Thots on a Sunday morning
Bad boy
this morning, I watched the first rays pierced through the cloud,
sparkling like millions of crystals from dew drops on leaves.
This moment in time, stood still for me, as I went on a idle
quest, asking myself, "Who am I ?".
Many had found the answers to this three-word question, ...
but it is like an onion with an infinite layers of skin.....a new
one is always found underneath if you seek deeper.
As Bad boy, my life began on the day I was born, and will
end when I die.
However, 'I' have existed much longer...even before I was born...
as part of my father, my grandfather, his great grand father.....
back to the first Homo sapiens 220 millions years ago,... If
any of my great-grand's died as infants, I would not have existed.
I will continue to exist if I have children, if their decedent have
children.
In order to live, I need some basic requirements....I need air, water,
and food. ...I need an earth that can sustain life, I need the sun that
give warmth, I need a solar systems, I need a galaxy that has stars
and planets, I need a universe that has billions of galaxies, I need
a .........
Can I live, without computer, handphone, cars, plane, email, TV
money, schools, football, golf, ...? In earlier times, I existed without
them.
Can I live without gravity ? No
Can I live without the Sun ? No, All live form will end
Can I live without air ? No, I will die after a few minutes
Can I live without water ? No. I will die after a few days
Can I live without food ? No. I will die in a few weeks.
Can I live, without Allah, or God ?
In my 220 million year of existence, Allah, the Christian God,
Buddha, God of the Jew, Hindus, were no where to be found.
They came into man's mind only recently, between 2000 and
1500 years old.
Earlier man lived in fear of the devils and spirits. They do not
have Allahs, Buddha or Christian God, and yet they survived
with our Gods.
I come to the conclusion that I can live without God.
Who am I ? I am a life form in this universe, this galaxy, this
solar system, this earth...breathing air, needing water and food.
I enjoy creature comfort, have my own values and culture,
have innate desires, needs, and yearnings. I live in a 'world'
created by human, a social system created by human, believing
in a 'God' created by human!
Bad boy.
Bad boy
15,000 years old.
Kling kling kling
"Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4115d226$3...@news.starhub.net.sg...
hitler
Polar Bear
if you don't have a physical body, you don't need any of those things.
Immortalist
> this morning, I watched the first rays pierced through the cloud,
> sparkling like millions of crystals from dew drops on leaves.
> This moment in time, stood still for me, as I went on a idle
> quest, asking myself, "Who am I ?".
> Many had found the answers to this three-word question, ...
> but it is like an onion with an infinite layers of skin.....a new
> one is always found underneath if you seek deeper.
>
> As Bad boy, my life began on the day I was born, and will
> end when I die.
> However, 'I' have existed much longer...even before I was born...
> as part of my father, my grandfather, his great grand father.....
> back to the first Homo sapiens 220 millions years ago,... If
> any of my great-grand's died as infants, I would not have existed.
Aristotle's four causes
[1] "What is it made from?" "Flesh and so on" (material cause);
[2] "What is its form or essence?" "A two-legged creature capable of reason
(say)," (formal cause);
[3] "What produced it?" "The father (on Aristotle's biology)" (efficient cause);
[4] "For what purpose?" "To fulfill the function of a man (roughly meaning "to
live a life in accordance with reason") (final cause).
http://jamesthornton.com/theory/theory?theory_id=5
http://www.msu.org/intro/content_intro/texts/aristotle/4causes.html
http://www.google.com/search?q=aristotle+%22four+causes%22
Carl Rooker
1st off, the "Christian God", and the "God of the Jew" are one and the same.
The Jew simply does not believe that Jesus of Nazereth was the Messiah. We
believe in the same God. Hence, belief in the "Christian God" is far older
than you give it credit for. Muslims will say the same thing about Allah
and Jehova.
Believing in this God is far older than 1500 to 2000 years old. If you
(incorrectly) state that Moses introduced the God of the Jews, then belief
in Him is at leaste 3500 years old. It was Moses' contention that this God
(who intervened in his life, and the lives of his people) existed long
before that time, and that poeple believed in Him long before. Your concept
of this God is inadequate, and faulty.
This particular God has a habit of intervening in the lives of those whom He
loves. He did so for Noah, Abraham, Joeseph, Moses (and his whole nation),
and the lives of the people of Isreal. He also sent His Son, to intervene
for us in some very dramatic ways, and establishes a personal relationship
with all who turn to Him.
Your idea that this is a God made up by mankind is incorrect. While mankind
is constantly trying to bring God down to man's level, He is the instigator
of Faith in Him.
Can you live without Him? Most certainly you can have a life, sustained by
His gifts, but you are missing an element of Life beyond your comprehension.
God Bless
Carl
Comicboards
"Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4115d226$3...@news.starhub.net.sg...
>
> Can I live, without Allah, or God ?
> In my 220 million year of existence, Allah, the Christian God,
> Buddha, God of the Jew, Hindus, were no where to be found.
> They came into man's mind only recently, between 2000 and
> 1500 years old.
> Earlier man lived in fear of the devils and spirits. They do not
> have Allahs, Buddha or Christian God, and yet they survived
> with our Gods.
> I come to the conclusion that I can live without God.
>
>
> Bad boy.
You may be able to live without God/Allah, but you owe both your life and
your afterlife to him.
--
Discuss Islam
http://www.comicboards.org/religion
Pastor Frank
> solar system, this earth...breathing air, needing water and food.
>
and thither by the winds of fate? Great vision you have!!!!
We Christians believe ourselves the children of our most holy and
perfect God, our Father which is in Heaven, and who loves us to the extreme
of coming to us in the form of a man, Jesus Christ and dying on the cross of
Calvary to propitiate our sins along with the guilt and shame.
Our Father in Heaven is the King of kings and the Lord of lords and that
makes us princes of the realm. However we glory not in ourselves and our own
achievements but in the glory, perfection and achievements of our heavenly
Father.
Pastor Frank
THE MANDATE OF JESUS
**Jesus in Lk:4:18: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath
anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the
broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of
sight to the blind.
**Jesus in Mk:2:17: When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are
whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
**Jesus in Lk:9:56: For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives,
but to save them.
**Jesus Mt:18:11: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
**Jesus in Jn:12:47: And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge
him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
**Jesus in Mt:11:28-30 "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened,
and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am
gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my
yoke is easy and my burden is light."
Pastor Frank
>
> I come to the conclusion that I can live without God.
>
It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of
God.) meaning man lives not only by reason of having his body looked after
and his material needs met, but by words / ideas / ideals, the
implementation of which give him a reason for living. Therefore everyone has
his god(s) or devils. It's just that the "God" of YOUR definition doesn't
exist most likely and is therefore irrelevant.
So, yes, you certainly can live without that god, but not others that
don't appear to you to be gods nor devils, but in fact are.
Pastor Frank
"GOD" The Christian meaning of the word according to scripture:
Jesus in Jn:4:24: GOD IS A SPIRIT: and they that worship him must
worship him in spirit and in truth.
Jesus in John 14:6: Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and
the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
7: If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also:
and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8: Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9: Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast
thou not known me, Philip? HE THAT HAS SEEN ME HATH SEEN THE FATHER;
and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10: Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?
the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that
dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
1Jn:4:8: He that loveth not, knoweth not God; for GOD IS LOVE.
1Jn:4:16: And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us.
GOD IS LOVE; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
Acts:17:28: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain
also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
Bad boy
that man existed. 15,000 years in 220 millions years
is approximately equal to only ONE second in our life time
of about 80 years.
For argument sake, let's assume that there is Allah and
God.
I have a deeply disturbing question. Why wasn't God or
Allah around in our infancy?Why did he appear only in
the last second!
Surely a loving father will protect his infants, care for
them, guard them against harm, devil and evils, and would
do everything possible for his infant kids!
Why did God or Allah let creatures kill them, let animals
eat them and allowed the 'devil' to frighten them!
Do you know why was God or Allah absent for 220 million
years in our existence, absent for 99.9% of human history?
Is it not true that the author of the bible and Quran did not
know man have existed for 220 millions years.
Is it not true that they lived in an age when world was flat,
when the earth was the centre of the universe, when
out space didn't exist......
If Allah or God had existed, surely he would NOT allow
such glaring flaws in holy books.
Allah or God was created by man, that is WHY!
Using the words in the Bible or Quran to show the
existence of God or Allah is like asking us to believe
in the words in 'Obi-Wan' in Star War. The words of
the authors are fiction, mere assertions or story, not
proven facts.
Bad boy.
"Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:6FtRc.77987$_o....@nntp-post.primus.ca...
Bad boy
Aristotle was a great thinker. However, he didn't have
the benefit of modern science.
Bad boy.
"Immortalist" <Reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:od6dnau5QLu...@comcast.com...
Bad boy
Gods, ie God of Hindus came into our world at about
15,000 years.
Thanks for informing me that Allah, the God of Jews and
the God of Christian is one and the same God. I have
read the Bible, Quran and the Torah many times and
I wonder.
Wonder, why Muslim claim that Allah is truer, and
Christian claim their God is truer.
Wonder, why the same God all Muslims and all Christians
allow them to kill each other.
Why one God has different messages for his followers ?
As a loving father, would you allow your children to
kill one another ?
Bad boy.
"Carl Rooker" <roo...@dnx.net> wrote in message
news:10919797...@w9.dnx.net...
Bad boy
Man is but one of thousands of life forms on earth. It is
likely that there are billions of other life forms in the millions
of galaxies in our universe.
Our world is not the centre of the universe. The universe
is not created around us, and we are not the reason for the
existence of the universe. We are in fact very insignificant
and very punny in the scheme of things in the universe.
In this vast universe, only an egoist would think that man is
the chosen one among all life forms, our world is the centre
of the universe, and we are the reason for the existence of
the Universe.
The authors of the Bible and the Quran were the pathological
egoists.
They preached that Muslims are the chosen ones and Christians
were the chosen ones. The rest of mankind deserve to be killed,
because they were not chosen by their God. We, the non-
believers of their God, don't have a right to live. This belief is the
reason why Christian and Muslim killed non-believers and the
killings has not stop even now.
I respect your belief in your perfect God....only if your belief
allow me and others like me to lead our way of life, the ways
of our chosing.
However, if your God (same one as Allah) does not tolerate
our existence on this earth, then I will question your the truth or
falsehood of your belief, the truth of your God and the right
of the followers of your God to kill us.
I found flaws in the Bible and Quran, the belief of Muslim
and Christian is flawed.
Bad boy.
"Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:5FtRc.77986$_o.3...@nntp-post.primus.ca...
Carl Rooker
> It was a typo...I have correct it immediate ...the earliest
> Gods, ie God of Hindus came into our world at about
> 15,000 years.
>
> Thanks for informing me that Allah, the God of Jews and
> the God of Christian is one and the same God. I have
> read the Bible, Quran and the Torah many times and
> I wonder.
>
That is not exactly what I have said, and you know it. Taking thoughts out
of context, and changing them is dishonest.
What I said was (copied and pasted from my post);
"1st off, the "Christian God", and the "God of the Jew" are one and the
same.
The Jew simply does not believe that Jesus of Nazereth was the Messiah. We
believe in the same God. Hence, belief in the "Christian God" is far older
than you give it credit for. Muslims will say the same thing about Allah
and Jehova."
They make the claim, but they still deny the Son of God.
> Wonder, why Muslim claim that Allah is truer, and
> Christian claim their God is truer.
> Wonder, why the same God all Muslims and all Christians
> allow them to kill each other.
> Why one God has different messages for his followers ?
>
>
>
Why, that is simple.
Not all who claim to follow God actually do so. When they use belief in God
to achieve their own goals of power, then they are capable of anything.
JAS 4:1 What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don't they come from your
desires that battle within you? 2 You want something but don't get it. You
kill and covet, but you cannot have what you want. You quarrel and fight.
You do not have, because you do not ask God. 3 When you ask, you do not
receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get
on your pleasures.
JAS 4:4 You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world
is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes
an enemy of God. NIV
> As a loving father, would you allow your children to
> kill one another ?
Who would allow it? However, it happens all too often that a loving father
can't prevent some children from doing just that. My parents never allowed
my brother and I to fight when we were young. Whether they allowed us or
not did not seem to stop us though.
What you are referring to is called sin. Man wanting his own way,
regardless of God's way.
So, God (for Justice sake) is now in a position to Judge mankind for it's
evil deeds, even though many evil deeds are done in His name. Before said
Judgment, though, He has offered reconciliation and forgiveness to those who
would turn to Him, from evil. That is the message of Jesus Christ.
God Bless
Carl
Immortalist
>
> Aristotle was a great thinker. However, he didn't have
> the benefit of modern science.
>
Are you proposing a standard for determining a criterian by which we can deduce a
standard for differentiating those times when having the benifit of modern
science makes a difference and when not for Aristotle or anyone born yesterday?
If so then it seem rather vague as a guide.
How about this version;
Aristotle was a great thinker. However, he didn't have the benefit of modern
science which SOMETIMES made those ideas of his false which depend upon modern
science for their justification but in SOME other instances his truths remain
true when those truths depend not upon modern science for their justification.
Even in those cases when modern science was necessary for SOME idea's
justification Aristotle could have been right by luck some of the time?
Pastor Frank
>
> "1st off, the "Christian God", and the "God of the Jew" are one and the
> same.
> The Jew simply does not believe that Jesus of Nazereth was the Messiah.
We
> believe in the same God. Hence, belief in the "Christian God" is far
older
> than you give it credit for. Muslims will say the same thing about Allah
> and Jehova."
>
Christ and their God YHWH are the same. Christ called His God "a Spirit",
and Jews don't consider YHWH a spirit. Do you have any evidence to prove you
are right and Jews are wrong?
Bad boy
>
> "Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4116b85e$1...@news.starhub.net.sg...
> > It was a typo...I have correct it immediate ...the earliest
> > Gods, ie God of Hindus came into our world at about
> > 15,000 years.
is the anwer to:
" Believing in this God is far older than 1500 to 2000 years old. ...
......."
> >
> > Thanks for informing me that Allah, the God of Jews and
> > the God of Christian is one and the same God. I have
> > read the Bible, Quran and the Torah many times and
> > I wonder.
> >
>
> That is not exactly what I have said, and you know it. Taking thoughts
out
> of context, and changing them is dishonest.
Did you not say, Christian God, God of Jew and Allah
is one and the same God?
Is not the Christian God, the same as Allah ? Or are they
two distinct and separate Gods ?
Whatever is your answer.....He (They) did not appear until
'recently', ie 5000 years in the time man has existed ie
220, millions years. Where was God(Allah) during the long
history of mankind?
Tell me, who are making false claim. What proof do you have ?
Can you prove that your belief is truer ?
I have tried long and hard to get answers from teachers of
Islam and Christianity that the bible and the Quran are
not mere fictions written by men who lived long ago, but words
of God.
Like you, they made baseless claims that their holy book is
the true words of God and others' are false. They can only quote
the words from the Bible or the Quran to back their claims.
You know that this is nonsense: it is like quoting words spoken
by Obi Wan of Star War to prove that Vader really exist.
>
> JAS 4:4 You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the
world
> is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world
becomes
> an enemy of God. NIV
>
> > As a loving father, would you allow your children to
> > kill one another ?
>
> Who would allow it? However, it happens all too often that a loving
father
> can't prevent some children from doing just that. My parents never
allowed
> my brother and I to fight when we were young. Whether they allowed us or
> not did not seem to stop us though.
Are the difference between Muslim and Christian as harmless
as brotherly fights ?
Are the millions killed in Sudan and Africa by Muslims
brotherly fights ?
Are the millions killed by the Christian Crusaders brotherly fights ?
Are not their killings not inspired by words written in the Bible
and Quran ?
>
> What you are referring to is called sin. Man wanting his own way,
> regardless of God's way.
You call it sin ! Killing in accordance with the teaching in bible is
sinful?
Killings will be rewarded by Allah, with a place in paradise with 72
virgins.
This is the teaching of Islam.
God has different teachings for Christian and Muslims ?
>
> So, God (for Justice sake) is now in a position to Judge mankind for it's
> evil deeds, even though many evil deeds are done in His name. Before said
> Judgment, though, He has offered reconciliation and forgiveness to those
who
> would turn to Him, from evil. That is the message of Jesus Christ.
How do you know ? Based on what the bible said ?
The Buddhists do not believe in Judgement day.
They claim that if you do bad, you will come back in later
life as a cockroach.
The Muslims do not believe in Judgement day either. Muslims
can rape Christian women, chop of the heads of non-Muslims,
suicide bomb infants and old ladies, and they will be rewarded
immediately by Allah.
Do you have anything other than the words written the authors
who lived long ago to substantiate your claim that there will be
judgement day ?
Bad boy.
>
> God Bless
> Carl
>
>
Bad boy
"Tell that to the marine", the GI will say in answer to you.
First you must prove that God/Allah is not
a fictitious creation by the authors of the
Bible and Quran. Can you?
Until then, your claim is no better than the
words of a shameless charlatan.
Bad boy.
"Comicboards" <tle...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:zf6dnYP4Vsr...@comcast.com...
Bad boy
wrong in many of his ideas.
However, he was the person responsible for logic in our thinking.
In fact, in Prior Analytics Aristotle proposed the now famous
Aristotelian syllogistic, a form of argument consisting of two premises
and a conclusion. Example is:-
(i) Every Greek is a person.
(ii) Every person is mortal.
(iii) Every Greek is mortal.
The other great contribution by Aristotle is the classification of human
knowledge into systematic disciplines, eg logic, physics, astronomy,
meteorology, zoology, metaphysics, theology, psychology, politics,
economics, ethics, rhetoric, poetics.... What is astounding is the fact
that the majority of these subjects did not exist as such before him.
Earlier, such subjects were vaguely called philosophy.
It takes a great mind to conceptualise an original thought. Eg
the use of Zero in maths, by a Muslim thinker. Of course, now
even a child know what is a Zero.
Aristotle deserved to be honoured as a great thinker.
Bad boy.
"Immortalist" <Reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:zKKdnYJ49tz...@comcast.com...
Immortalist
> You are rather unkind to this great thinker. Yes, Aristotle was
> wrong in many of his ideas.
> However, he was the person responsible for logic in our thinking.
> In fact, in Prior Analytics Aristotle proposed the now famous
> Aristotelian syllogistic, a form of argument consisting of two premises
> and a conclusion. Example is:-
> (i) Every Greek is a person.
> (ii) Every person is mortal.
> (iii) Every Greek is mortal.
>
> The other great contribution by Aristotle is the classification of human
> knowledge into systematic disciplines, eg logic, physics, astronomy,
> meteorology, zoology, metaphysics, theology, psychology, politics,
> economics, ethics, rhetoric, poetics.... What is astounding is the fact
> that the majority of these subjects did not exist as such before him.
> Earlier, such subjects were vaguely called philosophy.
>
> It takes a great mind to conceptualise an original thought. Eg
> the use of Zero in maths, by a Muslim thinker. Of course, now
> even a child know what is a Zero.
>
> Aristotle deserved to be honoured as a great thinker.
>
> Bad boy.
Well said! But by implication leaves "Modern science" in the contextual
perspective of being a final word and not guilty of most of what Aristotle was,
during those times he is wrong now but was possibly knowledgable then.
ardeedee
"Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4118...@news.starhub.net.sg...
ardeedee
So you are simply an animal that will rot and die like the other animals and
that God does not exist because you exist and how did you exist?
"Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4118d2bc$1...@news.starhub.net.sg...
Bad boy
So you are special, the one chosen by God, by a God created
by man. A God created by authors who teach you to kill and
to bomb innocent babies and helpless women.
I am man, one of thousand of creatures that flourish on earth, a planet
of a star, one of billions of stars in millions of galaxies that are likely
to have billions of creatures. In the scheme of things in this great
universe, I am of no consequence.
I think, I question and I never take words of anyone as the truth
on blind faith.
I will not be tempted by promises of a place in heaven, a paradise
created in stories told by dead authors.
As a man, I have my own value system, my own morality(concepts of
right and wrong), my own concept on life. I will not accept out-dated
values system, not accept the morality of fedual socities, accept the
concept of life based on fairy tales, based on flawed premise.
I have no fear of death, no fear of no afterlife, and no fear of no place
in heaven.
"I" have existed for 220 million years and "I" will live on for a long
time more, through my kids and their kids, until the end of mankind
on earth.
This is how I exist.
Bad boy.
"ardeedee" <arde...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4118fa31$1...@news.starhub.net.sg...
Bad boy
and suicide bomb babies and women and expect
to be rewarded immediately upon their death by Allah
with a place in heaven.
In Christianity, the concept of sin is the foundation of the belief
in Judgement day.
Bad boy.
"ardeedee" <arde...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4118f9ef$1...@news.starhub.net.sg...
Pastor Frank
>
> As a man, I have my own value system, my own morality(concepts of
> right and wrong), my own concept on life. I will not accept out-dated
> values system, not accept the morality of fedual socities, accept the
> concept of life based on fairy tales, based on flawed premise.
> I have no fear of death, no fear of no afterlife, and no fear of no place
> in heaven.
> "I" have existed for 220 million years and "I" will live on for a long
> time more, through my kids and their kids, until the end of mankind
> on earth.
>
accept nothing but your own ideas and are unwilling to listen to any authors
of other ideas, most of whom being long dead, then why make a proclamation
of it? Are you looking for people to follow you, each believing in only
their own ideas? That won't happen, precisely because others like yourself
are islands unto themselves in their own little world and won't listen to
anyone else either.
Religion deals with the quality of existence and we all have been
created with talents to advance the Kingdom of Heaven. Anyone not improving
upon the quality of existence will be discarded, and thrown into that large
trash-pile called hell, where you will find plenty of other buggy programs
like yourself that don't work of their own free will.
And no, your creator / programmer will not force you, or pre-program
you, to make the right choices. See below by what standards you will be
judged, and note, it all hinges on the degree you care about your brothers
and sisters, including your parent which is in Heaven.
Pastor Frank
THE ROYAL LAW OF CHRIST
**Jesus in Mk 12:30: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy
strength: this is the first commandment.
**31: And the second is alike, namely this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour
as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
**Jesus in Mat 22:40 "All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two
commandments."
THE GOLDEN RULE OF CHRIST
Jesus in Matt. 7:12: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men
should do to you, do ye even so to them...."
Pastor Frank
>
> If they had, Muslims would not commit mass murder, rape
> and suicide bomb babies and women and expect
> to be rewarded immediately upon their death by Allah
> with a place in heaven.
>
non-Muslim countries in comparison to the number we killed in Muslim
countries? I think you will find the kill ratio far more "massive" in our
favour than in theirs.
I think what you want to say is: If they only would accept our way of
thinking and quit objecting violently at being dispossessed and made
refugees by an invader on record of having killed "all that breatheth" in
the area once before, to "possess the land" and "reap where they have not
sown", we could get along just fine. See below what you appear to support
Pastor Frank
CAUSE OF THE APOCALYPSE: Being proud instead of repentant of the
horrific holocaust of the entire native population of "the promised land",
as well as the continuing colonial brutality against Palestinian natives.
Deuteronomy 20:16-17 But of the cities of these people, which the Lord
thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing
that breatheth. But thou shalt utterly destroy them; the Hittites, and the
Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites
as the Lord thy God has commanded thee."
Ezekiel 32:5 "I will strew your flesh upon the mountains, and fill the
valleys with your carcass. I will drench the land even to the mountains with
your flowing blood..."
Ezekiel 9:5 "Pass through the city after him, and smite; your eye shall
not spare and you shall show no pity; slay old men outright, young men and
maidens, little children and women...'"
Deut. 7:1 (KJV)When Yahweh your god has settled you in the land you're
about to occupy, and driven out many infidels before you...you're to cut
them down and exterminate them. You're to make no compromise with
them nor show them any mercy.
Joshua 10:40 - BBE So Joshua struck all the land, the hill-country, and
the South, and the lowland, and the slopes, and all their kings: he left
none remaining, but he utterly destroyed all that breathed, as God, the God
of Israel, commanded."
1 Samuel 15:3 - BBE Now go and strike Amalek, and utterly destroy all
that they have, and don't spare them; but kill both man and woman, infant
and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and donkey."
Isaiah 13:16 - BBE Their infants also will be dashed in pieces before
their eyes. Their houses will be ransacked, and their wives raped."
Hosea 13:16 - BBE Samaria will bear her guilt; For she has rebelled
against her God. They will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed
in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open."
Moses in Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore kill every male among the
little ones, and kill every woman, that hath known man by lying with him.
But all the female children, that have not known man by lying with him,
keep alive for yourself.
Observer
"Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
> Isaiah 13:16 - BBE Their infants also will be dashed in pieces before
> their eyes. Their houses will be ransacked, and their wives raped."
> Hosea 13:16 - BBE Samaria will bear her guilt; For she has rebelled
> against her God. They will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed
> in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open."
> Moses in Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore kill every male among the
> little ones, and kill every woman, that hath known man by lying with him.
> But all the female children, that have not known man by lying with him,
> keep alive for yourself.
Thanks for a very illuminating post.
In fact, I did not even know that the
bible had all these commands to kill
and rape.
Are they for real?
None of the Xtians here mentioned them.
Can the Xtians give some commentary
when apparently Muslims have been bad mouthed
all these while?
Observer
"Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:GAkSc.83781$Ld6....@nntp-post.primus.ca...
> their eyes. Their houses will be ransacked, and their wives raped."
> Hosea 13:16 - BBE Samaria will bear her guilt; For she has rebelled
> against her God. They will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed
> in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open."
> Moses in Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore kill every male among the
> little ones, and kill every woman, that hath known man by lying with him.
> But all the female children, that have not known man by lying with him,
> keep alive for yourself.
Observer
"Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:GAkSc.83781$Ld6....@nntp-post.primus.ca...
> their eyes. Their houses will be ransacked, and their wives raped."
> Hosea 13:16 - BBE Samaria will bear her guilt; For she has rebelled
> against her God. They will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed
> in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open."
> Moses in Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore kill every male among the
> little ones, and kill every woman, that hath known man by lying with him.
> But all the female children, that have not known man by lying with him,
> keep alive for yourself.
Shastram
<badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>It takes a great mind to conceptualise an original thought. Eg
>the use of Zero in maths, by a Muslim thinker. Of course, now
>even a child know what is a Zero.
>
>
>Bad boy.
>
Please get that right. Zero was not invented by a Muslim Thinker.
It is a well known fact that what is now known as Arabic numerals in
the west came from India. The numbers, along with Zero, were invited
in India by Hindus. The Arabs didn't have any numbers of their own,
they simply used the Hindu numeral system.
Here are some references for you:
http://www.csis.american.edu/museum/HOC_Class/html/slides/numeration/tsld014.htm
http://web.vtc.edu/Training/stccamp2000/aaaarabic.htm
http://www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/university/scit/modules/mm2217/han.htm
Shastram
<badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>"Carl Rooker" <roo...@dnx.net> wrote in message
>news:10920625...@w9.dnx.net...
>>
>" Believing in this God is far older than 1500 to 2000 years old. ...
> ......."
>
>Whatever is your answer.....He (They) did not appear until
>'recently', ie 5000 years in the time man has existed ie
>220, millions years. Where was God(Allah) during the long
>history of mankind?
>
>
>>
you see, you are a bit confused. You are mixing up some concepts. You
must not confuse GOD with RELIGION.
Let's look at it in an objective manner. Assume that Science is
correct (which I firmly believe), than evolution took place. Which
means we evolved with time to what we are today, and perhaps this
whole evolution started from something as primitive as a single-cell
organism. Of course, you would want to know, where did this first
organism came from?
Forget that, let's go back to the creation of the universe. Science
has one major school of thought in it, and that is: Big Bang. Great,
but what existed before the Big Bang? Science will say, this "before"
is irrelevant as time didn't exist before Big Bang, then the question
becomes, where did this bang came from? What was there that erupted?
Where did this material that erupted came from?
Science can not answer these questions. You have to believe in
something that is myseterious, something that gave us existence.
Something that was there before the fourth-dimension existed, that is
time. To deny this existence would be stupid. We have termed that
something God, Allah, YHWH Brahman, whatever you want to call it (I
have to say here that you must also be informed that Buddha is NOT a
God and neither is Jesus).
God surely exists, IT has been there since the beginnings, it gave
birth to the universe and the universe took it's own course, just like
parents give birth to a child, take care of him for a bit and then let
the children live their own lives without interfering. God was there
in the beginning, but he/she/it is not here now. We are missing God
now, we didn't miss God before. You see, you have it all wrong if you
look at it this way. You should be asking, where is God now?
Now, coming back to my original point, you are mixing God with
Religion. RELIGION is man made. It's a way to reach God, at
different times, different civilizations came with different ways to
reach this God, this ultimate power, to achieve ultimate bliss. These
systems of beliefs (Religions) were introduced by man of course.
Hinduism - no one knows when it started exactly, but it is assumed to
be the oldest belief system in place, with focus on spirituality and
achieving or reaching God than anything else.
Christinism - we all know that Jesus was the one that started this
Religion
Judaism - I'm unclear on my facts on this one.
Islam - only started with Prophet Muhammad
Buddhism - Buddha reached nirvana (or Moksha in Hinduism) and a whole
bunch of people started following his ways to reach the same place,
the utlimate bliss, hence Buddhism took birth from the teachings of
Buddha.
SO Religion is Not God. Religion is a way of living, a way of
reaching God, guidelines to live your life. Religion gets distorted.
People with power mislead those who are illiterate simple minded using
religion, teaching it to them in a wrong way, the way they see fit.
Religion leads to war, to killings, Not GOD. God has been there since
the beginning, call him whatever you want, believe in him or not. The
world is now adult, and God doesn't have time to look after us :)
apart from time to time, when we give him a call like we call our
parents even after reaching adulthood, he will listen to you, try to
do what he can, but he can't help you all the time, you gotta live
your life.
A lot of religions believe in Free Will, what would be the point of it
if God interfered all the time? :)
I don't know if I made sense, but I think your questions stem from the
fact that you mix God with Religion, and so does this whole world,
when the distinction will become clear, we will understand that we all
aim for the same thing. Mukti - Freedom from this life, to acheive,
or to reach the ultimate bliss - Moksha, Nirvana.
Shastram
Pastor Frank
news:4119f794$5...@news.starhub.net.sg...
> "Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
> news:GAkSc.83781$Ld6....@nntp-post.primus.ca...
> >
> > Isaiah 13:16 - BBE Their infants also will be dashed in pieces
before
> > their eyes. Their houses will be ransacked, and their wives raped."
> > Hosea 13:16 - BBE Samaria will bear her guilt; For she has rebelled
> > against her God. They will fall by the sword. Their infants will be
dashed
> > in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open."
> > Moses in Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore kill every male among the
> > little ones, and kill every woman, that hath known man by lying with
him.
> > But all the female children, that have not known man by lying with him,
> > keep alive for yourself.
>
> Thanks for a very illuminating post.
> In fact, I did not even know that the
> bible had all these commands to kill
> and rape.
> Are they for real?
>
line and find one to check.
To form a valid opinion you need to take into account simple greed and
opportunism, for the God of the Jews, YHWH commanded Moses shortly before
NOT TO covet the property of neighbors, nor kill them to get it. So it's
obvious, that this same god is unlikely to have changed his mind all of a
sudden and commanded ancient Hebrews to "kill all that breatheth" to
"possess the land" of their neighbors and "reap where they have not sown".
Quite the opposite from Germans, who are sorry, ashamed, if not
repentant of their holocaust of Jews, inviting surviving Jews to come back
to their properties in Germany or accept compensation, Jews are still proud
of their ancestor's holocaust of the natives, and as a result Jews have been
a persecuted minority for most their history. The numbers of innocent Jews
killed by Hitler being roughly equal the number of innocent natives killed
by ancient Jews. Jesus tells us, that persecutors will themselves be
persecuted until they repent. This means Israel must also invite refugees to
come back to their confiscated properties or accept compensation to be free
from judgment.
We who are supporting Jewish hegemony with massive financial help
amounting to about US$15 million foreign aid per day courtesy US taxpayers
to Israel, will be drawn into the melee and can expect nuclear mines to
explode in our cities some day soon, as our entire foreign policy rests on
trusting desperately poor and corrupt Russian Generals not to sell
fissionable material on the black market.
Pastor Frank
Famous Zionist Quote (back when the Zionists were really cocky):
"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not
even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because
those Arab villages were destroyed and don't exist any longer, nor do the
maps which showed them, for they were destroyed also and replaced
with Israeli maps showing only Israeli names.
Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta;
Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushu'a in the place of
Tal al-Shuman. There is not one single place built in this country that did
not have a former Arab Population."
--Moshe Dayan, Address to the Technion, Haifa (as quoted in
Ha'aretz, 4 April 1969) http://www.birzeit.edu/crdps/village@.html
http://www.jerusalemites.org/crimes/destroyed_villages/list.htm
.
Do u know how/where I can sign up for Bible Study Fellowship?
Appreciate your advise, thx.
"Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:0LzSc.85411$M33....@nntp-post.primus.ca...
Observer
"Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
> The OT Bible references are all given. If you don't own a Bible go on
> line and find one to check.
So these are from the OT?
> To form a valid opinion you need to take into account simple greed and
> opportunism, for the God of the Jews, YHWH commanded Moses shortly before
> NOT TO covet the property of neighbors, nor kill them to get it. So it's
> obvious, that this same god is unlikely to have changed his mind all of a
> sudden and commanded ancient Hebrews to "kill all that breatheth" to
> "possess the land" of their neighbors and "reap where they have not sown".
So what you're implying here is
that the said writings you gave
did not come from God and that
they were likely to be human inspired
or forgeries?
>Jews are still proud
> of their ancestor's holocaust of the natives,
Please elaborate.
Pastor Frank
news:cfepdl$b0i$1...@mawar.singnet.com.sg...
> Pastor Frank,
>
> Do u know how/where I can sign up for Bible Study Fellowship?
> Appreciate your advise, thx.
>
news:soc.religion.christian.bible-study , but don't expect too many
Christians believing consequentially in the most important commandments of
Christ below, especially when against popular opinion and current
propaganda.
Remember it was a Protestant Christian government which declared all
North American Natives "varmint" and put a bounty on their scalps. It was
that act which contributed to the virtual decimation of native peoples in
North America, whereas today in Catholic South America, native features are
very much in evidence and form the majority in most erstwhile Spanish
colonies.
Observer
"Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
> Remember it was a Protestant Christian government which declared all
> North American Natives "varmint" and put a bounty on their scalps.
So much for US call for other countries
to respect human rights when they kill
and loot in their own backyard.....to create
the modern USA.
Pastor Frank
news:braph01sboin1tqrn...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 23:29:54 +0800, "Observer" <obser...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
show
> anything other than the greatest credulity here.
> Beyond that, the grain of truth behind the false comment you are so happy
to
> swallow has got PRECISELY nothing to do with the US.
> Why not do some penance, and find out which portion of the crap you
swallowed
> was worth eating, and which was an outright falsehood?
> cheers,
> Paul Saccani
> Perth West Australia
>
You are not correcting anyone here by telling them to "check facts".
What ARE the facts that you know, but we don't?
Btw Australia gets a lot of media here, about the way they treat their
natives. Do you regard those facts also fictitious? Is it not a fact you are
a merely a refuter totally ignorant of any facts in regards to the subject
of so-called Christians and Jews uprooting and killing natives on a massive
scale, in total disregards of the commandments of Christ, as well as YHWH
and His 10 commandments?
Pastor Frank
JUDGMENT
Jesus in Mt:18:7: Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must
needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence
cometh!
Jesus in Mt:7:2: For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged:
and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Mt:23:12: And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that
shall humble himself shall be exalted.
Rv:13:10: He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he
that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the
patience and the faith of the saints.
Jesus in Mt12:36-37: But I say unto you, That every idle word that men
shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by
thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.
Jesus in Jn:8:15: Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
Jesus in Lk:6:37: Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not,
and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:
1Cor:4:3: But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged
by you, or by any man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.
1Cor:4:4: For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified:
but He that judgeth me is my Father which is in Heaven.
Ephesians 2:8-9: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not
of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should
boast.
Jms:2:24: Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by
faith only.
Bad boy
followers who accept even the flawed teachings of the bible
unquestioningly? I think NOT.
This internet forum is open to all. Everyone is free to express
his thoughts and his ideas. In fact, everyone has a right to do so.
My previous posting was in reply to Ardeedee's question
on how do I exist without believing in the bible.
I have been seeking answer to the question of "who am I"
I like to believe in God, the true God, not a fictitious God.
This is the reason why I read the holy books of the major
established religions, not once but many times.
I have questions on the validity of the words in the bible and
the quran.
I tried to find answers not only in the Christian NG, but in the
forum for Islam, and other religions.
Unfortunately, I got only quotes from bible and Quran as
proof of validity of the words. I was told to accept the words
based on blind faith.
I do not live in a feudal society, and as such, I cannot accept
ANY words on blind faith, not even the words in the holy bible
and quran.
I found flaws in the teachings and words which clearly
indicate the words were not from God, but from human
authors. Do you have answers to the followings:
If the words in the holy books were the true teaching of God
and Allah, how to reconcile the fact that the teachings are
different, eg. Christians and Muslims are taught to kill each other?
Surely God cannot be evil!
If the words in the holy books were the true teaching of
God and Allah, how to reconcile the errors in the basic
knowledge our real world, a world created by God ?
God cannot be guilty of such obvious flaws!
If the words in the holy books were the true teaching of
God and Allah, how to reconcile some of the immoral
teachings, eg. the teaching of incest committed by the
children of Adam and Eve.
Do you know ?
Bad boy
"Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:FAkSc.83780$Ld6....@nntp-post.primus.ca...
> So you are special, the one chosen by God, by a God created
> by man. A God created by authors who teach you to kill and
> to bomb innocent babies and helpless women.
>
> I am man, one of thousand of creatures that flourish on earth, a planet
> of a star, one of billions of stars in millions of galaxies that are
likely
> to have billions of creatures. In the scheme of things in this great
> universe, I am of no consequence.
> I think, I question and I never take words of anyone as the truth
> on blind faith.
> I will not be tempted by promises of a place in heaven, a paradise
> created in stories told by dead authors.
> As a man, I have my own value system, my own morality(concepts of
> right and wrong), my own concept on life. I will not accept out-dated
> values system, not accept the morality of fedual socities, accept the
> concept of life based on fairy tales, based on flawed premise.
> I have no fear of death, no fear of no afterlife, and no fear of no place
> in heaven.
> "I" have existed for 220 million years and "I" will live on for a long
> time more, through my kids and their kids, until the end of mankind
> on earth.
>
bluskie
Pastor Frank, you're absolutely correct.
ardeedee
The road you are travelling is one which is of curiosity first of God and
values of life.
Keep travelling on the road it will lead you to Him.
No religion that is worth its history of survival can teach anything other
than good. Muslims are not taught evil and neither do Christians.
The evil of Muslims waging Jihad is not condoned by the religion but the
extremists that wage such Jihad are misled or misinterpreting the religious
tenets for causes that are good but with wrong ends - even the devil can
quote the Bible.
The basis of religion is truth.The Muslim extremists believe they are
upholding the truth.
There is always logic in what God does even if we not see it in our time -
the Crusades was one that spread the faith of both religions. This is a
return to those times as the Muslims need another fillip to their cause.
"Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:411d...@news.starhub.net.sg...
Gwar
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004, Pastor Frank wrote:
[Pastor Frank]
> What ARE the facts that you know, but we don't?
That you're one of a billion other idiots who think a man nailed a stick
is god. It's time for the rest of us to stop letting religious idiots try
to run things, because you're all certifiable, & yet you all think you
know-it-all.
H.D.S
news:9l3lh0168ng9o08dq...@4ax.com:
I am curious. This concept of god, is it sentient, or is it metaphorical
like nature or physical laws?
There are many theories that do postulate "what" caused the big-bang and
the relationship of time to spacial dimensions.
One theory (I can not remember the name at the moment, but it is an
extension of QM) describes time as the human interpretation of entropy.
In particular, it holds that all matter and energy have both a physical
waveform (what it is at the moment) and a "temporal" waveform (how the
physical waveform will change). In other words, time is nothing more then
how the human brain catalogs entropy.
Check out the Ekpyrotic Cosmological theory (an extension of String
Theory) for one possible explanation for the cause of the big-bang.
In general, it holds that a collision between higher dimensional branes
(the 4th spacial dimension) caused a masive release of energy (the actual
"substance" that makes the dimensional brane).
IMO it is quite a beautiful and simple model, assuming that string theory
is correct.
--
Read the Bible, because we need more atheists.
Pastor Frank
nor are most other religionists, a fact you seem unable to see. I think you
hating holy scripture and its adherents so much, you would do better in
atheist NGs. I will post you over to them.
------------------
"Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:411d...@news.starhub.net.sg...
JessHC
> We don't discuss top posts. Btw most of us Christians are not "blind",
> nor are most other religionists, a fact you seem unable to see. I think you
> hating holy scripture and its adherents so much, you would do better in
> atheist NGs. I will post you over to them.
An effective tactic when one can't address the point.
Pastor Frank
>
> The road you are travelling is one which is of curiosity first of God and
> values of life.
> Keep travelling on the road it will lead you to Him.
> No religion that is worth its history of survival can teach anything other
> than good. Muslims are not taught evil and neither do Christians.
> The evil of Muslims waging Jihad is not condoned by the religion but the
> extremists that wage such Jihad are misled or misinterpreting the
religious
> tenets for causes that are good but with wrong ends - even the devil can
> quote the Bible.
> The basis of religion is truth.The Muslim extremists believe they are
> upholding the truth.
> There is always logic in what God does even if we not see it in our time -
> the Crusades was one that spread the faith of both religions. This is a
> return to those times as the Muslims need another fillip to their cause.
>
should consider "jihad" evil, but our own warfare exacting for more dead and
causing a great many more refugees on THEIR soil then jihad does on OUR
soil, as justified.
The underground resistance to German occupation during WW2 was a jihad
and we feted them as heroes. Why should any occupied and dispossessed and
their friends not fight against colonizers and us their friends, would we do
any different if the roles were reversed? "Muslim extremists" indeed!!!!
That's exactly our greatest failure, for far too many of us call
ourselves Christians, yet totally ignore Christ's most important
commandment, to care about and treat others as we want to be cared for and
treated ourselves. -the Golden Rule of Christ. See below
Pastor Frank
news:Xns9544DF8EDC...@66.75.162.201...
> Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:9l3lh0168ng9o08dq...@4ax.com:
> > On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 21:39:57 +0800, "Bad boy"
> > <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>" Believing in this God is far older than 1500 to 2000 years old. ...
>
don't get your shoes dirty if not stuck in the soft soil of freshly dug mass
graves, and that the screams of the tortured don't disturb your tranquility.
We Christians if not also Islamists are busy trying to advance ideals of
behaviour, such as the Golden Rule of Christ below, so that there won't be
anymore of man's inhumanity to man, nay that war, torture and mass graves
become totally unthinkable.
And no, we don't need more atheists, for atheists live by their own
rules, each man for himself, and therefore know how to justify torture and
mass-graves especially when the current popular opinion of their society
supports them.
Pastor Frank
news:d58e3ac.04081...@posting.google.com...
cupcake
Pastor Frank wrote:
>"JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote in message
>[16]news:d58e3ac.04081...@posting.google.com...
>> "Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
>[17]news:<B7lTc.90652$cA5....@nntp-post.primus.ca>...
>> >
>> > We don't discuss top posts. Btw most of us Christians are not "blind",
>> >
well, considering that yu all believe in a God
that doesn't even exist, i think yer all pretty
pathetic...
"blind"? -- i think the whole bunch of
you need a good enema too!
cupcake
> Re: Thots on a Sunday morning
>
> From: cupcake <t...@r.slrup>
> Reply to: [1]cupcake
> Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:06:39 GMT
> Newsgroups:
> [2]talk.religion.buddhism,
> [3]alt.buddha.short.fat.guy,
> [4]alt.christian.religion,
> [5]alt.religion.christian,
> [6]alt.religion.hindu,
> [7]alt.religion.islam
> Followup to: [8]newsgroups
> References:
> [9]<p7wTc.91827$pq4....@nntp-post.primus.ca>>>[16][10]news:d58e3ac.04081...@posting.google.com...
>>> "Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
>>> >
>>> > We don't discuss top posts. Btw most of us Christians are not "blind",
>>> >
>
>
> well, considering that yu all
>
(see the header)
bluskie
> >
> > Who am I ? I am a life form in this universe, this galaxy, this
> > solar system, this earth...breathing air, needing water and food.
> >
> Like a speck of dust in an infinite cosmos perhaps, being blown hither
> and thither by the winds of fate? Great vision you have!!!!
> We Christians believe ourselves the children of our most holy and
> perfect God, our Father which is in Heaven, and who loves us to the extreme
> of coming to us in the form of a man, Jesus Christ and dying on the cross of
> Calvary to propitiate our sins along with the guilt and shame.
> Our Father in Heaven is the King of kings and the Lord of lords and that
> makes us princes of the realm. However we glory not in ourselves and our own
> achievements but in the glory, perfection and achievements of our heavenly
> Father.
>
> Pastor Frank
>
>
Jesus is LOVE, God incarnate come to earth in the image of man to free
sinners from the clutches of evil of this imperfect world, praise the
Lord Jesus! Only by serving Him will you be truly free! Hallelujah! In
God we trust!
H.D.S
I am an avid astronomer and throughly enjoy philosophical debate.
> Be
> careful you
> don't get your shoes dirty if not stuck in the soft soil of freshly
> dug mass graves, and that the screams of the tortured don't disturb
> your tranquility.
> We Christians if not also Islamists are busy trying to advance
> ideals of
> behaviour,
Perhaps you mean *your* ideals of behaviour.
Don't forget that buddhists, hindus, etc. have their own ideals. Just as
religions of history past had theirs.
For that matter all humans have their own set of ideals. One does not
need to belong to an organization to have ideals.
> such as the Golden Rule of Christ below, so that there
> won't be anymore of man's inhumanity to man, nay that war, torture and
> mass graves become totally unthinkable.
It is a noble goal but is obviously unattainable or you (plural theists)
have failed, given that the last two thousand years have seen the worst
atrocities, violence and genocidal horrors ever witnessed by our species.
> And no, we don't need more atheists, for atheists live by their
> own
> rules,
Everyone lives by their own rules. One theist is just as likely to commit
murder as another is as likely to save a life. The same applies to
atheists and agnostics. You may have *ideals* by which to live (as any
moral person does) but having and practicing are two different things.
When it comes down to it, most people will do what benefits them (or
those they care for) over their ideals.
I am sure we do not need to make specific references to living or
historic persons do we?
> each man for himself, and therefore know how to justify torture
> and mass-graves especially when the current popular opinion of their
> society supports them.
Popular opinon supports those who share the same opinon. Are you saying
that popular opinon is to torture and kill, or that atheists are
responsible for [all] torture and killing? Keep in mind that the super
majority of human population is, and has been, theist, so *if* atheists
are commiting these acts (laugh) it is supported by theists.
I do not wish to get into a numbers game (where this type of conversation
usually ends up) so I will admit that I have meet quite a few asshole
atheists. Just the same, I have meet quite a few asshole theists. My best
guess is that the number of assholes is proportional to the total number
of people who share the same ideology. i.e. people can just be assholes
regardless of what they adhere to.
--
Pastor Frank
>
> well, considering that yu all believe in a God
> that doesn't even exist, i think yer all pretty
> pathetic...
>
perfect in Christ Jesus, and our God exists alright. I suspect it's YOUR
god, who is an invisible hairy old warrior in the sky which doesn't exist,
except in your imagination of course.
But why are you posting atheism to Christian NGs? You don't want us
posting Christ to atheist NGs, do you? So please post atheism to atheist
NGs. I will post you over to them this time.
cupcake
> Re: Thots on a Sunday morning
>
> Reply to: [1]"Pastor Frank"
> Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 22:35:10 -0400
> Organization: Primus Canada
> Newsgroups:
> [2]alt.atheism,
> [3]alt.christian.religion,
> [4]alt.religion.christian,
> [5]alt.religion.hindu,
> [6]alt.religion.islam,
> [7]talk.religion.buddhism> [10]<3WwTc.43$i_4...@news.more.net>
>"cupcake" <t...@r.slrup> wrote in message [11]news:3WwTc.43$i_4...@news.more.net..
>.
>>
>> well, considering that yu all believe in a God
>> that doesn't even exist, i think yer all pretty
>> pathetic...
>>
> What god would that be? Our Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) made
>perfect in Christ Jesus, and our God exists alright. I suspect it's YOUR
>god, who is an invisible hairy old warrior in the sky which doesn't exist,
>except in your imagination of course.
> But why are you posting atheism to Christian NGs? You don't want us
>posting Christ to atheist NGs, do you? So please post atheism to atheist
>NGs. I will post you over to them this time.
>
well, i juzt want yu to seriously consider the possibility
that yu are severely deluded
cupcake
> Re: Thots on a Sunday morning
>
> Reply to: [1]cupcake
> Newsgroups:
> [2]alt.atheism,
> [3]alt.christian.religion,
> [4]alt.religion.christian,
> [5]alt.religion.hindu,
> [6]alt.religion.islam,
> [7]talk.religion.buddhism
> Followup to: [8]newsgroups
> References:
>>
>> Re: Thots on a Sunday morning
>>
>> From: "Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com>
>> Reply to: [1]"Pastor Frank"
>> Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 22:35:10 -0400
>> Organization: Primus Canada
>> Newsgroups:
>> [2]alt.atheism,
>> [3]alt.christian.religion,
>> [4]alt.religion.christian,
>> [5]alt.religion.hindu,
>> [6]alt.religion.islam,
>> [7]talk.religion.buddhism
>> Followup to: [8]newsgroups
>> References:
>> [9]<p7wTc.91827$pq4....@nntp-post.primus.ca>
>> [10]<3WwTc.43$i_4...@news.more.net>
>net..
>>.
>>>
>>> well, considering that yu all believe in a God
>>> that doesn't even exist, i think yer all pretty
>>> pathetic...
>>>
>> What god would that be? Our Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) made
>>perfect in Christ Jesus, and our God exists alright. I suspect it's YOUR
>>god, who is an invisible hairy old warrior in the sky which doesn't exist,
>>except in your imagination of course.
>> But why are you posting atheism to Christian NGs? You don't want us
>>posting Christ to atheist NGs, do you? So please post atheism to atheist
>>NGs. I will post you over to them this time.
>>
>
>
> well, i juzt want yu to seriously consider the possibility
> that yu are severely deluded
>
here's a hint:
just because people for 2000 years have been the
same is no justification on your part...
Mike Painter
Pastor Frank ("God is that which is most important to you" ) continues to
complain about crossposting, then does it himself.
Bad boy
with Hinduism. (see article below)
My search, not based on blind faith nor on what the holy books say,
is based on attaining a deeper understanding of the question
"Who am I".
Through another route, I have had glimpses of the existence
of God through another route.
God has been in existence long before the Bible, Quran, Torah,
holy books of Hinduism and Buddhism were written. He existed
much longer than man who is about 220 millions years. This much
I found out for certain.
Our knowledge of the world and the universe is limited. However,
we know enough now to realise that the workings of our world, the
billions of planets, suns, galaxies, and universes are controlled by
physical laws (laws of nature).
These physical laws, including those yet to be discovered, are too
perfect, too enormous, simply too huge to have come about without
a guiding hand. This is my first deduction(glimpse) that God is present
in our universe. Many leading scientists of today have come to this
conclusion.
There are many things and happenings which are beyond the
detection of our human senses. For example, electricity, energy
within our body, radio waves, x-ray, forces like gravity, the weak
and strong forces. There are events that are beyond the understanding
of scientists. Example. Fire walking, spiritual trance, evidence of
people having previous life......There is more than that meet the eyes!
I am quite certain that God is not human-like, with human feelings,
weaknesses and idiosyncrasies, like the one depicted in the Bible
and Quran.
Bad boy.
http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/human/hu-azeb2.htm
Seeking the Self
By Armin Zebrowski
My brother -- I have been on a long journey after supreme knowledge, I
took a long time to rest. Then, upon coming back, I had to give all my time
to duty, and all my thoughts to the Great Problem. It is all over now: the
New Year's festivities are at an end and I am "Self" once more. But what is
Self? Only a passing guest, whose concerns are all like a mirage of the
great desert. . . . -- , The Mahatma Letters to A. P. Sinnett,
Who am I? This question, asked by the high adept and initiate in his letter,
is one of the greatest we can ask. It rouses us time and again from our
everyday routines and compels us to think. It implies other equally
important questions: Where have we come from? Where are we heading? How are
we related to the universe around us? Human traditions give a variety of
answers, but none is ultimately satisfying. Here and there, for a brief
moment, the seeker is bathed in the glow of understanding and is content.
But we know that nothing endangers spiritual growth so much as the lethargy
which accompanies contentment. The teacher, therefore, endeavors to keep his
pupil's mind always in motion and uncrystallized. On our search, therefore,
we should recognize teachings and symbols for what they are, not mistaking
them for truth itself. After all, we are not striving to reach a
destination; the journey itself is our goal, and the path begins with a
single step. Self-knowledge comes from innumerable single steps, whose
direction and length we determine. If truth remains our objective, we cannot
miss the "right" path for us.
"ardeedee" <arde...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:411d...@news.starhub.net.sg...
Mark K. Bilbo
<HiATc.92272$qb.7...@nntp-post.primus.ca> we saw our hero "Pastor Frank"
<Pasto...@Christfirst.com>:
> What god would that be? Our Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16)
But you, Frank, revel in hate...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
--------------------------------------------------
"Come to think of it, there are already a million
monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet
is NOTHING like Shakespeare!" -- Blair Houghton
Aaron
Well, all of those American indians were already damned before the
white man came. Now many who would otherwise be damned are saved.
Yes, certain individuals did evil things. But the majority of
Americans at the time knew nothing of this. and despite all the
wrongs that were done, on the whole the American Indians have
profitted from the civilization of North America. Granted, they would
have been better off if America had had advanced means of
communication so that the majority could have stopped the crimes of
the minority or if there was a stronger Jewish influence in America.
> Btw Australia gets a lot of media here, about the way they treat their
>natives. Do you regard those facts also fictitious? Is it not a fact you are
>a merely a refuter totally ignorant of any facts in regards to the subject
>of so-called Christians and Jews uprooting and killing natives on a massive
>scale, in total disregards of the commandments of Christ, as well as YHWH
>and His 10 commandments?
Where did you get the "Jews" part from?
Frank, you are so anti-Semitic, that you almost never post anything
without a slur against Jesus and His People.
BTW: there are 613 Commandments and Ten Utterances. The Bible calls
the 10 the "Aseret HaDibrot" (Ten Utterances) never the "Ten
Commandments." "The Ten Commandments" is the title of a movie that
was not biblically accurate.
Pastor Frank
news:9c4vh01lpm5f0bm5h...@4ax.com...
invading Jews committed then and now. Why don't you read up on this in your
Torah. See below how our Old Testament of the Bible describe this obscene
massacre of an entire native population along with their animals, -in fact
killing "all that breatheth".
All that happened shortly after YHWH forbade the coveting of other
people's property and killing them to get a hold of it. If being
anti-holocaust of ANYONE is being "antisemitic", then I am proud to be so.
According to both Rabbit Hillel AND Jesus, you WILL be judged and treated as
you judge and treat others, or justify how they are judged and treated by
others.
Pastor Frank
CAUSE OF THE APOCALYPSE: Being proud instead of repentant of the
horrific holocaust of the entire native population of "the promised land",
as well as the continuing colonial brutality against Palestinian natives.
Deuteronomy 20:16-17 But of the cities of these people, which the Lord
thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing
that breatheth. But thou shalt utterly destroy them; the Hittites, and the
Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites
as the Lord thy God has commanded thee."
Ezekiel 32:5 "I will strew your flesh upon the mountains, and fill the
valleys with your carcass. I will drench the land even to the mountains with
your flowing blood..."
Ezekiel 9:5 "Pass through the city after him, and smite; your eye shall
not spare and you shall show no pity; slay old men outright, young men and
maidens, little children and women...'"
Deut. 7:1 (KJV)When Yahweh your god has settled you in the land you're
about to occupy, and driven out many infidels before you...you're to cut
them down and exterminate them. You're to make no compromise with
them nor show them any mercy.
Joshua 10:40 - BBE So Joshua struck all the land, the hill-country, and
the South, and the lowland, and the slopes, and all their kings: he left
none remaining, but he utterly destroyed all that breathed, as God, the God
of Israel, commanded."
1 Samuel 15:3 - BBE Now go and strike Amalek, and utterly destroy all
that they have, and don't spare them; but kill both man and woman, infant
and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and donkey."
Isaiah 13:16 - BBE Their infants also will be dashed in pieces before
their eyes. Their houses will be ransacked, and their wives raped."
Hosea 13:16 - BBE Samaria will bear her guilt; For she has rebelled
against her God. They will fall by the sword. Their infants will be dashed
in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open."
Moses in Numbers 31:17-18 Now therefore kill every male among the
little ones, and kill every woman, that hath known man by lying with him.
But all the female children, that have not known man by lying with him,
keep alive for yourself.
PROPHETIC APOCALYPSE, (The N-U-C-L-E-A-R consequence of the abomination
above and others like it, employing great noise and heat that can melt
elements, scorch people and destroy the "works of man" on a massive scale)
2Pt:3:10: But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in
the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements
shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein
shall be burned up.
2Pt:3:12: Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God,
wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall
melt with fervent heat?
Jesus in Matt. 24:16: Then let them which be in Judea flee into the
mountains:
17: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out
of his house:
18: Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his
clothes.
19: And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in
those days!
20: But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the
sabbath day:
21: For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the
beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22: And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be
saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
Jesus in Lk:23:30: Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall
on us; and to the hills, Cover us.
Rv:16:9: And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name
of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give
him glory.
Pastor Frank
news:411b...@news.starhub.net.sg...
> "Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
> >
> > The OT Bible references are all given. If you don't own a Bible go
on
> > line and find one to check.
>
> So these are from the OT?
>
> > To form a valid opinion you need to take into account simple greed
and
> > opportunism, for the God of the Jews, YHWH commanded Moses shortly
before
> > NOT TO covet the property of neighbors, nor kill them to get it. So it's
> > obvious, that this same god is unlikely to have changed his mind all of
a
> > sudden and commanded ancient Hebrews to "kill all that breatheth" to
> > "possess the land" of their neighbors and "reap where they have not
sown".
>
> So what you're implying here is
> that the said writings you gave
> did not come from God and that
> they were likely to be human inspired
> or forgeries?
>
> >Jews are still proud
> > of their ancestor's holocaust of the natives,
>
> Please elaborate.
>
Germans are sorry, ashamed if not repentant of their holocaust of the
Jews, asking survivors to come back to their properties of accept
compensation. Jews on the other hand do the opposite and to this day kill
native refugees, bulldoze their refugee shanties, stealing their taxes,
denying them basic services like water, building permits, freedom of
movement, etc. etc. and are busy making life absolute hell for them.
There is no doubt in my mind, that Jews will be responsible for causing
the Apocalypse which will kill half of the world's population. See below the
cause and prophesy of the consequences.
Shastram
First of all, thanks HDS for taking note of my post here. the OP
completely missed it or ignored it, whatever the reason, I thought i
made a valid point here to let him know that he should not confuse God
with Religion, which, as I explained (IMHO) are two completely
different things.
Now, coming to your "sincere" ;) question. I think the concept of God
is highly debatable (of course, that's nothing new). Should it be
metaphorical or physical or sentient? Obviously I can't call it bound
by physical laws, if it was, science might have had some sort of
insight on it, but then again, it might just be, and in future, we
might just get insight on it.
Rather I'm thinking back to evolution, before homo sapiens, the homo
Neanderthal had started burying their dead, and not just the body, but
with materialistic items. The idea was to help the dead through the
coming journey (of course, that's the most logical assumption). The
idea of mortality was too much to face for the growing human brain,
and hence immortality was created. Was it really created though?
Could it not be true? Could it not be that we actually do have a
journey to make after death? What's the counter proof? No one can say
definitely what it is.
And if there can be something after the death, what's their to say
that some superpower, something that perhaps transcends this universe,
above the laws of physics... exists?
I personaly dont really believe in religions, i think all these
religious people are just carrying out political propagandas only.
But i can't get myself to disbelieve in this one superpower that may
exist out there. Perhaps this universal spirit is not watching over
us, but just there, for us to become one with it and free us of this
world. You must be thinking, it's a very hindu way of thinking, sure
it is, I'm a hindu afterall.
To answer your question firmly now, I don't think calling God
metaphorical (or even this concept of God metaphorical) is right. It
can't be proven by Physical laws (yet?), but it is not a metaphor. It
is definitely there, it transcends this world, this universe, it is
much more than a sentient being.
>There are many theories that do postulate "what" caused the big-bang and
>the relationship of time to spacial dimensions.
>
>One theory (I can not remember the name at the moment, but it is an
>extension of QM) describes time as the human interpretation of entropy.
>In particular, it holds that all matter and energy have both a physical
>waveform (what it is at the moment) and a "temporal" waveform (how the
>physical waveform will change). In other words, time is nothing more then
>how the human brain catalogs entropy.
>
>Check out the Ekpyrotic Cosmological theory (an extension of String
>Theory) for one possible explanation for the cause of the big-bang.
>In general, it holds that a collision between higher dimensional branes
>(the 4th spacial dimension) caused a masive release of energy (the actual
>"substance" that makes the dimensional brane).
>
>IMO it is quite a beautiful and simple model, assuming that string theory
>is correct.
Thank you for the extra bit of information. It's always good to
learn as much as one can. Knowledge is God ;-)
Regards,
Shastram
One never can see the thing in itself, because the mind does not
transcend phenomena---- (Hilaire Belloc
H.D.S
news:96g2i0ppccstthk43...@4ax.com:
I completely agree.
Although I am an atheist, I practice buddhism.
Religion and god are not synonymous.
>
> Now, coming to your "sincere" ;) question. I think the concept of God
> is highly debatable (of course, that's nothing new). Should it be
> metaphorical or physical or sentient? Obviously I can't call it bound
> by physical laws, if it was, science might have had some sort of
> insight on it, but then again, it might just be, and in future, we
> might just get insight on it.
If it is natural it should be within the realm of our understanding and
explanation, eventually.
>
> Rather I'm thinking back to evolution, before homo sapiens, the homo
> Neanderthal had started burying their dead, and not just the body, but
> with materialistic items. The idea was to help the dead through the
> coming journey (of course, that's the most logical assumption). The
> idea of mortality was too much to face for the growing human brain,
> and hence immortality was created.
I have always been fascinated by the origins of burying our dead.
From an evolutionary / behavioral point of view it seems logical that
burying the dead would decreases disease and not attract predatory animals
to a potential meal.
But more likely it was a sign of respect; leaving the dead in the open
allowed predatory animals to make a meal of them. Burying them would at
least keep them from whole and maintain some dignity.
Perhaps the desire to not die molded this custom of respect into the modern
day practice.
> Was it really created though?
> Could it not be true? Could it not be that we actually do have a
> journey to make after death? What's the counter proof? No one can say
> definitely what it is.
No one can prove that we do not have a soul or that there may be a life-
after-life. Just as no one can disprove god.
However, if we consider only those aspect which are observable and
understandable to humans (i.e. natural events and processes, rather then
supernatural), we can only conclude that the "self" dies upon the
ceassation of brain activity.
If damage to the brain causes a change in behavior while one is a live,
then "you" are nothing more then how your brain is wired.
If your brain dies then you likely die as well.
>
> And if there can be something after the death, what's their to say
> that some superpower, something that perhaps transcends this universe,
> above the laws of physics... exists?
True.
A "soul" (if you will) does not need to be synonymous with a god either.
>
> I personaly dont really believe in religions, i think all these
> religious people are just carrying out political propagandas only.
Pretty much.
However, it is usually someone elses agenda rather then their own.
> But i can't get myself to disbelieve in this one superpower that may
> exist out there. Perhaps this universal spirit is not watching over
> us, but just there, for us to become one with it and free us of this
> world. You must be thinking, it's a very hindu way of thinking, sure
> it is, I'm a hindu afterall.
It was this same perception of life, death, and reality that drew me to
buddhism.
The goal of ending reincarnation and returning to the source is a very
elegant and satisfying belief.
>
> To answer your question firmly now, I don't think calling God
> metaphorical (or even this concept of God metaphorical) is right. It
> can't be proven by Physical laws (yet?), but it is not a metaphor. It
> is definitely there, it transcends this world, this universe, it is
> much more than a sentient being.
[snip Ekpyrotic Theory]
>
> Thank you for the extra bit of information. It's always good to
> learn as much as one can. Knowledge is God ;-)
What is beautiful about this theory is that there is a source for all
matter and energy. Further, if you consider "god" to be the source, it is
everywhere and literally in everything.
We ourselves are made from the fabric of space.
Pastor Frank
> Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:96g2i0ppccstthk43...@4ax.com:
> > On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 07:58:31 GMT, "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote:
> >>Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> >>news:9l3lh0168ng9o08dq...@4ax.com:
>
> >>> NOT a God and neither is Jesus).
>
>>
> >>I am curious. This concept of god, is it sentient, or is it
> >>metaphorical like nature or physical laws?
> >>
Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) then every loving person expresses
and demonstrates or represents this God in part or fully as in Jesus Christ
on the cross of Calvary.
>
> Although I am an atheist, I practice buddhism.
>
Christ.
> Religion and god are not synonymous.
>
Religion is a practice of ideals, where God IS the ideal.
> >
> > Now, coming to your "sincere" ;) question. I think the concept of God
> > is highly debatable (of course, that's nothing new). Should it be
> > metaphorical or physical or sentient? Obviously I can't call it bound
> > by physical laws, if it was, science might have had some sort of
> > insight on it, but then again, it might just be, and in future, we
> > might just get insight on it.
>
> If it is natural it should be within the realm of our understanding and
> explanation, eventually.
>
In the Christian case God can be understood as much as we can understand
love.
>
> However, if we consider only those aspect which are observable and
> understandable to humans (i.e. natural events and processes, rather then
> supernatural), we can only conclude that the "self" dies upon the
> ceassation of brain activity.
> If damage to the brain causes a change in behavior while one is a live,
> then "you" are nothing more then how your brain is wired.
> If your brain dies then you likely die as well.
>
Buddhism, like all other Asian religions rests on maya philosophy, which
explains this quite well.
> >
> > I personaly dont really believe in religions, i think all these
> > religious people are just carrying out political propagandas only.
>
That's a religion in it self, born out of cynicism, whereas Christ is
all about empathy.
> Pretty much.
> However, it is usually someone elses agenda rather then their own.
>
> > But i can't get myself to disbelieve in this one superpower that may
> > exist out there. Perhaps this universal spirit is not watching over
> > us, but just there, for us to become one with it and free us of this
> > world. You must be thinking, it's a very hindu way of thinking, sure
> > it is, I'm a hindu afterall.
>
Hinduism is also based on maya, -appearances, illusion. The Baghavad
Gita deals with it extensively.
>
> We ourselves are made from the fabric of space.
>
That is a very "religious" or rather mystical thought found in many
religions including the Bible. see below
Pastor Frank
Acts:17:28: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain
also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
Pastor Frank
>
> You treat my search for God as a journey is in keeping
> with Hinduism. (see article below)
> My search, not based on blind faith nor on what the holy books say,
> is based on attaining a deeper understanding of the question
> "Who am I".
> Through another route, I have had glimpses of the existence
> of God through another route.
>
>
> I am quite certain that God is not human-like, with human feelings,
> weaknesses and idiosyncrasies, like the one depicted in the Bible
> and Quran.
>
Brahman sufficiently impersonal? If you think far enough back via maya,
there can only be one God and we are the maya / image of that God. See below
the Biblical equivalent
H.D.S
> "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9547A158EA...@66.75.162.201...
>> Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> news:96g2i0ppccstthk43...@4ax.com:
>> > On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 07:58:31 GMT, "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote:
>> >>Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> >>news:9l3lh0168ng9o08dq...@4ax.com:
>>
>> >>> it (I have to say here that you must also be informed that Buddha
>> >>> is NOT a God and neither is Jesus).
>>
> Whether something is a god is a matter of definition.
A defintion is used to summarize the characteristics of something.
A god would still be a god regardless of how you define it, just as a
human is still a human even if you call it a chicken.
>>>
>> >>I am curious. This concept of god, is it sentient, or is it
>> >>metaphorical like nature or physical laws?
>> >>
> If you define god to be a quality, then this god can be sentient.
> Our
> Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) then every loving person
> expresses and demonstrates or represents this God in part or fully as
> in Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary.
Fair enough.
>>
>> Although I am an atheist, I practice buddhism.
>>
> In my case it was the Buddha who made it possible for me to
> understand
> Christ.
Then I will assume you still hold many of the truths taught by the
buddha.
>
>> Religion and god are not synonymous.
>>
> Religion is a practice of ideals, where God IS the ideal.
>> >
>> > Now, coming to your "sincere" ;) question. I think the concept of
>> > God is highly debatable (of course, that's nothing new). Should it
>> > be metaphorical or physical or sentient? Obviously I can't call it
>> > bound by physical laws, if it was, science might have had some sort
>> > of insight on it, but then again, it might just be, and in future,
>> > we might just get insight on it.
>>
>> If it is natural it should be within the realm of our understanding
>> and explanation, eventually.
>>
> In the Christian case God can be understood as much as we can
> understand
> love.
I would explain love as a physical / chemical reaction.
[snip]
>>
>> We ourselves are made from the fabric of space.
>>
> That is a very "religious" or rather mystical thought found in
> many
> religions including the Bible. see below
>
> Pastor Frank
>
> Acts:17:28: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as
> certain
> also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
>
It is a very intersting parallel to many religious beliefs, which is why
I brought it up.
Shastram
>Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>news:96g2i0ppccstthk43...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 07:58:31 GMT, "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>>>news:9l3lh0168ng9o08dq...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> Science can not answer these questions. You have to believe in
>>>> something that is myseterious, something that gave us existence.
>>>> Something that was there before the fourth-dimension existed, that
>>>> is time. To deny this existence would be stupid. We have termed
>>>> that something God, Allah, YHWH Brahman, whatever you want to call
>>>> it (I have to say here that you must also be informed that Buddha is
>>>> NOT a God and neither is Jesus).
>>>
>>>I am curious. This concept of god, is it sentient, or is it
>>>metaphorical like nature or physical laws?
>>>
>>
>> First of all, thanks HDS for taking note of my post here. the OP
>> completely missed it or ignored it, whatever the reason, I thought i
>> made a valid point here to let him know that he should not confuse God
>> with Religion, which, as I explained (IMHO) are two completely
>> different things.
>
>I completely agree.
>
>Although I am an atheist, I practice buddhism.
>
>Religion and god are not synonymous.
>
Thank God!! There is someone who agrees with me out there. I think i
have been talking to muslims a lot, cuz they FIRMLY disagree with me.
>>
>> Now, coming to your "sincere" ;) question. I think the concept of God
>> is highly debatable (of course, that's nothing new). Should it be
>> metaphorical or physical or sentient? Obviously I can't call it bound
>> by physical laws, if it was, science might have had some sort of
>> insight on it, but then again, it might just be, and in future, we
>> might just get insight on it.
>
>If it is natural it should be within the realm of our understanding and
>explanation, eventually.
>
Absolutely, eventually is what I'm hoping for.
>>
>> Rather I'm thinking back to evolution, before homo sapiens, the homo
>> Neanderthal had started burying their dead, and not just the body, but
>> with materialistic items. The idea was to help the dead through the
>> coming journey (of course, that's the most logical assumption). The
>> idea of mortality was too much to face for the growing human brain,
>> and hence immortality was created.
>
>I have always been fascinated by the origins of burying our dead.
>
>From an evolutionary / behavioral point of view it seems logical that
>burying the dead would decreases disease and not attract predatory animals
>to a potential meal.
>
>But more likely it was a sign of respect; leaving the dead in the open
>allowed predatory animals to make a meal of them. Burying them would at
>least keep them from whole and maintain some dignity.
>
>Perhaps the desire to not die molded this custom of respect into the modern
>day practice.
>
Yes, but this does not explain the fact that they buried their dead
with daily use items, fruits, utensils, clothes. Of course, to save
the dead from predatory animals, out of respect, maintaining their
dignity, these are all good and valid reasons for burying the dead
body ONLY. Not along with daily usage items and clothes and jewels.
This can only suggest that they were preparing the dead for another
journey, giving the dead all that he/she needed for his "after-life".
This obviously must stem from the "desire not to die". We are of
course conscious of our mortality and to "cease to exist" is a notion
that is very hard to cope with for our mind. It make sense to think
about the "double", the "soul", that moves on after the earthly
journey is over. But for a primitive mind to think of it, there must
be some thing out there, some evidence that prompted that primitive
mind to think of this double. Or yeah, maybe it's simply natural
instincts :)
Remember though, Hindus do not bury their dead, they burn them and
reduce them in ashes. And that only stems from the fact that hindus
know, body is material, not needed for the soul to carry out it's
other journey, the more important one, to reach God, to become one
with the supereme one.
>> Was it really created though?
>> Could it not be true? Could it not be that we actually do have a
>> journey to make after death? What's the counter proof? No one can say
>> definitely what it is.
>
>No one can prove that we do not have a soul or that there may be a life-
>after-life. Just as no one can disprove god.
>
>However, if we consider only those aspect which are observable and
>understandable to humans (i.e. natural events and processes, rather then
>supernatural), we can only conclude that the "self" dies upon the
>ceassation of brain activity.
>
>If damage to the brain causes a change in behavior while one is a live,
>then "you" are nothing more then how your brain is wired.
>
>If your brain dies then you likely die as well.
>
Yes, I agree with you. IF "self" is what you define it here as,
simple wiring of the brain.
>>
>> And if there can be something after the death, what's their to say
>> that some superpower, something that perhaps transcends this universe,
>> above the laws of physics... exists?
>
>True.
>
>A "soul" (if you will) does not need to be synonymous with a god either.
>
No it does not but Hinduism doesn't define it as such. William James,
an American Philosopher, was forced to admit after reading the
Upanishads (Vedantas): "An absolute One, and I that One..."
>>
>> I personaly dont really believe in religions, i think all these
>> religious people are just carrying out political propagandas only.
>
>Pretty much.
>
>However, it is usually someone elses agenda rather then their own.
>
Yes, another reason to despise religions.
>> But i can't get myself to disbelieve in this one superpower that may
>> exist out there. Perhaps this universal spirit is not watching over
>> us, but just there, for us to become one with it and free us of this
>> world. You must be thinking, it's a very hindu way of thinking, sure
>> it is, I'm a hindu afterall.
>
>It was this same perception of life, death, and reality that drew me to
>buddhism.
>
>The goal of ending reincarnation and returning to the source is a very
>elegant and satisfying belief.
>
Yes indeed. This buddhist belief is obviously a Hindu belief, as you
probably already know. What Buddhists call Nirvana is what we Hindus
call Moksha. One and same thing. Hinduism gives several ways to
achieve Moksha, Buddhism only focused on one of those ways as Buddha
achieved Nirvana by following these guidelines, in his own way... the
forgotten teachings of Hinduism.
It's the realization that we are ALREADY ONE with God, to realize that
and to actually realize the full impact of those few words is to
acheive the ultimate bliss.
>
>We ourselves are made from the fabric of space.
and wouldn't that be saying what all Hindu litterature teaches us?
Aham Brahmasmi
I am Brahman
I denotes the Universal Self in this mantra and Brahman the Universal
soul.
Shastram
Shastram
<Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote:
>"H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
>news:Xns9547A158EA...@66.75.162.201...
>> Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> news:96g2i0ppccstthk43...@4ax.com:
>> > On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 07:58:31 GMT, "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote:
>> >>Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> >>news:9l3lh0168ng9o08dq...@4ax.com:
>>
>> >>> it (I have to say here that you must also be informed that Buddha is
>> >>> NOT a God and neither is Jesus).
>>
> Whether something is a god is a matter of definition.
>>>
>> >>I am curious. This concept of god, is it sentient, or is it
>> >>metaphorical like nature or physical laws?
>> >>
> If you define god to be a quality, then this god can be sentient. Our
>Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) then every loving person expresses
>and demonstrates or represents this God in part or fully as in Jesus Christ
>on the cross of Calvary.
>>
>> Although I am an atheist, I practice buddhism.
>>
> In my case it was the Buddha who made it possible for me to understand
>Christ.
>
>> Religion and god are not synonymous.
>>
> Religion is a practice of ideals, where God IS the ideal.
Religion is not a practice of ideals. Religion is a way to reach God.
A way that has become corrupted in the hands of those looking for
power and means to rule the illiterate world. Those who follow
religious books as explained by religious leaders are illiterate as
they will never fully understand the impact of those books. They
follow distorted views. Hence, religion can never be a practice of
ideals. And God is certainly not an "Ideal". God is bliss, freedom
from this world full of liars and treachrous, arrogant leaders who
control the lives of normal human beings.
Perfection of Self is an ideal. Religion can only show us how to do
that, but people don't understand religions as such. They see the
distorted corrupted view of religion presented to them by the leaders,
the political puppets.
>> > Now, coming to your "sincere" ;) question. I think the concept of God
>> > is highly debatable (of course, that's nothing new). Should it be
>> > metaphorical or physical or sentient? Obviously I can't call it bound
>> > by physical laws, if it was, science might have had some sort of
>> > insight on it, but then again, it might just be, and in future, we
>> > might just get insight on it.
>>
>> If it is natural it should be within the realm of our understanding and
>> explanation, eventually.
>>
> In the Christian case God can be understood as much as we can understand
>love.
I also see Love as a chemical/physical reaction. Hence is God a
chemical/physical reaction ?
>>
>> However, if we consider only those aspect which are observable and
>> understandable to humans (i.e. natural events and processes, rather then
>> supernatural), we can only conclude that the "self" dies upon the
>> ceassation of brain activity.
>> If damage to the brain causes a change in behavior while one is a live,
>> then "you" are nothing more then how your brain is wired.
>> If your brain dies then you likely die as well.
>>
> Buddhism, like all other Asian religions rests on maya philosophy, which
>explains this quite well.
>> >
everything is an illusion, the only real thing is your soul which is
one with the ultimate universal soul.
>> > I personaly dont really believe in religions, i think all these
>> > religious people are just carrying out political propagandas only.
>>
> That's a religion in it self, born out of cynicism, whereas Christ is
>all about empathy.
>
>> Pretty much.
>> However, it is usually someone elses agenda rather then their own.
>>
>> > But i can't get myself to disbelieve in this one superpower that may
>> > exist out there. Perhaps this universal spirit is not watching over
>> > us, but just there, for us to become one with it and free us of this
>> > world. You must be thinking, it's a very hindu way of thinking, sure
>> > it is, I'm a hindu afterall.
>>
> Hinduism is also based on maya, -appearances, illusion. The Baghavad
>Gita deals with it extensively.
>>
>> We ourselves are made from the fabric of space.
>>
> That is a very "religious" or rather mystical thought found in many
>religions including the Bible. see below
>
Absolutely, as a matter of fact, Hinduism / Buddhism, Maya, is all
about that. We are One with the Universal Soul, soul that is present
everywhere, in everything. Thus, we ourselves are made from the
fabric of space.
Are the similarities astounding? Hindus do not condemn any religion
as wrong or void of meaning. On the contrary, Hindus believe that all
religions are paths to the same God.
Shastram
Shastram
<Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote:
>"Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:411f...@news.starhub.net.sg...
>>
>> You treat my search for God as a journey is in keeping
>> with Hinduism. (see article below)
>> My search, not based on blind faith nor on what the holy books say,
>> is based on attaining a deeper understanding of the question
>> "Who am I".
>> Through another route, I have had glimpses of the existence
>> of God through another route.
>>
> Which God would that be?
>>
There is only one God in Hinduism.
>> I am quite certain that God is not human-like, with human feelings,
>> weaknesses and idiosyncrasies, like the one depicted in the Bible
>> and Quran.
>>
> How do you like Brahman as seen by Arjuna in the Baghavad Gita? Is
>Brahman sufficiently impersonal? If you think far enough back via maya,
>there can only be one God and we are the maya / image of that God. See below
>the Biblical equivalent
>
you don't understand what Maya means. "maya / image of that God" is
an absolutely wrong statement. The Biblical equivalent you presented
is nothing what Maya is about.
Maya = Illusion. What we see around us is nothing but an illusion.
The material world is an illusion, one should not get attached to it.
Body is made of material. It embodies a spirit, soul. That soul is
the only real thing. Your body is an illusion, hence you should not
get attached to your body or any other body or any other materialistic
items that are out there. If you let go of that attachment, you will
be free, free of this world and you will reach the ultimate bliss,
mukti, moksha, nirvana.
I highly doubt that you understand what Arjuna saw during his battle
of Mahabharata. What Arjuna saw was the universal soul. How it is
everywhere, how it transcends everything, how everybody on this earth
becomes one with him, how this world is nothing but an illusion and
the sole truth is the soul. A soul that never dies, but moves on from
one body to another body like we change clothes every day and then
finally reaches the end of it's journey by becoming one with the
universal soul, where everybody goes.
Shastram
Shastram
<badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>You treat my search for God as a journey is in keeping
>with Hinduism. (see article below)
>
>My search, not based on blind faith nor on what the holy books say,
>is based on attaining a deeper understanding of the question
> "Who am I".
>
The upanishads (Vedantas), Hindu books, constituting the concluding
part of the Vedas make a distinction between two kinds of knowledge,
the higher (para) and the lower (apara). The lower knowledge consists
of all the empirical sciences and arts as also of such knowledge as
related to things and enjoyments that perish. Interestingly, even the
four Vedas are included inthe category of lower knowledge.
The higher knowledge is described as that whereby what had not been
heard of becomes heard of, what has not been thought of becomes
thought of, what has not been understood becomes understood. Further
explained as the knowledge of the ground which is more than and
inclusive of the knowledge of the various expressions or
manifestations of the ground. " Just as by one piece of clay, all
that is made of clay may be known... the modification being only a
name depending on a word; the truth being that it is just clay... so
is that teaching" (Chandogya VI, i 4).
(Hope you understand what the clay metaphor here represents).
Compared with the knowledge of the ultimate ground which is the
absolute self, the lower knowledge is nescience or false knowledge.
The supreme wisdom, then, is the knowledge of the Self. But this
knowledge is not to be confused with what we ordinarily refer to as
knowledge. In this sense, it may be said that the Self is unknowable.
How, then, can one speak intelligibly of Self-Knowledge?
in Brhadaranyaka-upanishad, Yajnavalkya, the most prominent sage
teaches the significance of the term knowledge with reference to the
Self thus: "Where there is duality, as it were, there one sees
another, one smells another, one hears another, one thinks of another,
one understands another. Where, however, everything has become just
one's own self, there whereby and whom would one smell, see, hear,
speak to, think of, or understand? "
This, then, is the answer to the question about the unknowability of
the self. The self is unknowable, not because it is unknown, but
because it is the basis of all knowledge, nay, knowledge per se. In
short, it can not be known as objects are known. "You cannot see the
seer of seeing. You cannot hear the hearer of hearing. You cannot
think the thinker of thinking. You cannot understand the understander
of understanding. He is your soul, which is in all things."
(Brhadaranyaka, II, 4, 12-14).
As a unity, the self is to be looked upon... this unknowable, constant
being, free from blemishes, beyond space, the unborn self, great,
permanent. The self is to be comprehended as "It is". This is the
supreme knowledge, true wisdom.
Reference: Upanishads, Selection from 108 Upanishads by TMP
Mahadevan, 1999, New Delhi.
Shastram
H.D.S
news:d987i0tnavvsvhtei...@4ax.com:
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:51:32 GMT, "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote:
>
>>Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>>news:96g2i0ppccstthk43...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 07:58:31 GMT, "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Shastram <shas...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>>>>news:9l3lh0168ng9o08dq...@4ax.com:
>>>>
>>
[snip]
>
>>>
>>> Rather I'm thinking back to evolution, before homo sapiens, the homo
>>> Neanderthal had started burying their dead, and not just the body,
>>> but with materialistic items. The idea was to help the dead through
>>> the coming journey (of course, that's the most logical assumption).
>>> The idea of mortality was too much to face for the growing human
>>> brain, and hence immortality was created.
>>
>>I have always been fascinated by the origins of burying our dead.
>>
>>From an evolutionary / behavioral point of view it seems logical that
>>burying the dead would decreases disease and not attract predatory
>>animals to a potential meal.
>>
>>But more likely it was a sign of respect; leaving the dead in the open
>>allowed predatory animals to make a meal of them. Burying them would
>>at least keep them from whole and maintain some dignity.
>>
>>Perhaps the desire to not die molded this custom of respect into the
>>modern day practice.
>>
>
> Yes, but this does not explain the fact that they buried their dead
> with daily use items, fruits, utensils, clothes. Of course, to save
> the dead from predatory animals, out of respect, maintaining their
> dignity, these are all good and valid reasons for burying the dead
> body ONLY. Not along with daily usage items and clothes and jewels.
> This can only suggest that they were preparing the dead for another
> journey, giving the dead all that he/she needed for his "after-life".
In many cultures and practices burial with their earthly possesion was
for the purposes of use in the after life. The egyptians for example.
But again, this may have evolved from a sign of respect. Soldiers and
warriors are often buried with their swords, bows and weapons. Loved ones
are often dressed well and covered in their jewelry for final respects.
Christians, for example, do not believe that the items one is burried
with go with them to the after-life, but they still do it out of respect
and love for their lost one.
From my point of view as an atheist, and one who does not believe in any
supernatural phenomenon, I can understand and would, out of respect, bury
those I love with their most prized possesion. Not ofcourse so they can
use them in the next life, but out of respect (why should someone else
take up and claim as their own that which was of a loved one).
>
> This obviously must stem from the "desire not to die". We are of
> course conscious of our mortality and to "cease to exist" is a notion
> that is very hard to cope with for our mind. It make sense to think
> about the "double", the "soul", that moves on after the earthly
> journey is over. But for a primitive mind to think of it, there must
> be some thing out there, some evidence that prompted that primitive
> mind to think of this double. Or yeah, maybe it's simply natural
> instincts :)
Makes sense.
At some point in human history the innate desire to survive was
transfered to the burial process, and religion in general.
Whether philosophy was a big thing 100's of thousands of years ago, who
knows, but believing the mind and body are seperate is probably not new.
>
> Remember though, Hindus do not bury their dead, they burn them and
> reduce them in ashes. And that only stems from the fact that hindus
> know, body is material, not needed for the soul to carry out it's
> other journey, the more important one, to reach God, to become one
> with the supereme one.
I also prefer cremation over burial. Cremation seems so much... cleaner.
[snip]
>>>
>>> I personaly dont really believe in religions, i think all these
>>> religious people are just carrying out political propagandas only.
>>
>>Pretty much.
>>
>>However, it is usually someone elses agenda rather then their own.
>>
>
> Yes, another reason to despise religions.
To be fair, organized religion.
>
>>> But i can't get myself to disbelieve in this one superpower that may
>>> exist out there. Perhaps this universal spirit is not watching over
>>> us, but just there, for us to become one with it and free us of this
>>> world. You must be thinking, it's a very hindu way of thinking,
>>> sure it is, I'm a hindu afterall.
>>
>>It was this same perception of life, death, and reality that drew me
>>to buddhism.
>>
>>The goal of ending reincarnation and returning to the source is a very
>>elegant and satisfying belief.
>>
>
> Yes indeed. This buddhist belief is obviously a Hindu belief, as you
> probably already know. What Buddhists call Nirvana is what we Hindus
> call Moksha. One and same thing. Hinduism gives several ways to
> achieve Moksha, Buddhism only focused on one of those ways as Buddha
> achieved Nirvana by following these guidelines, in his own way... the
> forgotten teachings of Hinduism.
>
> It's the realization that we are ALREADY ONE with God, to realize that
> and to actually realize the full impact of those few words is to
> acheive the ultimate bliss.
>
>>
>>We ourselves are made from the fabric of space.
>
> and wouldn't that be saying what all Hindu litterature teaches us?
>
> Aham Brahmasmi
>
> I am Brahman
>
> I denotes the Universal Self in this mantra and Brahman the Universal
> soul.
>
Yup. Which is why I brought it up.
Coincedence or not, it is quite interesting how modern cosmological
theory nicely parallels some theological premises.
Regards,
HDS
Pastor Frank
news:gc97i05as6op2snkb...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:17:57 -0400, "Pastor Frank"
> <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote:
> >
> > If you define god to be a quality, then this god can be sentient. Our
> >Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) then every loving person
expresses
> >and demonstrates or represents this God in part or fully as in Jesus
Christ
> >on the cross of Calvary.
> >>
> >> Although I am an atheist, I practice buddhism.
> >>
> > In my case it was the Buddha who made it possible for me to
understand
> >Christ.
> >
> >> Religion and god are not synonymous.
> >>
> > Religion is a practice of ideals, where God IS the ideal.
>
> Religion is not a practice of ideals. Religion is a way to reach God.
>
specified more closely that I am talking about the God of Christ only, none
other. And I reference my assertion to the NT of the Bible, in this case to
Christ saying in Matthew. 5:48: "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your
Father which is in heaven is perfect".
If the Baghavad Gita has one fault, it is describing Brahman the creator
as loving all his creation equally and undifferentiated. That is simply
false.
>
> I also see Love as a chemical/physical reaction. Hence is God a
> chemical/physical reaction ?
>
to the qualities of "chemical / physical reactions", such as good, justice,
beauty, righteousness, love, care, kindness, altruism, empathy etc. etc.
etc. none of which are scientifically quantifiable.
>
> Are the similarities astounding? Hindus do not condemn any religion
> as wrong or void of meaning. On the contrary, Hindus believe that all
> religions are paths to the same God.
>
believe not all belief systems are equally good "paths to the same God".
Many other religions are quite vocal, certain, as well as assertive about
which one is better and which is best.
Pastor Frank
THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST
Jesus in Matthew. 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye
for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: (Exodus 21:23-24)
39: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall
smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40: And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let
him have thy cloke also.
41: And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
42: Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee
turn not thou away.
43: Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour,
and hate thine enemy.
44: But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do
good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you,
and persecute you;
45: That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for
he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on
the just and on the unjust.
46: For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? Do not even
the publicans the same?
47: And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? Do
not even the publicans so?
48: Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is
perfect.
---------------------
His teaching is a humongous step up from Judaism's Exodus 21:23-24
"If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth
for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound,
stripe for stripe."
Bad boy
"Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
> "Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:411f...@news.starhub.net.sg...
> >
> > You treat my search for God as a journey is in keeping
> > with Hinduism. (see article below)
> > My search, not based on blind faith nor on what the holy books say,
> > is based on attaining a deeper understanding of the question
> > "Who am I".
> > Through another route, I have had glimpses of the existence
> > of God through another route.
> >
> Which God would that be?
The God who existed for BILLIONS of years, long before man
came into existence 220 millions ago, long before those gods created
by man for only 15,000 years.
God has been in existence long before the Bible, Quran, Torah,
holy books of Hinduism and Buddhism were written. God is therefore
NOT Christian, Islamic, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist,Toaist ....God is above
petty religious quarrels, above the fights of man, above the man's
foolishness and follies.
Through scientific discovery, I have had glimpses of his guiding
hand in the law of nature and the forces that control the Universe,
the millions of galaxies and billions of stars...the billions of life-forms
on earth and on billions of planets elsewhere.
> >
> > I am quite certain that God is not human-like, with human feelings,
> > weaknesses and idiosyncrasies, like the one depicted in the Bible
> > and Quran.
> >
> How do you like Brahman as seen by Arjuna in the Baghavad Gita? Is
> Brahman sufficiently impersonal? If you think far enough back via maya,
> there can only be one God and we are the maya / image of that God. See
below
> the Biblical equivalent
>
The God of Hindu is a very recent creation by man, recent in
the 220 millions histroy of man. Hindu gods is human-like, with
human feelings , weaknesses and idiosyncrasies. Hindu Gods are artistic
creations by man.
Bad boy.
H.D.S
> You treat my search for God as a journey is in keeping
> with Hinduism. (see article below)
>
> My search, not based on blind faith nor on what the holy books say,
> is based on attaining a deeper understanding of the question
> "Who am I".
Always a noble quest.
>
> Through another route, I have had glimpses of the existence
> of God through another route.
>
> God has been in existence long before the Bible, Quran, Torah,
> holy books of Hinduism and Buddhism were written. He existed
> much longer than man who is about 220 millions years. This much
> I found out for certain.
Perhaps you mean 220 thousand years (?), even that is a stretch for
homosapiens.
>
> Our knowledge of the world and the universe is limited. However,
> we know enough now to realise that the workings of our world, the
> billions of planets, suns, galaxies, and universes are controlled by
> physical laws (laws of nature).
> These physical laws, including those yet to be discovered, are too
> perfect, too enormous, simply too huge to have come about without
> a guiding hand.
Why?
Are you judging them on what you see around us or on what they actually
imply?
> This is my first deduction(glimpse) that God is
> present in our universe. Many leading scientists of today have come to
> this conclusion.
Yeah, right.
>
> There are many things and happenings which are beyond the
> detection of our human senses. For example, electricity, energy
> within our body, radio waves, x-ray, forces like gravity, the weak
> and strong forces. There are events that are beyond the understanding
> of scientists.
Not at all. We can measure and detect all of these phenomenon with
complete certainty.
If scientists could not understand these principals you would not have
had the computer you used to type this post.
> Example. Fire walking, spiritual trance, evidence of
> people having previous life......There is more than that meet the
> eyes!
None of which are scientific.
(If you consider fire walking mysterious you haven't attempted to learn a
scientific explanation for it. Hint, it is beyond mundane.)
>
> I am quite certain that God is not human-like, with human feelings,
> weaknesses and idiosyncrasies, like the one depicted in the Bible
> and Quran.
>
Although I would claim that nothing presented even suggests that a god
exists, I doubt a god would be as feeble and shallow as a human.
H.D.S
>
> "Pastor Frank" <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
> news:NEmUc.97569$%W.5...@nntp-post.primus.ca...
>> "Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:411f...@news.starhub.net.sg...
>> >
>> > You treat my search for God as a journey is in keeping
>> > with Hinduism. (see article below)
>> > My search, not based on blind faith nor on what the holy books say,
>> > is based on attaining a deeper understanding of the question
>> > "Who am I".
>> > Through another route, I have had glimpses of the existence
>> > of God through another route.
>> >
>> Which God would that be?
>
> The God who existed for BILLIONS of years, long before man
> came into existence 220 millions ago,
Mammals did not even exist 220 million years ago, let alone our species.
Homosapien sapien evolved about 50,000 years ago.
> long before those gods created
> by man for only 15,000 years.
Gods were probably introduced to our collective cultures at the begining of
our species some 50,000 years ago.
Bad boy
> > we know enough now to realise that the workings of our world, the
> > billions of planets, suns, galaxies, and universes are controlled by
> > physical laws (laws of nature).
> > These physical laws, including those yet to be discovered, are too
> > perfect, too enormous, simply too huge to have come about without
> > a guiding hand.
>
> Why?
The galaxies, the stars, the forces that control them, the energy generated
by each star, the infinite changes, the varied life forms, the colours, the
sound, the beautiful sights are like a gigiantic symphony orchastra.
I like to believe, there is a hand conducting this master piece.
It is beyond our limited human intellect to fathom or to explain why.
We can only conjecture.
It is foolish to claim that our world is the centre of all the galaxies, and
our universe is the work of a man-like god created by the authors
of holy books. Scientific facts show that such claims are flawed.
> >
> > There are many things and happenings which are beyond the
> > detection of our human senses. For example, electricity, energy
> > within our body, radio waves, x-ray, forces like gravity, the weak
> > and strong forces.
> >There are events that are beyond the understanding
> > of scientists. Example. Fire walking, spiritual trance, evidence of
> > people having previous life......There is more than that meet the
> > eyes!
> Not at all. We can measure and detect all of these phenomenon with
> complete certainty.
>
Are you sure that scientists can measure and detect all of these
phenomenon !
> None of which are scientific.
'Not scientific' does not mean they do not exist.
Are you claiming, events which are beyond the understanding of
present day scientists are not real ??
Not long ago, scientists were sceptical about Acupuncture, and
scientist do not understand how Chinese medicine work. Are
Acupuncture and Chinese medicine not real ?
To deny the existence of phenomenon merely because scientist
cannot explain them is not scientific nor rational!
Bad boy.
Bad boy
to some scientists appear some 220 millions years ago.
According to other scientists man in our present form
appear between 7 millions year and 500,000 years ago.
It depends on the accuracy of the dating methods and on
the definition of mankind.
My point, God is a recent creation by man. It appeared
some 15,000 years ago. It is a short histroy, even if you take
man had appeared only 500,000 years ago.
According to the Bible and Quran, God created the
universe and man within a period of 7 days. This is
wrong, the universe is NOT 6 days older than man.
The universe existed at least 1.2 billions years ago and
man at least 500,000 years ago. The age difference between
the universe and man is at least 1 billions years.
The bible and Quran are wrong. This show that
the bible and the quran are NOT God's words. The
holy books are fictions, the creative works of human authors.
It show that the Church and Islam are founded on fiction. The
belief of Christian and Muslims are not better than the belief
of earlier man who worshiped the Sun as God.
Bad boy.
"H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
news:Xns954AD70A25...@66.75.162.196...
H.D.S
@news.starhub.net.sg:
> Mankind's evolution started long ago. Mammal according
> to some scientists appear some 220 millions years ago.
> According to other scientists man in our present form
> appear between 7 millions year and 500,000 years ago.
> It depends on the accuracy of the dating methods and on
> the definition of mankind.
>
> My point, God is a recent creation by man. It appeared
> some 15,000 years ago. It is a short histroy, even if you take
> man had appeared only 500,000 years ago.
>
> According to the Bible and Quran, God created the
> universe and man within a period of 7 days. This is
> wrong, the universe is NOT 6 days older than man.
> The universe existed at least 1.2 billions years ago and
> man at least 500,000 years ago. The age difference between
> the universe and man is at least 1 billions years.
> The bible and Quran are wrong. This show that
> the bible and the quran are NOT God's words. The
> holy books are fictions, the creative works of human authors.
>
> It show that the Church and Islam are founded on fiction. The
> belief of Christian and Muslims are not better than the belief
> of earlier man who worshiped the Sun as God.
>
I agree with your sentiment, but your numbers are still significantly off
from the standard accepted values.
Homosapien sapien ; last 30 - 50 thousand years (our species)
Homosapien ; last 100 thousand years
Genus Homo ; last 1 million years,
Age of the universe ; 12 - 15 billion years
Age of Earth ; 4.3 billion years
Depending on the definition of god we could argue differnt dates as well.
H.D.S
>
> "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns954A7E1ABD...@66.75.162.201...
>> "Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:411f...@news.starhub.net.sg:
>>
>> > Our knowledge of the world and the universe is limited. However,
>> > we know enough now to realise that the workings of our world, the
>> > billions of planets, suns, galaxies, and universes are controlled
>> > by physical laws (laws of nature).
>> > These physical laws, including those yet to be discovered, are too
>> > perfect, too enormous, simply too huge to have come about without
>> > a guiding hand.
>>
>> Why?
>
> The galaxies, the stars, the forces that control them, the energy
> generated by each star, the infinite changes, the varied life forms,
> the colours, the sound, the beautiful sights are like a gigiantic
> symphony orchastra. I like to believe, there is a hand conducting this
> master piece. It is beyond our limited human intellect to fathom or to
> explain why. We can only conjecture.
>
> It is foolish to claim that our world is the centre of all the
> galaxies, and our universe is the work of a man-like god created by
> the authors of holy books. Scientific facts show that such claims are
> flawed.
Agreed.
Science and fact does refute most religious claims.
But I still don't see why we should assume any guiding force.
All of the things you have outlined above could just as easily have been
the result of a few simple rules and a lot of time.
>
>
>> >
>> > There are many things and happenings which are beyond the
>> > detection of our human senses. For example, electricity, energy
>> > within our body, radio waves, x-ray, forces like gravity, the weak
>> > and strong forces.
>
>> >There are events that are beyond the understanding
>> > of scientists. Example. Fire walking, spiritual trance, evidence of
>> > people having previous life......There is more than that meet the
>> > eyes!
>
>> Not at all. We can measure and detect all of these phenomenon with
>> complete certainty.
>>
>
> Are you sure that scientists can measure and detect all of these
> phenomenon !
Why did you reposition my response?
One can only assume that you are planning a dishonest strawman argument.
Here is how it was originally positioned:
"
[BAD BOY]
>
> There are many things and happenings which are beyond the
> detection of our human senses. For example, electricity, energy
> within our body, radio waves, x-ray, forces like gravity, the weak
> and strong forces. There are events that are beyond the understanding
> of scientists.
[HDS}
Not at all. We can measure and detect all of these phenomenon with
complete certainty.
If scientists could not understand these principals you would not have
had the computer you used to type this post.
[BAD BOY]
> Example. Fire walking, spiritual trance, evidence of
> people having previous life......There is more than that meet the
> eyes!
[HDS]
None of which are scientific.
"
So where my response was originally located, yes I am absolutely certain
we can measure and detect all of these phenomenon.
>
>> None of which are scientific.
>
> 'Not scientific' does not mean they do not exist.
>
> Are you claiming, events which are beyond the understanding of
> present day scientists are not real ??
>
> Not long ago, scientists were sceptical about Acupuncture, and
> scientist do not understand how Chinese medicine work. Are
> Acupuncture and Chinese medicine not real ?
>
> To deny the existence of phenomenon merely because scientist
> cannot explain them is not scientific nor rational!
>
You misuderstand.
I meant since they are not scientific we can not explain them using
science.
I did not mean that they didn't occur.
Past lives, spritual trances, etc. are in the realm of the supernatural
and therefore can not be explained by science (the realm of the natural).
Bad boy
You have intentionally or unintentionally separated the two
sentences of mine. In my original posting, I stated scientifically
proven discoveries, and phenomenon beyond the understanding
modern science. Quote:
"...........forces. There are events that are beyond the understanding
of scientists. Example. Fire walking, spiritual trance, evidence of
people having previous life......There is more than that meet the eyes!"
I have merely re-group the sentences together again. Read my original
posting.
> One can only assume that you are planning a dishonest strawman argument.
You are the intellectuallly dishonest one.
>
>
>
> I meant since they are not scientific we can not explain them using
> science.
Read my original posting. After I have said events that could not
be understood by scientists, you tell me that it is not scientific !
>
> I did not mean that they didn't occur.
>
> Past lives, spritual trances, etc. are in the realm of the supernatural
> and therefore can not be explained by science (the realm of the natural).
'Natural' and 'supranational are matters of classification.
I have seen Hindu and Buddhist followers walking over
burning charcoal, .... Hindu, under trance, piercing
their cheek with swords and cutting their tongue and their
wounds healed immediately, ... patients in pain
soaked in cold sweat, cured immediately by acupuncture
needle, .... blind-folded Japanese martial expert
hitting the bulleye with arrows unfailingly, .....these
acts are not supernatural.... they are simply forces or energy
that are beyond the understanding of present day scientists.
Bad boy.
H.D.S
>
> "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns954B8E5AC5...@66.75.162.196...
>> "Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:4126...@news.starhub.net.sg:
>>
>> >
>> > "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
>> > news:Xns954A7E1ABD...@66.75.162.201...
>> >> "Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> >> news:411f...@news.starhub.net.sg:
[snip]
>> >
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> > There are many things and happenings which are beyond the
>> >> > detection of our human senses. For example, electricity, energy
>> >> > within our body, radio waves, x-ray, forces like gravity, the
>> >> > weak and strong forces.
>> >
>> >> >There are events that are beyond the understanding
>> >> > of scientists. Example. Fire walking, spiritual trance, evidence
>> >> > of people having previous life......There is more than that meet
>> >> > the eyes!
>> >
>> >> Not at all. We can measure and detect all of these phenomenon with
>> >> complete certainty.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Are you sure that scientists can measure and detect all of these
>> > phenomenon !
>>
>> Why did you reposition my response?
>
>
>
> You have intentionally or unintentionally separated the two
> sentences of mine.
Yes, because they were discussing two seperate types of information.
One was scientific the other was non-scientific.
I addressed each point in your paragraph seperately, I did not change the
meaning of your post.
I did not break posting ettiquete.
> In my original posting, I stated scientifically
> proven discoveries, and phenomenon beyond the understanding
> modern science. Quote:
> "...........forces. There are events that are beyond the understanding
> of scientists. Example. Fire walking, spiritual trance, evidence of
> people having previous life......There is more than that meet the
> eyes!"
>
> I have merely re-group the sentences together again. Read my original
> posting.
You did more then that, you changed the meaning of *my* post. I posted as
I did because I relied on the context of your post to explain my
statement.
By repositioning my response you implied that I believe there is
verifiable evidence for the supernatural phenomenon you presented, which
is not what I meant.
>
>> One can only assume that you are planning a dishonest strawman
>> argument.
>
> You are the intellectuallly dishonest one.
What have I said or done that was dishonest?
You repositiond my post changing its meaning.
That is dishonest.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> I meant since they are not scientific we can not explain them using
>> science.
>
> Read my original posting. After I have said events that could not
> be understood by scientists, you tell me that it is not scientific !
I said that the events them selves were not scientific (they were outside
the realm of scientific explanation; in particular past-lives, spirit
etc.).
>
>>
>> I did not mean that they didn't occur.
>>
>> Past lives, spritual trances, etc. are in the realm of the
>> supernatural and therefore can not be explained by science (the realm
>> of the natural).
>
> 'Natural' and 'supranational
supranational?
> are matters of classification.
Natural is explainable by science, supernatural is not explainable by
science.
>
> I have seen Hindu and Buddhist followers walking over
> burning charcoal, .... Hindu, under trance, piercing
> their cheek with swords and cutting their tongue and their
> wounds healed immediately, ... patients in pain
> soaked in cold sweat, cured immediately by acupuncture
> needle, .... blind-folded Japanese martial expert
> hitting the bulleye with arrows unfailingly, .....these
> acts are not supernatural.... they are simply forces or energy
> that are beyond the understanding of present day scientists.
>
I would agree that those are not supernatural.
And many of these can be explained scientificaly.
I have walked over hot coals before. The explanation is simple. The coals
are always allowed to burn down for a few hours. This results in a nice
layer of ash over the surface of the hot coals. If you walk across the
coals at a moderate pace the ash will insulate your feet from the
majority of the heat so as not to do significant damage.
Wounds healing immediately after being inflicted, I do not know, I have
never witnessed such a thing.
Blindfolded and hitting a target is an accomplishment, but I am sure it
is the result of practice. I am rather proficient with hand guns and can
hit a coffee can without looking, multiple times, after I have an initial
downrange sighting.
I particulary was discussing the supernatural aspect; past live, spirit,
etc.
Science can not explain these things because they do not rely on natural
phenomenon. Science can only deal with natural phenomenon.
Do you have a natural / scientific explanation and evidence for past-
lives, spirit trances, or a spirit?
Bad boy
Are you sure the dates quoted by you are correct ?
I am sure these dates will change as dating method
improves and more accurate ways found to measure
the age of the universe.
Like I said, it depends on your definition of mankind,
and the methothology used in dating.
What is important is the error in the bible and
other holy books. They claimed that God created
the universe and man in 7 days.
By whatever measures, or methods, this is an
grave human error. Not an error by God.
God created the universe, God knows the
age of the universe and the age when man
first appeared on earth. It is nonsense to
claim these erroneous ideas are God teachings.
It shows, the religious belief of billions are based
on fiction, fantasies created in the minds of man.
Bad boy.
"H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
news:Xns954B8C4E4F...@66.75.162.201...
Bad boy
In your first reponse to my original posting, you separated the
sentences.
Are you honest ?
In my reply, I am entitled to re-grouped the sentences.
Of course, after I repositioned my sentences back to its original
position, the flaw of your argument is exposed.
You should not have separated my sentences in the first place.
Bad boy.
"H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
news:Xns954BAE2783...@66.75.162.201...
H.D.S
>
> Are you sure the dates quoted by you are correct ?
I am very confident, yes.
> I am sure these dates will change as dating method
> improves and more accurate ways found to measure
> the age of the universe.
No doubt.
>
> Like I said, it depends on your definition of mankind,
> and the methothology used in dating.
Agreed, but a few of your estimates were signifcantly off.
No big deal though.
>
> What is important is the error in the bible and
> other holy books. They claimed that God created
> the universe and man in 7 days.
> By whatever measures, or methods, this is an
> grave human error. Not an error by God.
Unless you accept that the bible is the word of god, then it must be
god's mistake.
>
> God created the universe, God knows the
> age of the universe and the age when man
> first appeared on earth. It is nonsense to
> claim these erroneous ideas are God teachings.
If you accept science, then you must realize that the bible, quran, etc..
are incorrect.
>
> It shows, the religious belief of billions are based
> on fiction, fantasies created in the minds of man.
>
agreed.
H.D.S
>
> In your first reponse to my original posting, you separated the
> sentences.
> Are you honest ?
Yes, because it did not change the meaning of your post, nor is it a breach
of etiquete.
I addressed each point fairly and did not shuffle your responses.
>
> In my reply, I am entitled to re-grouped the sentences.
> Of course, after I repositioned my sentences back to its original
> position, the flaw of your argument is exposed.
How is that? Did seperation change the meaning of your post? Did I shuffle
your responses around?
What it should have exposed was that repositioning my response changed the
meaning of my post!
Go back and read it and you should be able to tell that what I inteded and
what it says after you changed it are two differnet things.
You should have completely removed my statement rather then shuffling it.
>
> You should not have separated my sentences in the first place.
lol, you cant really be this obtuse.
You must be new to nesgroups.
Pastor Frank
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:29:21 -0400, "Pastor Frank"
> <Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote:
> >"Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:411f...@news.starhub.net.sg...
> >>
> >> You treat my search for God as a journey is in keeping
> >> with Hinduism. (see article below)
> >> My search, not based on blind faith nor on what the holy books say,
> >> is based on attaining a deeper understanding of the question
> >> "Who am I".
> >> Through another route, I have had glimpses of the existence
> >> of God through another route.
> >>
> > Which God would that be?
>
> There is only one God in Hinduism.
>
is Brahman. Who is YOUR God?
>
> >> I am quite certain that God is not human-like, with human feelings,
> >> weaknesses and idiosyncrasies, like the one depicted in the Bible
> >> and Quran.
> >>
> > How do you like Brahman as seen by Arjuna in the Baghavad Gita? Is
> >Brahman sufficiently impersonal? If you think far enough back via maya,
> >there can only be one God and we are the maya / image of that God. See
below
> >the Biblical equivalent
>
> you don't understand what Maya means. "maya / image of that God" is
> an absolutely wrong statement. The Biblical equivalent you presented
> is nothing what Maya is about.
> Maya = Illusion. What we see around us is nothing but an illusion.
Tell us what is an "image" if not illusion? Or do you believe the image
in your mirror is material?
> The material world is an illusion, one should not get attached to it.
> Body is made of material. It embodies a spirit, soul. That soul is
> the only real thing. Your body is an illusion, hence you should not
> get attached to your body or any other body or any other materialistic
> items that are out there. If you let go of that attachment, you will
> be free, free of this world and you will reach the ultimate bliss,
> mukti, moksha, nirvana.
>
If you want to be technical about maya, tell us what the difference is
between the dreamer of an illusion and the illusion of being himself in his
dreams.
> I highly doubt that you understand what Arjuna saw during his battle
> of Mahabharata. What Arjuna saw was the universal soul. How it is
> everywhere, how it transcends everything, how everybody on this earth
> becomes one with him, how this world is nothing but an illusion and
> the sole truth is the soul. A soul that never dies, but moves on from
> one body to another body like we change clothes every day and then
> finally reaches the end of it's journey by becoming one with the
> universal soul, where everybody goes.
>
"I highly doubt" you are familiar with the story of Arjuna seeing
Brahman, as per Baghavad Gita. It had nothing to do with Atman etc. etc.
You need to do a little more reading on the subject before commenting.
Let me reword the Christian reference which you judged to be
inapplicable to maya. Acts:17:28: For in him we live, and move, and have
our being; as certain
also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
We are God dreaming Himself in a limited / diminished / temporal form.
That is why we are maya and God is not only the matrix in which we exist,
but also the ONLY reality.
Pastor Frank
"GOD" The Christian meaning of the word according to scripture:
Jesus in Jn:4:24: GOD IS A SPIRIT: and they that worship him must
worship him in spirit and in truth.
Jesus in John 14:6: Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and
the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
7: If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also:
and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8: Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9: Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast
thou not known me, Philip? HE THAT HAS SEEN ME HATH SEEN THE FATHER;
and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10: Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?
the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that
dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
1Jn:4:8: He that loveth not, knoweth not God; for GOD IS LOVE.
1Jn:4:16: And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us.
GOD IS LOVE; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
Bad boy
> "Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:4126...@news.starhub.net.sg:
>
> >
> > In your first reponse to my original posting, you separated the
> > sentences.
> > Are you honest ?
>
> Yes, because it did not change the meaning of your post, nor is it a
breach
> of etiquete.
Did not change the meaning of my post. Are you serious ?
Bad boy.
Bad boy
> "Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:4126c754$1...@news.starhub.net.sg:
>
> >
> > Are you sure the dates quoted by you are correct ?
>
> I am very confident, yes.
Go to Google Search, you'll find many scientists having
dates different from yours. Are you sure your dates
are correct and theirs are wrong?
I wouldn't say your dates are incorrect, just like
I wouldn't say their dates are wrong.
I am sure, the difference are due to different methods of dating
and different definition of mankind at different stages of evolution.
>
> > I am sure these dates will change as dating method
> > improves and more accurate ways found to measure
> > the age of the universe.
>
> No doubt.
>
> >
> > Like I said, it depends on your definition of mankind,
> > and the methothology used in dating.
>
> Agreed, but a few of your estimates were signifcantly off.
>
> No big deal though.
>
> >
> > What is important is the error in the bible and
> > other holy books. They claimed that God created
> > the universe and man in 7 days.
> > By whatever measures, or methods, this is an
> > grave human error. Not an error by God.
>
> Unless you accept that the bible is the word of god, then it must be
> god's mistake.
A God who make such elementary mistakes
is not much of a God.
>
> >
> > God created the universe, God knows the
> > age of the universe and the age when man
> > first appeared on earth. It is nonsense to
> > claim these erroneous ideas are God teachings.
>
> If you accept science, then you must realize that the bible, quran, etc..
> are incorrect.
Ask Christians and Muslims, they will tell you that they
are good Christians and Muslims. They will swear that
the bible and Quran are God's words and at the same time
they accept science. There are millions of such irrational
people in our society.
H.D.S
>
> "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns954BBA28B6...@66.75.162.201...
>> "Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:4126c754$1...@news.starhub.net.sg:
>>
>> >
>> > Are you sure the dates quoted by you are correct ?
>>
>> I am very confident, yes.
>
> Go to Google Search, you'll find many scientists having
> dates different from yours. Are you sure your dates
> are correct and theirs are wrong?
I do not know which sources you found so I can not make that judgment.
And they are not my dates, they are the dates determined by other
scientists.
>
> I wouldn't say your dates are incorrect, just like
> I wouldn't say their dates are wrong.
> I am sure, the difference are due to different methods of dating
> and different definition of mankind at different stages of evolution.
No doubt,
but if I may repost my previous numbers:
Homosapien sapien ; last 30 - 50 thousand years (our species)
Homosapien ; last 100 thousand years
Genus Homo ; last 1 million years,
Age of the universe ; 12 - 15 billion years
Age of Earth ; 4.3 billion years
My numbers for Homosapien and genus Homo were modest. Better numbers
would be 100 - 200 thousand years and 3 million years, respectively.
Everything else is the most widely accepted numbers.
>
>>
>> > I am sure these dates will change as dating method
>> > improves and more accurate ways found to measure
>> > the age of the universe.
>>
>> No doubt.
>>
>> >
>> > Like I said, it depends on your definition of mankind,
>> > and the methothology used in dating.
>>
>> Agreed, but a few of your estimates were signifcantly off.
>>
>> No big deal though.
>>
>> >
>> > What is important is the error in the bible and
>> > other holy books. They claimed that God created
>> > the universe and man in 7 days.
>> > By whatever measures, or methods, this is an
>> > grave human error. Not an error by God.
>>
>> Unless you accept that the bible is the word of god, then it must be
>> god's mistake.
>
> A God who make such elementary mistakes
> is not much of a God.
>
Agreed.
>>
>> >
>> > God created the universe, God knows the
>> > age of the universe and the age when man
>> > first appeared on earth. It is nonsense to
>> > claim these erroneous ideas are God teachings.
>>
>> If you accept science, then you must realize that the bible, quran,
>> etc.. are incorrect.
>
> Ask Christians and Muslims, they will tell you that they
> are good Christians and Muslims. They will swear that
> the bible and Quran are God's words and at the same time
> they accept science. There are millions of such irrational
> people in our society.
If they accept every aspect of the bible and quran(even those that
contradict each other), and accept most scientific theories without
question, but deny those theories that conflict with their beliefs, they
are hypocrites.
H.D.S
>
> "H.D.S" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns954BBBF1BA...@66.75.162.196...
>> "Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:4126...@news.starhub.net.sg:
>>
>> >
>> > In your first reponse to my original posting, you separated the
>> > sentences.
>> > Are you honest ?
>>
>> Yes, because it did not change the meaning of your post, nor is it a
> breach
>> of etiquete.
>
> Did not change the meaning of my post. Are you serious ?
>
Yes, I do not see how inline comments alter the meaning of the post. It
just seperates the points and does not alter their meaning.
Could you explain how my inline comment altered the meaning of your post.
(Specifically, how it could have been interpreted differently if they had
been contiguous)?
Pastor Frank
>
> Mankind's evolution started long ago. Mammal according
> to some scientists appear some 220 millions years ago.
> According to other scientists man in our present form
> appear between 7 millions year and 500,000 years ago.
> It depends on the accuracy of the dating methods and on
> the definition of mankind.
> My point, God is a recent creation by man. It appeared
> some 15,000 years ago. It is a short histroy, even if you take
> man had appeared only 500,000 years ago.
> According to the Bible and Quran, God created the
> universe and man within a period of 7 days. This is
> wrong, the universe is NOT 6 days older than man.
> The universe existed at least 1.2 billions years ago and
> man at least 500,000 years ago. The age difference between
> the universe and man is at least 1 billions years.
> The bible and Quran are wrong. This show that
> the bible and the quran are NOT God's words. The
> holy books are fictions, the creative works of human authors.
> It show that the Church and Islam are founded on fiction. The
> belief of Christian and Muslims are not better than the belief
> of earlier man who worshiped the Sun as God.
> Bad boy.
>
You ignore the basic premise of most religion, that there are multiple
realities, i.e. the here and now, the hereafter, heaven, hell, if not
purgatory etc. Creation and our afterlife only makes sense when based on the
existence of multiple realities. The difference between realities is similar
to being awake and dreaming, the evidence for the existence of another
reality only becoming apparent after moving from one to the other, i.e.
waking up from a dream. On that basis, death is seen as moving from one
reality to another higher more lucid reality such as heaven, or perhaps to a
lesser reality such as hell.
There is no other evidence possible, neither for not against this
premise. Whatever your beliefs, for or against, they can only be based on
faith. See below the Christian position.
Pastor Frank
Pastor Frank
news:4126...@news.starhub.net.sg...
cannot "refute" the other. Religion is philosophy and deals mostly with
qualities, such as what makes a human humane. Any "science" in religion is
likely morally didactic parable or philosophical premise, it is not based on
scientific quantification of impirical data.
H.D.S
news:b5mWc.3377$my7....@nntp-post.primus.ca:
Both are trying to explain reality and the natural world.
> Therefore one
> cannot "refute" the other.
The bible uses supplies faulty or unnecessary exaplanations for natural
events.
Genesis, noah's ark, parting of the red sea...
Science clearly debunks these myths as fanciful story telling.
> Religion is philosophy and deals mostly
> with qualities, such as what makes a human humane. Any "science" in
> religion is likely morally didactic parable or philosophical premise,
> it is not based on scientific quantification of impirical data.
>
True, science does not in any way describe how people should live their
lives. This is because science is not a religion or belief system.
Religious philiosophy is not in the realm of science, but religious
claims about natural events are.
Bad boy
This is hard cold fact.
Man was created billions of years after the universe was created.
This is fact.
The bible was wrong. This is fact.
Tell me, if the bible represent the words of God, how
can it be so wrong!
This truth cannot be hidden any longer by clever
lies about reality, about dreaming as reality.
Bad boy.
"Pastor Frank" <P...@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:a5mWc.3376$my7....@nntp-post.primus.ca...
ardeedee
How do you come to the conclusion that the Bible is wrong and someone else
is right?
"Bad boy" <badboy_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:412b2f9b$1...@news.starhub.net.sg...
Bad boy
by God within SEVEN days! In other words, the Universe
is 6 days older than man.
Do you know that the Universe is more than 1 billions
year old and man is less than 1 millions year old ?
Obviously, the medieval author of the bible, knew very
little about the age of man, the age of our earth, the age
of our galaxy .... Poor ignorant sod, they made such fundamental
errors in their writings. Worse, the unquestioning and unthinking
Christians nowadays blindly accept such flaws in the bible.
It is called blind faith.
One clever liar tried to fool us by saying there are different
reality !! He claims that our dreams are reality. Christians are
fooled by such lies.
Bad boy.
"ardeedee" <arde...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:412b3168$1...@news.starhub.net.sg...
Shastram
<Pasto...@Christfirst.com> wrote:
>>
>> Religion is not a practice of ideals. Religion is a way to reach God.
>>
> "Reach God"? by whose definiton of the word "God"? I should have
>specified more closely that I am talking about the God of Christ only, none
>other. And I reference my assertion to the NT of the Bible, in this case to
>Christ saying in Matthew. 5:48: "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your
>Father which is in heaven is perfect".
> If the Baghavad Gita has one fault, it is describing Brahman the creator
>as loving all his creation equally and undifferentiated. That is simply
>false.
>>
That is the problem with your "kind". You need to DEFINE GOD. Why
can't you just accept the fact that God can't be defined by your
standards or any other standards. Yes, I said REACH GOD, and why do I
need to define that God? Why is your God different than mine? IF that
is the case, then who created this world, your God or mine? Is your
superior than mine? IF you say yes to that question, than your God is
an egotistical entity and does not deserve to be a God, but rather
just another human being with some powers.
What you call faults of Gita are in reality the Strengths of Gita.
Your understanding of Gita and Hinduism is very clear in your posts,
you sould not talk about what you don't know. You don't see me talking
about your Bible, do you? Brahman the creator must love all his
creation equally and undifferentiated because Brahman is ONE with the
creation. The reason for your problems in understanding this is
becuase you see the world in a dualistic manner, which is certainly
not the case.
> Unfortunately 3 of those qualities are good better and best. Even Hindus
>believe not all belief systems are equally good "paths to the same God".
>Many other religions are quite vocal, certain, as well as assertive about
>which one is better and which is best.
Once again, you are demonstrating your faulty understanding of
Hinduism and once again I must say, when you don't know what you are
talking about, it's better to just keep quiet. Let the religions be
assertive about which one is better, just because they are assertive
and vocal doesn't mean anything. They are simply egotistical
religions, demonstrating what the founder of those religions intended
to do, political propagandas.
Shastram