davewhite04
Valued Senior Member
It would suggest that Jesus Christ will be judge on judgement day.
jesus christ is god
- Thread starter firingseeds
- Start date
It would suggest that Jesus Christ will be judge on judgement day.
- SnakeLord -
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe there is a God, because there is evidence for him through what he has made, this earth and everything in it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To get a clearer picture i find it always worthwhile going back to the earlier sources. In Sumerian texts you will find an overwhelming majority of the bible in its original form. However their 'gods' were mortal space travelling aliens.
I haven't heard of this before, do you have some more information on this?
There are people who have religious experiences but there are also people who get abducted by aliens. I knew this 6foot 8 black guy who was convinced he was a white guy and related to the queen, (England).
Interesting.
When a belief is so deeply rooted it becomes a personal reality.
In my case, it was the other way around, my personal experience, reality, proved to me that Jesus was indeed the real thing and ever since I have had a belief in that deeply rooted in me.
Hell, there have been people who have passed lie detector tests, hypnotising etc to show they were abducted by aliens. Does that actually mean they were?
No, but this is I feel not a valid comparison to Christianity.
The reason I don't believe this is a valid argument, comparing Christian "experiences" with "alien abductions", is the fact that we humans are very fickle, when something doesn't work out for us, we recognize our problem and head another way. The same is true (i think) in this case. When a Christian who absolutely believes Jesus Christ has forgiven his sins and has had a life-changing experience, like i do/have, the reality of that change causes other people around them to see it, their is proof (the change) to back up the claim (the belief). The problem with alien abductions altough just as "possible" - (in this i mean we lack as many facts for it), it does not have a (change) people believe in something weird (claim) they talk funny, but do they act different? There might be, (a few and far between) but not the same as the vast amounts of people who have truly changed in nature in essence a 180 degree U.
if the mind actually believes something without question it is to all intents and purposes a truth, and one that will pass any kind of test.
Yes, I agree (completely?). This is faith. The bible says about this:
"Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see" (Hebrews 11:1)
However the bible says (like previously mentioned) :
"In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead." (James 2:17)
The idea of heaven and hell to me is laughable. In the bible it is said not to judge and yet every religious person i;ve come into contact with does exactly that. I masturbate im going to hell, i smoke im going to hell, my neighbours an asshole- im going to hell. Much like the next man i do appreciate and understand morals but the fear which is bred into most of us as children is a little out of place and far from needed. The religious establishment portrays moral through fear... kill someone and go to hell..... however that's more in line with conscience-less killing. I can pretty much guarantee that given the right circumstances all of us would kill.
Christians should not judge, God will do that. That is what heaven and hell is God's jugdment or the result thereof.
About fear, I believe that we should not fear anything on this earth or in the heavens, only the Lord my (our) God. Fear of the Lord is the beginning of all wisdom proverbs opens up and says. Maybe in the right circumstances we would kill, for example if my sister died if i didn't kill this person. I don't believe God's judgement can be put into laws, for what law can judge the heart? Actions are an effect of our heart's desires, God judges our hearts where those actions came from. However details like "right-circumstances killing" do not happen often, the true fact is we all have sin in our lives, not one of us is perfect.
Does that make being a paedophile morally correct?
NO, of course not, and I agree with you not everything is in the Bible of what you may do or may not do, but it says in the bible that our conscience knows what is wrong and right, again this is a matter of our hearts, we know that this is wrong morally.
Personally i feel that IF there is a god he wouldn't be as callous as to doom us all to eternal flame for being ignorant of the truth.
Again as mentioned earlier, the creation gives evidence to a creator, if you realize there is a creator, you realize you need to worship him for he created you. I believe those who do not hear the Good News will be judged justly by God on the basis of what was in their hearts.
Of course the christian has an answer for everything so he says: "As long as you love jesus". But that is not an answer either- it's just a scapegoat. In exactly the same manner that sentence is used to forgive yourself of sins undertaken.
I mentioned earlier faith without works is dead. The fact that Christ has already died on the cross for your sins should not be a reason to go and sin. However works have nothing to do with salvation. Well, then, you may ask, if works have nothing to do with salvation, then how can you say they are important to a believer?
We don't work for grace, we work from grace. We are not saved by faith and works; we are saved by a faith that works. We are saved by faith alone, but a saving faith is never alone. Works are not the root of our salvation; works are the fruit of our salvation. Works are not a requirement for salvation; works are a result of salvation.
Our salvation is based on the work of Christ. Those who believe in Christ have an imputed, legal, forensic righteousness, and actual, real righteousness will follow. However, our actual righteousness will never be enough to satisfy the righteous requirement of God's law; for this reason, we must trust solely in Christ's sacrificial work for salvation. I believe there is no other way to be saved.
Even the usage of Elohim, (a plural word meaning gods), and gods own speeches in plural suggests a group of beings which coincides with earlier texts.
I was thinking the "im" plural ending was referring to the trinity, for later in the OT God says that he is one God. If anyone has further thoughts on this i am interested.
surrounding jesus but forgot one point. The confusion that arises in consideration to jesus' ressurrection. In one instance the tomb has two angels, in one four angels, in one 2 angels- 2 men, in one 4 angels- 4 men or something along those lines- forgive my memory block- i'll try point the specific passages for you shortly. This shows how unsure his whole ressurrection is: who ressurrected him, if anyone, how did they ressurrect him? Was it gods work or the devils?
I recently read something about this, will try to find it, but i feel the essence of the gospels was not lost because the amount of angels in the tomb was incorrect.
Well I'm going to hit the sack. Welterusten I would say.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe there is a God, because there is evidence for him through what he has made, this earth and everything in it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To get a clearer picture i find it always worthwhile going back to the earlier sources. In Sumerian texts you will find an overwhelming majority of the bible in its original form. However their 'gods' were mortal space travelling aliens.
I haven't heard of this before, do you have some more information on this?
There are people who have religious experiences but there are also people who get abducted by aliens. I knew this 6foot 8 black guy who was convinced he was a white guy and related to the queen, (England).
Interesting.
When a belief is so deeply rooted it becomes a personal reality.
In my case, it was the other way around, my personal experience, reality, proved to me that Jesus was indeed the real thing and ever since I have had a belief in that deeply rooted in me.
Hell, there have been people who have passed lie detector tests, hypnotising etc to show they were abducted by aliens. Does that actually mean they were?
No, but this is I feel not a valid comparison to Christianity.
The reason I don't believe this is a valid argument, comparing Christian "experiences" with "alien abductions", is the fact that we humans are very fickle, when something doesn't work out for us, we recognize our problem and head another way. The same is true (i think) in this case. When a Christian who absolutely believes Jesus Christ has forgiven his sins and has had a life-changing experience, like i do/have, the reality of that change causes other people around them to see it, their is proof (the change) to back up the claim (the belief). The problem with alien abductions altough just as "possible" - (in this i mean we lack as many facts for it), it does not have a (change) people believe in something weird (claim) they talk funny, but do they act different? There might be, (a few and far between) but not the same as the vast amounts of people who have truly changed in nature in essence a 180 degree U.
if the mind actually believes something without question it is to all intents and purposes a truth, and one that will pass any kind of test.
Yes, I agree (completely?). This is faith. The bible says about this:
"Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see" (Hebrews 11:1)
However the bible says (like previously mentioned) :
"In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead." (James 2:17)
The idea of heaven and hell to me is laughable. In the bible it is said not to judge and yet every religious person i;ve come into contact with does exactly that. I masturbate im going to hell, i smoke im going to hell, my neighbours an asshole- im going to hell. Much like the next man i do appreciate and understand morals but the fear which is bred into most of us as children is a little out of place and far from needed. The religious establishment portrays moral through fear... kill someone and go to hell..... however that's more in line with conscience-less killing. I can pretty much guarantee that given the right circumstances all of us would kill.
Christians should not judge, God will do that. That is what heaven and hell is God's jugdment or the result thereof.
About fear, I believe that we should not fear anything on this earth or in the heavens, only the Lord my (our) God. Fear of the Lord is the beginning of all wisdom proverbs opens up and says. Maybe in the right circumstances we would kill, for example if my sister died if i didn't kill this person. I don't believe God's judgement can be put into laws, for what law can judge the heart? Actions are an effect of our heart's desires, God judges our hearts where those actions came from. However details like "right-circumstances killing" do not happen often, the true fact is we all have sin in our lives, not one of us is perfect.
Does that make being a paedophile morally correct?
NO, of course not, and I agree with you not everything is in the Bible of what you may do or may not do, but it says in the bible that our conscience knows what is wrong and right, again this is a matter of our hearts, we know that this is wrong morally.
Personally i feel that IF there is a god he wouldn't be as callous as to doom us all to eternal flame for being ignorant of the truth.
Again as mentioned earlier, the creation gives evidence to a creator, if you realize there is a creator, you realize you need to worship him for he created you. I believe those who do not hear the Good News will be judged justly by God on the basis of what was in their hearts.
Of course the christian has an answer for everything so he says: "As long as you love jesus". But that is not an answer either- it's just a scapegoat. In exactly the same manner that sentence is used to forgive yourself of sins undertaken.
I mentioned earlier faith without works is dead. The fact that Christ has already died on the cross for your sins should not be a reason to go and sin. However works have nothing to do with salvation. Well, then, you may ask, if works have nothing to do with salvation, then how can you say they are important to a believer?
We don't work for grace, we work from grace. We are not saved by faith and works; we are saved by a faith that works. We are saved by faith alone, but a saving faith is never alone. Works are not the root of our salvation; works are the fruit of our salvation. Works are not a requirement for salvation; works are a result of salvation.
Our salvation is based on the work of Christ. Those who believe in Christ have an imputed, legal, forensic righteousness, and actual, real righteousness will follow. However, our actual righteousness will never be enough to satisfy the righteous requirement of God's law; for this reason, we must trust solely in Christ's sacrificial work for salvation. I believe there is no other way to be saved.
Even the usage of Elohim, (a plural word meaning gods), and gods own speeches in plural suggests a group of beings which coincides with earlier texts.
I was thinking the "im" plural ending was referring to the trinity, for later in the OT God says that he is one God. If anyone has further thoughts on this i am interested.
surrounding jesus but forgot one point. The confusion that arises in consideration to jesus' ressurrection. In one instance the tomb has two angels, in one four angels, in one 2 angels- 2 men, in one 4 angels- 4 men or something along those lines- forgive my memory block- i'll try point the specific passages for you shortly. This shows how unsure his whole ressurrection is: who ressurrected him, if anyone, how did they ressurrect him? Was it gods work or the devils?
I recently read something about this, will try to find it, but i feel the essence of the gospels was not lost because the amount of angels in the tomb was incorrect.
Well I'm going to hit the sack. Welterusten I would say.
There's quite a few instances of angels there's little evidence to suggest any of them as having been jesus. However, a messenger of god is not to be regarded as being god but as being a mediator between god and man, (as spoken of earlier). If this angel was jesus there's even less to suggest he is in fact one and the same as god, which many people believe, and worship him accordingly. I mean isn't it just as easy to say it was gabriel or lucifer or anyone who is recognised and spoken of in terms of 'angelhood'? Really a gets to a point where the whole affair becomes nothing more than a circus frenzy. jesus was the rock that moses smacked, jesus was the angel mentioned ever so briefly in the passages you named, jesus was giving joseph his dreams, hell we could think of anything written in the OT and claim it was jesus- maybe jesus was one of the goats sent off into the desert to remove mans sins? It says jesus was even the word 'seed' used by god in the OT. (Although i have shown the fallacy of such a statement). It's ridiculous imo. I find if the evidence isn't there it's not worth the time or effort of mention.
From what can be seen the holy spirit comes from original Sumerian translations pertaining to 'ghost of intelligence'. But that aside i am becoming more aware of what the christians believe but feel in this instance it is a misplaced belief. However if that's how the belief is why don't people bow down and worship the holy spirit- instead of jesus? Being that they are all one and the same it wouldn't make any difference surely? The reason people put their faith, love and worship to jesus first and foremost, even above god himself, is because what? He was a physical being? He did magic tricks? Many tell me the whole christian faith is down to the ressurrection, which indeed is a miracle, but not unheard of from times even before jesus. But god himself did many many miracles aswell. None of us saw any of them, but neither did we see jesus doing his. Is it perhaps because jesus was the only one of the three that said you'd be sinless and get eternal life for worshipping him? I'm interested in knowing so if you can tell me why people have jesus at the fore, and everything else comes after i'd be interested to know. I refer to the various comments i've seen floating around this thread and from people i know in life who say stuff like this:
"amen, lord jesus", "praise jesus", and so on. Why not "amen, holy ghost", "praise the holy ghost"? Or why not just include all 3 in one and say "amen, lord god" - would seem more appropriate considering he said he was one and jesus said god was one.
Yeah, im aware of that. But are angels, (god messengers), one and the same as god? If not, and people believe jesus is god, why would anyone suggest the angel in those chapters you showed earlier was jesus?
But not when his son was going to be born? I thought he was an all loving father
Doh! excuse the mix up.
And word has it if you dont accept jesus you go to hell. However if a man chooses to worship just god without mention of jesus where would he be destined to go? Surely it would be heaven considering god and jesus are one and the same? Wouldn't that mean the jews are going to heaven? I mean there's little reason for them to worship jesus as a separate being. God is one- so whichever way you worship him you're worshipping the very same thing. Instead what has happened is the jews worship god, who has said he is god of the israelites which wasn't good enough for the gentiles. So they forged their own god and now try to condemn the jews to hell. Wouldn't it be apparent that you're all worshipping the exact same thing just using a different alias, if indeed they are one and the same?
Well how would you think evil tempts honest men? Wasn't satan originally cast down to 'roam the earth'? Look at modern day evil- like those who kill children, (i see nothing as being more evil than that). How do they get kids in their cars? Do they smack them over the head, (which they easily have the power to do), or does evil present itself as a friend and doer of good first and foremost? These people offer the children sweets, offer to take them home and a whole host of pleasantries not associated with evil- but an integral part of evil. The first lesson we teach our kids is not to accept things off strangers, and not to even talk to them. We don't give them mace sprays and flick knives in case evil will pounce because evil is generally subtle and friendly, (ok in america they just give their kids rocket launchers
)Ok, from a christian angle would this mean god was offered land that is already his? god was offered control of nations that were already his? Doesn't god already control everything? Why would satan try to tempt god with something he already has?
So a godly entity performing miracles isn't as good as a human person performing miracles, those miracles in fact that make people believe he was godly?
Wouldn't that be: take his position *inside* god as they are actually one and the same? If he sits on the right hand side of god it is pertinent to say he does not have the rank of god but more like prince. god is on the throne as the one and only true god, jesus is at his right side like a prince of god, (son of). Thus why worship jesus as a god? God is god, jesus is a right hand man.
jesus died temporarily because people had him killed. Now i understand the stress of being crucified but why, being that jesus is one and the same as god, would he shout: "eloi eloi, lama sabachtani?"- "my god, my god, why have you forsaken me?" Rather a bizarre thing for god to shout dont you think?
'With a loud cry, jesus breathed his last'.
Seems to me he was thinking more about himself than anyone else when he died.
As for the ressurrection.. I suppose common belief is he just came back from the dead? What i'm more interested in is who this man in white is, (dependant on chapter). Someone has come and brought jesus back from the dead, (on par with jesus who also brought lazarus back from the dead). Wouldn't it seem apparent there are many of these "in between"? beings who can bring others back from the dead? The written word shows jesus could not save himself at the crucifiction shouting to god to ask why god had given up on him. Afterwards he did get ressed by someone- but who?
But in line with your question. If evil knew it was going to be alive after dying would the act of dying actually make any difference? It would be like spending a $1000 dollars, knowing in advance you're going to find $1000 dollars in the street later on. If jesus didnt ressurrect from the dead i could somewhat understand people saying he died for everyones sins. The fact he was brought back from the dead could signify anything, including evil- After all, you now all worship this being as god. If he was evil, he's laughing his socks off right now.
Again this would suggest jesus as being mediator, (a middle man). God will be the judge, jesus will be the lawyer.
True Wisdom
Registered Senior Member
The Jews use to practice tribal monotheism, each tribe had their own god that fathers them. The tribes' gods together, or the council of the gods, is known as the Elohim. "El" meaning "of the" is used later in the names of angels, like: Michael, Uriel, Gabriel and so forth, "of the" council of the gods. Any divine pluralism in the OT does not constitute the trinity. The idea of the trinity is exclusive to Christianity and Christianity is based on the NT. The OT is an ancient Hebrew bible where the concept of the 3-in-one(trinity) has not even been conceived of yet.
Mediator- one who intervenes between two persons who are at variance, with a view to reconcile them. This word is not found in the Old Testament; but the idea it expresses is found in Job 9:33, in the word "daysman" (q.v.), marg., "umpire."
This word is used in the New Testament to denote simply an internuncius, an ambassador, one who acts as a medium of communication between two contracting parties. In this sense Moses is called a mediator in Gal. 3:19.
Christ is the one and only mediator between God and man (1 Tim. 2:5; Heb. 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). He makes reconciliation between God and man by his all-perfect atoning sacrifice. Such a mediator must be at once divine and human, divine, that his obedience and his sufferings might possess infinite worth, and that he might possess infinite wisdom and knowlege and power to direct all things in the kingdoms of providence and grace which are committed to his hands (Matt. 28:18; John 5:22, 25, 26, 27); and human, that in his work he might represent man, and be capable of rendering obedience to the law and satisfying the claims of justice (Heb. 2:17, 18; 4:15, 16), and that in his glorified humanity he might be the head of a glorified Church (Rom. 8:29).
This office involves the three functions of prophet, priest, and king, all of which are discharged by Christ both in his estate of humiliation and exaltation. These functions are so inherent in the one office that the quality appertaining to each gives character to every mediatorial act. They are never separated in the exercise of the office of mediator.
Source: Easton's Bible Dictionary
Sure, for now i will keep this brief, if you want any more info pm me or something.
The Sumerian version of the nephilim was Anunnaki which mean respectively: nephilim: 'the fallen ones' or 'those who fell from above' and anunnaki: 'those who from heaven to earth came'. The nephilim were spoken of as giants, (in hebrew the word for giant can be either: anak or anaki). In the bible: 'the children of anak' is mentioned several times, which is 'the children of giants'- the nephilims offspring.
In the Sumerian accounts of Noah, (Ziusudra), the anunnaki are sitting on the mountain crying over those who are drowning. Ziusudra gets stuck on a barge carrying animals to the local market. He drifts off down the Euphrates and ends up in the persian gulf where he floats off for a while. However the Ziusudra story is more credible in that it's not a global flood. He sends out a raven to check for land, (which is also done in the bible, and then the second time is with a dove). When his barge lands he cooks some meat: After Ziusudra lands, he builds a fire to cook and "... the gods smelt the fragrance, the gods smelt the pleasant fragrance..."
In Genesis: Noah cooks his food and, "God smelled the pleasing aroma"
There is strong evidence purporting to a flood of the Euphrates at around 2,900bc.
A site that will know more, (Yes, they have a book)
is: Here The Sumerian tower of babel: "... Harmony-tongued Sumer... To Enlil in one tongue gave speech...” a few lines later "... Changed the speech in their mouths, put contention into it, into the speech of man that had (until then) been one."
The beginning of Sargon, (Moses): "... My changeling mother conceived me, in secret she bore me. She set me in a basket of rushes, with bitumen she sealed my lid. She cast me into the river, which rose not (over) me. The river bore me up and carried me to Akki, the drawer of water. Akki, the drawer of water lifted me out as he dipped his e[w]er. Akki the drawer of water, [took me] as his son (and) reared me."
As you can see this bears remarkable resemblence to the story beginnings of moses story. And of course, how did he get his name? She called his name Moses, as she said, " For I drew him from the water."
The Sumerian text here is dated: 2,279 - 2,334 BCE, the bible version? about 1,250 - 1,350 BCE
All these Sumerian texts obviously predate the bible by a considerable amount of years.
The Sumerian creation story: "When in the heights heaven was not named. And the Earth beneath did not yet bear a name, and the primeval Apsu, who begat them, and chaos, Tiamet, the mother of them both, Their waters were mingled together, and no field was formed no marsh was to be seen. When of the gods none had been called into being, and none bore a name, and no destinies were ordained. They were created the gods in the midst of heaven."
"... Let me put blood together and bones too, let me set up primeval man: Man shall be his name...", "... The work of the gods shall be imposed on him..."
"... Nintu mixed clay, with her flesh and blood, they heard the drumbeat forever after, a ghost (soul) came into existence from the god's flesh and she (Nintu) proclaimed it a living sign." Later on "... I myself created (it), my hands have made (it)..."
By L.W.King: "According to each account the existence of a watery chaos preceded the creation of the universe; and the Hebrew word Tehom, translated as "the deep" is the equivalent of the Sumerian/Babylonian Tiamet, the monster of the deep personifying chaos and confusion." Later on King says, "... it may here be added that the employment by Marduk, the creator, of his own blood in the creation of man may perhaps be compared to the Hebrew account of the creation of man in the image and likeness of Elohim. Moreover, the use of the plural in the phrase "let us make man" may be compared with the Sumerian/Babylonian narrative which relates that Marduk imparted his purpose of forming man to his father Ea (Enki), whom he probably afterwards instructed to carry out the actual work of man's creation."
Might i also suggest you read some of Samuel Noah Kramers work. It's very interesting.
This: Here was found in a temple in Ur, Sumeria. "And Abraham raised his eyes and saw -- behold, a ram! -- afterwards, caught in the thicket by its horns; so Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as an offering instead of his son."
There is so much to show the bible is overwhelmingly a collection of stories handed down through the generations, (based on other 'creator' beliefs), and changed to suit the times by personally added comments on behalf of the new authors, by chinese whispers and by the loss of data that would always occur over such a large time span. It is said that the scripts, written on tablets, were not readily accessible, (stored away in the temples). As such the stories handed down would have been via the recollections of people. They were told a story by their parents who in turn told their children and so on. The Babylonians, Akkadians etc actually kept the majority of beliefs the Sumerians had passed on and this in turn was passed on further..
It is no surprise that the bible places the garden of eden as being in sumeria, (southern mesopotamia), if we were to conclude the stories originally stem from there.
That was hardly 'brief', my apologies.
firingseeds
Registered Senior Member
snake
hi,
u are bounding along at a considerable rate, arn't u. having trouble keeping up.
the visitor, (hi, visitor; nice to make your aquaintance ...your fame precedes u), states the father, son, and holy spirit quite clearly, so i needn't elaborate there.
the facts the visitor presents - and all witnesses (be blessed) - can be PROVEN by faith -the gifting of the holy spirit. so, as u can see, it's not just believing by faith, but proof by faith: and to the relevant existance of god, thru the gospel of jesus christ.
that actually happens to be an experience one needs to encounter first hand. u basically have all the elements of truth presented before u, and "ONLY THE TRUTH WILL SET U FREE."
be back later. whew!
in answer to me agreeing with dave concerning proud syrian: there was no contradiction there, but only in your mind. proud syrian still has to get thru the fact that jesus is son of god let alone the fact he is god. get my drift. (it's better to climb the ladder one rung at a time). proud syrian also differs to u in the fact that he doesn't believe jesus to be a false prophet, as u do.
some gardens - not mentioning names - u need a pickaxe for just to break thru the rock, whereby other gardens just need watering.
as to my enlightening: i guess this first happened around age 10 when i first went to sunday school and heard about sin, jesus, and heaven and hell. tho, funny, i had already prayed to god at about age 7 asking for a donkey (in a raffle). i never got it and that made me rather cross with god.
at 21-22 years of age i looked in the mirror. i saw good looks vanity strength (and without having read the buddha or the bible)
saw how worthless they were to me.
hope this helps.
also; it's a joy to share the gospel of jesus christ. i could quite easily say nothing, and do something else.
hi,
u are bounding along at a considerable rate, arn't u. having trouble keeping up.
the visitor, (hi, visitor; nice to make your aquaintance
...your fame precedes u), states the father, son, and holy spirit quite clearly, so i needn't elaborate there.the facts the visitor presents - and all witnesses (be blessed) - can be PROVEN by faith -the gifting of the holy spirit. so, as u can see, it's not just believing by faith, but proof by faith: and to the relevant existance of god, thru the gospel of jesus christ.
that actually happens to be an experience one needs to encounter first hand. u basically have all the elements of truth presented before u, and "ONLY THE TRUTH WILL SET U FREE."
be back later. whew!
in answer to me agreeing with dave concerning proud syrian: there was no contradiction there, but only in your mind. proud syrian still has to get thru the fact that jesus is son of god let alone the fact he is god. get my drift. (it's better to climb the ladder one rung at a time). proud syrian also differs to u in the fact that he doesn't believe jesus to be a false prophet, as u do.
some gardens - not mentioning names - u need a pickaxe for just to break thru the rock, whereby other gardens just need watering.
as to my enlightening: i guess this first happened around age 10 when i first went to sunday school and heard about sin, jesus, and heaven and hell. tho, funny, i had already prayed to god at about age 7 asking for a donkey (in a raffle). i never got it and that made me rather cross with god.
at 21-22 years of age i looked in the mirror. i saw good looks vanity strength (and without having read the buddha or the bible)
saw how worthless they were to me.
hope this helps.
also; it's a joy to share the gospel of jesus christ. i could quite easily say nothing, and do something else.
It's amazing how quickly people are to squash any basis of reality to abduction claims- labelling those people as 'fickle'. You further go on to say abductions bear no relevance because you can see a 'change' in people who have found christ. Of course that change is understandable for you because your mind now tells you, you are free from sin and as such have a hell of a lot less to worry about. In that aspect i cannot fault the idea. If it removes stresses in life it can be seen as a good thing. But do not think for one second abductees do not change. You said they might change the way they speak but not the way they act when that is completely wrong. The changes may not be in the same style as religious folk, no they don't generally start praying for sick folk, but the changes are massive and instant for many cases of abduction. Of course it is a subject of much controversy and more than likely filled with frauds. However in either case it's not to instantly dismiss someone as being wrong but to question and seek. What i find funny is how, when mentioning abduction to many people they instantly laugh and call it utter nonsense- yet none of them have the right to do so when none of them talk to these people and question them. Would you think it right of me to claim your finding of jesus is utter nonsense without even asking you a question relating to it? How do you know an abductee is different to a christian if you've never spoken to any?
yes, but your minds truth isn't neccesarily actual truth- which is why i hold little room for 'faith' in such instances. As my example of the black guy who thought he was white and first cousin to the queen- Is his belief genuinely real or genuinely real *just in his head*? If things like this work purely on the faith in truth aspect then how can you ever deny the claims of anyone, no matter how bizarre? As such we have no need for mental institutions.
Are you responsible for what your heart feels? Do you decide the feelings of your heart? If you say yes, i'd be inclined to disagree.
If someone feels in their heart that they are homosexual it is not through choice, that's just the way they are. You think anyone sits down and says... "hmm well i want to be gay"? What the heart gives us all is in essence an infliction. It's not based through personal choice. Of course you can deny the heart- but if it's the heart being judged then the denial is irrelevant for that 'sin'? is already within the heart.
It's always been an interesting subject- creation vs evolution. I will openly accept the possibility that us humans were made. I rather enjoy the notion that aliens made us to work for them while they stopped off in this part of space- then eventually resumed their course and left us to fend for ourselves. To me it sounds nice with my own internal desires. You see... i do not have the need to live forever- im comfortable with mortality. However when i gaze up at the stars at night, at the moon and any other 'heavenly bodies' i am intrigued. I do wish i could go out and see what's out there... of course immortality would help this become a reality but i acknowledge and accept the inevitable drawbacks with mortality. There are overwhelming, heart felt, desires within each of us that gives us reason to want and need a 'god' of somekind. As for the worship part.... I would say i love, adore, worship my daughter- she is a part of me. I wouldn't ask my daughter or expect her to worship me in return. I created her but she owes me nothing- i owe her everthing as her creator. I teach her, provide for her, care for her but not once would i ever demand she love and worship me. Not once would i even consider condemning her if she chose not to love me. By demanding such a thing i would be showing selfishness to all the things i do, over the things she does. Imagine i make her a drink then say "thank me for that drink for i made it for you." It's preposterous and self serving.
As a father i have no need for self glorification by worship from my daughter. yes, it is nice when she runs up and says "daddy, i love you" but i could never demand such a thing for it demeans the value of it. I made her, yes... is it right for her mother or i to demand she worship us for making her? We can advise throughout life. I can say: "that boy looks a bit dodgy, you should go out with someone else". She can choose to do whatever she pleases. The advice is given- no matter what she decides i would be nothing more than a monster if i decided to condemn her.
I hate all this faith vs works debate
The bible is so contradictory with this particular debate it leads us nowhere. From my human perspective however works is irrelevant. If my daughter doesn't clean her room, put her plate in the dishwasher, go and get a job etc it is of no consequence. I wouldn't love her any less.
If she had no faith in me as a father, as her creator, i wouldn't love her any less. She can feel whatever she wants to about me, my love is unbreakable and unchangeable. Ah we await the rebellious teen years when she calls me a shithead or whatever else she wants to.... she could hate me all she wants- either may my love would stand fast.
The thing that causes slight concern with me is the fact by the time Mary and Mary had got to the tomb jesus was alive and had gone. There is nothing to say the miracle was performed by jesus or god- so it's important to know who the tomb visitor/s was/were. If they can't even agree on that there's no basis with which to start.
firingseeds
Registered Senior Member
poet
hi.
yeah, thanks, poet. me gaining quite a library and certainly learning a lot. really enjoy dharma the cat.
as per mediator: i think the gist there is that at least in christ we get a fair hearing.
as witness aardappelvreter clarifies for us, "for what law can judge the heart."
hi.
yeah, thanks, poet. me gaining quite a library and certainly learning a lot. really enjoy dharma the cat.
as per mediator: i think the gist there is that at least in christ we get a fair hearing.
as witness aardappelvreter clarifies for us, "for what law can judge the heart."
firingseeds
Registered Senior Member
snake
if u build a home on alien claims, u would have a mighty crooked house, but, as u are aware, i'm sure, if u build a house on the rock of jesus christ, u will always have a roof. the construction of the frame, presented to u, shows the strength of the gospel, the strength of the bible, the strength of god's wisdom, and the strength of one's faith; whereby faith becoming a realization (or reality) of truth. me, personally, i have no time for fiction. not that i don't mind fiction, but that time is value, (or of the essense).
there are no cracks or flaws in the bible, but only in someones head. trying to separate the old from the new testaments is like trying to separate honey from a bee. they are, essentially, one and the same, being the word of god, laid down by god, and for signposts to heaven. little have u realized, i think, that u are using the very bible to produce your own arguement. meaning: it's not on your terms u are arguing, but on the bible's terms. so, in other words, show us your house of rock. so far i have only seen a shanty of straw; albeit some positive bits amongst the rubble.
if u build a home on alien claims, u would have a mighty crooked house, but, as u are aware, i'm sure, if u build a house on the rock of jesus christ, u will always have a roof. the construction of the frame, presented to u, shows the strength of the gospel, the strength of the bible, the strength of god's wisdom, and the strength of one's faith; whereby faith becoming a realization (or reality) of truth. me, personally, i have no time for fiction. not that i don't mind fiction, but that time is value, (or of the essense).
there are no cracks or flaws in the bible, but only in someones head. trying to separate the old from the new testaments is like trying to separate honey from a bee. they are, essentially, one and the same, being the word of god, laid down by god, and for signposts to heaven. little have u realized, i think, that u are using the very bible to produce your own arguement. meaning: it's not on your terms u are arguing, but on the bible's terms. so, in other words, show us your house of rock. so far i have only seen a shanty of straw; albeit some positive bits amongst the rubble.
firingseeds
Registered Senior Member
snake
so, we have now, in essense, introduced, into the construction of the case, the power of the holy spirit; which also testifies, and convicts, to the living gospel of jesus christ, being lord and saviour, and god on earth. this conviction in christ is the underlying theme of the whole gospel, including the old, wherefore why would god promise by abraham of righteousness, and then lay down laws of impossibility; which no man can live by: including no jew today, who even comes close to the levitical laws. (maybe that's a punishment in hell, living to each and every single law forever, every single day. hmmm, interesting....and no time off for good behaviour - i better get off this!)
have u really understood the significance of jesus' intervention? only he, gods son, being able to fulfill the requirements of the law: he, jesus, came to earth, served god perfectly, and then died for god. (ecclesiastes - for the whole duty of man is to serve god.) man has his cake, eats it; and still moans. jesus overcame wholly on man's terms, by the way. (little thought, little brain).
brick by brick god will build his house, on the cross of jesus christ, and according to his promise.
so, we have now, in essense, introduced, into the construction of the case, the power of the holy spirit; which also testifies, and convicts, to the living gospel of jesus christ, being lord and saviour, and god on earth. this conviction in christ is the underlying theme of the whole gospel, including the old, wherefore why would god promise by abraham of righteousness, and then lay down laws of impossibility; which no man can live by: including no jew today, who even comes close to the levitical laws. (maybe that's a punishment in hell, living to each and every single law forever, every single day. hmmm, interesting....and no time off for good behaviour - i better get off this!)
have u really understood the significance of jesus' intervention? only he, gods son, being able to fulfill the requirements of the law: he, jesus, came to earth, served god perfectly, and then died for god. (ecclesiastes - for the whole duty of man is to serve god.) man has his cake, eats it; and still moans. jesus overcame wholly on man's terms, by the way. (little thought, little brain).
brick by brick god will build his house, on the cross of jesus christ, and according to his promise.
firingseeds
Registered Senior Member
snake
just a few further points as they sprang to mind:
about death, which u mentioned on my behalf: for if the dead are not raised, then the lord has not been raised. 1 corinthians 15:16
and a note on your creationist skills: people born of dust are like the man of dust, and people born from heaven are like the man from heaven;...1 corinthians 15:48
just a few further points as they sprang to mind:
about death, which u mentioned on my behalf: for if the dead are not raised, then the lord has not been raised. 1 corinthians 15:16
and a note on your creationist skills: people born of dust are like the man of dust, and people born from heaven are like the man from heaven;...1 corinthians 15:48
"for what law can judge the heart."
Heart - According to the Bible, the heart is the centre not only of spiritual activity, but of all the operations of human life. "Heart" and "soul" are often used interchangeably (Deut. 6:5; 26:16; comp. Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30, 33), but this is not generally the case.
The heart is the "home of the personal life," and hence a man is designated, according to his heart, wise (1 Kings 3:12, etc.), pure (Ps. 24:4; Matt. 5:8, etc.), upright and righteous (Gen. 20:5, 6; Ps. 11:2; 78:72), pious and good (Luke 8:15), etc. In these and such passages the word "soul" could not be substituted for "heart."
The heart is also the seat of the conscience (Rom. 2:15). It is naturally wicked (Gen. 8:21), and hence it contaminates the whole life and character (Matt. 12:34; 15:18; comp. Eccl. 8:11; Ps. 73:7). Hence the heart must be changed, regenerated (Ezek. 36:26; 11:19; Ps. 51:10-14), before a man can willingly obey God."
Source: Easton's Bible Dictionary
Choices
We are what we think.
All that we are arises with out
thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the
world.
Speak or act with an inpure mind
And trouble will follow you
As the wheel follows the ox that draws
the cart.
We are what we think.
All that we are arises with out
thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the
world.
Speak or act with a pure mind
And happiness will follow you
As your shadow, unshakable.
-Dhammapada
Heart - According to the Bible, the heart is the centre not only of spiritual activity, but of all the operations of human life. "Heart" and "soul" are often used interchangeably (Deut. 6:5; 26:16; comp. Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30, 33), but this is not generally the case.
The heart is the "home of the personal life," and hence a man is designated, according to his heart, wise (1 Kings 3:12, etc.), pure (Ps. 24:4; Matt. 5:8, etc.), upright and righteous (Gen. 20:5, 6; Ps. 11:2; 78:72), pious and good (Luke 8:15), etc. In these and such passages the word "soul" could not be substituted for "heart."
The heart is also the seat of the conscience (Rom. 2:15). It is naturally wicked (Gen. 8:21), and hence it contaminates the whole life and character (Matt. 12:34; 15:18; comp. Eccl. 8:11; Ps. 73:7). Hence the heart must be changed, regenerated (Ezek. 36:26; 11:19; Ps. 51:10-14), before a man can willingly obey God."
Source: Easton's Bible Dictionary
Choices
We are what we think.
All that we are arises with out
thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the
world.
Speak or act with an inpure mind
And trouble will follow you
As the wheel follows the ox that draws
the cart.
We are what we think.
All that we are arises with out
thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the
world.
Speak or act with a pure mind
And happiness will follow you
As your shadow, unshakable.
-Dhammapada
Oh my, you certainly are an arrogant self-serving individual aren't you?
Presented to me? I have offered pages upon pages of debate issues, and thoughts to be debated upon. After my first post you said i had "won the day" but you would be back. Upon your return all you have offered are attempted personal insults and worthless statements as your one above. Trying to preach about what is or isn't solid is futile if your brain is not open to debating them when questioned. The fact that all you have offered is personal comments directed at me shows you either have no intention of debating because you have nothing new to learn or teach or just no debate to offer because you cannot answer the questions and debates presented. That is your right, i guess, but then you might aswell just send me an email instead of wasting time on a forum.
I have time for anything if it gives me a chance to learn and possibly to teach. That obviously is our fundamental difference. I find in comparison this whole issue, and many like it, to be like a debate over languages.
Imagine if you can a chinese man, english man, french man etc all sitting at a table.
The chinese man says his language is the 'real' language and the first to be 'born'. All others disagree and state the same with theirs. the next step is to place evidence onto that table. Then along comes firingseed. Instead of understanding the concept of 'placing' one's evidence on the table and discussing all evidence shown he chooses just to insult the other men, label them as completely wrong and that they MUST accept his version, and then stomp out claiming he has no time for fiction. What has he learnt, what has he taught? The answer is: nothing.
Continue in that fashion all you like, just don't be surprised when people start to ignore you.
I know many many people who would put up a worthy debate with evidence to show otherwise. But alas, you're not interested in debate- you're right, they're wrong, end of story.
I love your little metaphors and comments. However they are thus far faulty in their design. You can easily separate a bee from honey.
I guess you haven't been around long. I took up a challenge to work on the premise of If the bible is factual. My aim was to analyse events, people, god himself and so on from that basis that the bible is a factual piece of work. That doesn't mean i actually believe it to be, just that is how the challenge works. Now perhaps you understand a bit better why i use the bible in these matters. Apologies for the confusion.
So far, on that "shanty of straw", you have not commented in debateful manner. All you have done is attempt insult at me, and preach jesus. Neither aid debate, neither aid learning or teaching.
Snake
firingseeds
Registered Senior Member
poet
yeah, nice. hurt should be shallow not deep.
yeah, nice. hurt should be shallow not deep.
Proverbs 26:24-28 (NIV)
"A malicious man disguises himself with his lips, but in his heart he harbors deceit. Though his speech is charming, do not believe him, for seven abominations fill his heart. His malice may be concealed by deception, but his wickedness will be exposed in the assembly. If a man digs a pit, he will fall into it; if a man rolls a stone, it will roll back on him. A lying tongue hates those it hurts, and a flattering mouth works ruin."
"A malicious man disguises himself with his lips, but in his heart he harbors deceit. Though his speech is charming, do not believe him, for seven abominations fill his heart. His malice may be concealed by deception, but his wickedness will be exposed in the assembly. If a man digs a pit, he will fall into it; if a man rolls a stone, it will roll back on him. A lying tongue hates those it hurts, and a flattering mouth works ruin."
firingseeds
Registered Senior Member
snake
i don't agree with u. as far as i'm concerned, u are in a well constructed house. the framework of the bible make it correct. we may be wrong, but it's basic principles are correct. we may even mis-interprete it, but still it stands correct. even different translations can be as the editors see fit: but not any of that makes the structure of the bible to any less of effect. it's only thru the use of the bible that we are able to communicate. by bible terms u would be fatherless. well, as far as i'm aware, jesus is a father to the father-less: and i still reckon ya fighting yaself.
this isn't a theory about jesus being god; this is fact. to u it may not be so, but that is thru no fault of my own. we seem to have read most of the same words, but we see them differently. your problem probably lies further up the ladder [i think!]; than where i could take u - coz' theres lots more i don't know. (like alien spacecraft?).
this is about as far as i go. with the information supplied to u, and concerning the gospel of jesus christ, (many, many christians who would disagree, too), u have had a good foundation for further development, but that's a step u'd have to take yaself.
aardappelvreter has already posted the fundamental principles of christianity and soforth. we have used the bible to build a pretty good picture of jesus for u. i'm not concerned about whether we agree or disagree, as long as u gain some benefits. it's not about anything, really, if it's not about jesus - thats the whole point! to me, people have a right to know that, including yourself. many of us ALREADY KNOW THAT; but i agree - in different ways. as i said, whether u agree or not is another matter, that doesn't concern me. as long as u get the basic gospel tenets presented to u on a plate, then how can u complain? what about the poor guy down the road? what are u gonna present him with? knowledge? i don't think so. it would be more about self, i reckon. arn't these the real issues? show me one crack in the evidences given u, by the evidences provided? u are debating with the bible but introducing lots of hearsay. a bible answer to that is that sand washes away but the rock stands forever. perhaps, one day, i'll tell u how i was beaten, or overcome, by faith. it is one of the greatest of gifts,"lil' ol' faith." go inside, have a look around; rome wasn't built in one day. not bad for a book!
cheersl
i don't agree with u. as far as i'm concerned, u are in a well constructed house. the framework of the bible make it correct. we may be wrong, but it's basic principles are correct. we may even mis-interprete it, but still it stands correct. even different translations can be as the editors see fit: but not any of that makes the structure of the bible to any less of effect. it's only thru the use of the bible that we are able to communicate. by bible terms u would be fatherless. well, as far as i'm aware, jesus is a father to the father-less: and i still reckon ya fighting yaself.
this isn't a theory about jesus being god; this is fact. to u it may not be so, but that is thru no fault of my own. we seem to have read most of the same words, but we see them differently. your problem probably lies further up the ladder [i think!]; than where i could take u - coz' theres lots more i don't know. (like alien spacecraft?).
this is about as far as i go. with the information supplied to u, and concerning the gospel of jesus christ, (many, many christians who would disagree, too), u have had a good foundation for further development, but that's a step u'd have to take yaself.
aardappelvreter has already posted the fundamental principles of christianity and soforth. we have used the bible to build a pretty good picture of jesus for u. i'm not concerned about whether we agree or disagree, as long as u gain some benefits. it's not about anything, really, if it's not about jesus - thats the whole point! to me, people have a right to know that, including yourself. many of us ALREADY KNOW THAT; but i agree - in different ways. as i said, whether u agree or not is another matter, that doesn't concern me. as long as u get the basic gospel tenets presented to u on a plate, then how can u complain? what about the poor guy down the road? what are u gonna present him with? knowledge? i don't think so. it would be more about self, i reckon. arn't these the real issues? show me one crack in the evidences given u, by the evidences provided? u are debating with the bible but introducing lots of hearsay. a bible answer to that is that sand washes away but the rock stands forever. perhaps, one day, i'll tell u how i was beaten, or overcome, by faith. it is one of the greatest of gifts,"lil' ol' faith." go inside, have a look around; rome wasn't built in one day. not bad for a book!
cheersl
firingseeds
Registered Senior Member
poet
yeah nice poet.
yeah nice poet.
firingseeds
Registered Senior Member
poet
yeah, poet, one thing came to mind. unless u live in those halls then quoting bible proverbs is just spouting
yeah, poet, one thing came to mind. unless u live in those halls then quoting bible proverbs is just spouting