100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Fake Christians | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I enjoy the conversations on these forums . . . I find nothing gained in responding to Peter, no give and take, no real conversation ever occurs. Even in our most heated arguments Spider still responds in meaningful ways. Agreed to the fifth degree. I think that rhymes.. No, not one time has anyone ever provided "proof" of these claims that I challenge. Nothing but deflections, denial and fluff. No "give and take". Give what? What would you want me to give someone who makes claims about my religion then refuses to back up their claims? Then if they do attempt to back up those claims, they cite "oral testimony"? (most recently by both of you) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol, not cocky, confident... Here's a hint, go find out which of these two words were the original words that "most" people accept as "fact". 1. "Eternity" 2. "Hell" this is really simple and something that most anyone should be able to accomplish on their own. After you figure out what the original words were, slap yourself in the forehead for being so damn gullible... ..For the love of.. Your confidence is truly misguided. The point is up here. -------------------- ...you are down here. -------------------------------- Maybe someday, you'll see your own nonsense. As for the words, themselves. It's irrelevant. Because, yes, every 3-4-5-6-7 year old is already at the level of your Einsteins and Darwins. Shall I just predict now that you won't respond with anything except fluff and deflections? (and some more lame attempts at insult) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I enjoy the conversations on these forums . . . I find nothing gained in responding to Peter, no give and take, no real conversation ever occurs. Even in our most heated arguments Spider still responds in meaningful ways. Agreed to the fifth degree. I think that rhymes.. No, not one time has anyone ever provided "proof" of these claims that I challenge. Nothing but deflections, denial and fluff. No "give and take". Give what? What would you want me to give someone who makes claims about my religion then refuses to back up their claims? Then if they do attempt to back up those claims, they cite "oral testimony"? (most recently by both of you) I have. Twice matter of fact. Maybe why you stopped coming after me? Hmm.. ..and not to mention, I just did. ..and I just did give you 'proof' beyond 'oral' testimony. *sighs* Not to mention. Our oral testimony was, at those times, a practiced preaching across the world, not just our backyard. How much proof do I need to smack you with before you just stfu? ..and furthermore, how is it that I deflect or deny when I answered? You asked. I gave. Nothing but your continuous foul venom is returned. How is that I can hold a respectful and meaningful discussion about Christianity with five other Christians, but you enter it and right off the bat you start being a rude-- Ugh, I don't even want to resort to your level. But, look, Peter, I don't want to argue with you but since you ARE here and about. I have a question for you. Serpent Seed Doctrine. It's another thread I started. Mind checking it out? I'm sure you can guess what category it is under. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shall I just predict now that you won't respond with anything except fluff and deflections? (and some more lame attempts at insult) Is it my fault you can't see the proof nor answer right before your eyes? No. Is it my fault you don't see that I did exactly what you asked and received nothing but your own feeble attempts at insults back? No. If what I am doing is deflecting.. ...then you are my superior in that aspect. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Peter_Pan69
on
Wed 02/22/12 04:12 PM
|
|
I enjoy the conversations on these forums . . . I find nothing gained in responding to Peter, no give and take, no real conversation ever occurs. Even in our most heated arguments Spider still responds in meaningful ways. Agreed to the fifth degree. I think that rhymes.. No, not one time has anyone ever provided "proof" of these claims that I challenge. Nothing but deflections, denial and fluff. No "give and take". Give what? What would you want me to give someone who makes claims about my religion then refuses to back up their claims? Then if they do attempt to back up those claims, they cite "oral testimony"? (most recently by both of you) I have. Twice matter of fact. Maybe why you stopped coming after me? Hmm.. ..and not to mention, I just did. ..and I just did give you 'proof' beyond 'oral' testimony. *sighs* Not to mention. Our oral testimony was, at those times, a practiced preaching across the world, not just our backyard. How much proof do I need to smack you with before you just stfu? ..and furthermore, how is it that I deflect or deny when I answered? You asked. I gave. Nothing but your continuous foul venom is returned. How is that I can hold a respectful and meaningful discussion about Christianity with five other Christians, but you enter it and right off the bat you start being a rude-- Ugh, I don't even want to resort to your level. But, look, Peter, I don't want to argue with you but since you ARE here and about. I have a question for you. Serpent Seed Doctrine. It's another thread I started. Mind checking it out? I'm sure you can guess what category it is under. So, the first claim I challenged was: There were actually two claims made, but I thought I would make it easier for ya by only focussing on one. "Yea real nice guy this god that requires you believe in him or he makes you suffer for eternity." 1st claim: God requires you to believe in Him... 2nd claim: He will make you suffer for eternity if you don't believe in Him... And you responded with this: To blindly say, 'people who will not back up their own claims' is ludicrous; because while it is not 'written'; this ideal was an early and deliberate message delivered by Christians (whether you deem them fake or otherwise) themselves So I am right, you are wrong. Period. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I enjoy the conversations on these forums . . . I find nothing gained in responding to Peter, no give and take, no real conversation ever occurs. Even in our most heated arguments Spider still responds in meaningful ways. Agreed to the fifth degree. I think that rhymes.. No, not one time has anyone ever provided "proof" of these claims that I challenge. Nothing but deflections, denial and fluff. No "give and take". Give what? What would you want me to give someone who makes claims about my religion then refuses to back up their claims? Then if they do attempt to back up those claims, they cite "oral testimony"? (most recently by both of you) I have. Twice matter of fact. Maybe why you stopped coming after me? Hmm.. ..and not to mention, I just did. ..and I just did give you 'proof' beyond 'oral' testimony. *sighs* Not to mention. Our oral testimony was, at those times, a practiced preaching across the world, not just our backyard. How much proof do I need to smack you with before you just stfu? ..and furthermore, how is it that I deflect or deny when I answered? You asked. I gave. Nothing but your continuous foul venom is returned. How is that I can hold a respectful and meaningful discussion about Christianity with five other Christians, but you enter it and right off the bat you start being a rude-- Ugh, I don't even want to resort to your level. But, look, Peter, I don't want to argue with you but since you ARE here and about. I have a question for you. Serpent Seed Doctrine. It's another thread I started. Mind checking it out? I'm sure you can guess what category it is under. So, the first claim I challenged was: There were actually two claims made, but I thought I would make it easier for ya by only focussing on one. "Yea real nice guy this god that requires you believe in him or he makes you suffer for eternity." 1st claim: God requires you to believe in Him... 2nd claim: He will make you suffer for eternity if you don't believe in Him... And you responded with this: [qoute]To blindly say, 'people who will not back up their own claims' is ludicrous; because while it is not 'written'; this ideal was an early and deliberate message delivered by Christians (whether you deem them fake or otherwise) themselves So I am right, you are wrong. Period. No, you are not. That's a fraction of my response. So I am right, you are a .......... Period. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st claim: God requires you to believe in Him... 2nd claim: He will make you suffer for eternity if you don't believe in Him... Also, if you want further proof. Sodom and Gommorah (sp) are two individuals who, are in fact, according to scriptures, last I checked 'two that will suffer for eternity in Hell'. So, ultimately, to make the claim that 'no one' is ever going to face such a verdict, is ludicrous, because if it happened not just once, but twice; who is anyone to say that it is not possible again? Furthermore. "Deny me among men, I will deny you before my Father." If such an idea is taken by its context; this implies that if you deny Him (Christ) while walking on this Earth, he will deny you when you are facing judgment in front of God. That said; if we deny him now, and then are denied by Christ when we face God... ...are you saying that such is BS and we will still get into Heaven? Somehow you missed this. You responded to the first half. ..then my arrogant comment at the end. Ignored everything in between. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol, my prediction comes true...
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Peter_Pan69
on
Wed 02/22/12 04:21 PM
|
|
1st claim: God requires you to believe in Him... 2nd claim: He will make you suffer for eternity if you don't believe in Him... Also, if you want further proof. Sodom and Gommorah (sp) are two individuals who, are in fact, according to scriptures, last I checked 'two that will suffer for eternity in Hell'. So, ultimately, to make the claim that 'no one' is ever going to face such a verdict, is ludicrous, because if it happened not just once, but twice; who is anyone to say that it is not possible again? Furthermore. "Deny me among men, I will deny you before my Father." If such an idea is taken by its context; this implies that if you deny Him (Christ) while walking on this Earth, he will deny you when you are facing judgment in front of God. That said; if we deny him now, and then are denied by Christ when we face God... ...are you saying that such is BS and we will still get into Heaven? Somehow you missed this. You responded to the first half. ..then my arrogant comment at the end. Ignored everything in between. You did it again so I did not re-oppose it. You made the claim of "eternity in hell" The "deny me.." line was just you changing the goalposts, adding to a claim that has still not been addressed properly. Plus you said "implies", so you're not sure about that one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And lastly, as much as I hate to be the damper on your Anus Parade..
I never made that said claim to begin with. However, it was how Christians originally tried to bang this ideal home to create more believers. It was a common practice. OBVIOUSLY, we questioned this, because is either I or Bushido Christian now? You cannot disprove nor brush aside our upbringing just because that doesn't 'count' as proof to you. When I denoted it as being 'unwritten', I meant our upbringing, and the Christian (original) way of force-feeding it to the public. That in itself, was beyond the measure of proof required. Which can be backed up by researching old teachings, watching old clips of church sermons; or you can ask those like me or Bushido who were brought up on such 'values'. Whether they were true or not, that is the original perception. Finally. Just who in the **** are you to claim who was and wasn't a 'fake' Christian anyway? Morning Song and Cowboy are FAR more Christian then you will EVER be. That's a bold printed PERIOD. Now, if you'll excuse me. I'm literally done with you. ..but, you should check out that Serpent Seed crap. It's causing more degradation to your religion than me nor Bushido could do in our lifetime combined. ..should focus your 'God Powers' thataway. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st claim: God requires you to believe in Him... 2nd claim: He will make you suffer for eternity if you don't believe in Him... Also, if you want further proof. Sodom and Gommorah (sp) are two individuals who, are in fact, according to scriptures, last I checked 'two that will suffer for eternity in Hell'. So, ultimately, to make the claim that 'no one' is ever going to face such a verdict, is ludicrous, because if it happened not just once, but twice; who is anyone to say that it is not possible again? Furthermore. "Deny me among men, I will deny you before my Father." If such an idea is taken by its context; this implies that if you deny Him (Christ) while walking on this Earth, he will deny you when you are facing judgment in front of God. That said; if we deny him now, and then are denied by Christ when we face God... ...are you saying that such is BS and we will still get into Heaven? Somehow you missed this. You responded to the first half. ..then my arrogant comment at the end. Ignored everything in between. You did it again so I did not re-oppose it. You made the claim of "eternity in hell" The "deny me.." line was just you changing the goalposts, adding to a claim that has still not been addressed properly. Plus you said "implies", so you're not sure about that one. ..wow you are dense. What do you think we are doing?! DENYING HIM. Thus, the idea of SERVE HIM OR SUFFER is the SAME CONCEPT. My God.. Goal posts may have moved.. but it's still up and its damm good. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Peter_Pan69
on
Wed 02/22/12 04:32 PM
|
|
1st claim: God requires you to believe in Him... 2nd claim: He will make you suffer for eternity if you don't believe in Him... Also, if you want further proof. Sodom and Gommorah (sp) are two individuals who, are in fact, according to scriptures, last I checked 'two that will suffer for eternity in Hell'. So, ultimately, to make the claim that 'no one' is ever going to face such a verdict, is ludicrous, because if it happened not just once, but twice; who is anyone to say that it is not possible again? Furthermore. "Deny me among men, I will deny you before my Father." If such an idea is taken by its context; this implies that if you deny Him (Christ) while walking on this Earth, he will deny you when you are facing judgment in front of God. That said; if we deny him now, and then are denied by Christ when we face God... ...are you saying that such is BS and we will still get into Heaven? Somehow you missed this. You responded to the first half. ..then my arrogant comment at the end. Ignored everything in between. You did it again so I did not re-oppose it. You made the claim of "eternity in hell" The "deny me.." line was just you changing the goalposts, adding to a claim that has still not been addressed properly. Plus you said "implies", so you're not sure about that one. ..wow you are dense. What do you think we are doing?! DENYING HIM. Thus, the idea of SERVE HIM OR SUFFER is the SAME CONCEPT. My God.. Goal posts may have moved.. but it's still up and its damm good. Damn, how hard is it for someone, even a non-believer, to accept the fact that "hell" AND "eternity" are mistranslations? This is just too fuccin simple. Seriously, do you need my "testimony" to believe that "hell" was made up around the 1600's? Or do you actually have the balls to research it yourself and admit defeat? Deal with this and I'll address your "deny me.." BS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christianity Part 1 made up between 1-300 AD
Christianity Part Duex made up ~1050 AD Christianity 1-38,000 was made up along the way. Mormonism made up Circa 1820 Why is when this stuff was made up important? Does not seem to matter to the people who believe it . . . does it? It was all just made up. Dantes inferno and the modern understanding of hell being made up from interpretations ect being much later has no significance any more than the rest of it being made up earlier has significance. The fact is that many modern denominations of Christians hold hell as a real thing, and behavior and belief can get you there forever. Peter are you saying these denominations are filled with Fake Christians? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You have never been to the center of your being I can tell.  The only constant is change, gradual as it may seem to be. Yes survival is paramount and so is freedom. Change is inevitable and gradual. When you learn something meaningful, you will change. Hi Tribo!! Long time no see! Are you still on the Islands? I like this. BTW. ..and he reminds me of that ship captain from that one old TV show. I wanna say Love Boat, I'm for some reason, certain that wasn't it.. ..maybe it was a movie? Hmmm... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christianity Part 1 made up between 1-300 AD Christianity Part Duex made up ~1050 AD Christianity 1-38,000 was made up along the way. Mormonism made up Circa 1820 Why is when this stuff was made up important? Does not seem to matter to the people who believe it . . . does it? It was all just made up. Dantes inferno and the modern understanding of hell being made up from interpretations ect being much later has no significance any more than the rest of it being made up earlier has significance. The fact is that many modern denominations of Christians hold hell as a real thing, and behavior and belief can get you there forever. Peter are you saying these denominations are filled with Fake Christians? No, I'm saying if you can use "hearsay testimony" for "proof", then so can I. If you can't show written proof of your claims, then don't expect others to hold up to "your standards" of "evidence". By your current standard as displayed in this thread, psychics, God, Adam and Eve, Moses, and numerous other things are all real and true. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christianity Part 1 made up between 1-300 AD Christianity Part Duex made up ~1050 AD Christianity 1-38,000 was made up along the way. Mormonism made up Circa 1820 Why is when this stuff was made up important? Does not seem to matter to the people who believe it . . . does it? It was all just made up. Dantes inferno and the modern understanding of hell being made up from interpretations ect being much later has no significance any more than the rest of it being made up earlier has significance. The fact is that many modern denominations of Christians hold hell as a real thing, and behavior and belief can get you there forever. Peter are you saying these denominations are filled with Fake Christians? ..that was a decent game. Just seemed like too much of a bite off from God of War. Granted different man character, and one was off a Crusader and one was off a dude named after Zeus's pop.. but, meh. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have a question that goes along with your statement here. It's a little "off topic" but it relates into the topic. So do you check EVERYTHING you know about "history" to verify it to be true? How do you absolutely know Abraham was a president for absolutes? Someone tell you? Where you there? Or I'll go with what you request, "what evidence do you have of this"? And the evidence has to be shown to be authentic and absolute. I think when 12 different countries all have the same documented proof, whether pictures, or have it written; it's pretty much safe to say its truth. Even Iraq knows who are presidents have been; even if they do not teach it. Yet even Christians argue the content of the Bible, let alone the other religion and non-religious in existence. For me, it is not truth, until I have encountered enough evidence for me to have no room to believe otherwise. People don't believe in religion because they do not wish to. In this case "Christianity". It's not because they haven't been "convinced" or anything, it's because they CHOOSE not to believe. Not at all true. I did believe once, but when I began to question, is when I began to have that believe waiver. Lack of evidence, lack of logic. Yes I understand quite a bit of history CAN be verified through investigation, but have you ever really done it? I'm not speaking about one or two incidents, but everything you know about history, have you thoroughly checked it out to ensure it to be true? If not, why not? I myself have on areas that presently affect me in some way or another. Some things, I just feel the need or desire to concern myself with because their validity is or little to no value to me so why bother? History is myth, based on pesonages thruoghout time, no more no less, if they wont believe the truth, then give them the myth. ..on certain levels, this could be true. My own history, well, that wouldn't be. I was there for it. Hi Sin, i even find myself at times not remebering things quite the way they realy happened when talking to others, that is what i mean ok? We "myth" represent and "myth" understand and "myth" construe a time moves on.history, even our own gets embellished, added onto, recollected differntly, i even see this with my 85 year old step mom. I dont correct her, i just agree and move on. But it is true that no history really is what happened just writings by those either present in some or one sense seeing it from thier perspective [one facet of what was actually happening] or gleaning the material from others transcrpits lateron who were also looking at if from thier own perspective, how many heros were there in rome or greece or elsewhere? we will never know, nor the real reasons behind any history. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forgiveness can only be granted to a person who is sincerely sorry for what they have done and that is a person who resolves not to do it again. It also can only be granted if you can forgive yourself and others. You must be willing to take full responsibility for your actions and you must know that you have changed and you will be a changed person with resolve. That is being born again in spirit. You are a new person, and a changed person. None of that requires the idea of God or Jesus or the belief that God or Jesus has forgiven you, but some people feel they need an outside entity to forgive them for their sins and wash them clean. As long as you forgive yourself and have resolved to be responsible and pay the price and to change your ways, you are a new person, and one can say that you are born again. Judgement is when you have judged yourself.  Hogwash!!! We are at the center of our bieng pure selfishness, with that comes the inability for true change, meaning if and when circumstances arise that put us in a position to survive we will revert to our most basic instincts not caring what we do to stay alive. the onlt time this does or may not hold true is if we are putting our life at risk to save others we love more than ourselves. And even then it scares the proverbial myth of hell out of us. You have never been to the center of your being I can tell. The only constant is change, gradual as it may seem to be. Yes survival is paramount and so is freedom. Change is inevitable and gradual. When you learn something meaningful, you will change. Hi Tribo!! Long time no see! Are you still on the Islands? Yes but i have been to the center of my "bean", that has to count for something right? lol.Can a leopard change his spots? If i learn something "meaning" - full, like when i have eaten to much, does that count? If i'm "full" of **** does that count? Meaningful is an abstract concept, what is meaningful to you may not be to others. but then if i remember correctly,your pretty much into finding out the impossible for yourself correct? Impossible = truth, lol No things changed, philippines is no longer in the plan unless my books sell. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was pissin' myself laughing today...watching all of the 'christians' running around with crap on their heads.
Hmmmmmm, seems to me they forgot a certain little part of the bible about PD's of their beliefs. Gotta' love the crispys 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
..which ultimately is the 'said claim'. Ahh, makes sense, however. I was raised southern Babtist and I WAS taught that if you did not believe in Jesus as your savior you would be sent to hell and there was nothing saying it wouldn't be forever. So any given person may argue scripture, but to deny that these tactics are not used by many Christians is to stick your head in the sand. Just my .02 Hmmmm, was this a deflection tactic or an obscured "no need to show evidence BS"? Or perhaps it was your evidence in an appeal to authority? Whatever it was, it's time for you to pull your head out of the sand and recognise what it is that you are doing... You apply the double-standard, sliding scale rule of requirements for "evidence".... OK, the Southern Baptists taught you about "Jesus" and "Hell", I get that... So then why do you question the existence of God? If you can take oral testimony and draw conclusions as well as make claims about "hell", then what's the difference between that and the existence of God? With one you require "spectacular" evidence, the other, hearsay testimony? To be honest, I'd have to say that your line of reasoning is what should constitute "magical thinking". After all, it seems to give you the ability to deny what you have posted... It took Sin_and_Sorrow's post to show you the claim(s) you made, doesn't that slight mishap cause you to question your own memory and/or perception? There were actually two claims made, but I thought I would make it easier for ya by only focussing on one. "Yea real nice guy this god that requires you believe in him or he makes you suffer for eternity." 1st claim: God requires you to believe in Him... 2nd claim: He will make you suffer for eternity if you don't believe in Him... So, do you apply the scientific principal and verify your own claims? Or do you simply believe whatever someone tells you and say "no need to show evidence"? Who are you "spider" in disguise???? Nope... I'm just a psychic who knows that people will not back up their own claims... Interesting, tell me something in the near future that is of large proportions that will come to pass please. |
|
|
|
|
