Re: Why are the idol worshipers guilty of serving their idols ? because by praying to them they think they are answered by them...
Andrew W
news:34ofs6he07nh7uslr...@4ax.com...
>
> http://www.catholic.com/library/Do_Catholics_Worship_Statues.asp
>
> here we have yet another site where speaking in defense of making graven
> images of dead people and
> praying to them is part of the faith delivered once for all unto the
> elect. God forbid.
>
> to begin with, no Catholic nor Orthodox nor any practicing Protestant is
> allowed to interpret the
> Holy Scriptures for himself...
>
Its not so much a case of not being allowed, its more that the average
person doesn't know enough about ancient spiritual and religious
esotericisms to be able to interpret what the scriptures were really saying.
>
denominational traditions handed down by their church father's forbid
> them all to be out of line with the preconceived doctrines prescribed by
> their particular
> denomination. not obeying the word of man, how can they obey the Word of
> God ? ... both can't be
> true which leads to redemption... we simply can not serve God AND mammon.
>
What exactly is "the Word Of God"? Do you believe its your Bible?
But the Muslims and every other religious group claim that the Word of God
is their book.
You can't all be right.
>
> nonetheless, we have the usual double-speak here on this site condoning
> idol worship. we even have
> a few text of Holy Scripture bent around to suit and condone idol worship.
>
Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol worship.
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol worship.
But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words. Such does not happen
with any other teaching.
Gary Eickmeier
Tell us how you think they got the story of creation in Genesis. Not too
many humans were around to witness it. How, exactly, did they get all that?
G
Peter B.
From Adam who walked and talked with God.
God walked on this earth and spoke with men frequently in the beginning.
After that He spoke by His Spirit and through the Prophets, then Jesus,
then the Apostles and now through His word and His believers.
seeker
> > Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol worship.
>
> But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words.
Let me guess. You have no objective evidence that supports your claim
but if people choose to believe it then afterwards they will get an
emotion which confirms they are right?
> Such does not happen
> with any other teaching.
I don't see a difference. Put the Bible next to any other teaching
and what is the measurable difference? How do we know the Spirit of
God breaths life into one and not the other?
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 9, 9:54 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 09:15:13 +1000, Andrew W
>>
>> <spam_ajwer...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>> Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol worship.
>>
>> But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words.
>
> Let me guess. You have no objective evidence that supports your claim
> but if people choose to believe it then afterwards they will get an
> emotion which confirms they are right?
>
Let me guess, tho I hold in my hand a copy of the personal testimonies of
various people who lived and saw Jesus and saw Him in His heavenly body as
well and that book is also an object that has survived well over 2000 years
that you deny its existence, and deny what the witnesses gave testimony
too. By law two or more witnesses swearing to the same thing can be
construed as evidence for either not guilty or guilty.
>> Such does not happen
>> with any other teaching.
>
> I don't see a difference. Put the Bible next to any other teaching
> and what is the measurable difference? How do we know the Spirit of
> God breaths life into one and not the other?
By listening to the words. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word
of God.
Andrew W
That's exactly what every other religious follower says about their holy
book.
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:1kbdyzew6yq1b$.dlg@4ever.his...
>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 09:15:13 +1000, Andrew W
>> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol
>>> worship.
>>
>> But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words. Such does not happen
>> with any other teaching.
>>
>
> That's exactly what every other religious follower says about their holy
> book.
I know of none who claimed their leader died and rose from the dead. I know
of none who told their followers to watch for His return, not told them to
go into all the world and preach the Gospel. To pray for the sick, cast out
demons, raise the dead and so on. Name one religion that says Gods spirit
will tell you or explain to you whatever He said in their writings?
Andrew W
> On Tue, 10 May 2011 17:08:12 +1000, Andrew W
> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>> "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message
>> news:1kbdyzew6yq1b$.dlg@4ever.his...
>>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 09:15:13 +1000, Andrew W
>>> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol
>>>> worship.
>>>
>>> But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words. Such does not
>>> happen
>>> with any other teaching.
>>>
>>
>> That's exactly what every other religious follower says about their holy
>> book.
>
> I know of none who claimed their leader died and rose from the dead. I
> know
> of none who told their followers to watch for His return, not told them to
> go into all the world and preach the Gospel. To pray for the sick, cast
> out
> demons, raise the dead and so on.
>
Of course the details are different but the types of claims and the passion
are the same.
>
> Name one religion that says Gods spirit
> will tell you or explain to you whatever He said in their writings?
>
Quite a few say God will tell them things but the way they put it is
different.
If God really talked to Christians then they wouldn't be holding the world
record for the largest number of denominations and sects all arguing with
each other over God's specific will.
Gary Eickmeier
"Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:d6qkz1o8...@4ever.his...
Strangely, he has vanished after the modern age of accurate documentation of
events and stories.
G
Gary Eickmeier
"Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:14v8uwzz...@4ever.his...
> On Tue, 10 May 2011 17:08:12 +1000, Andrew W
> I know of none who claimed their leader died and rose from the dead. I
> know
> of none who told their followers to watch for His return, not told them to
> go into all the world and preach the Gospel. To pray for the sick, cast
> out
> demons, raise the dead and so on. Name one religion that says Gods spirit
> will tell you or explain to you whatever He said in their writings?
>
There were approximately 16 other dying and resurrecting godmen who saved us
from our sins before Jesus.
G
Pastor Dave
<geic...@tampabay.rr.com> spake thusly:
>> God walked on this earth and spoke with men frequently in the beginning.
>> After that He spoke by His Spirit and through the Prophets, then Jesus,
>> then the Apostles and now through His word and His believers.
>
>Strangely, he has vanished after the modern age of accurate documentation of
>events and stories.
Strangely, you believe in people as historic figures with only
ancient documentation, but farther removed from the time,
unless they're Jesus and then the same closer to the time,
is not good enough for you.
I also notice how you claim that only now is documentation
supposedly "accurate". That's a load of crap. And I know
of quite a bit of documentation that isn't trustworthy at all
that was written right there on computers!
When you wear your bias on your sleeve while claiming
it's just you being objective, you shouldn't expect much
in the way of respect.
seeker
> On Mon, 9 May 2011 23:32:54 -0700 (PDT), seeker <hsot...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On May 9, 9:54 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 10 May 2011 09:15:13 +1000, Andrew W
>
> >> <spam_ajwer...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >>> Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol worship.
>
> >> But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words.
>
> > Let me guess. You have no objective evidence that supports your claim
> > but if people choose to believe it then afterwards they will get an
> > emotion which confirms they are right?
>
> Let me guess, tho I hold in my hand a copy of the personal testimonies of
> various people who lived and saw Jesus
Nope. You are not holding the Easter bunny either.
> . . . and saw Him in His heavenly body as
> well and that book is also an object that has survived well over 2000 years
> that you deny its existence, and deny what the witnesses gave testimony
> too.
I can find all kinds of stories on Santa Claus. Does that mean Santa
Claus is real?
> By law two or more witnesses swearing to the same thing can be
> construed as evidence for either not guilty or guilty.
What have you been smoking? Which law is that?
> >> Such does not happen
> >> with any other teaching.
>
> > I don't see a difference. Put the Bible next to any other teaching
> > and what is the measurable difference? How do we know the Spirit of
> > God breaths life into one and not the other?
>
> By listening to the words. Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word
> of God.
So your evidence is an emotion experienced after believing. Did you
try all the other religions and experience the emotions they have to
offer?
Pastor Dave
<geic...@tampabay.rr.com> spake thusly:
> Peter B. wrote:
>
>> I know of none who claimed their leader died
>> and rose from the dead. I know of none who
>> told their followers to watch for His return, not
>> told them to go into all the world and preach
>> the Gospel. To pray for the sick, cast out demons,
>> raise the dead and so on. Name one religion
>> that says Gods spirit will tell you or explain to
>> you whatever He said in their writings?
>
> There were approximately 16 other dying and
> resurrecting godmen who saved us from our
> sins before Jesus.
Now why are you guys so dishonest about this?
You guys try to imply that it's the same thing,
or you wouldn't be mentioning it as a response
to Peter's statement.
I have refuted this old garbage so many times,
including to you and yet, like the rest, here you
are again, making the same old false claims.
And of course, since various pagan religions were
around before Christianity, the claim that Christianity
stole from these pagan religions either follows, or as
it is here, is automatically implied. The most popular
claim being that Christianity stole from Mithraism.
Before I begin to address this, let me say right up front,
that Christianity was not considered a separate religion
at first and that is the mistake that you people make
right off the bat when you try to compare ages. The
reality is, that Christianity was considered to be a sect
of Judaism (the NT and other historical sources attest
to this fact) and that is what you will need to compare
the pagan religions to.
The Claim:
Christianity stole from Mithraism, with its pagan "man-god"
that gets resurrected and its sacrificial bulls with the blood
and its "Eucharist".
The Answer:
No, I'm sorry, it didn't and you haven't done your homework.
The pagan religions have gone through many major evolutions.
In fact, Mithraism had gone through four major evolutions,
before it appeared in the form that atheists commonly quote
it as being in and claim Christianity copied from. They aren't
even aware that this is the case and the atheist tends to do
no more research than reading an atheist web page that was
put up by another atheist, who also did no research and just
copied from another atheist web page, etc., etc..
The problem for the atheist claim is, that Mithraism simply
did not exist in that form until _after_ it had come to the
same area that Christianity was in at the time (it had just
started to spread and so this would be Judea) and then
taken the last of the four major evolutions it went through
up to that point.
I.e., When Mithraism first entered the same area as Christianity
(Judea), it did not yet exist in the form that the atheists quote it
as being in and it actually copied from Christianity, not the other
way around!
In fact, as stated again below, Justin Martyr referred to the meal
that they ate (in Mithraism), as a Satanic copy of the Lord's Supper,
not the other way around.
If I were these atheists, I would take the time to do some actual
research and find out when Mithraism developed different beliefs
within their religion and what was going on in the area at the time.
I.e., Did those ideas already exist in other religions when it arrived?
They will find that in reality, Mithraism stole from Christianity!
You see folks, the argument is not whether or not Mithraism existed
at all, which the atheists think proves their case, but whether or not
it existed in the form they claim, in Jerusalem and the immediately
surrounding area, at the time Christianity started. That is what is
important and the fact is, that it did not!
And what the atheists don't even take into account (which almost
all Christians are also ignorant of), is that Christianity was not even
viewed as a new religion, nor was it considered a new religion by
Jesus, nor the Apostles who preached it after His Ascension, folks!
The truth is, that the name "Christianity" didn't even exist at first!
This faith was simply considered to be Judaism and a sect of that
by those who did not believe in Christ. What Jesus and the Apostles
preached, was "Judaism fulfilled", not a new religion.
And _after_ the time that Mithraism came into the area (Judea) that
Christianity was in, it then developed beliefs that somewhat paralleled
the Christian beliefs and not the other way around!
Mithraism also did not have a god that they could say lived at a certain
date and provide support for that. Nor could they show you a god who
was physically killed and resurrected and appeared to over 500 witnesses
that could be questioned and ascend to heaven in front of witnesses.
Mithraism eventually became Christianity's most serious rival, but had
no importance in the Roman world during the first century. There is
no way it influenced Christianity! And that is why I keep using the
word "had" in this text. Because any of the listed ideas that it did
later evolve to gain (which does not include all of those ideas listed),
it did not have before entering the area Christianity was already in.
Not only this, but the Romans knew Mithra as Sol Invictus. In fact,
Justin Martyr referred to the meal that they ate (in Mithraism), as
a Satanic copy of the Lord's Supper, not the other way around! :)
Mithraism had no concept of the death and resurrection of its god.
Mithraism had no place for any concept of rebirth (at least during
the early stages).
Mithraism was more of a military cult. Christians in the early
centuries sought peace.
Mithraism occurred in the area after the close of the canon. This
is simply far too late to have influenced Christianity, or the writings
of the New Testament!
Mithraism had no date to point to, to show that their god existed.
Jesus had lived only a few years before the writings and the people
who would have been able to disprove it, were still alive at the time.
Many Christians may foolishly buy into these late dates assigned to
the New Testament writings, due to their own ignorance because
they do zero research, but those late dates are old news and scholars
are now, as they should, coming back to much earlier dated, as the
liberals, who are not really believers in the first place and who have
always sought to undermine the Scriptures (which is why you read
them claiming that this or that in them didn't really happen, etc.),
are being dismissed as exactly that! The truth is, that Corinthians,
for example, was written as little as only 10-15 years after Christ!
As for Mithraic baptism, there was no notion of dying to self and
rising a new creature, as was symbolic in the Christian baptism.
In fact, it was later (in the third century) that a change came
about in Mithraism and the blood of this baptism became symbolic
of purification, which leaves open a Christian influence on Mithraism
and not the other way around. Folks ignorant to these facts, will
simply point out the purification element of Mithraism and never
check the history of it, thereby fooling folks like them, who assume
that atheist and pagan web pages are honest and full of wonderful
research, when in reality, their arguments don't hold water, when
put to the test. The reality is, that this "blood baptism" had nothing
to do with any purification, nor did Christians use blood in baptisms.
These people (even some falsely claiming to be Christians) can and
I'm sure will, start quoting web sites that make claims, but read the
claims carefully. Do they even talk about the evolutions that these
pagan religions have gone through and in what exact form in detail
that it existed in before being introduced in an area in which the
Christian faith already existed/had been preached?
Watch Mithraism go through its stages in A.D. history, while at the
same time, Christianity is more and more dominant and you'll see
Mithraism change in ways that adapt to Christianity, not vice versa!
I will grant however, that centuries later, paganism began to creep
in and some of its practices were adopted into what is now the
Catholic Church. Protestants broke away from those things, with
some exceptions ("Catholic Lite" denominations, like the Episcopal),
but that does not mean that Christianity had come from paganism
and that is simply a fallacious and a ridiculous argument to make!
There are many other arguments against Mithraism having any
influence on Christianity. That's all I really have time for though.
I would suggest picking up a copy of the book;
"The Gospel and the Greeks: Did the New Testament Borrow
from Pagan Though?"
It is authored by Ronald H. Nash and is available through Amazon
and it will enlighten you on many of these subjects. It's a great read!
The bottom line is, that if they wish to claim that Christianity
stole from Mithraism, then they must prove that it existed
AS THEY DESCRIBED IT, IN THAT AREA AND AT THAT TIME!
These are just old, tired arguments, which for some reason,
still float around in this country especially, but have been
refuted and dismissed a long time ago. The reason I think
they still survive, is because Christians don't bother to do
any research and I don't think one can find any group of
people that are lazier about researching something, nor more
easily suckered into believing something, when it comes to
Christians regarding the Bible and it is sad! Let's change this!
I'm sorry if that offends anyone, but if it weren't true, then
we wouldn't see "Christians" arguing FOR these various claims,
such as the "Q" document, the late dates for NT writings,
"this or that was never actually said/done by Jesus", the
Bible has contradictions, WWJD and other sucker arguments.
And yet, that is exactly what we see and not just from some
small number, but in very large numbers! It is sad and it
needs to stop and be changed! A "180" needs to happen!
Hope this helped and edified/blessed many! :)
seeker
wrote:
[...]
> I also notice how you claim that only now is documentation
> supposedly "accurate". That's a load of crap. And I know
> of quite a bit of documentation that isn't trustworthy at all
> that was written right there on computers!
Are you unable to read?
That documentation had to be less accurate in the past due to inferior
methods does not mean that everything written on a computer must be
right.
seeker
wrote:
[...]
> > There were approximately 16 other dying and
> > resurrecting godmen who saved us from our
> > sins before Jesus.
>
> Now why are you guys so dishonest about this?
You seem to have trouble reading.
[...]
> The Claim:
> Christianity stole from Mithraism, with its pagan "man-god"
> that gets resurrected and its sacrificial bulls with the blood
> and its "Eucharist".
[...]
That wasn't his claim. Gary's claim was there were about 16 other
dying and resurrecting godmen saving us from sin prior to Jesus.
Peter B.
<geic...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:d6qkz1o8...@4ever.his...
>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 01:57:15 -0400, Gary Eickmeier
>> <geic...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Peter B. wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 09:15:13 +1000, Andrew W
>>>> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol
>>>>> worship.
>>>>
>>>> But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words. Such does not
>>>> happen with any other teaching.
>>>
>>> Tell us how you think they got the story of creation in Genesis. Not too
>>> many humans were around to witness it. How, exactly, did they get all
>>> that?
>>>
>> From Adam who walked and talked with God.
>>
>> God walked on this earth and spoke with men frequently in the beginning.
>> After that He spoke by His Spirit and through the Prophets, then Jesus,
>> then the Apostles and now through His word and His believers.
>
> Strangely, he has vanished after the modern age of accurate documentation of
> events and stories.
>
> G
No, He hasn't. Draw near to Him and He will draw near to you.
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 10, 7:09 am, Pastor Dave <*newsgroup-mail*@*tampabay.rr.com*>
Is two plus two equals four any less accurate 4000 years ago then it is
now?
seeker
> On Tue, 10 May 2011 07:58:27 -0700 (PDT), seeker <hsot...@hotmail.com>
No, and I will draw your attention to the fact that such is not
documentation.
holy...@wondering.com
around in this country especially, but have been refuted and dismissed a
long time ago. The reason I think they still survive, is because
Christians don't bother to do any research and I don't think one can
find any group of people that are lazier about researching something,
nor more easily suckered into believing something, when it comes to
"Christians regarding the Bible and it is sad! Let's change this!
I have found that those who arne't christian are in no better place in
this regard.
For example there are few atheists who really look into such issues to
any degree. They hear it from peers, put it in their box of things to
throw out and know no more then that as to the validity of it.
There's is a belief system based on faith by the same measure.
Mithraism as you have covered it is a good example.
Pastor Dave
>"These are just old, tired arguments, which for some reason, still float
>around in this country especially, but have been refuted and dismissed a
>long time ago. The reason I think they still survive, is because
>Christians don't bother to do any research and I don't think one can
>find any group of people that are lazier about researching something,
>nor more easily suckered into believing something, when it comes to
>"Christians regarding the Bible and it is sad! Let's change this!
>
>I have found that those who arne't christian are in no better place in
>this regard.
You need to turn on the quoting feature.
It's too confusing otherwise.
And my point was that Christians should be better of
and aren't. That makes them even worse than atheists.
Andrew W
news:ediis6dt7flei1ijr...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 10 May 2011 08:31:18 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
> <geic...@tampabay.rr.com> spake thusly:
>
>
>> Peter B. wrote:
>>
>>> I know of none who claimed their leader died
>>> and rose from the dead. I know of none who
>>> told their followers to watch for His return, not
>>> told them to go into all the world and preach
>>> the Gospel. To pray for the sick, cast out demons,
>>> raise the dead and so on. Name one religion
>>> that says Gods spirit will tell you or explain to
>>> you whatever He said in their writings?
>>
>> There were approximately 16 other dying and
>> resurrecting godmen who saved us from our
>> sins before Jesus.
>
> Now why are you guys so dishonest about this?
>
We're not.
>
> You guys try to imply that it's the same thing,
> or you wouldn't be mentioning it as a response
> to Peter's statement.
>
If you do the research you'll find tremendous parallels.
>
> I have refuted this old garbage so many times,
> including to you and yet, like the rest, here you
> are again, making the same old false claims.
>
Of course you have, because you are enamoured with your own godman.
Every cultist believes that his/her godman is the only true one.
>
> And of course, since various pagan religions were
> around before Christianity, the claim that Christianity
> stole from these pagan religions either follows, or as
> it is here, is automatically implied. The most popular
> claim being that Christianity stole from Mithraism.
>
The similarities are striking.
>
> Before I begin to address this, let me say right up front,
> that Christianity was not considered a separate religion
> at first and that is the mistake that you people make
> right off the bat when you try to compare ages. The
> reality is, that Christianity was considered to be a sect
> of Judaism (the NT and other historical sources attest
> to this fact) and that is what you will need to compare
> the pagan religions to.
>
Christianity has a lot of pagan stuff too, for example the blood sacrifice
thing for a start.
>
> The Claim:
> Christianity stole from Mithraism, with its pagan "man-god"
> that gets resurrected and its sacrificial bulls with the blood
> and its "Eucharist".
>
Stole is too strong a word.
Of course such a strong premise cannot be posed. It happened more subtly
than that.
Don't only go by what the sensationalists say.
>
> The Answer:
> No, I'm sorry, it didn't and you haven't done your homework.
>
Of course not. It wasn't nearly that simple.
>
> The pagan religions have gone through many major evolutions.
> In fact, Mithraism had gone through four major evolutions,
> before it appeared in the form that atheists commonly quote
> it as being in and claim Christianity copied from. They aren't
> even aware that this is the case and the atheist tends to do
> no more research than reading an atheist web page that was
> put up by another atheist, who also did no research and just
> copied from another atheist web page, etc., etc..
>
Nope, we don't only read atheist websites. This is your misconception. Most
of us that are serious research scholarly and proper research materials.
>
> The problem for the atheist claim is, that Mithraism simply
> did not exist in that form until _after_ it had come to the
> same area that Christianity was in at the time (it had just
> started to spread and so this would be Judea) and then
> taken the last of the four major evolutions it went through
> up to that point.
>
You are wrong there. Mithraism had all its core concepts before
Christianity.
>
> I.e., When Mithraism first entered the same area as Christianity
> (Judea), it did not yet exist in the form that the atheists quote it
> as being in and it actually copied from Christianity, not the other
> way around!
>
You've been reading too many Christian apologist websites or books.
What you accuse others of doing is what you do.
Andrew W
news:4dc981f8$0$2812$1c46...@news.club.cc.cmu.edu...
Its fairly apparent that you and Dave haven't spent much time around serious
researchers and scholars.
You are just religious apologists promoting your own brand and hoping to get
into God's good books so you can go to heaven because you're scared of the
bogus claims by the Catholic church and its predecessors about damnation.
holy...@wondering.com
> find any group of people that are lazier about researching something,
> nor more easily suckered into believing something, when it comes to
> "Christians regarding the Bible and it is sad! Let's change this!
>
> I have found that those who arne't christian are in no better place in
> this regard.
>
> For example there are few atheists who really look into such issues to
> any degree. They hear it from peers, put it in their box of things to
> throw out and know no more then that as to the validity of it.
>
> There's is a belief system based on faith by the same measure.
>
> Mithraism as you have covered it is a good example.
"Its fairly apparent that you and Dave haven't spent much time around
serious researchers and scholars. You are just religious apologists
promoting your own brand and hoping to get into God's good books so you
can go to heaven because you're scared of theA bogus claims by the
Catholic church and its predecessors about damnation."
Cann't speak for dave, I spent a large chunck of my life around and
preparing for formal research and those who do it and it has been an
important part of my entire life.
It is on this basis I made my observations about atheists and their lack
of research or even demonstrated skills in same. Why should they be
different then any other group of people in this regard?
Andrew W
news:4dc9b347$0$2804$1c46...@news.club.cc.cmu.edu...
With your kind of religious beliefs I think it shows that you've mainly been
around apologist scholars and researchers and not objective ones.
Apologist scholars are not really scholars as such because they're biased
towards their own religion.
Pastor Dave
>>Its fairly apparent that you and Dave haven't spent much time around
>>serious researchers and scholars. You are just religious apologists
>>promoting your own brand and hoping to get into God's good books so you
>>can go to heaven because you're scared of theA bogus claims by the
>>Catholic church and its predecessors about damnation."
>
>Can't speak for dave, I spent a large chunck of my life around and
>preparing for formal research and those who do it and it has been an
>important part of my entire life.
>
>It is on this basis I made my observations about atheists and their lack
>of research or even demonstrated skills in same. Why should they be
>different then any other group of people in this regard?
It is the following, that he is saying this to avoid dealing with:
The Claim:
Christianity stole from Mithraism, with its pagan "man-god"
that gets resurrected and its sacrificial bulls with the blood
and its "Eucharist".
The Answer:
No, I'm sorry, it didn't and you haven't done your homework.
The pagan religions have gone through many major evolutions.
In fact, Mithraism had gone through four major evolutions,
before it appeared in the form that atheists commonly quote
it as being in and claim Christianity copied from. They aren't
even aware that this is the case and the atheist tends to do
no more research than reading an atheist web page that was
put up by another atheist, who also did no research and just
copied from another atheist web page, etc., etc..
The problem for the atheist claim is, that Mithraism simply
did not exist in that form until _after_ it had come to the
same area that Christianity was in at the time (it had just
started to spread and so this would be Judea) and then
taken the last of the four major evolutions it went through
up to that point.
I.e., When Mithraism first entered the same area as Christianity
(Judea), it did not yet exist in the form that the atheists quote it
as being in and it actually copied from Christianity, not the other
way around!
In fact, as stated again below, Justin Martyr referred to the meal
These are just old, tired arguments, which for some reason,
still float around in this country especially, but have been
refuted and dismissed a long time ago. The reason I think
they still survive, is because Christians don't bother to do
any research and I don't think one can find any group of
people that are lazier about researching something, nor more
easily suckered into believing something, when it comes to
Christians regarding the Bible and it is sad! Let's change this!
I'm sorry if that offends anyone, but if it weren't true, then
Andrew W
Apologists articles, claims and rationalisations rejected.
Apologists make poor researchers.
Andrew W
> <geic...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> Peter B. wrote:
>>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 09:15:13 +1000, Andrew W
>>> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol
>>>> worship.
>>>
>>> But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words. Such does not
>>> happen with any other teaching.
>>
>> Tell us how you think they got the story of creation in Genesis. Not too
>> many humans were around to witness it. How, exactly, did they get all
>> that?
>>
> From Adam who walked and talked with God.
>
> God walked on this earth and spoke with men frequently in the beginning.
>
That's debatable and highly open to interpretation.
It could have been ETs pretending to be Gods for all we know, or stories to
enforce morality.
>
> After that He spoke by His Spirit and through the Prophets, then Jesus,
> then the Apostles and now through His word and His believers.
>
That is also debatable.
Theists who have claimed that God speaks to them in spirit etc. have claimed
a lot of questionable, false and even ridiculous things.
Andrew W
I did and the wisdom I got was very different to anything that Christianity
propagates.
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 10, 8:47 am, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
It is if you are speaking about the history of Math. Or speaking of the
history of materials or food used/consumed at various points in History.
Peter B.
Do be sure and name them and their disciples who witnessed everything.
seeker
> On Tue, 10 May 2011 09:05:23 -0700 (PDT), seeker <hsot...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 10, 8:47 am, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 10 May 2011 07:58:27 -0700 (PDT), seeker <hsot...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> On May 10, 7:09 am, Pastor Dave <*newsgroup-mail*@*tampabay.rr.com*>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>>> I also notice how you claim that only now is documentation
> >>>> supposedly "accurate". That's a load of crap. And I know
> >>>> of quite a bit of documentation that isn't trustworthy at all
> >>>> that was written right there on computers!
>
> >>> Are you unable to read?
>
> >>> That documentation had to be less accurate in the past due to inferior
> >>> methods does not mean that everything written on a computer must be
> >>> right.
>
> >> Is two plus two equals four any less accurate 4000 years ago then it is
> >> now?
>
> > No, and I will draw your attention to the fact that such is not
> > documentation.
>
> It is if you are speaking about the history of Math. Or speaking of the
> history of materials or food used/consumed at various points in History.
Well then it might look like "two [hole in scroll] equals [hole in
scroll]"
Andrew W
We're not here to educate you. Do your own research. Take responsibility for
your education.
We're only here to inform you of errors in thinking and get you moving in
the right direction.
--
There is a God, but its nothing like the Judeo-Christian God.
Gary Eickmeier
"Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:iqd5d6$o61$1...@dont-email.me...
Wow, this is turning into a real discussion. Glad I stumbled back in. Pastor
Dave has read at least two books!
Rather than quote all of my favorite books this late at night, let me just
state my general impressions from my reading.
Paul seems to have been a real historical character. We have some letters
from him that could be genuine. Half of them seem modified or fake, from my
reading. But Paul never met Jesus, never talked about a historical Jesus,
only about The Christ, a mythological godman modelled after the pagan ones
that went before.
There may have been a Peter, or Saul, who ended up in Rome preaching a
somewhat different version of the Christ cult. But there were no "12
disciples" - they were based on the 12 signs of the Zodiac that most pagan
religions believed in.
Atonement theology makes no sense. I keep trying to come up with a scenario,
or example, where it might make sense, but it always ends up being just a
senseless human sacrifice to appease an angry god scenario. Do you believe
in human sacrifice? Of course you do, if you are a Christian. Shame on you.
Who killed Jesus? You did - because your whole faith is based on the
necessity of his death. If he hadn't been crucified, you would not be
"saved." Shame on you. And that one act by another "saves" all the rest of
us, but only if we believe in it? What's up with that? Either it works or it
doesn't. Shouldn't depend on your believing it happened!
God himself was tramping around on the planet among us? Are you nuts? And
left no historical evidence of the most important event in human history?
This would be entirely too important for a GOD man to leave to chance and
the memoirs of a few followers.
I ask myself, is it a game? Was it purposely made unbelievable to test our
ability to develop a childlike "faith" in something that makes no sense
otherwise? What kind of game would that be?
Mskes about as much sense as the Adam and Eve story, or the creation story.
Don't get me started.
G
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 10, 9:49 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
or two ephah + two ephah = four mityr, caution words used were made up
words.
Peter B.
holy...@wondering.com
> serious researchers and scholars. You are just religious apologists
> promoting your own brand and hoping to get into God's good books so
you
> can go to heaven because you're scared of theA bogus claims by the
> Catholic church and its predecessors about damnation."
>
> Cann't speak for dave, I spent a large chunck of my life around and
> preparing for formal research and those who do it and it has been an
> important part of my entire life.
>
> It is on this basis I made my observations about atheists and their
lack
> of research or even demonstrated skills in same. Why should they be
> different then any other group of people in this regard?
>
"With your kind of religious beliefs I think it shows that you've mainly
been around apologist scholars and researchers and not objective ones.
Apologist scholars are not really scholars as such because they're
biased towards their own religion."
Smile, and with this we see such grand sweeping conclusions absent
evidence excludes you from the burden of being a researcher or scholar.
I make an observation how alike many christians and atheists are and you
can come up with only this as an explanation?
As an apologist for your faith and belief system and absent any evidence
you qualify more then the many christians and atheists to speak on the
basis of research and scholarship, what makes you other then just
another member of the opinion bearing pack? Such opinion as one can
find expressed at a bar the dime the dozen, given a few beers to make
them really flow.
For your benefit, my formal training in research and scholarship was
entirely secular.
seeker
> On Tue, 10 May 2011 21:57:42 -0700 (PDT), seeker <hsot...@hotmail.com>
No, from that we would know that an ephah was the same as a mityr.
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:d6qkz1o8...@4ever.his...
>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 01:57:15 -0400, Gary Eickmeier
>> <geic...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Peter B. wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 09:15:13 +1000, Andrew W
>>>> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol
>>>>> worship.
>>>>
>>>> But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words. Such does not
>>>> happen with any other teaching.
>>>
>>> Tell us how you think they got the story of creation in Genesis. Not too
>>> many humans were around to witness it. How, exactly, did they get all
>>> that?
>>>
>> From Adam who walked and talked with God.
>>
>> God walked on this earth and spoke with men frequently in the beginning.
>>
>
> That's debatable and highly open to interpretation.
> It could have been ETs pretending to be Gods for all we know, or stories to
> enforce morality.
>
>>
>> After that He spoke by His Spirit and through the Prophets, then Jesus,
>> then the Apostles and now through His word and His believers.
>>
>
> That is also debatable.
> Theists who have claimed that God speaks to them in spirit etc. have claimed
> a lot of questionable, false and even ridiculous things.
It is those that are not open to God and His Spirit who would say such
things. They are open to the voice of satan and his demons, his thoughts.
He is their god. Those that know God know His voice.
God is not some creature way up high in the sky who shows little or no
interest in His people. He knows how many hairs are in our head. He that
feeds the sparrows daily knows our needs and we are far more important to
Him then they. The Bible says to cast _all_ our cares on Him since He cares
for us.
Truth is, you want to know and the sad thing has it is in front of your
face the whole time. You wouldn't be here if weren't looking and hoping for
some earth shaking awakening.
Peter B.
<geic...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
You just like throwing stuff out there to see what sticks. You have not
read the whole bible so you are clueless about the atonement thread,
sacrifice, etc. You don't even know who killed Jesus according to this
post. You call Paul a liar, and mix up heard truths with heard myths. You
will never be able to sort our the mess that you have created unless you
focus. Satan is the author of confusion, all confusion.
If you are looking for a religion, don't.
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 11, 12:34 am, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
No, four would be. So now we know that nothing has changed between then and
now because it was documented.
SFD
"Gary Eickmeier" <geic...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Vp4yp.15145$ZN1....@unlimited.newshosting.com...
> Peter B. wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 09:15:13 +1000, Andrew W
>> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol
>>> worship.
>>
>> But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words. Such does not
>> happen with any other teaching.
>
> Tell us how you think they got the story of creation in Genesis. Not too
> many humans were around to witness it. How, exactly, did they get all
> that?
>
SFD
> On Tue, 10 May 2011 08:28:07 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
>
>
>>> God walked on this earth and spoke with men frequently in the beginning.
>>> then the Apostles and now through His word and His believers.
>>
>>of
>>events and stories.
>
> ancient documentation, but farther removed from the time,
> unless they're Jesus and then the same closer to the time,
> is not good enough for you.
>
> I also notice how you claim that only now is documentation
> supposedly "accurate". That's a load of crap. And I know
> of quite a bit of documentation that isn't trustworthy at all
> that was written right there on computers!
>
> it's just you being objective, you shouldn't expect much
> in the way of respect.
>
In a nutshell - BS
SFD
"Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:52zz0q65...@4ever.his...
> On Tue, 10 May 2011 08:28:07 -0400, Gary Eickmeier
>
>> "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:d6qkz1o8...@4ever.his...
>>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 01:57:15 -0400, Gary Eickmeier
>>> <geic...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Peter B. wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 10 May 2011 09:15:13 +1000, Andrew W
>>>>> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thumping the Bible and putting it on a high pedestal is also idol
>>>>>> worship.
>>>>>
>>>>> But the Spirit of God breathes life into those words. Such does not
>>>>> happen with any other teaching.
>>>>
>>>> Tell us how you think they got the story of creation in Genesis. Not
>>>> too
>>>> many humans were around to witness it. How, exactly, did they get all
>>>> that?
>>>>
>>>
>>> After that He spoke by His Spirit and through the Prophets, then Jesus,
>>> then the Apostles and now through His word and His believers.
>>
>> Strangely, he has vanished after the modern age of accurate documentation
>> of
>> events and stories.
>>
>
> No, He hasn't. Draw near to Him and He will draw near to you.
Boby warmth in winter - is this why so many priests cuddle up to little
boys?
SFD
SFD
"Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:zz5034aa6k3c$.dlg@4ever.his...
God and Satan - no such people/persons/spirits/things - its all in the mind,
you know!
> God is not some creature way up high in the sky who shows little or no
> interest in His people. He knows how many hairs are in our head. He that
> feeds the sparrows daily knows our needs and we are far more important to
> Him then they. The Bible says to cast _all_ our cares on Him since He
> cares
> for us.
>
> Truth is, you want to know and the sad thing has it is in front of your
> face the whole time. You wouldn't be here if weren't looking and hoping
> for
> some earth shaking awakening.
What brand of Pot do you smoke mate?
Andrew W
Really? Wow. No wonder he's such a snapperhead.
Yep Christianity makes no sense, except on a very superficial level.
Its also rather petty. You have to obey a paranormal being to the letter and
not do many things including think for yourself or he'll burn you alive. I
mean really.
Only small children and the under-educated can believe such stuff. As soon
as you look deeper into it it starts to shows its silliness. But of course
the religion's god also forbids questioning it so they never do. A nice neat
mental enslavement package. Many centuries in the making.
--
There is a kind of God or creation force, but its nothing like the
Judeo-Christian God.
Andrew W
I have plenty of times, but you believers can't handle it because you're
married to your old outdated religion.
Here's a summary of some of the answers I got to my questions.
- Is God angry and judgemental like a human judge. A. Extremely unlikely and
inevident.
- Is the Christian Bible the word of God? A. Mostly not.
- Is there an eternal hell with fire and brimstone where most people will
end up. A. Certainly not.
- Are animal sacrifices and Jesus' blood sacrifice on the cross pagan in
origin. A. Yes.
- Did Jesus come here to be worshipped and take away our sins? A. No.
Andrew W
So only some Christians actually hear the true God? Interesting. Sounds like
a rather dodgy system.
No Christian has ever really said anything that wise or remarkable.
>
> God is not some creature way up high in the sky who shows little or no
> interest in His people. He knows how many hairs are in our head. He that
> feeds the sparrows daily knows our needs and we are far more important to
> Him then they. The Bible says to cast _all_ our cares on Him since He
> cares
> for us.
>
The Bible is mostly ancient people's opinions about God. That's clearly
evident.
>
> Truth is, you want to know and the sad thing has it is in front of your
> face the whole time. You wouldn't be here if weren't looking and hoping
> for
> some earth shaking awakening.
>
I do know.
I'm here because I want others to also know and leave their old false
superstitious beliefs behind where they belong.
That would benefit our society and then we would all benefit.
Andrew W
Satan likes to enslave people. The Christian religion and its Bible are also
about disempowering you and enslaving you to a jealous and vengeful god.
Think about it. You could be backing the wrong horse.
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
Sounds like straight from satan to me.
His is probably the oldest religion in the world.
Peter B.
That is what happens when on listens to doctrine of devils.
Peter B.
Make up your mind. Chose which one you want to follow. By default it is
Satan. Have you also come to learn about God? To find truth?
>> God is not some creature way up high in the sky who shows little or no
>> interest in His people. He knows how many hairs are in our head. He that
>> feeds the sparrows daily knows our needs and we are far more important to
>> Him then they. The Bible says to cast _all_ our cares on Him since He
>> cares
>> for us.
>>
>> Truth is, you want to know and the sad thing has it is in front of your
>> face the whole time. You wouldn't be here if weren't looking and hoping
>> for
>> some earth shaking awakening.
>
> What brand of Pot do you smoke mate?
You mean it is prepackaged there? How many brands do you have?
It will open you mind to the spirits of the deviles, be careful.
Andrew W
news:4dca8ae7$0$2811$1c46...@news.club.cc.cmu.edu
Then don't listen to me (a researcher) but go and talk to or research some
other researchers and objective scholars and philosophers on the subject.
A good place to start is Prof. Bart Ehrman. He will explain how the
scriptures were edited etc.
>
> For your benefit, my formal training in research and scholarship was
> entirely secular.
>
Let me guess. Your training was religious (Christian) in nature and not so
much academic or philosophic.
Christian education is no education. Its all about disempowerment and
enslavement to an angry petty god who wants blood sacrifices and a person's
death to be appeased.
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
I already know. God is not angry any more, He took it all out on Jesus.
However, when the time of the Gentiles has been fulfilled watch out. Those
who have not been redeemed will have a heavy price to pay for rejecting His
Son's work. Including those that die without Him before then. This is not a
game the stakes for eternity are just too high.
seeker
> On Thu, 12 May 2011 08:58:12 +1000, Andrew W
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in messagenews:zz5034aa6k3c$.dlg@4ever.his
How could they reject it when they didn't even know it happened?
Rumor is not knowledge. A true rumor hidden among thousands of false
rumors is hopelessly lost.
> Including those that die without Him before then. This is not a
> game the stakes for eternity are just too high.
Then why didn't God provide us with objective evidence so that we
would know which way was right?
Andrew W
To those who are upside-down, things that are right side up look
upside-down.
You haven't considered that you could have backed the wrong horse.
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
I know whom I believe and am convinced that He is able.
I am doing as He said to caution you about that which you know. Seek the
Savior while He may be found.
8 When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou
dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die
in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
9 Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he
do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast
delivered thy soul.
EZE 34
Andrew W
Bahahaha! You don't know how doltish and incredibly petty that sounds.
I thought God is supposed to be the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
If he's not angry any more then no one's going to be damned and the core
teachings of Christianity are now null.
When are you religionists going to grow up and start thinking?
Consider this also. Why would you be given a powerful brain and then
forbidden by God to use it? Think. Your religion is Satan's clever plan of
enslavement.
>
However, when the time of the Gentiles has been fulfilled
> watch out. Those who have not been redeemed will have a heavy price
> to pay for rejecting His Son's work. Including those that die without
> Him before then. This is not a game the stakes for eternity are just
> too high.
>
That's what your religion wanted the common rabble to believe so it could
control them cheaply.
When are you going to jettison these silly ancient superstitious beliefs?
You realise these same people believed for a long time that the earth was
flat?
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 11, 4:34 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
Because in their heart they know the truth, at least until they harden it
so badly that they forgot already. Yet , they will remember that point and
time when the Great White Throne Judgment takes place.
>> Including those that die without Him before then. This is not a
>> game the stakes for eternity are just too high.
>
> Then why didn't God provide us with objective evidence so that we
> would know which way was right?
Because our heart condemns us we know what is right. If we had "objective"
evidence the way you describe it then Faith would not need to be exercised
and those that worship God Must worship by Faith, Without Faith it is
impossible to please God.
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
He is the same. Hell remains. His anger will be there at the appointed
time. Your statement about a powerful brain and its usage is ridiculous on
any level.
>>
> However, when the time of the Gentiles has been fulfilled
>> watch out. Those who have not been redeemed will have a heavy price
>> to pay for rejecting His Son's work. Including those that die without
>> Him before then. This is not a game the stakes for eternity are just
>> too high.
>>
>
> That's what your religion wanted the common rabble to believe so it could
> control them cheaply.
> When are you going to jettison these silly ancient superstitious beliefs?
> You realise these same people believed for a long time that the earth was
> flat?
I have told you and you ignored it numerous times I follow no religion.
True religion is feeding widows and orphans and the like.
Giving away your ignorance again? Flat earth concept was from people like
you who follow religion. The Bible never taught that.
Post me a question if you have legitimate questions that you really would
like an answer on. If you want to persist in this foolishness of yours bug
Dave.
Andrew W
> On Thu, 12 May 2011 10:28:30 +1000, Andrew W
> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>> "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message
>> news:1wqm5k06...@4ever.his
>>> On Thu, 12 May 2011 08:44:43 +1000, Andrew W
>>> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> To those who are upside-down, things that are right side up look
>> upside-down.
>> You haven't considered that you could have backed the wrong horse.
>
> I know whom I believe and am convinced that He is able.
>
The one whom you know is a biblical character from a religion's holy book.
Muslims say the same thing about their Allah and he contradicts the
Christian god.
Do you hear a voice in your head or something?
And what do you mean He is able? Able to do what? Was there some question
regarding God's abilities? I wasn't aware that there was.
>
> I am doing as He said to caution you about that which you know. Seek
> the Savior while He may be found.
>
Who told you we need a saviour? Wasn't it only your religion?
Didn't God foresee that things were going to go horribly wrong? If he
simply would have taught Adam & Eve better then they would have made the
right decision and we wouldn't be in this mess. Why didn't God know this was
going to happen? Or did he plan it because this god is false and evil? You
realise that whether we choose the Christian god or the Christian Satan we
are enslaved either way? Only dark gods enslave.
The true Creator doesn't disempower and enslave his creations.
>
> 8 When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if
> thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man
> shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
>
> 9 Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it;
> if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but
> thou hast delivered thy soul.
> EZE 34
>
Old dark opinions of ancient men.
Why would a Creator require blood? What would he use it for?
Think.
Blood is shed only in satanic pagan rituals. The false satanic gods use the
blood to feed their own life force because they're disconnected from their
source and can't get life force any other way.
seeker
[...]
> >> I already know. God is not angry any more, He took it all out on Jesus.
> >> However, when the time of the Gentiles has been fulfilled watch out. Those
> >> who have not been redeemed will have a heavy price to pay for rejecting His
> >> Son's work.
>
> > How could they reject it when they didn't even know it happened?
> > Rumor is not knowledge. A true rumor hidden among thousands of false
> > rumors is hopelessly lost.
>
> Because in their heart they know the truth, at least until they harden it
> so badly that they forgot already.
Why are so many Christians dishonest like this? You must lie. And
when your lies are obviously false you try to lie your way out of your
lies.
Of course people don't know what you think they know.
> Yet , they will remember that point and
> time when the Great White Throne Judgment takes place.
A lot of these dogmas are not going to pan out. Humans invented them.
> >> Including those that die without Him before then. This is not a
> >> game the stakes for eternity are just too high.
>
> > Then why didn't God provide us with objective evidence so that we
> > would know which way was right?
>
> Because our heart condemns us we know what is right.
So you have no idea what these concepts mean. Nobody's heart condemns
them. People feel emotions and often those emotions are wrong.
> If we had "objective"
> evidence the way you describe it then Faith would not need to be exercised
That would be real justice.
> . . . and those that worship God Must worship by Faith, Without Faith it is
> impossible to please God.
Thus you make God out to be an evil monster. God created the vast
majority of people knowing that it would be impossible for them to
wind up anywhere else but being tortured by God for all eternity.
Andrew W
Lol. This is better than the comedy channel.
>
> It will open you mind to the spirits of the deviles, be careful.
>
Did you know that in biblical times drugs like cannabis were used and often
for talking with God, but also for healing etc. See links below.
It is said that many of the scriptures were likely written under the
influence. That might be what's referred to as 'inspiration'.
Paul, John etc. probably had their inspirations and visions that way.
Drugs can open you up to either positive or negative spirits. It all depends
on your state of mind.
Tip: Always keep a positive mind state and be firm about what you want.
Interesting note: Many writers, artists and musicians have shared that much
of their most lauded works were done while smoking cannabis etc.
Personal note: I have never taken any mind altering drugs whatsoever.
http://www.equalrights4all.org/religious/bible.htm
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_Jesus_use_drugs
http://www.skeptically.org/bible/id9.html
seeker
> >> Jesus.
>
> > Bahahaha! You don't know how doltish and incredibly petty that sounds.
> > I thought God is supposed to be the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
> > If he's not angry any more then no one's going to be damned and the core
> > teachings of Christianity are now null.
> > When are you religionists going to grow up and start thinking?
> > Consider this also. Why would you be given a powerful brain and then
> > forbidden by God to use it? Think. Your religion is Satan's clever plan of
> > enslavement.
>
> He is the same. Hell remains. His anger will be there at the appointed
> time.
So God was angry. Then God wasn't angry. Then God will be angry
again. And all three are exactly the same.
> Your statement about a powerful brain and its usage is ridiculous on
> any level.
Must . . . resist . . . . urge . . . to point out the obvious.
[...]
> Post me a question if you have legitimate questions that you really would
> like an answer on. If you want to persist in this foolishness of yours bug
> Dave.
Where is the objective evidence for any of this? I would love a
legitimate answer.
Andrew W
You are confused. You said he is not angry any more because he took it all
out on Jesus.
And it makes no sense to let people go crazy for a few thousand years and
then suddenly punish them by burning them in a fire for eternity.
>
> Your statement about a powerful brain and its usage is
> ridiculous on any level.
>
What's wrong with it? Scientific studies have proven that its very
powerful.
Some people can do incredible feats like advanced mathematics and gain
advanced insights. Einstein is a good example.
Even some people like savants can do complex mathematical calculations in
their heads, calculate accurate calendar dates years ahead, recite entire
books after reading them only once. The list goes on.
>>>
>> However, when the time of the Gentiles has been fulfilled
>>> watch out. Those who have not been redeemed will have a heavy price
>>> to pay for rejecting His Son's work. Including those that die
>>> without Him before then. This is not a game the stakes for eternity
>>> are just too high.
>>>
>>
>> That's what your religion wanted the common rabble to believe so it
>> could control them cheaply.
>> When are you going to jettison these silly ancient superstitious
>> beliefs? You realise these same people believed for a long time that
>> the earth was flat?
>
> I have told you and you ignored it numerous times I follow no
> religion. True religion is feeding widows and orphans and the like.
>
You can deny all you like. Christianity is a religion just like Islam etc.
You are holding onto a bunch of old outdated beliefs that were adopted from
older pagan beliefs like blood sacrifice.
>
> Giving away your ignorance again? Flat earth concept was from people
> like you who follow religion. The Bible never taught that.
>
Lol. Guess what? The Flat Earth Society still exists in some places and it
gets all its information from the Bible.
Check it yourself on the net if you don't believe me.
>
> Post me a question if you have legitimate questions that you really
> would like an answer on. If you want to persist in this foolishness
> of yours bug Dave.
>
There is nothing I could learn from a religious believer.
And what I say is not foolishness. I'm trying to help you.
And I'm not going to engage Dave any more because he always goes ballistic.
He's got real problems that one.
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:q2q9g725dt5o$.dlg@4ever.his
>> On Thu, 12 May 2011 10:28:30 +1000, Andrew W
>> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message
>>> news:1wqm5k06...@4ever.his
>>>> On Thu, 12 May 2011 08:44:43 +1000, Andrew W
>>>> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> To those who are upside-down, things that are right side up look
>>> upside-down.
>>> You haven't considered that you could have backed the wrong horse.
>>
>> I know whom I believe and am convinced that He is able.
>>
>
> The one whom you know is a biblical character from a religion's holy book.
> Muslims say the same thing about their Allah and he contradicts the
> Christian god.
> Do you hear a voice in your head or something?
> And what do you mean He is able? Able to do what? Was there some question
> regarding God's abilities? I wasn't aware that there was.
>
Very good. You have admitted that His capabilities are limitless. Showing
you are attempting mind games and being a willing tool of the evil one.
>>
>> I am doing as He said to caution you about that which you know. Seek
>> the Savior while He may be found.
>>
>
> Who told you we need a saviour? Wasn't it only your religion?
> Didn't God foresee that things were going to go horribly wrong? If he
> simply would have taught Adam & Eve better then they would have made the
> right decision and we wouldn't be in this mess. Why didn't God know this was
> going to happen? Or did he plan it because this god is false and evil? You
> realise that whether we choose the Christian god or the Christian Satan we
> are enslaved either way? Only dark gods enslave.
> The true Creator doesn't disempower and enslave his creations.
>
Very good, 2nd correct thing you established. God does not enslave His
creation not does He disempower them. (The gifts and calling of God are
without repentance)
>>
>> 8 When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if
>> thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man
>> shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
>>
>> 9 Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it;
>> if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but
>> thou hast delivered thy soul.
>> EZE 34
>>
>
> Old dark opinions of ancient men.
> Why would a Creator require blood? What would he use it for?
> Think.
> Blood is shed only in satanic pagan rituals. The false satanic gods use the
> blood to feed their own life force because they're disconnected from their
> source and can't get life force any other way.
Oh oh, wrong answer, heh, two out of three isn't too bad. Although you
spoke about a lot of things before you reached some truths.
Tell you what. When you feel you have some sincere questions and want
something far better for your life, or even if you get fear struck about
your future being death an eternity without anything comfortable, no
healing, no friends etc. Call upon Jesus Christ. I'll be glad to do what I
can from His perspective.
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
Funny you posted links to support ideas opposing your active arguments
here. Like Jesus doing drugs when you said He did not live. Stuff about the
bible that you say is not real. You are one confused pup.
The word pharmacia is for drugs, but not pot, some used them to speak with
satan, their god. We live in biblical times Andrew. Drugs were forbidden to
the Jew.
Regarding your usage of mind altering drugs, what do you think pain killers
do?
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 11, 7:18 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
> [...]
>>>> I already know. God is not angry any more, He took it all out on Jesus.
>>>> However, when the time of the Gentiles has been fulfilled watch out. Those
>>>> who have not been redeemed will have a heavy price to pay for rejecting His
>>>> Son's work.
>>
>>> How could they reject it when they didn't even know it happened?
>>> Rumor is not knowledge. A true rumor hidden among thousands of false
>>> rumors is hopelessly lost.
>>
>> Because in their heart they know the truth, at least until they harden it
>> so badly that they forgot already.
>
> Why are so many Christians dishonest like this? You must lie. And
> when your lies are obviously false you try to lie your way out of your
> lies.
>
Hmmm, and just how do you know that is a lie? The Bible speaks of it, you
spoke of it, most honest people would speak of it as well.
> Of course people don't know what you think they know.
>
If it is on this subject I'll trust experience plus the established Word of
God.
>> Yet , they will remember that point and
>> time when the Great White Throne Judgment takes place.
>
> A lot of these dogmas are not going to pan out. Humans invented them.
>
We will find out soon enough.
>>>> Including those that die without Him before then. This is not a
>>>> game the stakes for eternity are just too high.
>>
>>> Then why didn't God provide us with objective evidence so that we
>>> would know which way was right?
>>
>> Because our heart condemns us we know what is right.
>
> So you have no idea what these concepts mean. Nobody's heart condemns
> them. People feel emotions and often those emotions are wrong.
>
Odd, you say no, then justify people denying their "yes" statements.
Your own experience said otherwise from posts you have made here. Of course
you could have been lying to all of us.
>> If we had "objective"
>> evidence the way you describe it then Faith would not need to be exercised
>
> That would be real justice.
>
>> . . . and those that worship God Must worship by Faith, Without Faith it is
>> impossible to please God.
>
> Thus you make God out to be an evil monster. God created the vast
> majority of people knowing that it would be impossible for them to
> wind up anywhere else but being tortured by God for all eternity.
He created the Lake of Fire and Brimstone for that purpose. Like He can
forget sin because of the Work that Jesus did, I suspect that once sinners
have been judged and sent to the Lake designed for fallen angels that it
will be the last time He ever thinks of them. They will be "dead" spirits
and souls
seeker
> On Wed, 11 May 2011 20:03:13 -0700 (PDT), seeker <hsot...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 11, 7:18 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
> > [...]
> >>>> I already know. God is not angry any more, He took it all out on Jesus.
> >>>> However, when the time of the Gentiles has been fulfilled watch out. Those
> >>>> who have not been redeemed will have a heavy price to pay for rejecting His
> >>>> Son's work.
>
> >>> How could they reject it when they didn't even know it happened?
> >>> Rumor is not knowledge. A true rumor hidden among thousands of false
> >>> rumors is hopelessly lost.
>
> >> Because in their heart they know the truth, at least until they harden it
> >> so badly that they forgot already.
>
> > Why are so many Christians dishonest like this? You must lie. And
> > when your lies are obviously false you try to lie your way out of your
> > lies.
>
> Hmmm, and just how do you know that is a lie?
You asserted something that cannot be true. ". . . in their heart
they know the truth . . ." Heart is just a metaphor for the mind, and
likely the intuitive part at that. Emotions. And it is impossible to
know anything without verification. Emotions and intuition don't
verify.
> The Bible speaks of it,
That is men speaking of it, actually inventing it. Men are not God.
> . . . you
> spoke of it,
What are you talking aobut?
> most honest people would speak of it as well.
No True Scotsman
> > Of course people don't know what you think they know.
>
> If it is on this subject I'll trust experience plus the established Word of
> God.
Which is not verification so it is impossible for people to know.
They don't know. They can't know. They can only guess.
> >> Yet , they will remember that point and
> >> time when the Great White Throne Judgment takes place.
>
> > A lot of these dogmas are not going to pan out. Humans invented them.
>
> We will find out soon enough.
And if you advised people to do things that will get them tortured for
eternity then what? Oops.
> >>>> Including those that die without Him before then. This is not a
> >>>> game the stakes for eternity are just too high.
>
> >>> Then why didn't God provide us with objective evidence so that we
> >>> would know which way was right?
>
> >> Because our heart condemns us we know what is right.
>
> > So you have no idea what these concepts mean. Nobody's heart condemns
> > them. People feel emotions and often those emotions are wrong.
>
> Odd, you say no, then justify people denying their "yes" statements.
Learn to read.
> Your own experience said otherwise from posts you have made here.
Read the actual words rather than what you with they said.
> Of course
> you could have been lying to all of us.
In these mythical passages that I never wrote? I'm not responsible
for things you imagine.
> >> If we had "objective"
> >> evidence the way you describe it then Faith would not need to be exercised
>
> > That would be real justice.
>
> >> . . . and those that worship God Must worship by Faith, Without Faith it is
> >> impossible to please God.
>
> > Thus you make God out to be an evil monster. God created the vast
> > majority of people knowing that it would be impossible for them to
> > wind up anywhere else but being tortured by God for all eternity.
>
> He created the Lake of Fire and Brimstone for that purpose.
If God is all knowing and all powerful then we know God must be evil.
> Like He can
> forget sin because of the Work that Jesus did,
Why is God inferior to me at forgiveness? I don't need to separate
part of myself from the rest of me, kill it and let that be the
sacrifice I need in order to let something go, and then wind up not
forgiving anyway because the person who offended me didn't realize
they must believe and accept that the part of me that I killed was
their atonement.
I think a superior being would just let things go and do a better job
at it than I can.
> I suspect that once sinners
> have been judged and sent to the Lake designed for fallen angels that it
> will be the last time He ever thinks of them. They will be "dead" spirits
> and souls
What if it turns out the real sin is thinking God would do something
like that?
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
There was fair warning up front as usual.
>>
>> Your statement about a powerful brain and its usage is
>> ridiculous on any level.
>>
>
> What's wrong with it? Scientific studies have proven that its very
> powerful.
> Some people can do incredible feats like advanced mathematics and gain
> advanced insights. Einstein is a good example.
> Even some people like savants can do complex mathematical calculations in
> their heads, calculate accurate calendar dates years ahead, recite entire
> books after reading them only once. The list goes on.
>
It is your brain and your choice how to use it. Same with everyone else.
Then Satan offered such a deal, still it was your choice. Everything here
was corrupted by sin.
>>>>
>>> However, when the time of the Gentiles has been fulfilled
>>>> watch out. Those who have not been redeemed will have a heavy price
>>>> to pay for rejecting His Son's work. Including those that die
>>>> without Him before then. This is not a game the stakes for eternity
>>>> are just too high.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's what your religion wanted the common rabble to believe so it
>>> could control them cheaply.
>>> When are you going to jettison these silly ancient superstitious
>>> beliefs? You realise these same people believed for a long time that
>>> the earth was flat?
>>
>> I have told you and you ignored it numerous times I follow no
>> religion. True religion is feeding widows and orphans and the like.
>>
>
> You can deny all you like. Christianity is a religion just like Islam etc.
> You are holding onto a bunch of old outdated beliefs that were adopted from
> older pagan beliefs like blood sacrifice.
>
I am a believer, some are Christians and some are Christian believers. I
don't follow a religion, but it would seem that somone trained you well.
>>
>> Giving away your ignorance again? Flat earth concept was from people
>> like you who follow religion. The Bible never taught that.
>>
>
> Lol. Guess what? The Flat Earth Society still exists in some places and it
> gets all its information from the Bible.
> Check it yourself on the net if you don't believe me.
>
Which version? The one I use doesn't.
>>
>> Post me a question if you have legitimate questions that you really
>> would like an answer on. If you want to persist in this foolishness
>> of yours bug Dave.
>>
>
> There is nothing I could learn from a religious believer.
> And what I say is not foolishness. I'm trying to help you.
> And I'm not going to engage Dave any more because he always goes ballistic.
> He's got real problems that one.
Jesus and the Holy Spirit is all the help I need.
seeker
> "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in messagenews:1wwuqgq3nzb7t$.dlg@4ever.his
[..]
> I'm trying to help you.
You can't help the people who refuse to allow themselves to be helped.
Got any objective evidence of the divine? I've been looking for it
for years. I use to be a Christian but I can't do that anymore. When
it comes to dealing with the nuts and bolts of evidence Christians are
consistently dishonest about it. Something compels them to deny
reality and bend the facts. After all I use to do it myself a decade
ago. Something inside me compels me to continue to believe in God.
It's my bias. But for the rest of dogma I'm pretty much agnostic. I
know that we don't know. I notice you have criticized Christianity
but I'm more interested in positive views or statements you have on
religion, if any. What can we say about it. What do you believe and
why?
SFD
"Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:1iym4pid...@4ever.his...
Its all in the mind, you know!
SFD
"Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:t1yw9jx2yld4$.dlg@4ever.his...
Delusion! ... are you SURE you are not smoking pot?
SFD
"Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:iqfbka$ku1$1...@dont-email.me...
Satans' got them by the short-and-curlies!
SFD
"Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote in message news:1wwuqgq3nzb7t$.dlg@4ever.his...
It's all in the mind, you know!
SFD
"Pastor Dave" <*newsgroup-mail*@*tampabay.rr.com*> wrote in message
news:ediis6dt7flei1ijr...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 10 May 2011 08:31:18 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
> <geic...@tampabay.rr.com> spake thusly:
>
>
>> Peter B. wrote:
>>
>>> I know of none who claimed their leader died
>>> and rose from the dead. I know of none who
>>> told their followers to watch for His return, not
>>> told them to go into all the world and preach
>>> the Gospel. To pray for the sick, cast out demons,
>>> raise the dead and so on. Name one religion
>>> that says Gods spirit will tell you or explain to
>>> you whatever He said in their writings?
>>
>> There were approximately 16 other dying and
>> resurrecting godmen who saved us from our
>> sins before Jesus.
>
> Now why are you guys so dishonest about this?
>
> You guys try to imply that it's the same thing,
> or you wouldn't be mentioning it as a response
> to Peter's statement.
>
> I have refuted this old garbage so many times,
> including to you and yet, like the rest, here you
> are again, making the same old false claims.
>
> And of course, since various pagan religions were
> around before Christianity, the claim that Christianity
> stole from these pagan religions either follows, or as
> it is here, is automatically implied. The most popular
> claim being that Christianity stole from Mithraism.
>
> Before I begin to address this, let me say right up front,
> that Christianity was not considered a separate religion
> at first and that is the mistake that you people make
> right off the bat when you try to compare ages. The
> reality is, that Christianity was considered to be a sect
> of Judaism (the NT and other historical sources attest
> to this fact) and that is what you will need to compare
> the pagan religions to.
>
>
> The Claim:
> Christianity stole from Mithraism, with its pagan "man-god"
> that gets resurrected and its sacrificial bulls with the blood
> and its "Eucharist".
>
> The Answer:
> No, I'm sorry, it didn't and you haven't done your homework.
>
> The pagan religions have gone through many major evolutions.
> In fact, Mithraism had gone through four major evolutions,
> before it appeared in the form that atheists commonly quote
> it as being in and claim Christianity copied from. They aren't
> even aware that this is the case and the atheist tends to do
> no more research than reading an atheist web page that was
> put up by another atheist, who also did no research and just
> copied from another atheist web page, etc., etc..
>
> The problem for the atheist claim is, that Mithraism simply
> did not exist in that form until _after_ it had come to the
> same area that Christianity was in at the time (it had just
> started to spread and so this would be Judea) and then
> taken the last of the four major evolutions it went through
> up to that point.
>
> I.e., When Mithraism first entered the same area as Christianity
> (Judea), it did not yet exist in the form that the atheists quote it
> as being in and it actually copied from Christianity, not the other
> way around!
>
> In fact, as stated again below, Justin Martyr referred to the meal
> that they ate (in Mithraism), as a Satanic copy of the Lord's Supper,
> not the other way around.
>
> If I were these atheists, I would take the time to do some actual
> research and find out when Mithraism developed different beliefs
> within their religion and what was going on in the area at the time.
>
> I.e., Did those ideas already exist in other religions when it arrived?
>
> They will find that in reality, Mithraism stole from Christianity!
>
> You see folks, the argument is not whether or not Mithraism existed
> at all, which the atheists think proves their case, but whether or not
> it existed in the form they claim, in Jerusalem and the immediately
> surrounding area, at the time Christianity started. That is what is
> important and the fact is, that it did not!
>
> And what the atheists don't even take into account (which almost
> all Christians are also ignorant of), is that Christianity was not even
> viewed as a new religion, nor was it considered a new religion by
> Jesus, nor the Apostles who preached it after His Ascension, folks!
>
> The truth is, that the name "Christianity" didn't even exist at first!
> This faith was simply considered to be Judaism and a sect of that
> by those who did not believe in Christ. What Jesus and the Apostles
> preached, was "Judaism fulfilled", not a new religion.
>
> And _after_ the time that Mithraism came into the area (Judea) that
> Christianity was in, it then developed beliefs that somewhat paralleled
> the Christian beliefs and not the other way around!
>
> Mithraism also did not have a god that they could say lived at a certain
> date and provide support for that. Nor could they show you a god who
> was physically killed and resurrected and appeared to over 500 witnesses
> that could be questioned and ascend to heaven in front of witnesses.
>
> Mithraism eventually became Christianity's most serious rival, but had
> no importance in the Roman world during the first century. There is
> no way it influenced Christianity! And that is why I keep using the
> word "had" in this text. Because any of the listed ideas that it did
> later evolve to gain (which does not include all of those ideas listed),
> it did not have before entering the area Christianity was already in.
>
> Not only this, but the Romans knew Mithra as Sol Invictus. In fact,
> Justin Martyr referred to the meal that they ate (in Mithraism), as
> a Satanic copy of the Lord's Supper, not the other way around! :)
>
> Mithraism had no concept of the death and resurrection of its god.
>
> Mithraism had no place for any concept of rebirth (at least during
> the early stages).
>
> Mithraism was more of a military cult. Christians in the early
> centuries sought peace.
>
> Mithraism occurred in the area after the close of the canon. This
> is simply far too late to have influenced Christianity, or the writings
> of the New Testament!
>
> Mithraism had no date to point to, to show that their god existed.
> Jesus had lived only a few years before the writings and the people
> who would have been able to disprove it, were still alive at the time.
>
> Many Christians may foolishly buy into these late dates assigned to
> the New Testament writings, due to their own ignorance because
> they do zero research, but those late dates are old news and scholars
> are now, as they should, coming back to much earlier dated, as the
> liberals, who are not really believers in the first place and who have
> always sought to undermine the Scriptures (which is why you read
> them claiming that this or that in them didn't really happen, etc.),
> are being dismissed as exactly that! The truth is, that Corinthians,
> for example, was written as little as only 10-15 years after Christ!
>
> As for Mithraic baptism, there was no notion of dying to self and
> rising a new creature, as was symbolic in the Christian baptism.
> In fact, it was later (in the third century) that a change came
> about in Mithraism and the blood of this baptism became symbolic
> of purification, which leaves open a Christian influence on Mithraism
> and not the other way around. Folks ignorant to these facts, will
> simply point out the purification element of Mithraism and never
> check the history of it, thereby fooling folks like them, who assume
> that atheist and pagan web pages are honest and full of wonderful
> research, when in reality, their arguments don't hold water, when
> put to the test. The reality is, that this "blood baptism" had nothing
> to do with any purification, nor did Christians use blood in baptisms.
>
> These people (even some falsely claiming to be Christians) can and
> I'm sure will, start quoting web sites that make claims, but read the
> claims carefully. Do they even talk about the evolutions that these
> pagan religions have gone through and in what exact form in detail
> that it existed in before being introduced in an area in which the
> Christian faith already existed/had been preached?
>
> Watch Mithraism go through its stages in A.D. history, while at the
> same time, Christianity is more and more dominant and you'll see
> Mithraism change in ways that adapt to Christianity, not vice versa!
>
> I will grant however, that centuries later, paganism began to creep
> in and some of its practices were adopted into what is now the
> Catholic Church. Protestants broke away from those things, with
> some exceptions ("Catholic Lite" denominations, like the Episcopal),
> but that does not mean that Christianity had come from paganism
> and that is simply a fallacious and a ridiculous argument to make!
>
> There are many other arguments against Mithraism having any
> influence on Christianity. That's all I really have time for though.
>
> I would suggest picking up a copy of the book;
>
> "The Gospel and the Greeks: Did the New Testament Borrow
> from Pagan Though?"
>
> It is authored by Ronald H. Nash and is available through Amazon
> and it will enlighten you on many of these subjects. It's a great read!
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3hjdywt
>
> The bottom line is, that if they wish to claim that Christianity
> stole from Mithraism, then they must prove that it existed
> AS THEY DESCRIBED IT, IN THAT AREA AND AT THAT TIME!
>
> These are just old, tired arguments, which for some reason,
> still float around in this country especially, but have been
> refuted and dismissed a long time ago. The reason I think
> they still survive, is because Christians don't bother to do
> any research and I don't think one can find any group of
> people that are lazier about researching something, nor more
> easily suckered into believing something, when it comes to
> Christians regarding the Bible and it is sad! Let's change this!
>
> I'm sorry if that offends anyone, but if it weren't true, then
> we wouldn't see "Christians" arguing FOR these various claims,
> such as the "Q" document, the late dates for NT writings,
> "this or that was never actually said/done by Jesus", the
> Bible has contradictions, WWJD and other sucker arguments.
>
> And yet, that is exactly what we see and not just from some
> small number, but in very large numbers! It is sad and it
> needs to stop and be changed! A "180" needs to happen!
>
> Hope this helped and edified/blessed many! :)
>
>
Sorry, I fell asleep, can you repeat that!
SFD
> On 10 May 2011 18:20:40 GMT, holy...@wondering.com spake thusly:
>
>>"These are just old, tired arguments, which for some reason, still float
>>around in this country especially, but have been refuted and dismissed a
>>long time ago. The reason I think they still survive, is because
>>Christians don't bother to do any research and I don't think one can
>>find any group of people that are lazier about researching something,
>>nor more easily suckered into believing something, when it comes to
>>"Christians regarding the Bible and it is sad! Let's change this!
>>
>>this regard.
>
> You need to turn on the quoting feature.
> It's too confusing otherwise.
>
> And my point was that Christians should be better of
> and aren't. That makes them even worse than atheists.
Worse than what?
Nothing wrong with being an atheist - its just another belief mechanism.
Other beliefs are christianity, insanity etc....
Peter B.
Yes, Jesus and God are in my mind, Isaiah 26:3 (King James Version)
3 Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee:
because he trusteth in thee.
I would hope in yours is not what is left over.
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 11, 11:27 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
You said you were like I and had experienced all the same things, and that
you had difficulty overcoming or blinding of your mind to what you had
turned your back on. I took you at your word.
>> most honest people would speak of it as well.
>
> No True Scotsman
>
Fallacy. Given adequate chance to know they are a dead person most cry out
to God. Then because they don't know how to approach Him they curse and
call for a priest or minister, then cry out for _any_ minister. I have
heard them, it is not pleasant. And no, I have not heard all. I realize
some in that state have their conscience so seared that they hearts have
nothing but anger left and will curse God on their way out.
>>> Of course people don't know what you think they know.
>>
>> If it is on this subject I'll trust experience plus the established Word of
>> God.
>
> Which is not verification so it is impossible for people to know.
> They don't know. They can't know. They can only guess.
>
only in your current state of mind.
>>>> Yet , they will remember that point and
>>>> time when the Great White Throne Judgment takes place.
>>
>>> A lot of these dogmas are not going to pan out. Humans invented them.
>>
>> We will find out soon enough.
>
> And if you advised people to do things that will get them tortured for
> eternity then what? Oops.
>
Why would I do that? We are to operate out of Love. Love sometimes needs to
be brutally honest to warn of impending dangers to come if they will not
listen to anything else.
>>>>>> Including those that die without Him before then. This is not a
>>>>>> game the stakes for eternity are just too high.
>>
>>>>> Then why didn't God provide us with objective evidence so that we
>>>>> would know which way was right?
>>
>>>> Because our heart condemns us we know what is right.
>>
>>> So you have no idea what these concepts mean. Nobody's heart condemns
>>> them. People feel emotions and often those emotions are wrong.
>>
>> Odd, you say no, then justify people denying their "yes" statements.
>
> Learn to read.
>
I re read it several times.
>> Your own experience said otherwise from posts you have made here.
>
> Read the actual words rather than what you with they said.
>
When you read this post tell me my memory of what you said is faulty or you
were just pulling our strings. I will release it.
>> Of course
>> you could have been lying to all of us.
>
> In these mythical passages that I never wrote? I'm not responsible
> for things you imagine.
>
See above.
>
>> Like He can
>> forget sin because of the Work that Jesus did,
>
> Why is God inferior to me at forgiveness? I don't need to separate
> part of myself from the rest of me, kill it and let that be the
> sacrifice I need in order to let something go, and then wind up not
> forgiving anyway because the person who offended me didn't realize
> they must believe and accept that the part of me that I killed was
> their atonement.
>
> I think a superior being would just let things go and do a better job
> at it than I can.
>
Gods word is fixed, justice must be served. It is spoken of frequently in
the Bible. Yet you still argue and argue and argue when at this point in
time we live in a period of Grace(Unmerited favor) yet you deny all that to
argue stuff not applicable to today or even your life. Unless you be
already in a reprobate state in which case no doubt you will go down
swinging at God. I hope such is not the case with you.
>> I suspect that once sinners
>> have been judged and sent to the Lake designed for fallen angels that it
>> will be the last time He ever thinks of them. They will be "dead" spirits
>> and souls
>
> What if it turns out the real sin is thinking God would do something
> like that?
I am freed from sin, the only sin I can now do is reject His Holy Spirit. I
will not do that.
seeker
[..]
> >>>> Because in their heart they know the truth, at least until they harden it
> >>>> so badly that they forgot already.
>
> >>> Why are so many Christians dishonest like this? You must lie. And
> >>> when your lies are obviously false you try to lie your way out of your
> >>> lies.
>
> >> Hmmm, and just how do you know that is a lie?
>
> > You asserted something that cannot be true. ". . . in their heart
> > they know the truth . . ." Heart is just a metaphor for the mind, and
> > likely the intuitive part at that. Emotions. And it is impossible to
> > know anything without verification. Emotions and intuition don't
> > verify.
>
> >> The Bible speaks of it,
>
> > That is men speaking of it, actually inventing it. Men are not God.
>
> >> . . . you
> >> spoke of it,
>
> > What are you talking aobut?
>
> You said you were like I and had experienced all the same things, and that
> you had difficulty overcoming or blinding of your mind to what you had
> turned your back on. I took you at your word.
No, you took me at what you translated my word into.
I have experience nearly everything you have. I have even at one
point deluded myself into thinking "Because in their heart they know
the truth". That I now understand why that is not true doesn't have
anything to do with blinding of my mind. And I haven't turned my back
on anything. Realizing Christianity is dishonest isn't a betrayal.
> >> most honest people would speak of it as well.
>
> > No True Scotsman
>
> Fallacy.
Correct, that is what you used.
> Given adequate chance to know they are a dead person most cry out
> to God.
Yet nobody was given a chance to know that. Without objective
evidence knowledge is impossible.
> Then because they don't know how to approach Him they curse and
> call for a priest or minister, then cry out for _any_ minister. I have
> heard them, it is not pleasant. And no, I have not heard all. I realize
> some in that state have their conscience so seared that they hearts have
> nothing but anger left and will curse God on their way out.
They can't know any of that. You can't know any of it.
> >>> Of course people don't know what you think they know.
>
> >> If it is on this subject I'll trust experience plus the established Word of
> >> God.
>
> > Which is not verification so it is impossible for people to know.
> > They don't know. They can't know. They can only guess.
>
> only in your current state of mind.
Are they suppose to take hallucinogens or something?
> >>>> Yet , they will remember that point and
> >>>> time when the Great White Throne Judgment takes place.
>
> >>> A lot of these dogmas are not going to pan out. Humans invented them.
>
> >> We will find out soon enough.
>
> > And if you advised people to do things that will get them tortured for
> > eternity then what? Oops.
>
> Why would I do that?
Ignorance. You have been giving out all kinds of advise and you have
no idea if any of it has eternal consequences.
> We are to operate out of Love. Love sometimes needs to
> be brutally honest to warn of impending dangers to come if they will not
> listen to anything else.
You don't know any of these things.
> >>>>>> Including those that die without Him before then. This is not a
> >>>>>> game the stakes for eternity are just too high.
>
> >>>>> Then why didn't God provide us with objective evidence so that we
> >>>>> would know which way was right?
>
> >>>> Because our heart condemns us we know what is right.
>
> >>> So you have no idea what these concepts mean. Nobody's heart condemns
> >>> them. People feel emotions and often those emotions are wrong.
>
> >> Odd, you say no, then justify people denying their "yes" statements.
>
> > Learn to read.
>
> I re read it several times.
Then what is "Odd, you say no, then justify people denying their "yes"
statements" suppose to mean?
> >> Your own experience said otherwise from posts you have made here.
>
> > Read the actual words rather than what you with they said.
The "with" should read "wish". I don't know how I got the s mixed up
with i as different hands are responsible.
> When you read this post tell me my memory of what you said is faulty or you
> were just pulling our strings. I will release it.
Half the time I can't tell what you think you are saying. What do you
refer to now?
> >> Of course
> >> you could have been lying to all of us.
>
> > In these mythical passages that I never wrote? I'm not responsible
> > for things you imagine.
>
> See above.
You will have to identify what you think was my "lying to all of us".
> >> Like He can
> >> forget sin because of the Work that Jesus did,
>
> > Why is God inferior to me at forgiveness? I don't need to separate
> > part of myself from the rest of me, kill it and let that be the
> > sacrifice I need in order to let something go, and then wind up not
> > forgiving anyway because the person who offended me didn't realize
> > they must believe and accept that the part of me that I killed was
> > their atonement.
>
> > I think a superior being would just let things go and do a better job
> > at it than I can.
>
> Gods word is fixed, justice must be served.
That God must follow God's word does not get out of the goofiness of
the stories. Why would God put forward goofiness in God's word in the
first place? Oh and eternal torment is never justice for finite
sins. That is far more unbalanced that killing someone because you
don't like what they wear.
> It is spoken of frequently in
> the Bible.
Well that should be your first clue that it might not be true.
> Yet you still argue and argue and argue when at this point in
> time we live in a period of Grace(Unmerited favor) yet you deny all that to
> argue stuff not applicable to today or even your life.
Maybe if there was a legitimate answer I wouldn't need to ask these
questions.
> Unless you be
> already in a reprobate state in which case no doubt you will go down
> swinging at God.
I've got nothing against God. My critiques are directed at the words
of the men who pretend they speak for God.
> I hope such is not the case with you.
>
> >> I suspect that once sinners
> >> have been judged and sent to the Lake designed for fallen angels that it
> >> will be the last time He ever thinks of them. They will be "dead" spirits
> >> and souls
>
> > What if it turns out the real sin is thinking God would do something
> > like that?
>
> I am freed from sin, the only sin I can now do is reject His Holy Spirit. I
> will not do that.
So you could murder someone and it wouldn't be sin?
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 12, 1:07 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
Then you never experienced what I have. You have not even come close and
that is a good thing. Since it would appear then that the door may still be
open to you.
That you would slight me for taking you at your words when you wrote these
things several times, yet you dare to inject you understandings into mine?
That seems to be the height of hypocrisy. I will not dig up your words for
I have nothing to gain even if I was 100% correct, and I do not see any
benefit for you either. So I will clear the total slate here in my
understanding with regarding you.
>>>> most honest people would speak of it as well.
>>
>>> No True Scotsman
>>
>> Fallacy.
>
> Correct, that is what you used.
>
I used known RL experiences plus the Bible. They confirmed each other.
>> Given adequate chance to know they are a dead person most cry out
>> to God.
>
> Yet nobody was given a chance to know that. Without objective
> evidence knowledge is impossible.
>
Well, I've been there, heard it, had to deal with listening to it. But of
course there is no objectivity per your definitions.
>> Then because they don't know how to approach Him they curse and
>> call for a priest or minister, then cry out for _any_ minister. I have
>> heard them, it is not pleasant. And no, I have not heard all. I realize
>> some in that state have their conscience so seared that they hearts have
>> nothing but anger left and will curse God on their way out.
>
> They can't know any of that. You can't know any of it.
>
With my ears I heard, I listened to them explain their thoughts as they did
so out load in both anger and anguish. But heh, you know better, eh?
Jumped ahead through this post, pointless for me to continue further.
HAND
>balance snipped<
seeker
[...]
> I will not dig up your words for
> I have nothing to gain even if I was 100% correct, and I do not see any
> benefit for you either.
Oh it is of great benefit to me. You see I'm searching for honest and
lucid Christians. The ratio of honest/lucid Christians to dishonest/
delusional Christians will help me decide if I should allow my
children to continue to go to Christian church or pull them out and
rase them as humanists. So far it doesn't look good for
Christianity. I'm beginning to wonder if the self-delusions of
Christianity are harmful to one's ability to grasp logic.
[...]
> Well, I've been there, heard it, had to deal with listening to it. But of
> course there is no objectivity per your definitions.
Wrong. Of course objective exists. Facts are objective. Evidence
that is the same to everyone is objective. An emotion you experience
is not objective because only you can feel it.
[..]
> Jumped ahead through this post, pointless for me to continue further.
>
> HAND
Yeah, you are kind of stuck. Things won't be improving for you.
Gary Eickmeier
G
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 12, 5:43 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
> [...]
>> I will not dig up your words for
>> I have nothing to gain even if I was 100% correct, and I do not see any
>> benefit for you either.
>
> Oh it is of great benefit to me. You see I'm searching for honest and
> lucid Christians. The ratio of honest/lucid Christians to dishonest/
> delusional Christians will help me decide if I should allow my
> children to continue to go to Christian church or pull them out and
> rase them as humanists. So far it doesn't look good for
> Christianity. I'm beginning to wonder if the self-delusions of
> Christianity are harmful to one's ability to grasp logic.
>
If I believed you I would look up your words for you have said such more
than once. Sadly when I looked up evidence of people coming back to life
meeting your criteria you only proceeded to try and knock down the facts
and in the end found excuses for you to reject what you could not prove
incorrect. Stuff that hit the newspapers you said.
> [...]
>> Well, I've been there, heard it, had to deal with listening to it. But of
>> course there is no objectivity per your definitions.
>
> Wrong. Of course objective exists. Facts are objective. Evidence
> that is the same to everyone is objective. An emotion you experience
> is not objective because only you can feel it.
>
There you go, it was not my emotion and I was not the only one who heard
them. Everyone, believer nor not agreed. You see no matter what you assume
you are correct, even though the criteria matched your definition of fact.
> [..]
>> Jumped ahead through this post, pointless for me to continue further.
>>
>> HAND
>
> Yeah, you are kind of stuck. Things won't be improving for you.
I'm not stuck, I am growing. Your field of view is narrowing.
You have nothing to disprove God nor His existence. You have nothing to
disprove His Son Jesus Christ nor His existence. Maybe you should return to
your previous interest science fiction or politics?
seeker
> On Thu, 12 May 2011 18:05:33 -0700 (PDT), seeker <hsot...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On May 12, 5:43 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
> > [...]
> >> I will not dig up your words for
> >> I have nothing to gain even if I was 100% correct, and I do not see any
> >> benefit for you either.
>
> > Oh it is of great benefit to me. You see I'm searching for honest and
> > lucid Christians. The ratio of honest/lucid Christians to dishonest/
> > delusional Christians will help me decide if I should allow my
> > children to continue to go to Christian church or pull them out and
> > rase them as humanists. So far it doesn't look good for
> > Christianity. I'm beginning to wonder if the self-delusions of
> > Christianity are harmful to one's ability to grasp logic.
>
> If I believed you I would look up your words for you have said such more
> than once. Sadly when I looked up evidence of people coming back to life
> meeting your criteria you only proceeded to try and knock down the facts
> and in the end found excuses for you to reject what you could not prove
> incorrect. Stuff that hit the newspapers you said.
That never happened. It's unfortunate but you take the events that do
happen and run them through your understanding. The result is not
quite what happened. It's reality viewed through your perception.
> > [...]
> >> Well, I've been there, heard it, had to deal with listening to it. But of
> >> course there is no objectivity per your definitions.
>
> > Wrong. Of course objective exists. Facts are objective. Evidence
> > that is the same to everyone is objective. An emotion you experience
> > is not objective because only you can feel it.
>
> There you go, it was not my emotion and I was not the only one who heard
> them. Everyone, believer nor not agreed.
??? What have you deluded yourself about now?
> You see no matter what you assume
> you are correct,
That is false. I'm wrong about many things.
> even though the criteria matched your definition of fact.
Didn't happen. Again you run reality through your perception and the
result is wrong.
[...]
> You have nothing to disprove God nor His existence.
I know. I never claimed that I can disprove God.
> You have nothing to
> disprove His Son Jesus Christ nor His existence.
I know. Same thing.
> Maybe you should return to
> your previous interest science fiction or politics?
Okay. What kind of treaty do you think Pakistan has with the United
States? We have been shooting missiles into their country for years
now. And about two weeks ago we made a small invasion without
informing the Pakistani government. By any measure we have been
committing acts of war on Pakistan, unless there is a secret treaty.
Peter B.
wrote:
> On May 13, 2:13 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 May 2011 18:05:33 -0700 (PDT), seeker <hsot...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On May 12, 5:43 pm, "Peter B." <b...@i.org> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> I will not dig up your words for
>>>> I have nothing to gain even if I was 100% correct, and I do not see any
>>>> benefit for you either.
>>
>>> Oh it is of great benefit to me. You see I'm searching for honest and
>>> lucid Christians. The ratio of honest/lucid Christians to dishonest/
>>> delusional Christians will help me decide if I should allow my
>>> children to continue to go to Christian church or pull them out and
>>> rase them as humanists. So far it doesn't look good for
>>> Christianity. I'm beginning to wonder if the self-delusions of
>>> Christianity are harmful to one's ability to grasp logic.
>>
>> If I believed you I would look up your words for you have said such more
>> than once. Sadly when I looked up evidence of people coming back to life
>> meeting your criteria you only proceeded to try and knock down the facts
>> and in the end found excuses for you to reject what you could not prove
>> incorrect. Stuff that hit the newspapers you said.
>
> That never happened. It's unfortunate but you take the events that do
> happen and run them through your understanding. The result is not
> quite what happened. It's reality viewed through your perception.
>
OK, that is another thing I will dismiss. I was always under the impression
that words meant something.
>>> [...]
>>>> Well, I've been there, heard it, had to deal with listening to it. But of
>>>> course there is no objectivity per your definitions.
>>
>>> Wrong. Of course objective exists. Facts are objective. Evidence
>>> that is the same to everyone is objective. An emotion you experience
>>> is not objective because only you can feel it.
>>
>> There you go, it was not my emotion and I was not the only one who heard
>> them. Everyone, believer nor not agreed.
>
> ??? What have you deluded yourself about now?
>
It was part of the conversation that you snipped, my mistake, I guess your
comments were not referencing those statements and spoke to something else.
<Shrug> I don't have the time to try and figure out what it is. Sorry.
>> You see no matter what you assume
>> you are correct,
>
> That is false. I'm wrong about many things.
>
>> even though the criteria matched your definition of fact.
>
> Didn't happen. Again you run reality through your perception and the
> result is wrong.
>
Yes, Funny thing that. I define words my Webster's Dictionary and assume
that what I read is understandable based on that. Thank you for your
insight but I will stick to what I have been taught. Things like clock
cycles in computers vary imperceptibly by temp never by distance from the
earth.
> [...]
>> You have nothing to disprove God nor His existence.
>
> I know. I never claimed that I can disprove God.
>
>> You have nothing to
>> disprove His Son Jesus Christ nor His existence.
>
> I know. Same thing.
>
>> Maybe you should return to
>> your previous interest science fiction or politics?
>
> Okay. What kind of treaty do you think Pakistan has with the United
> States? We have been shooting missiles into their country for years
> now. And about two weeks ago we made a small invasion without
> informing the Pakistani government. By any measure we have been
> committing acts of war on Pakistan, unless there is a secret treaty.
Not in this ng, but in those.
I am not aware that we even have a treaty with Pakistan.
seeker
> On Fri, 13 May 2011 14:27:00 -0700 (PDT), seeker <hsot...@hotmail.com>
Words do have meaning.
[...]
> >> even though the criteria matched your definition of fact.
>
> > Didn't happen. Again you run reality through your perception and the
> > result is wrong.
>
> Yes, Funny thing that. I define words my Webster's Dictionary and assume
> that what I read is understandable based on that. Thank you for your
> insight but I will stick to what I have been taught. Things like clock
> cycles in computers vary imperceptibly by temp never by distance from the
> earth.
Webster's Dictionary taught you that? =)
Well if Webster's Dictionary teaches you that Albert Einstein was
wrong then who are the physicists of the world to disagree with
Webster's Dictionary?
[...]
> >> Maybe you should return to
> >> your previous interest science fiction or politics?
>
> > Okay. What kind of treaty do you think Pakistan has with the United
> > States? We have been shooting missiles into their country for years
> > now. And about two weeks ago we made a small invasion without
> > informing the Pakistani government. By any measure we have been
> > committing acts of war on Pakistan, unless there is a secret treaty.
>
> Not in this ng, but in those.
Oh so that wasn't an invitation to chat but rather a cryptic "get
lost" message?
> I am not aware that we even have a treaty with Pakistan.
Don't you find it strange that no matter how many acts of war the US
commits against Pakistan the protests of Pakistan's government never
say these acts are illegal? We _invaded_ their country with armed men
who shot and killed unarmed people. And for years not we have fired
missiles into Pakistan like clockwork. These strikes kill civilians
in Pakistan. It's not quite the intensity of the Blitz Germany
mounted against Britain during WWII but the pace is steady.
Peter B.
wrote:
No, I jumped thoughts in the same paragraph, that is a no no.
> Well if Webster's Dictionary teaches you that Albert Einstein was
> wrong then who are the physicists of the world to disagree with
> Webster's Dictionary?
>
> [...]
>>>> Maybe you should return to
>>>> your previous interest science fiction or politics?
>>
>>> Okay. What kind of treaty do you think Pakistan has with the United
>>> States? We have been shooting missiles into their country for years
>>> now. And about two weeks ago we made a small invasion without
>>> informing the Pakistani government. By any measure we have been
>>> committing acts of war on Pakistan, unless there is a secret treaty.
>>
>> Not in this ng, but in those.
>
> Oh so that wasn't an invitation to chat but rather a cryptic "get
> lost" message?
>
>> I am not aware that we even have a treaty with Pakistan.
>
> Don't you find it strange that no matter how many acts of war the US
> commits against Pakistan the protests of Pakistan's government never
> say these acts are illegal? We _invaded_ their country with armed men
> who shot and killed unarmed people. And for years not we have fired
> missiles into Pakistan like clockwork. These strikes kill civilians
> in Pakistan. It's not quite the intensity of the Blitz Germany
> mounted against Britain during WWII but the pace is steady.
Without our support they most likely would be over ran by India.
Andrew W
> On Thu, 12 May 2011 12:49:16 +1000, Andrew W
> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To those who are upside-down, things that are right side up look
>>>> upside-down.
>>>> You haven't considered that you could have backed the wrong horse.
>>>
>>> I know whom I believe and am convinced that He is able.
>>>
>>
>> The one whom you know is a biblical character from a religion's holy
>> book. Muslims say the same thing about their Allah and he
>> contradicts the Christian god.
>> Do you hear a voice in your head or something?
>> And what do you mean He is able? Able to do what? Was there some
>> question regarding God's abilities? I wasn't aware that there was.
>>
>
> Very good. You have admitted that His capabilities are limitless.
> Showing you are attempting mind games and being a willing tool of the
> evil one.
>
Mind games?
Looks like what I said went totally over your head. You didn't even try to
address my points and questions.
It is you who have allowed yourself to be used as a tool for evil because
you continue to propagate a doctrine of enslavement of the human race to a
jealous and vengeful god figure. Only evil enslaves. Do I preach
enslavement? No.
You Judeo-Christian believers are traitors to humanity.
>>>
>>> I am doing as He said to caution you about that which you know. Seek
>>> the Savior while He may be found.
>>>
>>
>> Who told you we need a saviour? Wasn't it only your religion?
>> Didn't God foresee that things were going to go horribly wrong? If
>> he simply would have taught Adam & Eve better then they would have
>> made the right decision and we wouldn't be in this mess. Why didn't
>> God know this was going to happen? Or did he plan it because this
>> god is false and evil? You realise that whether we choose the
>> Christian god or the Christian Satan we are enslaved either way?
>> Only dark gods enslave.
>> The true Creator doesn't disempower and enslave his creations.
>>
> Very good, 2nd correct thing you established. God does not enslave His
> creation not does He disempower them. (The gifts and calling of God
> are without repentance)
>
You've totally lost the plot here. Did you comprehend anything I said?
I said the 'true Creator' doesn't enslave his creations, not your god.
It is true that religion is the opiate of the common folk (educationally
disadvantaged).
>>>
>>> 8 When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die;
>>> if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked
>>> man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at
>>> thine hand.
>>>
>>> 9 Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it;
>>> if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but
>>> thou hast delivered thy soul.
>>> EZE 34
>>>
>>
>> Old dark opinions of ancient men.
>> Why would a Creator require blood? What would he use it for?
>> Think.
>> Blood is shed only in satanic pagan rituals. The false satanic gods
>> use the blood to feed their own life force because they're
>> disconnected from their source and can't get life force any other
>> way.
>
> Oh oh, wrong answer, heh, two out of three isn't too bad. Although you
> spoke about a lot of things before you reached some truths.
>
Of course you wouldn't know if what I said was right or wrong because you
only know what your religion says.
I might as well be talking to farm animals.
>
> Tell you what. When you feel you have some sincere questions and want
> something far better for your life, or even if you get fear struck
> about your future being death an eternity without anything
> comfortable, no healing, no friends etc. Call upon Jesus Christ. I'll
> be glad to do what I can from His perspective.
>
1/ My questions are sincere.
2/ I never get fear struck. Fear is a tool of the enslaver and I've defeated
it.
3/ My life and future are set and are fantastic.
4/ There is no eternal death. We are spirits in temp vehicles on a mission
to explore darkness on this world.
5/ I have called upon Jesus Christ and nothing happened, but now I have
lasting happiness.
--
There is a kind of God or creation force, but its nothing like the
Judeo-Christian God.
Andrew W
I didn't say Jesus did not live. It must have been someone else.
What I have said is that he has been misinterpreted and misunderstood and
stories about him are unreliable.
>
> The word pharmacia is for drugs, but not pot, some used them to speak
> with satan, their god. We live in biblical times Andrew. Drugs were
> forbidden to the Jew.
>
> Regarding your usage of mind altering drugs, what do you think pain
> killers do?
>
Deaden the pain centres?
They don't bend the mind.
Pain killers are not hallucinogens.
Peter B.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
When there is no pain the "pain killers" become addictive, also open the
mind to forces of evil.
Andrew W
I think its apparent that the Bible god was not benevolent and probably not
the creator of the universe.
It was only humans who thought so. Humans make mistakes.
And if Jesus was God then God took the anger out on himself, which is really
comical!
>>>
>>> Your statement about a powerful brain and its usage is
>>> ridiculous on any level.
>>>
>>
>> What's wrong with it? Scientific studies have proven that its very
>> powerful.
>> Some people can do incredible feats like advanced mathematics and
>> gain advanced insights. Einstein is a good example.
>> Even some people like savants can do complex mathematical
>> calculations in their heads, calculate accurate calendar dates years
>> ahead, recite entire books after reading them only once. The list
>> goes on.
>>
>
> It is your brain and your choice how to use it. Same with everyone
> else. Then Satan offered such a deal, still it was your choice.
> Everything here was corrupted by sin.
>
At least I'm using what I've been given.
>>>>
>>>> That's what your religion wanted the common rabble to believe so it
>>>> could control them cheaply.
>>>> When are you going to jettison these silly ancient superstitious
>>>> beliefs? You realise these same people believed for a long time
>>>> that the earth was flat?
>>>
>>> I have told you and you ignored it numerous times I follow no
>>> religion. True religion is feeding widows and orphans and the like.
>>>
>>
>> You can deny all you like. Christianity is a religion just like
>> Islam etc. You are holding onto a bunch of old outdated beliefs that
>> were adopted from older pagan beliefs like blood sacrifice.
>>
>
> I am a believer, some are Christians and some are Christian
> believers. I don't follow a religion, but it would seem that somone
> trained you well.
>
You don't think you are. No religionist does.
But if you follow the Christian Bible then you are a religionist. Do you
follow the Bible?
And if you believe in Jesus Christ then you are a Christian.
If you want to not be a religious follower then simply put your Bible away.
>>>
>>> Giving away your ignorance again? Flat earth concept was from people
>>> like you who follow religion. The Bible never taught that.
>>>
>>
>> Lol. Guess what? The Flat Earth Society still exists in some places
>> and it gets all its information from the Bible.
>> Check it yourself on the net if you don't believe me.
>>
>
> Which version? The one I use doesn't.
>
Any version. But of course you don't see the same things they see.
No Christian sees (interprets) exactly the same things in the Bible.
That's because the Bible is highly open to interpretation, which is why it
should be used so carefully and discerningly.
Read what The Flat Earth Society say below. Not only do they claim from the
Bible that the earth is flat but that its also fixed and immovable, whereas
we all know that it spins and orbits.
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/fe-scidi.htm
>>>
>>> Post me a question if you have legitimate questions that you really
>>> would like an answer on. If you want to persist in this foolishness
>>> of yours bug Dave.
>>>
>>
>> There is nothing I could learn from a religious believer.
>> And what I say is not foolishness. I'm trying to help you.
>> And I'm not going to engage Dave any more because he always goes
>> ballistic. He's got real problems that one.
>
> Jesus and the Holy Spirit is all the help I need.
>
What you have are not Jesus and the Holy Spirit. They wouldn't keep you
misled and ignorant all your life.
You have simply latched onto notions of Jesus and the Holy Spirit from the
Christian Bible and they are faulty ones.
Its fairly apparent that both human fear and negative forces contributed to
much of the verses in the scriptures.
There's not that much that's positive in them.
--
Education is the only real prevention and cure for religious
fundamentalism disease.