Not all who believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God are going to heaven; quit sinning.
Apostle Keith Brown
Many who continue to sin know Jesus is the Son of God, but they don't
follow and obey the Lord Jesus. Quit sinning. Disobeying God is sinning.
If you can't quit sinning by yourself, pray to God for deliverance from sin.
Look for us whom God's miracle signs are following. Look for the people
who have it like the first Christians, like Peter and John. Look for God's
power. Look for people who are living like Jesus Christ SAID how to live.
Look for Christian rallies, and attend. Show God that YOU are one of His
true Christians. Don't be ashamed of being a TRUE CHRISTIAN; we are
the ones going to heaven.
John Shaffer
What's a True Christian? You post intones it is those who are actively
obeying God, or those who have quit sinning, those attending rallies. I
agree these are fruit of a follower of Christ (rallies optional) but not
the entrance ticket into the Kingdom.
Ben Mitts
Then to your way of thinking,
what is required for entrance
into Gods Kingdom!
If you don't mind me asking?
--
Peace!
Sincerely,
Ben mitts
"Feed your faith,.... Starve your doubts"
From The Word of God: And as Moses lifted up the serpent
in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted
up; that whoever believes may in Him have eternal life."
Similarly, God so loved the world, that He gave His only
begotten Son, that who ever believes in Him should not
perish, but Have eternal life. Another: God did not send
the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the
world should be saved through Him. He spoke elsewhere:
I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me
shall live, even if he dies, and everyone who lives and
believes in Me shall never die. Believe you this?
Therefore we may, as many will to do so: "But as many as
received Him, to them He gave the right to become child-
ren of God, even to those who believe in His name,"
(John 1:12)
John Shaffer
I don't mind you asking at all but my answer is not according to my way
of thinking but rather to what scripture says:
John 3:16 says... that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have
eternal life.
John 6:29 says... Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe
in the one he sent."
Romans 10:9-10 says...That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is
Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you
will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are
justified and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
Philippians 3:8-9...I consider everything a loss compared to the
surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I
have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ
and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes
from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ - the
righteousness that comes from God and is by faith.
In Philippians Paul was addressing a crowd of Gentile christians who
were buckling to the pressure of some Jewish christians that were
stating that the Gentiles had to obey the laws of the Jews including
circumcision in order to be saved. Paul's point is that salvation is
found through the cross alone not the cross and right behavior. Right
behavior is a fruit of salvation and more so a fruit of the Lordship of
Jesus in one's life not on any effort of the flesh. It is true that
believeing that Jesus is the son of God won't save you, even demons
believe that, but accepting that Jesus's work on the cross pays our sin
debt in full and submitting to his Lordship over our lives is waht
makes, in my opinion, a true christian.
Chris Clark
"John Shaffer" <johnls...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:sqCdnRcxaM7B0dTe...@comcast.com...
What's a True Christian? You post intones it is those who are actively
> obeying God, or those who have quit sinning, those attending rallies. I
> agree these are fruit of a follower of Christ (rallies optional) but not
> the entrance ticket into the Kingdom.
A true Christian is not simply a person who belives in Christ (The bible
states that even the demons know he exists). However A true Christian is
one who not only belives in Christ, but comits to follow him. MOST
IMPORTANTLY!!! you cannot say that a true christian is one who stops
sinning. Sin is built into the nature of every human being, Christ
overrides that nature but we are still not fully rid of it. I sin ever day,
the thing that differs me from non-christians is it bothers me and I am
convicted of it and constantly live my life drawing closer to God. The
drawing closer to God does help eliminate the sin. However, Christians are
not perfect. That is why they are Christians. Christianity is a religion
of imperfetion seeking the perfect one knowing they can't be him but can be
in his image.
Also to the Apostle Keith Brown who wrote this
> Apostle Keith Brown wrote:>
> A lot of EVIL people too believe Jesus is God's Son.
> Many who continue to sin know Jesus is the Son of God, but they don't
> follow and obey the Lord Jesus. Quit sinning. Disobeying God is
sinning.
> If you can't quit sinning by yourself, pray to God for deliverance from
sin.
> Look for us whom God's miracle signs are following. Look for the people
> who have it like the first Christians, like Peter and John. Look for
God's
> power. Look for people who are living like Jesus Christ SAID how to
live.
> Look for Christian rallies, and attend. Show God that YOU are one of
His
> true Christians. Don't be ashamed of being a TRUE CHRISTIAN; we are
> the ones going to heaven.
First I want to aplaud you in your belif that a lot of evil people belive in
God, for this is true. Nevertheless I was wondering on what athority are
you calling yourself an apostle? Have you seen the lord with your eyes? Can
you testify to his reserection from your personal eyes? Have you been
spicificaly called by Christ to be an Apostle? Are you infalibly inspired?
Can you work miricles? First off I want to say that you are not infalibly
inspired, your teachings in this statment are not lining up with the word of
God. Why do you say attend Christian rallys? yes it is an amazing
experiance, but the reason you state is so you can show God you are one of
his this sounds a lot like salvation by works, Apostle (For by grace you
have been saved through faith and that not of yourselves). Yes many do
continue to sin even though they know that Jesus is Lord, in fact many of
these people could be considered unbelievers because they do not want to
make a commitment to Christ. However, Apostle, if you claim that us sinners
are unbeileivers, when was the last time you sinned? Apostle, it is my
opinion that people should worry about the log in their eye before they
worry about the speck in someone else's (aparently Jesus felt the same way).
Don't feel bad. I too was once a Christian much like yourself. I was a
true fanatic. I considered all sinners evil and degenerates an they must
repent at once. I also, like youself was not afraid to tell anyone that
they were evil sinners. Then at some point I relized that God is love, not
condemnation. The wrath of God found in the Old Testemate was finaly
forfilled by Christ's sacrafice. The point of our existance as the body of
Christ is to make Christ atractive to all. By climbing up on your soapbox
and pulling out your bullhorn proclaiming to be an apostle you are making
Christ atractive to none. You are guilting people into a relationship with
the most high God. You are selling fire insurance. You are portraying
Christianity as a scociety bassed on demanded perfection. You are harming
Christianity as a whole with statments like the one contained in this reply.
If I was a non-beliver I would take one glace at your letter and think to
myself about how hypocritical Christians are. You are gashing a huge wound
into the body of Christ. I am heartbroken as I read this letter because I
am not only reminded of my former self, but I am reminded of what is
happening to the conotation of the word "Christian." Don't you get it? By
making statments of this kind you are doing the work of the evil one and are
turning more away from Christ than toward him. Apostle, I beg you to stop.
Your's Truthfuly
Chris Clark
A Fellow Speck in the Body of Christ
Ben Mitts
Excellent, and well written may I
add! Thank you for taking the time
to answer. Not many would do this,
again, thank you.
May I say I too use these Verses in
my witness when talking to some
one about accepting Jesus Christ
as Lord of their life!
Apostle Keith Brown
Your accusations against me in your post are not true.
Ask God about every preacher. I ask God.
A Christian rally is an evangelistic meeting big or small for the
purpose of
getting more people to become true Christians like the first century
Christians
were. We want thousands, and even millions of new real Christians instead
of
pseudo-Christians. The angel said to me,"What the church suppose to be!"
God and His Son the Lord Jesus Christ and Their angels called me an
apostle,
even before the Lord Jesus appeared to me.Yes. They visited and appeared
to me many times. Customarily, they appear in person, in visions, and in
dreams. The Holy Spirit is in me all the time.
God has today many end time apostles, many prophets, evangelists,
pastors,
and teachers. Incidentally, one angel said to me, Chicago ought to be
called,
City of Prophets, because they have so many. Each of us can ask God what
kind
of ministry we have.
"Chris Clark" <tim...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:zMk2f.8497$sE3.2471@lakeread07...
Apostle Keith Brown
There are four categories of people: sinners; those who live the holy
life although they haven't heard the Gospel; the forgiven but don't have the
Holy Spirit Baptism;
and us who have the Holy Spirit Baptism with the first evidence of tongues.
1. Sinners need to repent and turn to God or His Son Jesus Christ
and pray
for salvation.
2. In the Judgment, there will be people like Cornelius in Acts
chapter 10,
righteous when he had not heard the Gospel.
3. People who felt something; felt an assurance, confirmation, or
touch
that meant forgiven and adopted.
4. Us who received the Holy Spirit Baptism with the first evidence
of speaking
in a foreign language with the Holy Spirit moving our mouth.
We can ask the Holy Spirit, What language is my "tongue" language?
Apostle Keith Brown
BUT, GOD talked to and poured some of His Holy Spirit into people,
throughout the centuries. WE PREACH THE TRUTH. When God makes
our souls SAFE from His future Great Judgment Fire, we are SAVED as long
as we stay in good standing with God.
Warning. There are a great many preachers who believe you only have to
believe that Jesus died for you and you are safe. They don't tell you to
pray
for God to fill your body with some of His tangible Holy Spirit, and they
don't tell you to further pray for God to baptize you with the Holy Spirit
until
you and God TOGETHER are praising God in a FOREIGN LANGUAGE
WHILE GOD IS MOVING YOUR MOUTH. Most pastors don't tell you
this because it is not written like this in the Roman Empire's Bible
purported
to be God's words, and, because they never experienced these experiences.
Even most priests and nuns deeply committed, never felt God's Spirit. It is
because of the LIES in the New Testament Bible, not merely mysteries,
but lies. God wants ALL of us apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors,
and
teachers to get filled with God's real tangible Holy Spirit, and preach our
testimony.news:z5adnVEGCYE...@comcast.com...
Apostle Keith Brown
Holy Spirit preachers. Sin is NEITHER SUBSTANCE NOR NATURE,
BUT AN ACT. Ask around, where are the healings, miracles, and signs
going on; and go there to see for yourself.
"Ben Mitts" <benm...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:434A74BD...@sbcglobal.net...
John Shaffer
> Salvation. The problem is: we have been lied to. People lied to us.
> BUT, GOD talked to and poured some of His Holy Spirit into people,
> throughout the centuries. WE PREACH THE TRUTH. When God makes
> our souls SAFE from His future Great Judgment Fire, we are SAVED as long
> as we stay in good standing with God.
> Warning. There are a great many preachers who believe you only have to
> believe that Jesus died for you and you are safe. They don't tell you to
> pray
> for God to fill your body with some of His tangible Holy Spirit, and they
> don't tell you to further pray for God to baptize you with the Holy Spirit
> until
> you and God TOGETHER are praising God in a FOREIGN LANGUAGE
> WHILE GOD IS MOVING YOUR MOUTH. Most pastors don't tell you
> this because it is not written like this in the Roman Empire's Bible
> purported
> to be God's words, and, because they never experienced these experiences.
> Even most priests and nuns deeply committed, never felt God's Spirit. It is
> because of the LIES in the New Testament Bible, not merely mysteries,
> but lies. God wants ALL of us apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors,
> and
> teachers to get filled with God's real tangible Holy Spirit, and preach our
> testimony.
John Shaffer
> Hello,
> Your accusations against me in your post are not true.
> Ask God about every preacher. I ask God.
> A Christian rally is an evangelistic meeting big or small for the
> purpose of
> getting more people to become true Christians like the first century
> Christians
> were. We want thousands, and even millions of new real Christians instead
> of
> pseudo-Christians. The angel said to me,"What the church suppose to be!"
> God and His Son the Lord Jesus Christ and Their angels called me an
> apostle,
> even before the Lord Jesus appeared to me.Yes. They visited and appeared
> to me many times. Customarily, they appear in person, in visions, and in
> dreams. The Holy Spirit is in me all the time.
> God has today many end time apostles, many prophets, evangelists,
> pastors,
> and teachers. Incidentally, one angel said to me, Chicago ought to be
> called,
> City of Prophets, because they have so many. Each of us can ask God what
> kind
> of ministry we have.
>
Would you share how you gained your knowledge of what the first century
christians were like?
John Shaffer
> Hello,
> There are four categories of people: sinners; those who live the holy
> life although they haven't heard the Gospel; the forgiven but don't have the
> Holy Spirit Baptism;
> and us who have the Holy Spirit Baptism with the first evidence of tongues.
> 1. Sinners need to repent and turn to God or His Son Jesus Christ
> and pray
> for salvation.
> 2. In the Judgment, there will be people like Cornelius in Acts
> chapter 10,
> righteous when he had not heard the Gospel.
> 3. People who felt something; felt an assurance, confirmation, or
> touch
> that meant forgiven and adopted.
> 4. Us who received the Holy Spirit Baptism with the first evidence
> of speaking
> in a foreign language with the Holy Spirit moving our mouth.
> We can ask the Holy Spirit, What language is my "tongue" language?
How did you come to believe the above?
Chris Clark
Corinthians 12:10 lists speaking and interpreting tongues (foreign
languages) as a spiritual gift. 1 Corinthians 12:28 Paul goes on to say
that God has spiritually gifted everyone. Later in 1 Corinthians 12:30 he
says that not all have the gift of tongues. This raises a very valid point
if you classify yourself as a very elite Christian who has been baptized by
the holy spirit and provide evidence by speaking in tongues. Are you
setting yourself above all those who are not gifted to speak in tongues?
There is much other evidence that the Holy Spirit is moving in someone's
live. Personally, God has never gifted me with the ability to speak in a
language that I have no prior training in. God has gifted me however with a
mind that is able to learn foreign language very efficiently. Does this
mean I am not a True Christian. The holy spirit works in mysterious ways
other than just by tongues. Some movements of the Holy Spirit can be
characterized by irrational acts of faith that can border on the edge of
insanity. Our lives as Christians call us to live insane radical lives for
Him. Abram was insane to pick up his entire family and take them on a trip
he did not know the direction of. Three men were insane to stand when
Nebeceneasar ordered them to bow. Moses was insane to stand before the most
powerful king on earth and demand that he release his labor force. The
Apostles were insane to leave their careers behind and follow Christ. But
as we pan out over their lives and see the big picture. The evidence of the
third person of the trinity working is astronomical. These apparently
insane acts eventually turned out for the better. Did all of these people
speak languages that they did not know? The answer is a definitive No.
"Us who received the Holy Spirit Baptism with the first evidence of speaking
Apostle, Brother, Friend, I beg you to lay down your bullhorn. In the 21st
century different methods are needed for evangelism. In the 17th century
"Sinners at the Hands of an Angry God" was powerful, as it is today. It
does not work today because Many do not believe in a God. In the 40's when
66% of America believed the bible was Absolutely true the four spiritual
laws or their equivalent worked. Now in today's relativistic society it
won't because less than a third believe the bible is true. This means that
in today's culture you must first make the case for the bible, then make the
case for Jesus, then politely convince them that they are sinners (if you
omit politely, they get upset and just say "what's right for you is right
for you and what's right for me is right for me" and leave). By skipping to
sin you convince that that Christians are an intolerant lot of Absolutists
(which we are). These people will simply not listen to someone they feel is
threatening them and accusing them. Apostle, please, I am begging you,
consider what I say. Don't just go around telling people they are sinners
and that they are on the way to hell. You are simply turning them off to
the faith. There are much better ways to go about evangelism that are far
more profitable than telling people they are evil.
Your Brother in Christ
Chris Clark
"Apostle Keith Brown" <apostlek...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:1iL2f.13002$QE1....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Markwise
Apostle Keith Brown wrote:
> Salvation. The problem is: we have been lied to. People lied to us.
> BUT, GOD talked to and poured some of His Holy Spirit into people,
> throughout the centuries. WE PREACH THE TRUTH. When God makes
> our souls SAFE from His future Great Judgment Fire, we are SAVED as long
> as we stay in good standing with God.
Your last statement, if taken literally, is contradicted in Holy
Scripture. St. Paul writes in Ephesians 2 "for it is by GRACE through
FAITH we have been saved. And this is not your OWN DOING; it is the
GIFT of GOD, NOT a result of WORKS."
We cannot save ourselves by the Law. St. Paul says we can do nothing
in ourselves to please God. St. Paul even says when we try to do
things pleasing to God we still do the thing which we do not want to
do.
We *can* be saved by the Gospel. The Holy Spirit enables us through
faith to receive God's grace and forgiveness. It is God's gift of
forgiveness and Christ's gift of reconciliation upon the cross that
saves us. Not our good works.
> Warning. There are a great many preachers who believe you only have to
> believe that Jesus died for you and you are safe. They don't tell you to
> pray
> for God to fill your body with some of His tangible Holy Spirit, and they
> don't tell you to further pray for God to baptize you with the Holy Spirit
Prayer is not a means of grace and as such does not save us in and of
itself. We pray because God asked us to and it is pleasing to God. We
are saved by hearing God's Word (see Rom. 10) and by God's gifts in the
Sacraments.
Something is also to be said of unrepentant sin. Though our works
cannot save us our works can condemn us. If we remain unrepentant and
do not ask for and have faith in God's forgiveness that can destroy our
faith and as such lose our salvation.
Apostle Keith Brown
Let me help you. See the truth, and turn, and ask God to fill you with
the Holy Spirit. Listen to us who have it. Look at St John 3:16.
"John Shaffer" <johnls...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:z5adnVEGCYE...@comcast.com...
Do not think that believing the story is the TOTAL that God expects of
faithful people. God's enemies want us to think that only the story
is enough. No wonder they are not getting filled with God's
tangible Holy Spirit; they are ever lied to. Same scriptures, but
wrong interpretations which encourage and protect ignorance.
God wants to fill us with His Holy Spirit too.
And look at what the Catholics forgeried in St John 6:29.
> John 6:29 says... Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe
> in the one he sent."
No, God has many works, and has given us many works.
We who have the Holy Spirit know God; and we who have seen
Jesus Christ know that He wants the world to believe His Father
and repent of all sins and live holy forever.
> Romans 10:9-10 says...That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is
> Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you
> will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are
> justified and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
SAVED FROM WHAT? from sin? from hell? from the Judgment?
See the Catholics' flaw in their tamperings! God wants to turn
Adam people into Holy Spirit people by His Holy Spirit operations
on our very spirit _ not just believing it. The world SAW the miraculous
religion of the first Christians, but, from the Fourth Century onward, the
emperors and the Catholics effectually changed the meaning of Christian,
even by falsifying supposed "scriptures". People who have the Holy Spirit
have seen STRANGE scriptures in the Bible, and the lying priests replied
that it's a mystery. No, It's a LIE! Go to another church: where the signs
of tongues and healings and miracles are now going on, and get the truth.
> Philippians 3:8-9...I consider everything a loss compared to the
> surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I
> have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ
> and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes
> from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ - the
> righteousness that comes from God and is by faith.
>
> In Philippians Paul was addressing a crowd of Gentile christians who
> were buckling to the pressure of some Jewish christians that were
> stating that the Gentiles had to obey the laws of the Jews including
> circumcision in order to be saved. Paul's point is that salvation is
> found through the cross alone not the cross and right behavior.
WRONG. That word "salvation" ought to be "forgiveness".
Forgiveness is through Jesus Christ's blood. WE MUST MAKE
OUR OWN EFFORTS TO DO BEHAVIOR ACCEPTABLE
TO GOD ALWAYS.
And, you don't have to have the Holy Spirit in order to have right
behavior. There have been righteous people who NEVER heard
of Jesus Christ, and God thinks they deserve eternal life; and
God will introduce those righteous souls to His Son later.
Apostle Keith Brown
Ask around. Where is a church where they speak in tongues
when the Holy Spirit moves their mouths, heal the sick, cast out
devils in Jesus Christ's name, and preach holiness?
Don't go to criticize them.
Don't go to teach them.
Pray for the Baptism of the Holy Spirit with the first evidence of tongues.
Apostle Keith Brown
their LIES into the Bible.
Proverbs 16:7, When a man's ways please the Lord...
Genesis 7:1, Thee have I seen righteous...
Genesis 17:1, Walk before Me and be thou perfect...
Luke 1:75, in holiness and righteousness before Him all
the days of our life.
St John 8:29, And He that sent Me is with Me: the Father
has not left Me alone; for I do always those
things that please Him.
And the Holy Spirit CAN LEAVE us for evil behavior.
Revelation 3:15, I know THY WORKS, that thou are neither
cold nor hot: I would thou were cold or hot.
16, So then because thou are lukewarm, and
neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of
My mouth.
Markwise
Yea but the problem is, none of these verses speaks of salvation.
Whereas the following do:
Ephesians 2:8 "For it is by GRACE you have been SAVED through FAITH"
Mark 16:16 "Whoever believes and is baptized will be SAVED"
The verses you quoted do finely show that God is pleased by our works
and wishes for us to do good works. But good works do not help or
affect our salvation. If you wish to argue otherwise then you must
refute the passages I have aforementioned and *not* bring up more that
don't mention salvation.
Chris Clark
middle voice. This is forien to all english speakers because we do not hve
middle voice in our language. The middle voice is used to show that you do
something and the benefit goes to you. It can literaly be translated as
"you pray for yourself." This means that prayer is not realy an action that
saves (that goes to belif), prayer is an action that builds you. There is
nothing better for your walk with God that to selflessly intercede for all
those around you. Also prayer is an importiant comunication line. If we
are the bride of Christ, how is our relationship going to flourish with our
groom if we never speak to him.
Chris Clark
Apostle Keith Brown
from getting filled with some of God's Spirit. Ephesians 2:8 is an emperor
FALSE SCRIPTURE. The emperors and the philosophers wanted to make
AUTHORITATIVE their ideas. God wants man to repent and turn to God,
and get water baptized, and get baptized with His Holy Spirit, and live
faithfully
toward God forever. Some of God's Holy Spirit added to us STAYS inside
us AFTER we EXPERIENCE God's baptism of the Holy Spirit with the FIRST
EVIDENCE OF TONGUES. This is GOOD; the Holy Spirit knows where the
mistakes in the Bible are, and He shares God's powers with us MORE THAN
WITH OTHER PEOPLE BECAUSE WE OBEYED TO GET THE TONGUES.
AND EVERYTHING CONTRARY TO THIS IS A LIE. Accept this truth
BEFORE God's Judgment. The first century people didn't have the Roman
Empire's tainted Bible, and they preached NO MORE BLOOD OF DOVES AND CATTLE
FOR JESUS' BLOOD TAKES THEIR PLACE, AND
RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT, AND RECEIVE WATER BAPTISM,
AND WE WILL BE JUDGED ACCORDING TO OUR WORKS IN THE
FINAL JUDGMENT. God gives us His Holy Spirit so as to MAKE us
COMBINATION SOUL AND HOLY SPIRIT improved beings like His Son
Jesus Christ. I write according to God, His Holy Spirit, His Son Jesus
Christ,
and their staff of holy angels. Become a HOLY SPIRIT -SOUL COMBINATION
BEING who can talk with God on the INSIDE of us. Get it; why should you
learn
everything before you get it? Pray and get it now. Quit the creeds and
doctrines,
and go all out everything for God, and pray: Lord Jesus, forgive me all my
sins and
save me, Lord, and baptize me with the Holy Spirit with tongues. Thank You.
I pray for you.
Pastor Frank
news:1129263926....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Angelo Parodi wrote:
>>
>> The way I look at it, if all these christians with their low-octane
>> mentalities are going to be in heaven, fuck it -- I'd rather burn.
>> However,
>> I believe God is a god of intellect, and wouldn't want to surround
>> himself
>> with all these groveling imbeciles.
>
> Yeah, I mean come on, If God is all loving then surely he must send
> those wimps to Hell for eternal damnation along with all those hethens
> who have never even heard of Jesus. How dare they be ignorant of such
> obvious facts. I mean Jesus presented himself to everyone, right!? He
> was in Jerusalem for Christ's sake. It's only like the cultural center
> of the entire world! How could you not know about it!?
> Seriously, if God punished the ignorant, then I think there'd be more
> Christians in Hell than anyone else.
>
God isn't about "intellect" but about being humane. Smart people built
atomic bombs, but only loving and caring people can achieve a just and
lasting peace. That is why heaven is not for the smart, nor brilliant, nor
perfect etc. etc. but is occupied solely by forgiven sinners.
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 14:6-10: Jesus saith unto him: "I am the way, the truth,
and the life; no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye had known me,
ye should have known my Father also, and from henceforth YE KNOW HIM AND
HAVE SEEN HIM."
Philip saith unto him: "Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us."
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: Show us the Father? 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."
Jesus in John 12:44-46`Then Jesus cried out and said, "He who believes
in me, believes not in me but in Him who sent me. And he who sees me sees
Him who sent Me. I have come as a light into the world, that whoever
believes in me should not abide in darkness."
Jesus in Lk 17:20-21: And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when
the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said: "The kingdom of
God cometh not with observation. Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo
there! For, behold, the kingdom of GOD IS WITHIN YOU."
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.
Captn Sensible
Pastor Frank wrote:
> >
> God isn't about "intellect" but about being humane. Smart people built
> atomic bombs, but only loving and caring people can achieve a just and
> lasting peace. That is why heaven is not for the smart, nor brilliant, nor
> perfect etc. etc. but is occupied solely by forgiven sinners.
>
Not for the smart? That's interesting Frank. So anyone with the
inteligence to be able to separate fact from fiction isn't going to get
in then?
Accidental
Yes. That is correct. God only allows people who accept his
children's stories to enter heaven.
I enjoy the analogy associating God with a loving father: God creates
humans and gives them their own will. He is surprised when two humans
act according to human nature and try to eat an apple out of curiosity.
For their insolence in eating that delicious apple, all humans thence
on shall be punished, because somehow we are responsible for their
sins.
Next, God constructs an eternal torture chamber for Satan, and we're
all invited! But no, God doesn't want us to go to hell, he just can't
stop us because he's all-powerful, yet a bit capricious. Therefore, he
lets the blood flow forth anew (a couple thousand years later) and
sends his son to die. Why this is necessary, nobody knows, because God
is all-powerful and could have forgiven us without this nonsense.
Next he says that only people who believe this ancient story can be
saved. This includes illiterate people who can't read the Bible,
people who have never heard of him, people who have heard of him, but
rationalize that it's probably just like all other myths, and people
who lived before Jesus died.
The moral of the story is that the only virtue that matters for eternal
life is gullability and luck. Never mind that belief isn't actually a
choice (either it seems probable to you, or it doesn't... if you claim
to believe it even though it doesn't seem probable, you are merely
lying), and that you are basically believing in humanity, not God
(because you must beleive the writers were telling the truth) and even
if it were a choice to believe, that would entail conditional love (and
who would torture a loved one for eternity?). And of course, we all
know that loving fathers love unconditionally, at least for the purpose
of the analogy... Is God a bad father?
So basically, what we have here is a set of contradictions that must
all be accepted as occuring simultaneously, or we shall burn in hell.
I'd better bring along my SPF 1,000,000,000.
xeno
On Sun, 16 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
> God isn't about "intellect" but about being humane.
If God is omniscient, then how can you claim God isn't about intellect?
& how can anybody be humane w/o understanding how to be, to whatever
degree they can be, in a given situation?
Pastor Frank
news:1129494996....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
"separating fact from fiction"? What is "interesting" is your apparent
preference of spending your life "separating fact from fiction" and letting
other people worry about being sufficiently humane, loving and caring.
Pastor Frank
> Captn Sensible wrote:
>> Pastor Frank wrote:
>> >
>> > God isn't about "intellect" but about being humane. Smart people
>> > built
>> > atomic bombs, but only loving and caring people can achieve a just and
>> > lasting peace. That is why heaven is not for the smart, nor brilliant,
>> > nor
>> > perfect etc. etc. but is occupied solely by forgiven sinners.
>>
>> Not for the smart? That's interesting Frank. So anyone with the
>> inteligence to be able to separate fact from fiction isn't going to get
>> in then?
>
> Yes. That is correct. God only allows people who accept his
> children's stories to enter heaven.
>
would have loved you!!!!!
> I enjoy the analogy associating God with a loving father: God creates
> humans and gives them their own will. He is surprised when two humans
> act according to human nature and try to eat an apple out of curiosity.
>
Now THAT is a "children's story". Truth is, Adam and Eve preferred to
taste of the fruit of knowing the difference between good and evil. As a
consequence they became opinionated and judgmental, and from that moment on
Paradize ceased to exist, for they were full of complaints, much like you
are in this post.
<snip a long wail of complaints>
>
> So basically, what we have here is a set of contradictions that must
> all be accepted as occuring simultaneously, or we shall burn in hell.
> I'd better bring along my SPF 1,000,000,000.
>
No, you would better "bring along" a fire-proof suit. The Broomleigh
group of churches have the franchise for them and will sell you the deluxe
model for all you have got and won't be needing where you are going.
Pastor Frank
news:2005101617...@synergy.transbay.net...
loved one(s), about the "degree" and amount of love to display befitting the
situation and occasion etc. etc. Do you have any loved ones?
Libertarius
Pastor Frank wrote:
===>What a HIPOCRITE!
You HATE the Jews, the OT, and YHWH himself!
TELL US: WAS JESUS THE SON OF YHWH? -- L.
Captn Sensible
Pastor Frank wrote:
> "Captn Sensible" <binn...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1129494996....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Pastor Frank wrote:
> >>
> >> God isn't about "intellect" but about being humane. Smart people
> >> built
> >> atomic bombs, but only loving and caring people can achieve a just and
> >> lasting peace. That is why heaven is not for the smart, nor brilliant,
> >> nor
> >> perfect etc. etc. but is occupied solely by forgiven sinners.
> >
> > Not for the smart? That's interesting Frank. So anyone with the
> > inteligence to be able to separate fact from fiction isn't going to get
> > in then?
> >
> What has aiming to be a humane, loving and caring person to do with
> "separating fact from fiction"?
It's called multi-tasking. It's possible to do both at the same time.
We can then separate the facts from the fiction in the bible whilst
aiming to be humane, loving and caring.
> What is "interesting" is your apparent
> preference of spending your life "separating fact from fiction" and letting
> other people worry about being sufficiently humane, loving and caring.
Multi-tasking Frank!
xeno
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
> Do you have any loved ones?
I'm not interested in these reductionisms you want to indulge in.
xeno
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
> What has aiming to be a humane, loving and caring person to do with
> "separating fact from fiction"?
Because in order to be humane, you have to understand how to be in a given
situation. That would require you to ascertain what is the true situation,
& to avoid having false ideas about that situation.
Accidental
> would have loved you!!!!!
How many examples do I have to give you of God exterminating, torturing
and otherwise acting haphazardly with humanb life. Is that your
definition of humane? As for Hitler, I don't really know where he came
in this conversation, but if I'm not mistaken, he considered himself a
Christian. I do not consider myself a Christian. Enough said.
> Now THAT is a "children's story". Truth is, Adam and Eve preferred to
> taste of the fruit of knowing the difference between good and evil. As a
> consequence they became opinionated and judgmental, and from that moment on
> Paradize ceased to exist, for they were full of complaints, much like you
> are in this post.
So, after eating the pernicious apple they became more like God,
judgmental? So he punished everyone because they became more like him?
I don't see why I'm being punished for someone else's mistake. I
guess that's God's justice.
> > So basically, what we have here is a set of contradictions that must
> > all be accepted as occuring simultaneously, or we shall burn in hell.
> > I'd better bring along my SPF 1,000,000,000.
> >
> No, you would better "bring along" a fire-proof suit. The Broomleigh
> group of churches have the franchise for them and will sell you the deluxe
> model for all you have got and won't be needing where you are going.
I'd like to know from which mental delusion you claim your certainty.
A rational person would realize that by definition a loving and just
God would not allow the tortue of people who had never even heard of
him. He would not punish people for coming to a different conclusion
concerning the veracity of ancient myths. But you go ahead and believe
what you want so long as you don't start another holy war.
Captn Sensible
Pastor Frank wrote:
> What has aiming to be a humane, loving and caring person to do with
> "separating fact from fiction"? What is "interesting" is your apparent
> preference of spending your life "separating fact from fiction" and letting
> other people worry about being sufficiently humane, loving and caring.
John 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you
free.
Meaning:- Learn how to distinguish what is fact from what it obviously
garbage and it will set you free.
I think Jesus knew a thing or two, he seemed like an inteligent fella.
After all, he was taught a lot from the essenes whilst growing up. But
we've got to separate what he DID say and do from what later scribes
added, which he obviously DIDN'T say and do.
Carl Rooker
>
> Captn Sensible wrote:
> > Pastor Frank wrote:
> > > >
> > > God isn't about "intellect" but about being humane. Smart people
built
> > > atomic bombs, but only loving and caring people can achieve a just and
> > > lasting peace. That is why heaven is not for the smart, nor brilliant,
nor
> > > perfect etc. etc. but is occupied solely by forgiven sinners.
> > >
> >
> > Not for the smart? That's interesting Frank. So anyone with the
> > inteligence to be able to separate fact from fiction isn't going to get
> > in then?
>
> Yes. That is correct. God only allows people who accept his
> children's stories to enter heaven.
>
> I enjoy the analogy associating God with a loving father: God creates
> humans and gives them their own will. He is surprised when two humans
> act according to human nature and try to eat an apple out of curiosity.
> For their insolence in eating that delicious apple, all humans thence
> on shall be punished, because somehow we are responsible for their
> sins.
>
Just another feeble attempt to distort the issue by misrepresentation
It was not an apple. That was a myth.
We are not responsible for Adam and Eve's sin. They were. We are only
responsible for our own.
The taste of the fruit was not an issue. They were given a command to see
if they would obey. Their act of disobedience was (in effect) them trying
to be gods themselves; "..you shall be like God...".
This act of disobedience was NOT in their nature. It is their act of
disobedience that they handed down to their children that has become our
nature.
But, the ability of some to correctly state the position they oppose is
common among a certain group. Their own lies should tell the rest
something.
God bless
Carl
Libertarius
Carl Rooker wrote:
> "Accidental" <Philip....@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1129508949.6...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Captn Sensible wrote:
> > > Pastor Frank wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > God isn't about "intellect" but about being humane. Smart people
> built
> > > > atomic bombs, but only loving and caring people can achieve a just and
> > > > lasting peace. That is why heaven is not for the smart, nor brilliant,
> nor
> > > > perfect etc. etc. but is occupied solely by forgiven sinners.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Not for the smart? That's interesting Frank. So anyone with the
> > > inteligence to be able to separate fact from fiction isn't going to get
> > > in then?
> >
> > Yes. That is correct. God only allows people who accept his
> > children's stories to enter heaven.
> >
> > I enjoy the analogy associating God with a loving father: God creates
> > humans and gives them their own will. He is surprised when two humans
> > act according to human nature and try to eat an apple out of curiosity.
> > For their insolence in eating that delicious apple, all humans thence
> > on shall be punished, because somehow we are responsible for their
> > sins.
> >
>
> Just another feeble attempt to distort the issue by misrepresentation
===>You are equally distorting the whole story.
> It was not an apple. That was a myth.
===>The entire story is a myth.
A creation fable, of which there are hundreds found
in most cultures throughout the world. The two stories
found in GENESIS are only the ones adopted by Jews
and Christians.
> We are not responsible for Adam and Eve's sin.
===>"Adam and Eve" are fictional characters.
And they committed no "sin".
> They were.
===>No, they were not.
They simply disbelieved the phony threat of YHWH ELOHIM
when he told them they would die from eating that fruit.
(True, it nowhere says it was an "apple").
> We are only responsible for our own.
===>The biggest "sin" is IGNORANCE.
And you are committing it all the time when you speak
from your position lacking the knowledge.
> The taste of the fruit was not an issue. They were given a command to see
> if they would obey.
===>NOWHERE does the story say that!
They were given a PROHIBITION, with a phony threat
attached that they would die the day they ate from that fruit.
The talking snake told them that is NOT what would happen,
that instead they would become KNOWERS, like the ELOHIM.
> Their act of disobedience was (in effect) them trying
> to be gods themselves; "..you shall be like God...".
===>You deceptively omit the POINT:
"knowers of good and evil".
Only in THAT SENSE were they promised to become
like the ELOHIM.
And YHWH HIMSELF confirms that is exactly what happened,
and the story also confirms that what YHWH threatened, did NOT
happen. They lived through "that day" and thousands of more
days.
> This act of disobedience was NOT in their nature. It is their act of
> disobedience that they handed down to their children that has become our
> nature.
===>That is stupid LAMARCKISM: transmission of
acquired characteristics. Signs of more of your ignorance,
i.e. YOUR SIN! -- L.
Pastor Frank
news:4355784A.4E7CF00C@Nothing_But_The.Truth...
> Carl Rooker wrote:
>>
>> This act of disobedience was NOT in their nature. It is their act of
>> disobedience that they handed down to their children that has become our
>> nature.
>
> ===>That is stupid LAMARCKISM: transmission of
> acquired characteristics. Signs of more of your ignorance,
> i.e. YOUR SIN! -- L.
>
Just ignore supertroll Libertine, who needs to ask whether Jesus was the
only begotten son of YHVH and apparently believes, that every son has to be
a clone of his dad.
But in answer to your post, the Bible is quite clear about the nature of
that fruit (result) that Adam and Eve tasted. It was the knowledge of good
and evil, meaning they became gossipy, opinionated and judgmental. From then
on, paradize had to ceased to exist, for Adam and Eve were sure to be full
of complaints about it, i.e. their lack of clothes etc. etc. Disobedience is
just part of the knowledge of good and evil. In this case they likely
self-justified their disobedience as being a good thing, i.e. making them
more like God.
Pastor Frank
ORIGINAL SIN
Gen 3:22-23 And the Lord God said: Behold, the man is become as one
of us, to know good from evil. And now, lest he put forth his hand, and
take also from the tree of life, and eat and live for ever, I will drive out
the man from the garden of Eden, to till the land from which he was taken.
Pastor Frank
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>>
>> Do you have any loved ones?
>
> I'm not interested in these reductionisms you want to indulge in.
>
Pastor Frank
Christians on the other hand need to ask always: What Would Jesus Do?
Pastor Frank
>Pastor Frank wrote:
>>
>> Being humane, loving and caring are "children's stories"? Oh, Hitler
>> would have loved you!!!!!
>
> How many examples do I have to give you of God exterminating, torturing
> and otherwise acting haphazardly with humanb life. Is that your
> definition of humane? As for Hitler, I don't really know where he came
> in this conversation, but if I'm not mistaken, he considered himself a
> Christian. I do not consider myself a Christian. Enough said.
>
incarnate. I think you have a beef with some other god or devil.
>
>> Now THAT is a "children's story". Truth is, Adam and Eve preferred to
>> taste of the fruit of knowing the difference between good and evil. As a
>> consequence they became opinionated and judgmental, and from that moment
>> on
>> Paradize ceased to exist, for they were full of complaints, much like you
>> are in this post.
>
> So, after eating the pernicious apple they became more like God,
> judgmental?
>
of the knowledge of good and evil and becoming opinionated and judgmental,
full of complaints about being naked and having nothing to wear. etc. etc.
>
> So he punished everyone because they became more like him?
> I don't see why I'm being punished for someone else's mistake. I
> guess that's God's justice.
>
your Father which is in heaven will reward you with eternal life. You
cannot, for you are born with the ability to know good from evil, yet are
not able to be good all the time.
>
>> > So basically, what we have here is a set of contradictions that must
>> > all be accepted as occuring simultaneously, or we shall burn in hell.
>> > I'd better bring along my SPF 1,000,000,000.
>> >
>> No, you would better "bring along" a fire-proof suit. The Broomleigh
>> group of churches have the franchise for them and will sell you the
>> deluxe
>> model for all you have got and won't be needing where you are going.
>
> I'd like to know from which mental delusion you claim your certainty.
> A rational person would realize that by definition a loving and just
> God would not allow the tortue of people who had never even heard of
> him. He would not punish people for coming to a different conclusion
> concerning the veracity of ancient myths. But you go ahead and believe
> what you want so long as you don't start another holy war.
>
for interpretations which make sense. Are you a lazy thinker on purpose, or
are you just born that way? If it's on purpose the Broomleigh group of
churches wish you a speedy and uneventful descent. Broomleigh's atheist
"True Christians®" have a form letter they distribute to people like you.
See below
Pastor Frank
Re: Your Salvation
__________________________________________________
As the vessel of the Lord's perfect message of boundless wrath and
annoyance with His imperfect creations, the matter of your wistful hopes
of salvation was brought before the full board of the Broomleigh Baptist
Salvation Evaluation Committee on this very day.
After a suitable time for contemplation, no matter how seemingly brief,
it was determined by unanimous consent of all True Christians present the
following findings of fact:
1. You are a thoroughly annoying person;
2. Your presence in God's Glory would make it extremely difficult
for "Heaven" to live up to its name; and
3. Therefore, you have been consigned to an everlasting Hell,
to have your flesh gnawed at by voracious hoofed demons.
The Lord has specifically asked us to remind you, that your consignment to
perpetual torture at the hands of deranged beasts of His making should in
no manner be construed as any indication, that the Lord has, by either
design or omission, discontinued His unconditional love for you.
And, further, you are not to construe our relief in the knowledge that we
shall not be sharing God's Glory with someone as appallingly wretched as
you (or the look of sublime delight that flashes across our otherwise
inscrutable faces when we contemplate the agony of your much deserved
destiny) as diminishing our love for you as True Christians.
Wishing you a speedy descent,
Mrs. Katie Fisher, Chairlady & Britain's Best Christian
Pastor Frank
> Pastor Frank wrote:
>>
>> What has aiming to be a humane, loving and caring person to do with
>> "separating fact from fiction"? What is "interesting" is your apparent
>> preference of spending your life "separating fact from fiction" and
>> letting
>> other people worry about being sufficiently humane, loving and caring.
>
> John 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you
> free.
>
and the truth of love is notorious difficult to ascertain. After all, your
loved ones might fake loving you because like your parents, they are obliged
to, or like your wife and children, for what they can get out of you, and
not because they like you. To look for truth in love is a sign of paranoia.
It's best just to believe in love and have faith in it, even if it turns out
to be fake and you get taken for a fool.
The reason is, that only lovers have a life worth living. If the love
you trusted turns out to be fake, it's not you who lose but the faker.
He/she might get a few of your Dollars and that's all, but you had a dream
come true for a time, a dream or illusion most people value very highly and
for which many would pay a fortune.
>
> Meaning:- Learn how to distinguish what is fact from what it obviously
> garbage and it will set you free.
>
feed your cynicism and paranoia.
>
> I think Jesus knew a thing or two, he seemed like an inteligent fella.
> After all, he was taught a lot from the essenes whilst growing up. But
> we've got to separate what he DID say and do from what later scribes
> added, which he obviously DIDN'T say and do.
>
loving and caring relationships.
Accidental
> incarnate. I think you have a beef with some other god or devil.
Jesus is separate from God the Father. I don't recall speaking ill of
Jesus. If Jesus truly was the son of God, I suspect it must be a
different God than the one in the old testament. Besides, people must
face God's judgment in heaven, or so the Bible says, so it's his
actions I will be looking at. I happen to have my own copy of the
Bible handy (I got it when I was 7!), and I'll share some of my
favorite passages with you. I've now highlighted all the juicy bits in
my adulthood. When I was a young child and incapable of truly thinking
on my own, my church only showed me the innocent, pleasing passages,
and I highlighted those too. I think it tends to convinve more kids
when you don't show them God's definition of justice, or love, or
omnipotence, or benevolence acted out upon those he created.
God's wrath to people he chose to not make "His people":
1 Samuel 6:19 NIV - "But God struck down some of the men of Beth
Shemesh, putting seventy of them to death because they had looked into
the ark of the LORD. The people mourned because of the heavy blow the
LORD had dealt them."
God's wrath for his "Chosen People":
Numbers 16:21-22 NIV - "'Separate yourselves from this assembly so I
can put an end to them at once.' But Moses and Aaron fell facedown and
cried out, 'O God, God of the spirits of all mankind, will you be angry
with the entire assembly when only one man sins?'"
.........................
Numbers 16:32 NIV - "and the earth oepned its mouth and swallowed them,
with their households and all Korah's men and all their
possessions."...........
Numbers 16:35 NIV - "And fire came out from the LORD and consumed the
250 men who were offering the incense."
Numbers 16:45 NIV - "'Get away from this assembly so I can put an end
to them at once.'"
Number 16:49 NIV - "But 14,700 people died from the plague, in addition
to those who had died because of Korah."
God's hate for entire civilizations:
Joshua 10:40 NIV - "So Joshua subdued the whole region, including the
hill country, the Negev, the western foothills and the mountain slopes,
together with all their kings. He left no survivors. He totalled
destroyed all who breathed, just as the LORD, the God of Israel had
commanded."
God's perverse, unusual threats of punishment:
Jeremiah 19:9 NIV - "'I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and
daughters, and they will eat one another's flesh during the stress of
the isege imposed on them by the enemies of seek their lives'."
God's contempt for all innocent life. Children and animals are
incapable of choosing sin, they are merely acting the way God created
them. For this they must die to show one man a lesson.
Exodus 12:29 NIV - "At midnight the LORD struck down all the firstborn
in Egypt, from the firstborn of the Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to
the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the
firstborn of all the livestock as well."
If you want more quotes, I could find some, but I'm sure you are aware
of all the wonderful things God has done. God be praised.
> There is no mention of any apple, but only of tasting the fruit (result)
> of the knowledge of good and evil and becoming opinionated and judgmental,
> full of complaints about being naked and having nothing to wear. etc. etc.
Ok, so it's not an apple in your translation, I'm sorry. But it's
still a nice little experiment that he knew would result in eternal
suffering.
> > So he punished everyone because they became more like him?
> > I don't see why I'm being punished for someone else's mistake. I
> > guess that's God's justice.
> >
> Stop being opinionated and judgmental, full of complaints etc. etc. and
> your Father which is in heaven will reward you with eternal life. You
> cannot, for you are born with the ability to know good from evil, yet are
> not able to be good all the time.
So I should not try to determine whether the God I am supposed to
worship is truly just and good as the Bible says he is? Am I to just
accept everything fed to me when I was a young child? Sounds like the
church's recipe for success.
> >> > So basically, what we have here is a set of contradictions that must
> >> > all be accepted as occuring simultaneously, or we shall burn in hell.
> >> > I'd better bring along my SPF 1,000,000,000.
> >> >
> >> No, you would better "bring along" a fire-proof suit. The Broomleigh
> >> group of churches have the franchise for them and will sell you the
> >> deluxe
> >> model for all you have got and won't be needing where you are going.
> >
> > I'd like to know from which mental delusion you claim your certainty.
> > A rational person would realize that by definition a loving and just
> > God would not allow the tortue of people who had never even heard of
> > him. He would not punish people for coming to a different conclusion
> > concerning the veracity of ancient myths. But you go ahead and believe
> > what you want so long as you don't start another holy war.
> >
> You already decided it's all "a myth" without even thinking, or looking
> for interpretations which make sense. Are you a lazy thinker on purpose, or
> are you just born that way? If it's on purpose the Broomleigh group of
> churches wish you a speedy and uneventful descent. Broomleigh's atheist
> "True Christians®" have a form letter they distribute to people like you.
> See below
As for being a lazy thinker, nope. If I were a lazy thinker I would
have never questioned the Bible. If I were a lazy thinker, I'd just
believe what everyone else believes.... hey wait isn't that what
religions do?
No I didn't decide this was a myth without thinking. It was, however,
decided for me as a child that it was fact, by my parents and my
church, that it wasn't a myth, until I began to think about it. Maybe
you should grow up and start thinking on your own, too? Are you ready
for it yet?
As for looking for interpretations that make sense, the best
interpretation is no interpretation at all. I take the Bible word for
word. I don't look for alternative interpretations which better allow
me to delude myself.
> Pastor Frank
>
> Re: Your Salvation
> __________________________________________________
>
> As the vessel of the Lord's perfect message of boundless wrath and
> annoyance with His imperfect creations, the matter of your wistful hopes
> of salvation was brought before the full board of the Broomleigh Baptist
> Salvation Evaluation Committee on this very day.
>
> After a suitable time for contemplation, no matter how seemingly brief,
> it was determined by unanimous consent of all True Christians present the
> following findings of fact:
>
> 1. You are a thoroughly annoying person;
>
> 2. Your presence in God's Glory would make it extremely difficult
> for "Heaven" to live up to its name; and
>
> 3. Therefore, you have been consigned to an everlasting Hell,
> to have your flesh gnawed at by voracious hoofed demons.
Do you remember saying:
"Stop being opinionated and judgmental, full of complaints etc. etc.
and your Father which is in heaven will reward you with eternal life."
Sounds contrary to this letter for some reason.
Stop being such a hypocrite. I know Jesus had nothing good to say
about hypocrites, do you remember the specific passage? I do: Matthew
7:5 - "Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then
you will see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye."
If Christians would actually follow Christ, maybe they'd be good
people.
That notwithsatdning, how can they be findings of fact when those
determinations are based on faith? Faith is not fact. Please stop
lying. I know the Bible has nothing good in store for people who
present false witness, either.
> The Lord has specifically asked us to remind you, that your consignment to
> perpetual torture at the hands of deranged beasts of His making should in
> no manner be construed as any indication, that the Lord has, by either
> design or omission, discontinued His unconditional love for you.
Does God enjoy making such deranged beasts to torment his creation? Do
you propose a maltheistic view of God? I might buy that.
> And, further, you are not to construe our relief in the knowledge that we
> shall not be sharing God's Glory with someone as appallingly wretched as
> you (or the look of sublime delight that flashes across our otherwise
> inscrutable faces when we contemplate the agony of your much deserved
> destiny) as diminishing our love for you as True Christians.
>
> Wishing you a speedy descent,
>
> Mrs. Katie Fisher, Chairlady & Britain's Best Christian
The self-proclaimed "Best Christian" in England? Egads! I didn't know
they were ranked! What's next, self-awarded prizes for piety and
humility? Sounds entirely fascinating, and "holy."
Sounds like an altogether non-judgmental Christian thing to do. Did
you say God punished Adam and Eve for trying to be gods themselves, or
was that some other Christian? Regardless, I'd think when Christians
begin condemning sinners, rather than the LORD Almighty, that you are
trying to be gods yourselves. Please tell me your authority to do such
things?
Wishing you would check into an insane ward.
Accidental.
John Shaffer
>> Show where Jesus does all those things you accuse Him of. He is our God
>>incarnate. I think you have a beef with some other god or devil.
>
>
> Jesus is separate from God the Father. I don't recall speaking ill of
> Jesus. If Jesus truly was the son of God, I suspect it must be a
> different God than the one in the old testament. Besides, people must
> face God's judgment in heaven, or so the Bible says, so it's his
> actions I will be looking at. I happen to have my own copy of the
> Bible handy (I got it when I was 7!), and I'll share some of my
> favorite passages with you. I've now highlighted all the juicy bits in
> my adulthood. When I was a young child and incapable of truly thinking
> on my own, my church only showed me the innocent, pleasing passages,
> and I highlighted those too. I think it tends to convinve more kids
> when you don't show them God's definition of justice, or love, or
> omnipotence, or benevolence acted out upon those he created.
>
> God's wrath to people he chose to not make "His people":
> 1 Samuel 6:19 NIV - "But God struck down some of the men of Beth
> Shemesh, putting seventy of them to death because they had looked into
> the ark of the LORD. The people mourned because of the heavy blow the
> LORD had dealt them."
>
Kind of like a wake up call.
You argument has merit when you elevate the created above the creator.
>
>> There is no mention of any apple, but only of tasting the fruit (result)
>>of the knowledge of good and evil and becoming opinionated and judgmental,
>>full of complaints about being naked and having nothing to wear. etc. etc.
>
>
> Ok, so it's not an apple in your translation, I'm sorry. But it's
> still a nice little experiment that he knew would result in eternal
> suffering.
>
>
>>>So he punished everyone because they became more like him?
>>>I don't see why I'm being punished for someone else's mistake. I
>>>guess that's God's justice.
>>>
Are you implying you are perfect, holy, fully righteous? And actually
it wasn't a mistake but a willful choice followed up by a pathetic
deflection of blame to his wife.
>>
>> Stop being opinionated and judgmental, full of complaints etc. etc. and
>>your Father which is in heaven will reward you with eternal life. You
>>cannot, for you are born with the ability to know good from evil, yet are
>>not able to be good all the time.
>
>
> So I should not try to determine whether the God I am supposed to
> worship is truly just and good as the Bible says he is? Am I to just
> accept everything fed to me when I was a young child? Sounds like the
> church's recipe for success.
>
Actually you should try to determine whether the god you are suppose to
worship is truly just and good. Why not ask him to prove that to you?
Just a thought. A somewhat common theme I've come across in these NGs
is that the "church" is responsible for one's fall from belief. Sounds
kind of like, "The woman you put here with me - she gave me some fruit
from the tree, and I ate it."
>
>>>>>So basically, what we have here is a set of contradictions that must
>>>>>all be accepted as occuring simultaneously, or we shall burn in hell.
>>>>>I'd better bring along my SPF 1,000,000,000.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, you would better "bring along" a fire-proof suit. The Broomleigh
>>>>group of churches have the franchise for them and will sell you the
>>>>deluxe
>>>>model for all you have got and won't be needing where you are going.
>>>
>>>I'd like to know from which mental delusion you claim your certainty.
>>>A rational person would realize that by definition a loving and just
>>>God would not allow the tortue of people who had never even heard of
>>>him. He would not punish people for coming to a different conclusion
>>>concerning the veracity of ancient myths. But you go ahead and believe
>>>what you want so long as you don't start another holy war.
>>>
>>
>> You already decided it's all "a myth" without even thinking, or looking
>>for interpretations which make sense. Are you a lazy thinker on purpose, or
>>are you just born that way? If it's on purpose the Broomleigh group of
>>churches wish you a speedy and uneventful descent. Broomleigh's atheist
>>"True Christians®" have a form letter they distribute to people like you.
>>See below
>
>
> As for being a lazy thinker, nope. If I were a lazy thinker I would
> have never questioned the Bible. If I were a lazy thinker, I'd just
> believe what everyone else believes.... hey wait isn't that what
> religions do?
I think it is awesome that you are questioning the bible? It shows you
want something deeper, a deeper truth. But I believe you can find it in
the bible especially if you are able to tune out all the static of
religion and culture. 1 Corinthians Chapter 2 speaks to how God will
speak to you directly. Look at verse 5, and 12-15. Then read Romans 12:2.
>
> No I didn't decide this was a myth without thinking. It was, however,
> decided for me as a child that it was fact, by my parents and my
> church, that it wasn't a myth, until I began to think about it. Maybe
> you should grow up and start thinking on your own, too? Are you ready
> for it yet?
It sounds like your parents and your church forced their beliefs on you
as a child. How did you come to believe this faith is myth versus say
just misguidedness on the part of your parents or church? Is your
current belief a rejection of their beliefs or of the bible or both?
John
John Shaffer
>
> I think Jesus knew a thing or two, he seemed like an inteligent fella.
> After all, he was taught a lot from the essenes whilst growing up. But
> we've got to separate what he DID say and do from what later scribes
> added, which he obviously DIDN'T say and do.
>
What primary source are you getting your information from? How do you
know he was taught a lot from the essenes when he was growing up? How
do you know what he did say to what he didn't say?
The new testament books were written when many first hand witnesses were
still alive. It would be like the German history books trying to get
away with writing stories that the Chinese were responsible for the
genocide of millions of Jews during WW2. Too many people are still
around to refute it.
John
xeno
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>>> What has aiming to be a humane, loving and caring person to do with
>>> "separating fact from fiction"?
>> Because in order to be humane, you have to understand how to be in a given
>> situation. That would require you to ascertain what is the true situation,
>> & to avoid having false ideas about that situation.
> I bet you fancy situation ethics and relative values, don't you?
It requires critical thinking.
> We Christians on the other hand need to ask always: What Would Jesus Do?
To do that requires you to assess every situation. How is that so
radically different from what you're objecting to?
Accidental
> worship is truly just and good. Why not ask him to prove that to you?
> Just a thought. A somewhat common theme I've come across in these NGs
> is that the "church" is responsible for one's fall from belief. Sounds
> kind of like, "The woman you put here with me - she gave me some fruit
> from the tree, and I ate it."
Actions speak louder than words. If I examine the Bible and determine
that this God is not the way he claims to be in any way (be it
omnipotent, all benevolent, omniscient, good, just, whatever) then I
can determine one of two things:
1) God is a liar. ... or ...
2) The Bible is not God's word.
In either case, he would not be worthy of worship. As I have shown his
contempt for people exercising their free will that HE gave them, he is
not benevolent. As shown by his murderous rampage(s) and punishments
which involve eternal torture, God's justice is rather unfair and
unmerciful. As per other information not imparted here, I've
determined that this God is either not omniscient or not omnipotent, or
both.
>From this I must conclude that the Bible is not God's word or that God
is a liar. It doesn't particularly matter which it is.
> I think it is awesome that you are questioning the bible? It shows you
> want something deeper, a deeper truth. But I believe you can find it in
> the bible especially if you are able to tune out all the static of
> religion and culture. 1 Corinthians Chapter 2 speaks to how God will
> speak to you directly. Look at verse 5, and 12-15. Then read Romans 12:2.
I do want something deeper, if you can call it that. I don't want to
be lied to, and I know that the Bible cannot be counted on to do that.
It is not a source of metaphysical truths. As a matter of fact, truth
as a concept is logically flawed, or at the very least a useless
concept, but I wont go into that here.
After careful thought I've determined any "deeper" "truth" people
believe exists is merely that: a belief. Deeper meanings help people
function better in society because they give people motivation and
security, which explains why every successful culture has developed its
own religious views.
As I have determined that the Bible is seemingly not credible, or that
the god depicted at least in the OT is not a just, good or omnipotent
god, I see no reason to look to the Bible for any so-called answers or
truths. But I may read those passages anyway later on, just so I know
what you are referring to.
> It sounds like your parents and your church forced their beliefs on you
> as a child. How did you come to believe this faith is myth versus say
> just misguidedness on the part of your parents or church? Is your
> current belief a rejection of their beliefs or of the bible or both?
Any parents who baptize their children are "forcing" their beliefs on
them, the only difference between various Christian parents is the
degree of social cohersion. Children think what their parents think at
an early age, and if this is encouraged, then no choice is actually
given to the child. If it is truly desired that children choose
Christianity, then they must not be raised in it because it takes away
their "free will" as free will is depicted in the Bible.
It's like if a child had grown up in a dark room with no lights, it
would be nearly impossible to explain to him what sunlight was; but
more importantly is that the child would have never guessed that such a
thing as light even existed. This is what happens to many Christian
children in the US.
How I determine that the Bible is a myth versus misguidedness?
Misguidedness is typically not shared in common with most people within
a certain group unless the very source of information is a myth. Also,
I've examined the source of information myself.
My current "beliefs" (I'd call them reasoned conclusions) are that the
most important metaphysical claims of the Bible are unjustifiable and
more probably completely wrong. Most OT stories that invoke the action
of God are false. There are many reasons why I believe this, I've
noted some of them above and in my previous posts. But a big clue for
me to begin questioning them was that they depict God in the same way
pagan gods were portrayed: as ridiculously petty and hypocritical
beings with no regard for humans.
As far as the NT is concerned, it is unclear to me what is true and
what is not true. Largely, I believe the stories about Jesus were
exaggerated, as tends to happen when you write down events decades
after they occur (espeically when there is already a desire for
independence from Rome... Christianity would have been a way to build a
resitance, but this is only a supposition). In any event, the
information in the NT is predicated on the information from the OT, and
is therefore specious speculation at best.
My conclusion is that a loving and just god would not punish me, or
anyone, for coming to a logical conclusion that ended up being false.
Moreover, he would not create a standard for salvation in the first
place, especially one which is unknown to large parts of the world.
Freedom from eternal torture should be a guarantee if God is all
benevolent and loving and just and merciful. If God does exist as
shown by his actions in the Bible, then I think he truly is unjust and
cruel, and far from omnipotent (but this conclusion on his omnipotence
comes elsewhere, and I don't wish to address it here); I don't see any
guarantees coming about by my worship of this type of god... nor do I
see any reason to worship a corrupt being in the first place.
Therefore I worry about nothing after I die. I'm worried about living.
This is the way it should be because there are no guarantees about
what happens when you die, if anything happens at all. There is simply
no reasonable way to go about speculating such things, and I think it
is counter-productive to concern yourself with things outside the realm
of knowable information; it is out of our control.
Accidental
> still alive. It would be like the German history books trying to get
> away with writing stories that the Chinese were responsible for the
> genocide of millions of Jews during WW2. Too many people are still
> around to refute it.
> John
IIRC, the earliest gospel was released about 20-30 years after Christ's
death. In ancient times, most people did not live past 50 years old,
and death around 40 was probably most common. So when you wait 30
years to release a book, you are eliminating a large number of
witnesses. Moreover, the spread of ideas was not the same 2000 years
ago. Most witnesses could not read the books that the apostles wrote,
so how would they contend? Most witnesses also lived in Israel. The
books were circulated elsewhere in the Roman empire, as far as I know.
But the point is that there was a lot of room for misinformation in the
gospels.
After a couple decades, a lot of information gets lost in the recesses
of the mind. The alarmingly detailed accounts in the gospels suggest
that either these uneducated fishers and farmers had photographic
memories, or that they took a lot of liberties with the details. I
thing the latter is more probable. Like all such myths, there is
certainly some factual information in them, the only question is how
much.
Pastor Frank
knowing Jesus, and do what He would do, will justify the action.
Pastor Frank
>>
>> The new testament books were written when many first hand witnesses were
>> still alive. It would be like the German history books trying to get
>> away with writing stories that the Chinese were responsible for the
>> genocide of millions of Jews during WW2. Too many people are still
>> around to refute it.
>> John
>
> IIRC, the earliest gospel was released about 20-30 years after Christ's
> death. In ancient times, most people did not live past 50 years old,
> and death around 40 was probably most common.
>
population died at, or shortly after birth and the other half died in their
80s, the average person died at 40. LOL The fact is, that much like today,
the very young and very old are most susceptible to illness etc. leading to
death, and few of the inbetweens die unless in war or by natural disaster.
The books of the Bible were transmitted by oral tradition for a long
time before being written down. Christ was literate and could have written
everything down Himself, but didn't, presumably because He wanted believers,
not people convinced against their will by facts in evidence. See below
Pastor Frank
Jesus in Jn:20:29: Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me,
thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have
believed.
Accidental
> > death. In ancient times, most people did not live past 50 years old,
> > and death around 40 was probably most common.
> >
> Where did you get that idea? That's like saying that if half the
> population died at, or shortly after birth and the other half died in their
> 80s, the average person died at 40. LOL The fact is, that much like today,
> the very young and very old are most susceptible to illness etc. leading to
> death, and few of the inbetweens die unless in war or by natural disaster.
You are absolutely right. I'm sorry, I have my facts wrong this time.
The average person did not die at the age of 40. I checked wickipedia,
and the avergae lifespan was actually about 28 years of age. See this
link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancies#Timeline_for_humans
So, even if there is some ridiculously large standard of deviation,
It'd be safe to say over 90 percent of people would be dead by the age
of 40. Of course, it could just be that everyone either died at the
age of 0 or 56, but I find that doubtful. In any event, after 30
years, most of the witnesses would have died, considering that most
witnesses were Israel's lower class, living in relative squalor.
> The books of the Bible were transmitted by oral tradition for a long
> time before being written down. Christ was literate and could have written
> everything down Himself.
Do you have any source for this knowledge? Even if Christ had written
down his thoughts, that doesn't imply that belief is still not
required... as it is, the only true belief I need is a belief in
humanity, that the apostles or some subsequent agent didn't lie.
Let's put it this way: if I believe that everything that people wrote
in the Bible is true, isn't it rather implied that I'd HAVE to believe
that God exists, etc., because if they're telling the truth, and they
say God exists... then he does exist (unless I was an idiot)? This is
belief in peolpe, and only by causality would I believe in God. Is
this what is necessary for salvation?
On the idea of faith and belief, I'd really like to know by what
criteria you determined that the Bible is true but other books, like
the Quran and Bhagavadgita and others, are not. How did you decide
that Christianity is true, but every other religion is wrong? To me,
it seems more like a cultural thing: many people were not brought up
with knowledge of other religions, therefore they chose Christianity
because it's the only acceptable or known religion.
> Pastor Frank
>
> Jesus in Jn:20:29: Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me,
> thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have
> believed.
Oh I see, use the very book in question to confirm its validity. Good
idea.
Libertarius
Pastor Frank wrote:
> "Accidental" <Philip....@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1129784846....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >> The new testament books were written when many first hand witnesses were
> >> still alive. It would be like the German history books trying to get
> >> away with writing stories that the Chinese were responsible for the
> >> genocide of millions of Jews during WW2. Too many people are still
> >> around to refute it.
> >> John
> >
> > IIRC, the earliest gospel was released about 20-30 years after Christ's
> > death. In ancient times, most people did not live past 50 years old,
> > and death around 40 was probably most common.
> >
> Where did you get that idea? That's like saying that if half the
> population died at, or shortly after birth and the other half died in their
> 80s, the average person died at 40. LOL The fact is, that much like today,
> the very young and very old are most susceptible to illness etc. leading to
> death, and few of the inbetweens die unless in war or by natural disaster.
> The books of the Bible were transmitted by oral tradition for a long
> time before being written down. Christ was literate and could have written
> everything down Himself, but didn't, presumably because He wanted believers,
> not people convinced against their will by facts in evidence. See below
>
> Pastor Frank
===>And, of course, THAT is exactly what you wish to promote:
not conviction based on facts in evidence, but BELIEF in your
idiotic, atheistic, Neo-Marcionite heresy, disguised as "pristine
Christianity". -- L.
xeno
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>>>>> What has aiming to be a humane, loving and caring person to do with
>>>>> "separating fact from fiction"?
>>>> Because in order to be humane, you have to understand how to be in a
>>>> given
>>>> situation. That would require you to ascertain what is the true
>>>> situation,
>>>> & to avoid having false ideas about that situation.
>>> I bet you fancy situation ethics and relative values, don't you?
>> It requires critical thinking.
>>> We Christians on the other hand need to ask always: What Would Jesus Do?
>> To do that requires you to assess every situation. How is that so
>> radically different from what you're objecting to?
> Assessing the situation doesn't justify any action you may take, but
> knowing Jesus, and do what He would do, will justify the action.
Any assessment doesn't *necessarily* justify any action you take. & it
isn't self-evident that what you think Jesus would do is what he would do.
That's just your opinion & it's just another kind of assessment. So, you
object to situational ethics but what you're engaging in *is* situational
ethics. This is just the usual contradictory bullshit.
Pastor Frank
======Don't erase authors' names=======
>> >
>> > IIRC, the earliest gospel was released about 20-30 years after Christ's
>> > death. In ancient times, most people did not live past 50 years old,
>> > and death around 40 was probably most common.
>>
>> Where did you get that idea? That's like saying that if half the
>> population died at, or shortly after birth and the other half died in
>> their
>> 80s, the average person died at 40. LOL The fact is, that much like
>> today,
>> the very young and very old are most susceptible to illness etc. leading
>> to death, and few of the inbetweens die unless in war or by natural
>> disaster.
>
> You are absolutely right. I'm sorry, I have my facts wrong this time.
> The average person did not die at the age of 40. I checked wickipedia,
> and the avergae lifespan was actually about 28 years of age. See this
> link:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancies#Timeline_for_humans
> So, even if there is some ridiculously large standard of deviation,
> It'd be safe to say over 90 percent of people would be dead by the age
> of 40. Of course, it could just be that everyone either died at the
> age of 0 or 56, but I find that doubtful. In any event, after 30
> years, most of the witnesses would have died, considering that most
> witnesses were Israel's lower class, living in relative squalor.
>
population dying between 0 and 5 years, which was quite common in those
days, and judging from the dates on grave markers of even only a couple of
hundred years ago, and 1 third surviving to age 70-80, and you will get your
28 years average. The conclusion that most people were dead by age 30 is
therefore erroneous. That more than half of the people were dead by age 5 is
closer to the truth, and they were not witnesses of Jesus. Those that
survived to a ripe old age were.
>> The books of the Bible were transmitted by oral tradition for a long
>> time before being written down. Christ was literate and could have
>> written everything down Himself.
>
> Do you have any source for this knowledge?
>
Jesus was literate enough to argue credibly about scripture with his
elders in the Temple at age 12 or thereabouts.
>
> Even if Christ had written
> down his thoughts, that doesn't imply that belief is still not
> required... as it is, the only true belief I need is a belief in
> humanity, that the apostles or some subsequent agent didn't lie.
>
Why would you care? It's totally irrelevant, for there is no way to
ascertain that, and rightly so, for if you merely believe authority, instead
of by faith, your belief would be useless anyway.
>
> Let's put it this way: if I believe that everything that people wrote
> in the Bible is true, isn't it rather implied that I'd HAVE to believe
> that God exists, etc., because if they're telling the truth, and they
> say God exists... then he does exist (unless I was an idiot)? This is
> belief in peolpe, and only by causality would I believe in God. Is
> this what is necessary for salvation?
>
That all depends on who or what your god is? Is it some supernatural
invisible hairy warrior in the sky, or perhaps some variation thereof, a la
Zeus or Odin? Whether you believe such to exist or not is also irrelevant,
for neither belief nor disbelief of it leads to any salvation.
> On the idea of faith and belief, I'd really like to know by what
> criteria you determined that the Bible is true but other books, like
> the Quran and Bhagavadgita and others, are not. How did you decide
> that Christianity is true, but every other religion is wrong? To me,
> it seems more like a cultural thing: many people were not brought up
> with knowledge of other religions, therefore they chose Christianity
> because it's the only acceptable or known religion.
>
Why would you measure scripture only on the true - false scale? We
believe that all scripture of the major faiths have some truth in it, but
Jesus is unique in many ways, and not just philosophically speaking, and we
prefer Him, much like you prefer some people over others. In fact we love
and adore Him.
Your salvation is dependent on the quality of your relationship with
Him, not making yourself believe the improbable proved by the incredible.
>
> Oh I see, use the very book in question to confirm its validity. Good
> idea.
>
It certainly is a "good idea", for any values system and its
philosophical edifice can only be evidenced by the originating text. You
prove the validity of Capitalism by capitalist economic philosophy, not by a
communist one. Likewise you prove Christ by His words and deeds as per
originating text, not by means of atheist deconstructionism.
Pastor Frank
faith, i.e. that your wife doesn't kill you in your sleep, regardless that
she probably has plenty of reasons to, I'm sure.
We put our faith into the Jesus of the NT Bible and in faith we know
what he would do.
xeno
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>>>>>>> What has aiming to be a humane, loving and caring person to do with
>>>>>>> "separating fact from fiction"?
>>>>>> Because in order to be humane, you have to understand how to be in a
>>>>>> given
>>>>>> situation. That would require you to ascertain what is the true
>>>>>> situation,
>>>>>> & to avoid having false ideas about that situation.
>>>>> I bet you fancy situation ethics and relative values, don't you?
>>>> It requires critical thinking.
>>>>> We Christians on the other hand need to ask always: What Would Jesus
>>>>> Do?
>>>> To do that requires you to assess every situation. How is that so
>>>> radically different from what you're objecting to?
>>> Assessing the situation doesn't justify any action you may take, but
>>> knowing Jesus, and do what He would do, will justify the action.
>> Any assessment doesn't *necessarily* justify any action you take. & it
>> isn't self-evident that what you think Jesus would do is what he would do.
>> That's just your opinion & it's just another kind of assessment. So, you
>> object to situational ethics but what you're engaging in *is* situational
>> ethics. This is just the usual contradictory bullshit.
> That's why religion is a matter of faith.
Having faith in bullshit terms is having faith in bullshit. What's your
explanation for that?
> We put our faith into the Jesus of the NT Bible and in faith we know
> what he would do.
"Would do" is a misnomer because it's pure speculation. For instance,
would Jesus be opposed to abortion or not. You may think you can ansewr
that question but it still just your opinion? "Might do" makes more sense,
& what he might do might be totally inappropriate. After all, you're
talking about an ignoramos who thought mental illness was a matter of
demons.
Elisha
The Christians make up lies and say faith is believing in God.
You are a god, and in effect you do need to believe in God.
But in Truth have faith that God created this universe.
In effect that means you and your ancestors created this world.
Confused yet?
Most theology is and I was wondering what christed is Pastor Frank?
This is some sort of open source Christian movement?
Perhaps F1?
Anyway I write open source and have already contacted a fellow reborn F1
Pastor Frank
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>>
>> That's why religion is a matter of faith.
>
> Having faith in bullshit terms is having faith in bullshit. What's your
> explanation for that?
>
>> We put our faith into the Jesus of the NT Bible and in faith we know
>> what he would do.
>
> "Would do" is a misnomer because it's pure speculation. For instance,
> would Jesus be opposed to abortion or not. You may think you can ansewr
> that question but it still just your opinion? "Might do" makes more sense,
> & what he might do might be totally inappropriate. After all, you're
> talking about an ignoramos who thought mental illness was a matter of
> demons.
>
That's why its call FAITH. There is no scientific way to determine
whether something is good or evil. It's all just opinion held in faith, and
you might as well get used to it. Btw demons is just another word for
illness, mental or physical. It's YOUR definition of the word 'demons' which
is the problem.
xeno
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>>> That's why religion is a matter of faith.
>> Having faith in bullshit terms is having faith in bullshit. What's your
>> explanation for that?
> That's not a lie, but then we don't believe in "bullshit".
You deem a man was god, is god, or a part of God based on a description of
someone who demonstrates a lack of knowledge of the real world. Also, the
same evidence describes a man who displayed contradictions in his thoughts
& behavior. So, to believe that such a man is beyond reproach & is divine
is total bullshit.
>>> We put our faith into the Jesus of the NT Bible and in faith we know
>>> what he would do.
>> "Would do" is a misnomer because it's pure speculation. For instance,
>> would Jesus be opposed to abortion or not. You may think you can ansewr
>> that question but it still just your opinion? "Might do" makes more sense,
>> & what he might do might be totally inappropriate. After all, you're
>> talking about an ignoramos who thought mental illness was a matter of
>> demons.
> That's why its call FAITH.
Faith can not make what is not the case be the case. You can't cast out
demons when there are none.
> There is no scientific way to determine whether something is good or
> evil.
But that's not the issue here. It is demonstrable that demons do not cause
mental illness & yet you believe that a man who believed such was divine,
which by definition would make him privy that demons have nothing to do
with it.
> Btw demons is just another word for illness, mental or physical.
For you. But for Jesus, he believed that demons were entities that enter
into people to cause them to do things. Evidently, he was not aware of the
realities of actual illnesses of any kind. Face it. He is not God because
he's demonstrating through your own evidence that he is less than
omniscient. Falling back on a notion that he was divine & human is just a
contradiciton. You can't have your cake & eat it too.
Sam Taylor
<Pasto...@christfirst.edu> wrote:
>"xeno" <xe...@transbay.net> wrote in message
>news:2005102120...@synergy.transbay.net...
>> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>>>
>>> That's why religion is a matter of faith.
>>
>> Having faith in bullshit terms is having faith in bullshit. What's your
>> explanation for that?
>>
> That's not a lie, but then we don't believe in "bullshit".
actually most Xtians do not believe Jesus (Yahshuah) is "the Only
begotten Son of G-D"
they believe this termonology was placed in scripture to fool the
People so they could be Condemned, when they couldn't get , or
believe in the Trinity Doctorine.
Pastor Frank
news:1130016752....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Faith is Truth, faith is believing in yourself.
>
>
> The Christians make up lies and say faith is believing in God.
>
Satan's minions.
>
> You are a god, and in effect you do need to believe in God.
> But in Truth have faith that God created this universe.
> In effect that means you and your ancestors created this world.
> Confused yet?
> Most theology is and I was wondering what christed is Pastor Frank?
> This is some sort of open source Christian movement?
> Perhaps F1?
> Anyway I write open source and have already contacted a fellow reborn F1
>
planning to create your own religion?
Pastor Frank
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>
>>>> That's why religion is a matter of faith.
>
>>> Having faith in bullshit terms is having faith in bullshit. What's your
>>> explanation for that?
>
>> That's not a lie, but then we don't believe in "bullshit".
>
> You deem a man was god, is god, or a part of God based on a description of
> someone who demonstrates a lack of knowledge of the real world.
>
hope? For with you we have no hope.
>
> Also, the
> same evidence describes a man who displayed contradictions in his thoughts
> & behavior. So, to believe that such a man is beyond reproach & is divine
> is total bullshit.
>
>
>>>> We put our faith into the Jesus of the NT Bible and in faith we know
>>>> what he would do.
>
>>> "Would do" is a misnomer because it's pure speculation. For instance,
>>> would Jesus be opposed to abortion or not. You may think you can ansewr
>>> that question but it still just your opinion? "Might do" makes more
>>> sense,
>>> & what he might do might be totally inappropriate. After all, you're
>>> talking about an ignoramos who thought mental illness was a matter of
>>> demons.
>
>> That's why its call FAITH.
>
> Faith can not make what is not the case be the case. You can't cast out
> demons when there are none.
>
gargoyles.
>
>> There is no scientific way to determine whether something is good or
>> evil.
>
> But that's not the issue here. It is demonstrable that demons do not cause
> mental illness
>
>
>& yet you believe that a man who believed such was divine,
> which by definition would make him privy that demons have nothing to do
> with it.
>
>> Btw demons is just another word for illness, mental or physical.
>
> For you. But for Jesus, he believed that demons were entities that enter
> into people to cause them to do things.
>
conditions, but "invisible entities'? That's YOUR fantasy.
>
> realities of actual illnesses of any kind. Face it. He is not God because
> he's demonstrating through your own evidence that he is less than
> omniscient. Falling back on a notion that he was divine & human is just a
> contradiciton. You can't have your cake & eat it too.
>
still look desperately for faults, errors, mistakes, lies and illusions and
keep finding them, even to the point of creating them if the don't exist.
That "wailing" complaints eternally in the "outer darkness" of hell is the
activity of the damned. Do you feel yourself "damned?
We feel ourselves loved and esteemed beyond parail. Why not jump your
sinking barge of faults and errors, and join us in beholding and worshipping
and glorifying God's perfection?
xeno
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>> You deem a man was god, is god, or a part of God based on a description of
>> someone who demonstrates a lack of knowledge of the real world.
> In comparison to whom
In comparison to what we collectively know now. & you're missing the
essential point here: if Jesus had less than perfect knowledge then he
couldn't be God by definition.
>> Also, the
>> same evidence describes a man who displayed contradictions in his thoughts
>> & behavior. So, to believe that such a man is beyond reproach & is divine
>> is total bullshit.
> Any evidence for that?
For instance, the gospels have it that Jesus preached against anger but he
is also depicted as displaying anger.
>>> Btw demons is just another word for illness, mental or physical.
>> For you. But for Jesus, he believed that demons were entities that enter
>> into people to cause them to do things.
> "entities"? Compulsions and addictions perhaps which are spiritual
> conditions, but "invisible entities'? That's YOUR fantasy.
Jesus is depicted as believing in demons as beings, not conditions. "&
there was a good way off from them a herd of many swine feeding. So the
devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away
into the herd of swine. & he said unto them, Go. & when they were come
out, they went into the herd of swine: &, behold, the whole herd of swine
ran violently down a steep place into the sea, & perished in the waters",
(Matthew 8:30-32).
>> realities of actual illnesses of any kind. Face it. He is not God because
>> he's demonstrating through your own evidence that he is less than
>> omniscient. Falling back on a notion that he was divine & human is just a
>> contradiciton. You can't have your cake & eat it too.
> While we look for, and find the perfection of God in Jesus Christ, you
> still look desperately for faults, errors, mistakes, lies and illusions and
> keep finding them
& then you go on to say those very errors don't exist. If one can find
things about what you claim as being perfect that are less than perfect
then there is no perfection here. It's crazy to say otherwise.
> That "wailing" complaints eternally in the "outer darkness" of hell is the
> activity of the damned. Do you feel yourself "damned?
Disillusionment can be gotten over. All your histrionics & melodrama is
silly.
> We feel ourselves loved and esteemed beyond parail.
But you don't have to base your self-esteem on bullshit.
Captn Sensible
Pastor Frank wrote:
> We feel ourselves loved and esteemed beyond parail. Why not jump your
> sinking barge of faults and errors, and join us in beholding and worshipping
> and glorifying God's perfection?
The perfect example of "ignorance is bliss!"
Captn Sensible
> Captn Sensible wrote:
>
>
> >
> > I think Jesus knew a thing or two, he seemed like an inteligent fella.
> > After all, he was taught a lot from the essenes whilst growing up. But
> > we've got to separate what he DID say and do from what later scribes
> > added, which he obviously DIDN'T say and do.
> >
>
> What primary source are you getting your information from? How do you
> know he was taught a lot from the essenes when he was growing up? How
> do you know what he did say to what he didn't say?
I'm surprised you don't seem to know about the essene influence upon
Jesus' education. Interesting how the church don't talk about it much,
eh?
It's always better to do your own reserch John. Don't just rely on your
-'reigious teachers'- for information because they have a tendancy to
withhold stuff that could set their flock off asking awkward questions.
>
> The new testament books were written when many first hand witnesses were
> still alive. It would be like the German history books trying to get
> away with writing stories that the Chinese were responsible for the
> genocide of millions of Jews during WW2. Too many people are still
> around to refute it.
> John
People often tell and re-tell a story to anyone who will listen, which
over the years gets added to, altered and embellished, to make it more
exciting for the listener. The story can end up bearing no resemblance
to the original.
For example, the 5 loaves and 2 fishes story. Come on, what a glaring
absurdity!
Pastor Frank
> On Sun, 23 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>>>
>>> You deem a man was god, is god, or a part of God based on a description
>>> of
>>> someone who demonstrates a lack of knowledge of the real world.
>>
>> In comparison to whom
>
> In comparison to what we collectively know now. & you're missing the
> essential point here: if Jesus had less than perfect knowledge then he
> couldn't be God by definition.
>
said in Mk:10:27: "To God ALL things are possible". All things mean, God can
lay aside some, or all of those things, including His ability to do evil, or
even lay down His life when nailed to a cross and pick it up again.
Pastor Frank
is knowledgeable and has bliss in abundance?
Anyway, religion is not an intellectual exercise limited to the few, but
religion is a matter of how one feels about things. Most people act
according to their feelings and use their intellect merely to justify their
actions. That is why Jesus confounds "the wise and prudent". See below refs.
Pastor Frank
CHILDREN OF GOD
Jesus in Mt:11:25: At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O
Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from
the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
Jesus in Mt:19:14: But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid
them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
Jesus in Lk:18:17: Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive
the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.
Jesus in Mt:18:4: Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this
little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
Jesus in Mk:9:42: And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones
that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about
his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
xeno
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>>>> You deem a man was god, is god, or a part of God based on a description
>>>> of
>>>> someone who demonstrates a lack of knowledge of the real world.
>>> In comparison to whom
>> In comparison to what we collectively know now. & you're missing the
>> essential point here: if Jesus had less than perfect knowledge then he
>> couldn't be God by definition.
> False presumption, for God has the power to limit Himself. Like Jesus
> said in Mk:10:27: "To God ALL things are possible".
All logical things are possible. If God is omniscient, God can't be less
than omniscient or otherwise God wouldn't be God by definition.
> All things mean, God can lay aside some, or all of those things,
> including His ability to do evil, or even lay down His life when nailed
> to a cross and pick it up again.
Not doing a thing when one has the ability to do anything is possible. But
not to know a thing when one is defined as knowing everything is a
contradiction. IOW, it's impossible.
John Shaffer
> John Shaffer wrote:
>
>>Captn Sensible wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I think Jesus knew a thing or two, he seemed like an inteligent fella.
>>>After all, he was taught a lot from the essenes whilst growing up. But
>>>we've got to separate what he DID say and do from what later scribes
>>>added, which he obviously DIDN'T say and do.
>>>
>>
>>What primary source are you getting your information from? How do you
>>know he was taught a lot from the essenes when he was growing up? How
>>do you know what he did say to what he didn't say?
>
>
> I'm surprised you don't seem to know about the essene influence upon
> Jesus' education. Interesting how the church don't talk about it much,
> eh?
> It's always better to do your own reserch John. Don't just rely on your
> -'reigious teachers'- for information because they have a tendancy to
> withhold stuff that could set their flock off asking awkward questions.
>
You didn't answer my question. I'll ask again. What primary source are
you getting your information from? How do you know he was taught a lot
from the essenes when he was growing up? How do you know what he did
say to what he didn't say?
My source is the Bible which if taken as the divine revelation from God
to man it is totally feasible to believe in its accuracy for history.
It is the most copied historical document with manuscripts dating to
within 100 years of the original. If your choice is to not believe the
bible then simply don't believe it and move on with your life. What
motivates you to argue against it. I am tolerant of your view, belief,
etc, why wouldn't you be tolerant of mine?
>
>
>>The new testament books were written when many first hand witnesses were
>>still alive. It would be like the German history books trying to get
>>away with writing stories that the Chinese were responsible for the
>>genocide of millions of Jews during WW2. Too many people are still
>>around to refute it.
>>John
>
>
> People often tell and re-tell a story to anyone who will listen, which
> over the years gets added to, altered and embellished, to make it more
> exciting for the listener. The story can end up bearing no resemblance
> to the original.
> For example, the 5 loaves and 2 fishes story. Come on, what a glaring
> absurdity!
>
Which is the same argument I could use regarding where you got your
research, which by the way you still haven't divulged. Also, what is
the absurdity of the loaves and fish story? If you don't believe in the
bible then it's absurd, but if you do believe in the bible then it is
not absurd.
John Shaffer
>>Actually you should try to determine whether the god you are suppose to
>>worship is truly just and good. Why not ask him to prove that to you?
>>Just a thought. A somewhat common theme I've come across in these NGs
>>is that the "church" is responsible for one's fall from belief. Sounds
>>kind of like, "The woman you put here with me - she gave me some fruit
>>from the tree, and I ate it."
>
>
> Actions speak louder than words. If I examine the Bible and determine
> that this God is not the way he claims to be in any way (be it
> omnipotent, all benevolent, omniscient, good, just, whatever) then I
> can determine one of two things:
> 1) God is a liar. ... or ...
> 2) The Bible is not God's word.
> In either case, he would not be worthy of worship. As I have shown his
> contempt for people exercising their free will that HE gave them, he is
> not benevolent. As shown by his murderous rampage(s) and punishments
> which involve eternal torture, God's justice is rather unfair and
> unmerciful. As per other information not imparted here, I've
> determined that this God is either not omniscient or not omnipotent, or
> both.
Not sure where you get the "all benevolent" from or what you mean by that?
>
>>From this I must conclude that the Bible is not God's word or that God
> is a liar. It doesn't particularly matter which it is.
>
>
>>I think it is awesome that you are questioning the bible? It shows you
>>want something deeper, a deeper truth. But I believe you can find it in
>>the bible especially if you are able to tune out all the static of
>>religion and culture. 1 Corinthians Chapter 2 speaks to how God will
>>speak to you directly. Look at verse 5, and 12-15. Then read Romans 12:2.
>
>
> I do want something deeper, if you can call it that. I don't want to
> be lied to, and I know that the Bible cannot be counted on to do that.
> It is not a source of metaphysical truths. As a matter of fact, truth
> as a concept is logically flawed, or at the very least a useless
> concept, but I wont go into that here.
Truth defined by whom? The way I see it if there is a God who is a
Creator of all things then that God is the sole source of truth. There
is no truth that is true outside of that God's truth. If there is no
god then truth is indeed flawed and open for interpretation and in the
end relative. Is truth relative or absolute? That is a question we all
have to answer. For me, relative truth breaks down rather quickly and
absolute truth does not. Truth, in order to exist must be defined so
absolute truth must be defined by an absolute force, (God.)
>
> After careful thought I've determined any "deeper" "truth" people
> believe exists is merely that: a belief. Deeper meanings help people
> function better in society because they give people motivation and
> security, which explains why every successful culture has developed its
> own religious views.
What is your idea of a successful culture?
Absolute truth exists before belief.
Relative truth exists as a result of belief.
>
> As I have determined that the Bible is seemingly not credible, or that
> the god depicted at least in the OT is not a just, good or omnipotent
> god, I see no reason to look to the Bible for any so-called answers or
> truths. But I may read those passages anyway later on, just so I know
> what you are referring to.
>
With what depth of understanding have you made this determination. See
those verses.
>
>>It sounds like your parents and your church forced their beliefs on you
>>as a child. How did you come to believe this faith is myth versus say
>>just misguidedness on the part of your parents or church? Is your
>>current belief a rejection of their beliefs or of the bible or both?
>
>
> Any parents who baptize their children are "forcing" their beliefs on
> them, the only difference between various Christian parents is the
> degree of social cohersion. Children think what their parents think at
> an early age, and if this is encouraged, then no choice is actually
> given to the child. If it is truly desired that children choose
> Christianity, then they must not be raised in it because it takes away
> their "free will" as free will is depicted in the Bible.
> It's like if a child had grown up in a dark room with no lights, it
> would be nearly impossible to explain to him what sunlight was; but
> more importantly is that the child would have never guessed that such a
> thing as light even existed. This is what happens to many Christian
> children in the US.
>
Parent's aren't given the responsibility to make the choice for Christ
for their children though many would hope or try to. They are given the
responsibility to teach them the truth of Jesus Christ and unfortunately
many parents hand that responsibility off to the church, christian
school, etc. Baptism by parent is not biblical, it is a response out of
one's own heart and mind to declare, "I choose Christ" not "My parent or
church chooses Christ for me."
> How I determine that the Bible is a myth versus misguidedness?
> Misguidedness is typically not shared in common with most people within
> a certain group unless the very source of information is a myth. Also,
> I've examined the source of information myself.
>
> My current "beliefs" (I'd call them reasoned conclusions) are that the
> most important metaphysical claims of the Bible are unjustifiable and
> more probably completely wrong. Most OT stories that invoke the action
> of God are false. There are many reasons why I believe this, I've
> noted some of them above and in my previous posts. But a big clue for
> me to begin questioning them was that they depict God in the same way
> pagan gods were portrayed: as ridiculously petty and hypocritical
> beings with no regard for humans.
Those versus in 1 Corinthians I pointed out speak to "Reasoned conclusions"
Elisha
My religon is to bring down all other major religon's and hold up
Christ which is Love.
Though nobody could possibly understand that.
It's all far to advanced for most.
Signed a Poet, Christian and Programmer
Faith is believing in yourself, most preachers do this, it's an
excellent way to make money for the kingdom of God.
Ask Apostle Paul he'll give you some good references to living as a
Judah Pastor.
Or perhaps James he's about believing and doing.
John also talks about living as a King and a Priest.
Some use this to their own advantage.
The Kingdom of Heaven is here, but it needs to be controlled.
God is showing that it's out of control.
The sign's have been displayed.
I'm a child of Jacob.
Lion of Judah
Favoured by God
A child of God in his eternal Kingdom
Whom are you Pastor Frank?
A minder of Hell?
Many shall be decieved in the last days,
Dressed up as righteous,
If you'd like scripture your more than welcome to pursue my website.
Pastor's twist words to how it suits the Kingdom of God so do I.
What do you do? Twist them to suit yourself or other people?
It could be argued any way, this way or that.
But I hold the sword.
Make your paths straight.
Captn Sensible
> Captn Sensible wrote:
> > John Shaffer wrote:
> >
> >>Captn Sensible wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>I think Jesus knew a thing or two, he seemed like an inteligent fella.
> >>>After all, he was taught a lot from the essenes whilst growing up. But
> >>>we've got to separate what he DID say and do from what later scribes
> >>>added, which he obviously DIDN'T say and do.
> >>>
> >>
> >>What primary source are you getting your information from? How do you
> >>know he was taught a lot from the essenes when he was growing up? How
> >>do you know what he did say to what he didn't say?
> >
> >
> > I'm surprised you don't seem to know about the essene influence upon
> > Jesus' education. Interesting how the church don't talk about it much,
> > eh?
> > It's always better to do your own reserch John. Don't just rely on your
> > -'reigious teachers'- for information because they have a tendancy to
> > withhold stuff that could set their flock off asking awkward questions.
> >
>
> You didn't answer my question. I'll ask again. What primary source are
> you getting your information from? How do you know he was taught a lot
> from the essenes when he was growing up? How do you know what he did
> say to what he didn't say?
There's no 'primary source' when one is searching for the truth John.
Do a google for 'jesus +essenes' and investigate without being biassed.
>
> My source is the Bible which if taken as the divine revelation from God
> to man it is totally feasible to believe in its accuracy for history.
Why do you take it as divine revelation from god? Doesn't your spider
senses tell you there's something not quite right about that belief?
> It is the most copied historical document with manuscripts dating to
> within 100 years of the original.
Oh, so the criteria for discerning if something is true or not is by
how many times it is copied?
> If your choice is to not believe the
> bible then simply don't believe it and move on with your life. What
> motivates you to argue against it. I am tolerant of your view, belief,
> etc, why wouldn't you be tolerant of mine?
What made you think I was intolerant of your view? What you believe is
your own problem. I'm simply discussing stuff to try to get to the
truth.
> >
> >>The new testament books were written when many first hand witnesses were
> >>still alive. It would be like the German history books trying to get
> >>away with writing stories that the Chinese were responsible for the
> >>genocide of millions of Jews during WW2. Too many people are still
> >>around to refute it.
> >>John
> >
> >
> > People often tell and re-tell a story to anyone who will listen, which
> > over the years gets added to, altered and embellished, to make it more
> > exciting for the listener. The story can end up bearing no resemblance
> > to the original.
> > For example, the 5 loaves and 2 fishes story. Come on, what a glaring
> > absurdity!
> >
> Which is the same argument I could use regarding where you got your
> research, which by the way you still haven't divulged.
Sorry, I've been busy of late. But see above.
> Also, what is
> the absurdity of the loaves and fish story?
Because common sense tells me that 5 loaves and 2 fish cannot feed
thousands of people. Water cannot be instantly turned into wine. The
only way anyone can walk on water is if it is ice, and one plus one
doesn't ALWAYS make two!
> If you don't believe in the
> bible then it's absurd, but if you do believe in the bible then it is
> not absurd.
So, do you believe in every word in the bible, like the fishes and wine
stories, or is the truth to be found in jesus' teachings?
John Shaffer
> John Shaffer wrote:
>
>>Captn Sensible wrote:
>>
>>>John Shaffer wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Captn Sensible wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I think Jesus knew a thing or two, he seemed like an inteligent fella.
>>>>>After all, he was taught a lot from the essenes whilst growing up. But
>>>>>we've got to separate what he DID say and do from what later scribes
>>>>>added, which he obviously DIDN'T say and do.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>What primary source are you getting your information from? How do you
>>>>know he was taught a lot from the essenes when he was growing up? How
>>>>do you know what he did say to what he didn't say?
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm surprised you don't seem to know about the essene influence upon
>>>Jesus' education. Interesting how the church don't talk about it much,
>>>eh?
>>>It's always better to do your own reserch John. Don't just rely on your
>>>-'reigious teachers'- for information because they have a tendancy to
>>>withhold stuff that could set their flock off asking awkward questions.
Ask me an awkward question. My church encourages this, it's the seek
part in Seek and you will find.
>>>
>>
>>You didn't answer my question. I'll ask again. What primary source are
>>you getting your information from? How do you know he was taught a lot
>>from the essenes when he was growing up? How do you know what he did
>>say to what he didn't say?
>
>
> There's no 'primary source' when one is searching for the truth John.
> Do a google for 'jesus +essenes' and investigate without being biassed.
Still no answer. I followed your search and found 212,000 pages.
Plenty of people will write plenty of biased things. No one authority
can claim truth over another unless the authority is the author of all
truth. Why would you give credence to one thing over another? How do
you determine what to believe? I haven't heard of the phrase "spider
senses" before but I take it you mean your gut feeling. With my faith I
believe I am not the one to determine the truth, God is, therefore I put
my faith in God not my gut.
Also, how do you investigate anything without being biased? Captn, when
you look within yourself can you honestly tell me there are no internal
biases. Your words reveal a bias against the church, and against
religious teachers forcing their views on the innocent. I believe the
only truly unbiased search for truth is when one surrenders all
knowledge and thought to Christ. Is it attainable? Never fully in this
life and I am leery when I hear someone claim the truth of God in a less
then humble way.
>
>
>>My source is the Bible which if taken as the divine revelation from God
>>to man it is totally feasible to believe in its accuracy for history.
>
>
> Why do you take it as divine revelation from god? Doesn't your spider
> senses tell you there's something not quite right about that belief?
>
>
>>It is the most copied historical document with manuscripts dating to
>>within 100 years of the original.
>
>
> Oh, so the criteria for discerning if something is true or not is by
> how many times it is copied?
>
No, my point was that it does validate to a degree the accuracy of the
copies to the original.
Miracles were a stumbling block for me, I'll admit that. Faith
eventually allowed me to believe in miracles. If God can create
something out of nothing he can easily turn water into wine. It was a
big jump to allow the supernatural into my beliefs, but since then I've
felt no betrayal of reason.
Pastor Dave
<Giant...@gmail.com> spake thusly:
Nice speech. Well written. Seriously.
Except I believe that the last days were
in the first century.
--
Pastor Dave
1st Century Church of Christ
The end timers believe in a literal, physical
New Jerusalem. But is that what Scripture teaches?
No, it doesn't! So what is the New Jerusalem? It
is amazing what the end timers miss, especially
since it is stated clearly that the New Jerusalem
is the bride of Christ, the church.
Revelation 21:1,9-10
1) And I saw a new heaven and a new earth. For the
first heaven and the first earth had passed away.
9) And one of the seven angels who had the seven
vials full of the seven last plagues came to me and
talked with me, saying, Come here, I will show you
the bride, the Lamb's wife.
10) And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great
and high mountain and showed me that great city, the
holy Jerusalem, descending out of Heaven from God
Bill Gamelson
"Pastor Dave" <1news-gr...@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:69t9m1t1khopjk9da...@4ax.com...
So we are living after the last days, or the last days are still going on?
> --
>
> Pastor Dave
> 1st Century Church of Christ
Where is this "1st Century Church Of Christ?" Where is it located?
Accidental
John Shaffer wrote:
> Accidental wrote:
>
> >>Actually you should try to determine whether the god you are suppose to
> >>worship is truly just and good. Why not ask him to prove that to you?
> >>Just a thought. A somewhat common theme I've come across in these NGs
> >>is that the "church" is responsible for one's fall from belief. Sounds
> >>kind of like, "The woman you put here with me - she gave me some fruit
> >>from the tree, and I ate it."
> >
> >
> > Actions speak louder than words. If I examine the Bible and determine
> > that this God is not the way he claims to be in any way (be it
> > omnipotent, all benevolent, omniscient, good, just, whatever) then I
> > can determine one of two things:
> > 1) God is a liar. ... or ...
> > 2) The Bible is not God's word.
> > In either case, he would not be worthy of worship. As I have shown his
> > contempt for people exercising their free will that HE gave them, he is
> > not benevolent. As shown by his murderous rampage(s) and punishments
> > which involve eternal torture, God's justice is rather unfair and
> > unmerciful. As per other information not imparted here, I've
> > determined that this God is either not omniscient or not omnipotent, or
> > both.
>
> Not sure where you get the "all benevolent" from or what you mean by that?
Does it somehow make my argument less credible? If I remove it, my
argument remains the same.
> >>From this I must conclude that the Bible is not God's word or that God
> > is a liar. It doesn't particularly matter which it is.
> >
> >
> >>I think it is awesome that you are questioning the bible? It shows you
> >>want something deeper, a deeper truth. But I believe you can find it in
> >>the bible especially if you are able to tune out all the static of
> >>religion and culture. 1 Corinthians Chapter 2 speaks to how God will
> >>speak to you directly. Look at verse 5, and 12-15. Then read Romans 12:2.
> >
> >
> > I do want something deeper, if you can call it that. I don't want to
> > be lied to, and I know that the Bible cannot be counted on to do that.
> > It is not a source of metaphysical truths. As a matter of fact, truth
> > as a concept is logically flawed, or at the very least a useless
> > concept, but I wont go into that here.
>
> Truth defined by whom? The way I see it if there is a God who is a
> Creator of all things then that God is the sole source of truth. There
> is no truth that is true outside of that God's truth. If there is no
> god then truth is indeed flawed and open for interpretation and in the
> end relative. Is truth relative or absolute? That is a question we all
> have to answer. For me, relative truth breaks down rather quickly and
> absolute truth does not. Truth, in order to exist must be defined so
> absolute truth must be defined by an absolute force, (God.)
If this, if that. if, If, IF. I don't particularly enjoy going on if
tangents. But like I said, this is not a point in my argument, nor is
it worth discussing on this topic. If you want, we can start a
separate discussion.
> > After careful thought I've determined any "deeper" "truth" people
> > believe exists is merely that: a belief. Deeper meanings help people
> > function better in society because they give people motivation and
> > security, which explains why every successful culture has developed its
> > own religious views.
>
> What is your idea of a successful culture?
> Absolute truth exists before belief.
> Relative truth exists as a result of belief.
1) A successful culture is a culture that the world views as
successful. You know... successful is subjective, so it's whatever
people
2) Absolute truth can not be determine to exist.
3) Relative truth is a euphemism for conjecture.
> > As I have determined that the Bible is seemingly not credible, or that
> > the god depicted at least in the OT is not a just, good or omnipotent
> > god, I see no reason to look to the Bible for any so-called answers or
> > truths. But I may read those passages anyway later on, just so I know
> > what you are referring to.
> >
>
> With what depth of understanding have you made this determination. See
> those verses.
I read the book. It is full of errors and hypocricy. Where it says
one thing is evil in one part, three chapters later, the same action is
praised. The book is ridiculous, I don't even know where to begin...
look at my points above where I show that the idea of God is
self-contradictory.
> >>It sounds like your parents and your church forced their beliefs on you
> >>as a child. How did you come to believe this faith is myth versus say
> >>just misguidedness on the part of your parents or church? Is your
> >>current belief a rejection of their beliefs or of the bible or both?
> >
> >
> > Any parents who baptize their children are "forcing" their beliefs on
> > them, the only difference between various Christian parents is the
> > degree of social cohersion. Children think what their parents think at
> > an early age, and if this is encouraged, then no choice is actually
> > given to the child. If it is truly desired that children choose
> > Christianity, then they must not be raised in it because it takes away
> > their "free will" as free will is depicted in the Bible.
> > It's like if a child had grown up in a dark room with no lights, it
> > would be nearly impossible to explain to him what sunlight was; but
> > more importantly is that the child would have never guessed that such a
> > thing as light even existed. This is what happens to many Christian
> > children in the US.
> >
>
> Parent's aren't given the responsibility to make the choice for Christ
> for their children though many would hope or try to. They are given the
> responsibility to teach them the truth of Jesus Christ and unfortunately
> many parents hand that responsibility off to the church, christian
> school, etc. Baptism by parent is not biblical, it is a response out of
> one's own heart and mind to declare, "I choose Christ" not "My parent or
> church chooses Christ for me."
There is no truth of Jesus Christ. There are stories of Jesus Christ.
Unfortunately, it ends up looking a lot like brainwashing whenever I
talk to anyone raised inside a very religious setting.
> > How I determine that the Bible is a myth versus misguidedness?
> > Misguidedness is typically not shared in common with most people within
> > a certain group unless the very source of information is a myth. Also,
> > I've examined the source of information myself.
> >
> > My current "beliefs" (I'd call them reasoned conclusions) are that the
> > most important metaphysical claims of the Bible are unjustifiable and
> > more probably completely wrong. Most OT stories that invoke the action
> > of God are false. There are many reasons why I believe this, I've
> > noted some of them above and in my previous posts. But a big clue for
> > me to begin questioning them was that they depict God in the same way
> > pagan gods were portrayed: as ridiculously petty and hypocritical
> > beings with no regard for humans.
>
> Those versus in 1 Corinthians I pointed out speak to "Reasoned conclusions"
Your reasoning seems to be based on wishful thinking, which is not a
credible source of knowledge.
John Shaffer
>
>
> There is no truth of Jesus Christ. There are stories of Jesus Christ.
> Unfortunately, it ends up looking a lot like brainwashing whenever I
> talk to anyone raised inside a very religious setting.
>
Jesus Christ is the Truth. So we have two people, you and me. You say
there is no truth of Jesus Christ while I say there is truth of Jesus
Christ. You are right in your own eyes, while I am right in my own
eyes. Are we both right?
You put a lot of emphasis on how one is raised religiously. I was
raised in a house of no religion, no church, no bible... it wasn't until
I was 40 when I discovered the truth of Jesus Christ. I'm still not
very comfortable with the practice of church though I do like the one I
am attending because it strives for the biblical notion of church rather
than the church that seems most prevalent in America today.
>
>>>How I determine that the Bible is a myth versus misguidedness?
>>>Misguidedness is typically not shared in common with most people within
>>>a certain group unless the very source of information is a myth. Also,
>>>I've examined the source of information myself.
>>>
>>>My current "beliefs" (I'd call them reasoned conclusions) are that the
>>>most important metaphysical claims of the Bible are unjustifiable and
>>>more probably completely wrong. Most OT stories that invoke the action
>>>of God are false. There are many reasons why I believe this, I've
>>>noted some of them above and in my previous posts. But a big clue for
>>>me to begin questioning them was that they depict God in the same way
>>>pagan gods were portrayed: as ridiculously petty and hypocritical
>>>beings with no regard for humans.
>>
>>Those versus in 1 Corinthians I pointed out speak to "Reasoned conclusions"
>
>
> Your reasoning seems to be based on wishful thinking, which is not a
> credible source of knowledge.
Depend where the source of knowledge comes from.
Argo
>> So, do you believe in every word in the bible, like the fishes and wine
>> stories, or is the truth to be found in jesus' teachings?
>>
> Miracles were a stumbling block for me, I'll admit that. Faith
> eventually allowed me to believe in miracles. If God can create
> something out of nothing he can easily turn water into wine. It was a
> big jump to allow the supernatural into my beliefs, but since then I've
> felt no betrayal of reason.
One of the things often forgotten by folks that want to prove the
existence of God using the Bible or disprove the existence of God by
using the Bible is the ignoring of the cultures at the time of the
Bible's writings.
Nobody then disbelieved in the supernatural or spiritual or the
existence of at least some god, or gods. And the Bible wasn't created
to prove the existence of God but rather it is an instruction book and
for lack of a better word, portfolio, of the one true God.
In it, you have your standard "Do's and don'ts" like the 10
Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, and so on. You have descriptions
of what is a spiritual person, etc.
And then like in a résumé you have your references which of course are
the people who know the individual of the résumé or in this case, God.
And the stories they tell are basically all about their interactions
with God and what happened.
You also have your counseling sessions where individuals like Paul and
the 12 Apostles tell about what they've learned directly in their
experence of God and what do in various situations.
They tell how to talk with potential believers. They tell how to talk
with people who respond to their message in a hostile fashion. They
tell how to respond to people who discredit the validity of the apostles
speaking.
The Bible is also a historical document that describes events and
individuals that lived before and during the time of the Bible. It
doesn't however intend to be a highly detailed account of all events
happening everywhere at the time of its writing.
Since it is only all about God, then of course only the details that
describe God, or show his nature, or show how he interacts with people
are what are the only things recorded.
That is the Bible!
-- Argo
Argo
> "xeno" <xe...@transbay.net> wrote in message
> news:2005101617...@synergy.transbay.net...
>
>>On Sun, 16 Oct 2005, Pastor Frank wrote:
>>
>>>God isn't about "intellect" but about being humane.
>>
>>If God is omniscient, then how can you claim God isn't about intellect?
>>& how can anybody be humane w/o understanding how to be, to whatever
>>degree they can be, in a given situation?
>>
>
> LOL I just can see you worrying yourself silly in the presence of you
> loved one(s), about the "degree" and amount of love to display befitting the
> situation and occasion etc. etc. Do you have any loved ones?
>
>
Does "Pastor" Frank have any real loved ones? Other than himself of
himself?
Would you now at this very moment be able to face God with your heavy
sarcasm directed toward Xeno and can you honestly say that He (Our Lord
and God) will honor you?
"LOL" - Pastor Frank's favorite totally sarcastic un-CHRISTIAN attitude
comments to anyone that disagrees with him.
Any problems with that?
- Argo