He is the Messiah.

In Mark, He is the Wonder-Worker.

In Luke, He is the Son of God.

In John, He is the Son of Man.

In Acts, He is the Holy Spirit.

In Romans, He is our Justifier.

In Corinthians, He is the Sanctifier.

In Galatians, He is the Redeemer from the curse of the law.

In Ephesians, He is the unsearchable Riches of Christ.

In Philippians, He is the God who Supplies all our Needs.

In Colossians, He is the Godhead bodily.

In I and II Thessalonians, He is our Soon-Coming King.

In I and II Timothy, He is our Mediator between God and man.

In Titus, He is our Faithful Pastor.

In Philemon, He is a Friend that sticks closer than a brother.

In Hebrews, He is the blood of the Everlasting Covenant.

In James, He is the Great Physician.

In I and II Peter, He is the Good Shepherd who soon shall appear

with a Crown of Glory.

In I,II, and III John, He is Everlasting Love.

In Jude, He is the Lord coming with ten thousand of His Saints.

In Revelations, He is the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords.


Jesus is the WORD !!!

And until God draws you, you won't see it, Abra.


None of us that are born again now could " see it" , without God

first drawing us...not one.

Nite now, my friend.

Well, the proof is in the pudding.None of these people who seem to think that they are 'born again' can ever agree with each other. So clearly they don't "see" what they think they see.

The myriad of different denominations of Christianity is living proof that all of these religious people who think they are 'seeing' something are merely kidding themselves.

And look at what it ultimately leads too?

People convincing themselves that they have been 'drawn to God' whilst other people have been 'left in the dark'.

That is the very makings of religious prejudices and bigotries, etc.

"We are enlightened by God and you are not."

That's precisely the kind of arrogance that these types of religious beliefs lead to.

This is why they become so obnoxious and politically dangerous.

We end up with cultures that have radically different beliefs each proclaiming they they hold the copyright on God.

The Muslims think they own God.
The Christians think they own God.

And all the other meek religions of the world that just want to worship God abstractly without claiming township of God have to put up with the extreme arrogance of the Muslims and Christians claiming that they hold the only patent rights on God.

And the poor atheists have to sit on the sidelines and watch all this religious bigotry filling the world with hatred in the name of God, when if everyone would become an atheist we could finally live in peace.

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace

You, you may say
I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people sharing all the world

You, you may say
I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will live as one

Not true, no one knows who has a relationship with God or doesn't, unless of course they straight up say it. Outside of that, we know not who is “enlightened” by God or not.



Likewise, if everyone became a Christian, we would live in a world full of love. No theivery, no crimes committed, no emotional tormant from anyone, ect. There is no hatred being filled in this world in the name of God. Some may, can't claim for ALL. But say from the Christians in particular. There is no hatred from a “Christian”. Only love. Atheists are not looked down upon, they are not thought to be lesser. They are no different from Christians besides the fact that Christians have accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior while the other(s) have not. This doesn't make one a “better” person, just difference in choices my friend.

Balderdash bubble...

Believing that everyone being 'christian' would solve any problem.

Let me pop that.

Ireland - mass murder in the name of God by two opposing 'christian' sects.

Absolute Extreme Babtists that interfere even with the burial of the dead.

Shall I go on.

Neither will everyone being athiests solve the problem. Such would lead to conflict at every level of society (athiest only agree that god is not - on all else they have a multitude of conflicting theroies).

Better to let God reach the rainbow of human 'norm' in his own way.

and accept what another brings to the table.

Those were not "Christians". Christianity is more then a title, it is a way of life. Root word of Christian is Christ. So with that being said, a Christian would never do such actions for our Lord has told us not to.

Go ahead and tell one of them Absolute Extreme Babtists he ain't a christian...

After he gets done bashing you with his 'anti' sign...

Back up and see the multitudes that can 'find' god in the sands and miss GOD in the gems within.

What 'christian' means to you has nothing to do with the 'perception' of the multitude.

god is personal

God is a being just as you and I. We are made in the image of God and his great glory. I tell no one specific they are not Christian, for I do not truly truly know their hearts. Only God and them know their hearts and where it stands. And if these "Christians" go to the terms of "bashing" someone, that just proves my point of what I'm making right there. For Jesus our Christ said

Matthew 5:39

39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

So to be "CHRIST"ian, one would have to turn the other cheek. This is not done by "bashing" someone(s).

This isn't in line with what you actually PREACH.

You PREACH that in order to have a relationship with God a person must OBEY God. And according to you that means recognizing Jesus as God and obeying the teachings of Jesus PLUS all the other Christian religious bigotries that Christians like yourself hold out in Jesus' name (like the idea that God hates homosexuality, etc.)

Now you're claiming that no one knows who has a relationship with God.

Well, if that's true, then you could have no clue whether someone who doesn't believe in Jesus or the Bible at all could have relationship with God because you can have no way of knowing.

You PREACH that people are "rejecting God", or "turning away from God", or refusing to LISTEN to the "Word of God" if they reject the Bible.

So your PREACHING doesn't match your claims here.

It's that's simple.



No, that's clearly not true at all. We already see this as plain as the nose on our face. Different Christian denominations and beliefs do not get along with each other.

In fact, Catholics and Protestants often don't even consider the others to even be "Christians". It's a highly bigoted religion that is often quite bigoted against it's own self.

I've often said that if the whole world were converted to Christianity that would only be the very beginning of the real holy wars. As soon as they realized that there was no one left to convert to "Christianity" they'd immediately start pointing fingers at each other proclaiming that only their form of Christianity is the "True Christianity", and all the other denominations are false.

That's the nature of the beast.

There could never be a harmonious Christianity ever. The scriptures that it's based on are far too ambiguous to ever be agreed on by everyone, and so it's basically impossible to have a consistent Christianity.

Catholicism falling out of protesting Protestants away from "The Body of Christ" which is the Catholic Church, is all the proof we need.

It's a done deal.

Proven historically beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Christianity doesn't have a prayer in the world of ever becoming the single world religion. It never had that potential, and never will.

That very delusion and quest is often what makes various factions of this religion so dangerous. They actually STRIVE to achieve that goal.

In fact, I was listening to a conversation about this on NPR radio. With the advent of the Internet Christian proselytizing organizations have sprung up everywhere. And they are even in competition with each other.

These Christian proselytizing camps are actually focusing on proselyting to the Arab countries with the dream of converting Muslims to Christianity. Just as few years ago they thought they had the upper hand and it would just be a matter of time because the Christians had the upper hand in technology.

But now that is changing. China and Russia are siding with the Muslims and arming them with Internet technologies to fight back. Now it appears that the Christians are going to lose that proselytizing war and that the Muslims are actually going to spread Islam at a far faster rate that the Christians can hope to compete with.

It's become and "information proselytizing war".

And the current prediction is that the Muslims will ultimately win.

So you better start studying up on Islam.