Science Vs Religion

Ah! highschool boy/girl. :D

Originally posted by mountainhare
That is also a type of 'LOVE'
Love of what, your belly? :p
Or maybe the love of a destroyed calf, bred soley for the purpose of slaughter, so we can tickle our fancy? :(
Prove to me gremlins and pink polka-dotted unicorns don't exist
How original. :rolleyes:
You have the burden of proof, my dear. You made the outrageous claim that god exists. It is up to you to prove it, not up to me to disprove it.
Firstly, there is no where in this thread, or to you, that I claimed, “God does exist”, but I have expressed in many ways, my belief in His existence.
Secondly, you…….. I repeat, yyyyou, sweetie, have claimed that “GOD DOES NOT EXIST”, here let me remind you of these claims.
“He should not waste his energy trying to destroy something THAT DOESN’T EXIST.”
“ That's right, there are quite a few types of love (UNLIKE GOD WHO DOES NOT EXIST)”
Now, a claim, is an assertion that something is true. It has nothing to do with whether it is positive or negative, it is all in the way you say it, and you said, “God does not exist.” Now, I don’t know about you, but that sounds like a straight out claim to me, and I’m sure, to anyone else of sound mind.
Now, about this burden of proof, falling on the claimant, I think you’ve got some proving to do, don’t you?
If I told you I had a martain under my bed, and you said you didn't believe me, and I said "Prove that I don't have a martain!" Would that be reasonable or fair? No, of course not.
Because I don’t believe you, doesn’t mean I don’t believe that a martian could be under your bed. And as you have not made clear, whether it is “a martian”, or “a martian under your bed”, the subject of my disbelief, but yet, feeling the need to challenge me. I could be forgiven, for assuming that you are indeed, a mad person. That is the first flaw in your sponge pudding argument.
The second flaw would be; me, refusing to believe, you, does not constitute a claim, and therefore, by challenging me, you would be, effectively talking nonsense, much like you have done, thus far.

Love

Jan Ardena.
 
God created time. God does not exist in Time. God can step into and out of Time. But God does not exist in the dimension of Time. If you remove Time then guess what happens... There is no beginning or end. Remember something: Our brains cannot comprehend anything outside of Time. Time is a creation, and our brains our products of TIME. There is no way for us to think outside of time. This is why we have problems understanding how something can be eternal, "alpha and omega" first and last, never-ending never-beginning. But we can understand this concept: Remove time and there is no TIME. No beginning, no end.
==============
I been through this already.....
Maybe they will listen to you since your not a "religious fanactic" ......right;)
 
Part 1 reply to Jan

There is no mention of any interactions with people of S.E. Asia, N. Europe, Africa, ect. It is all based around the middle east, the only reference is that He created mankind, which means everybody, throughout the world.

Indeed. Funnily enough there is so much relating to Sumerian land in the bible.

Gen 2:10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. The name of the first is Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold.... The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Asshur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

(see map Here)

This is real evidence to suggest a placement for the Garden of Eden. It goes to show the location of Eden was in Mesopotamia. To all intents and purposes this would make Adam and Eve the original Sumerians. Following on from that we have the story of Noah, (the Sumerian Ziusudra). From that we have Abraham- born in Ur, Sumeria. It would seem we are all originally Iraqi's. :) If everything stems from and starts in Mesopotamia we must also acknowledge Sumerian scripture along with the bible for it is all an integral part of each other. However, as i stated, i will try to stick solely to the bible for this discussion.

God does not speak about Himself, other than His actions and reactions pertaining to specific situations. In the NT, His exhalted son/devotee, talks more on the science (knowledge) and philosophy of God, but as we know, for some reason, there
is a large chunk of his life not accounted for, so there may be a lot more information than we are privy to. The only scripture where God actually talks fully about Himself is the “Bhagavad Gita”, which when translated means, “The Song of God”. If it is alright with you, I will in future refer to the Personality of God, from that source. It is up to you.

Sure, feel free to use that source. I couldn't claim to want discussion if i ignored important aspects of it. One thing though that does strike a chord and is obviously under my own, or others confusions is exactly what manner the bible is to be taken. To many it is the word of god- cannot be taken away from or added to- in which case it wouldn't matter who wrote it- it would be gods word. So we have to decide something in order to help this further. I will use this example because it gets to the very hub of the matter:

"Mankind has become like one of us.."

Is this god talking? Is this man accidentally turning it into plural? I concur god isn't speaking about or to himself- it shows he's talking to 'others' of his kind. Of course that's open to debate but it is a strong point. The usual, rather presumptuous opinion is to say that particular part is 'metaphor'. This in itself raises some problems. If it is metaphor what's to say the rest of the bible isn't also? In which case the bible is worthless as a 'tool' of god. Once we end up thinking we are able to pick and choose in that way it would cause nothing but arguments between all mankind. In fact, it does even now. Once we've answered whether this is a book written with mans own opinions, or a book written as the word of god we can proceed a lot faster i believe.

I fully understand your point, but your daughter doing something wrong, and the whole of mankind having nothing but “evil” intent, are two entirely different things.

Yes they are, but by that same token i use the power i have to get things done in a non-violent manner. I do not have the power of god- he does, and as such should have his own alternative non-entire anihilation method. I have the 'power' over one person. God has the power over every person. If mankind got tempted by evil to such extent it deserved such total action who really is at fault? God had the ability to change it in a more 'human friendly' manner. Some say he chose not to interfere because we have free will etc but the fact remains he did interfere. As such the free will argument is null and void.

Why? Because there are beings who thrive eternally, in hellish conditions, It is not created to ensnare or trap souls

Who made these hellish beings? If you state it wasn't god, and he can do nothing about them then we must assume either he lacks in power or they share the same power. Again this would relate to "Man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil.." What's to say there aren't several of these beings all as powerful- like humans some of them choose evil, some choose good. If god was the one and only he would be in position to deal with the threat of hellish beings. If he can but chooses not to it really is there to 'trap souls'.

If your daughter, decides, “dad, regardless of what you say, I’m going to hang out in Johanesburg,” or some other dangerous city, what could you do, short of physically forcing her to stay. Where love is involved, there can be no question of force, so we have to accept our condition, because we have chosen it. Sometimes our conditions are favourable and sometimes not, that is the material world, but ultimately they are all unfavourable.

I understand but i see one problem in that Johannesburg and hell are two completely different things. Death from violent foreigners and no-death just eternal never ending burning in hell are separate. Of course.. when our daughters say they're going off to Johannesberg we try to convince them otherwise. If that fails we try even harder, new tactics and so forth.

However in line with gods way of doing things i offer this 'human' example:

My daughter says she's going to Johannesberg no matter what i say. Because i fear she might get hurt over there i take out a gun and shoot her in the head. Does that sound loving?

Mankind says to god they're doing something else, even though it might be bad for them. He drowns them all.

In Ezekiel 18, He ramarks, “all the souls are mine”.

I'm not quite to that part in my analysis yet but i will still question.. :)

Does he mean all souls are a part of him, or that he owns all souls? We have agreed we are here to serve. As our master, god seems to be pointing out his ownership, not that we are part of him.

Do you provide everything you can for your child?
Do you do it out of love?

No i provide out of parental responsibility. I decided by choice to have children- as such i am in a position whereby i must provide.

Love is much more subtle than that.

Part 2 shortly :)
 
Last edited:
Part 2, (apologies for length)

That is a good point. We are servants, period. From the moment we accept responsibilities, we serve. We serve our parents, our friends, our lovers, our employers, our children, our houses, our society, our government, our monarchies, our pets, our country and our senses. Our constitutional position is one of servitude, this we cannot escape, the only Master is God, and He chooses to serve His devotees, because the exchange is one of, pure conditional love. It was only because Jesus prayed to Him, on the cross, why everyone who conspired in his murder, lived. Such is the power of a great devotee of the Lord.

I Agree completely, (aside from Jesus being involved). Servitude=slavery. The problem i can perceive from eating the fruit was that mankind would find out he was a slave. Remember though we do not serve through love, and we do not take slaves through love. Love has no hold over a person. If someone chooses to do something against you, you don't kill them through love, but through lack of serving. To think god serves us goes against his very own words, (or words we are yet to define an owner to). If your whole slave camp are going against you, you drown them all, (as long as you can get more), to teach a lesson. "Try to escape and die." Once that is done people will serve better. You can also confuse them all so they cannot work together and outsmart you, (Tower of Babel). You are at total right to punish them, but then you could never lay claim to loving them.

How hard is it to obey God

How hard would it be to obey hitler? How hard would it be to obey Stalin? How hard would it be to obey Saddam? Notice a distinct pattern emerging? We are slaves..

Thanks to Adam and Eve we attempted to break the bonds of slavery. If love is involved you never need to obey. You can do so by choice but you never get drowned for doing something else.

He asked Adam not to eat from a certain tree, but gave him every other comfort, but he forewent that command and ate from the one tree he was asked not to.

I made a car but for some reason the wheels kept dragging to the left. That's not the cars fault, it's mine as the designer.

God had to put that temptation there, because the decision to obey or not, had to come from Adam.

Ah....free will slavery? But there was no decision. Anyone who decided against got drowned, turned into salt, riddled with disease and so on. After all that they then get an eternity in hell. That my friend is not a decision. As i've also mentioned Adam/Eve would have had no knowledge of whether the serpent or god was telling the truth. As for temptation.. Look at my car analogy.

God knows that it is in mans nature to disobey Him, and knew that Adam would disobey Him, but He still had to give him every chance, because he has a small amount of independence, and had to have the right to use it.

Well it isn't 'independance' if god knows the outcome beforehand. Again that is a design flaw. As for 'having the right'. There was no right. It's not like god said: "Well you've used your free will and independance who can hold it against you?"

Instead they all got cursed.

Seriously not good progeny, is when the mother and father of a child or children is completely devoid of God-consciousness.

So it's serious to go against god? That is slavery. Remember we're talking about the anihiliation of every living thing, (save the ark passengers). This makes the independance speech null and void. We have no freedom of choice or independance. We are merely slaves to gods system. So it's dying under slavery and maybe getting a reward later, (as promised but slave masters are not usually trustworthy), or living a life free and dying, (then we can argue burning in hell or not etc). Personally, as a human, i would prefer to be free than to be a slave.

One cannot show freewill, freewill is constitutional, it is a part of your make up, like your hair or skin. Mankind is punished because of the choices he makes. As I have said, there are rules and regulations and if you violate them, then you have to accept the same violations are going to come upon you, this is natural. In all societies, there are systems which punish unlawful acts, this has to be, otherwise there would be complete havoc. We make our bed, we must lie in it.

Slavery. We have no free will, we have no independance- It's a do or die situation. Now we can see why the term 'fear of god' is used a lot. Where's this love you claim? Love does not make demands, love does not give do or die ultimatums.

it says, all of mankind had evil intent. Maybe you don’t understand what evil intent means.

Tell me what it means to you and i'll tell you what it means to me. As far as analysis goes i would say 'evil intent' signifies mankind going against his captor. I would do the same if i was caught by Saddam. Hell yes it might kill me, but better that than serve him.

Lets say an evil person, committed the most heinous, murderous and brutal crimes and it was proven beyond doubt, that he was the perpetrator of these acts, which numbered in tens or more. Lets say this person got a lot of pleasure from inflicting his will on others, and watching the fear and suffering of others, and was not in the least remorseful. And his crimes were against babies and children, to give it a personal dimension.

Sounds exactly like the being we are talking about.

Would you honestly mind if this person was sentenced to a death penalty by the authorities? Or do you think he should be allowed to do as he likes, as it is his choice?

You answer that..

Now, bear in mind, that he did this out of his own freewill.
Now imagine every single person on the face of the planet with that frame of mind.

There will always be bad people, for we were made in the image of god.

What is the difference between work and service? In this world we have to work, there is no getting away from it. There is not one person who can survive without some kind of work or service, otherwise how would they eat, where would they live, how would the defend themselves. Even the president of the US of A, the most powerful nation in the land, has to work and serve. We are servants, make no bones about it.
We love, according to our consciousness, but love is always there, because we are, in our natural form, spirit and therefore spiritual, which is love.

Work and service have no bearing on love. We work and serve because we have no other choice, as you said, but the same does not apply to love.

No, she knew that she wasn’t supposed to eat the fruit, that is why she had to be convinced, but why did she go against God’s Will, this is the question.

Because she wanted to. If there was love, it wouldn't have been so bad- if it was slavery the outcome would be eternal damnation.

You wouldn’t teach advanced level mathematics, to infants, because their consciousness is not yet developed to the level where they can comprehend it, but it doesn’t mean that, in time, they wont be able to grasp it. You can only teach people what their consciousness can understand. But the truth remains as one, in every scripture, just as mathematics is one.

Ok, then i hope you study Sumerian.

If they mean, aliens, alien to man, then that is correct, from theirs, or any religious or spiritual point of view.

No, they mean mortal space travellers. Nothing to suggest that isn't correct, nothing to say your god is.

Her intention was to become God, she was envious of God Greatness, and as a result, chatted foolishness upon the birth of her firstborn. This is the position of “some” ungodly men, they want to kill God, by becoming God.

And they succeeded:

"Man has become like one of us..."

I do agree with you. I think the god/s are as fragile as we and are also physical being/s. They showed true panic when man tried to build into the heavens, knowing eventually we would become greater then they are. If they weren't so worried about
man reaching the 'heavens', (cosmos), they would be god/s, not something of a lower nature. God would not need to worry.

Jealousy is an integral part of ignorance, there is no justification for it, within the realm of proper intelligence. God knew Abel’s intent, because God knew his nature.

Jealousy is a part of our genetic code. Intelligence, ignorance- neither of these have bearing on jealousy. Once again it's a fault of the mechanic, not the car.

Cain had committed an awful crime, which I’m sure you would agree, is punishable. It would be better to suffer the remainder of ones life, with the guilt, and die having atoned your actions, than to go to hell and suffer, in full awareness, as that would be the universal, natural punishment, for murdering ones younger brother, through an act of violent jealousy.
I think he got off rather lightely.

Ok, if we 'assume' there is a heaven or hell then he 'got off lightly'. If there isn't he got killed plain and simple. Eye for an eye is also fine i guess and Cain certainly did go overboard with his actions but either way god still started the problem. Yes, over a fruit.

Nature is like a machine, it just keeps going, round and round, this has happened, innumerable times in the past, it’s happening now, and it will keep on happening. As long as there are conditioned souls, there has to be material nature.
The law of nature is such, that everything and everyone, becomes anihilated, in some form or other. If you study spirituality, on a deeper level, you will understand it teaches that the soul and body are different, the body comes into being and eventually dies, whereas the soul does not come into being, and does not die, it is spirit and therefore eternal.

That's assuming we do have a spirit, and assuming it does anything other than die when we die. Things like this we can only take at face value. Would you believe you were going to be set free if saddam said so? Could anyone fault you for having your doubts?
 
Science is not supposed to assume anything, including the non-existence of God.
I wasn't implying it does assume the non-existance of god.
To say that science, that is led by subjective beings, is completly objective and has no preconceived assumptions and dogmas is nothing more than wishfull thinking.
Of course it has some assumptions, but false assumptions are shown to be false and are discarded unlike dogma. There is no dogma in science. Anything that can be shown to be false is discarded and eventually replaced with a better theory.
Your ignorance concerning the nature of science is showing. You perceive science as what explains the Why, rather than what is truly does: explain the How.
It is your ignorance that is showing. Science is a process that explains how, the theories explain why. You are either misusing the terms, or you truly don't understand the concepts.
I never said that theories 'gathered' facts, I said they explained their role in a given, pre-conceived theory. Since th etheory is pre-conceived, there is no way of verifing the theory, only if the facts can coincide with the theory.
Now your ignorance is really showing. And you DID say theories gather facts.
Read: Kuhn
There's a flaw with Khun's reasoning. In order to progress we need to learn what has been learned before so we don't cover old ground and waste time, so we can move forward. We don't challenge the accepted paradigm because there's no reason to until we find some apparently contradictory evidence or working theory. There's no reason to challenge the accepted paradigm without cause, covering old ground merely stagnates progress. To constantly challenge the accepted theories would be a waste of time without evidence.
You seem to live in a world where anybody can do anything... how cute. If you want to have any bearing on what is happening on the scientific scene, you must have a doctorate, have the necessayr grant\funds to do your research (grants that come from companies who want results... preferably what they want) and of course, you have to get published, then read and if your lucky accepted by the majority.
I've seen papers and proof from people without qualifications such as those you've mentioned that have changed accepted opinion.
If you oppose this I say:
"I have observed my tennis ball float in my kitchen"
Thus the theory of gravity has flaws.
Is this science?
Is what science? I don't know what you're trying to say here. I can make a tennis ball float in my kitchen too. Put it in the sink, full of water, lol.
Religion also changes. They have what they call 'theology' and scholars that constantly work in seeking the true faith.
Yet they still have the dogmatic assumption that god exists, and whatever other dogma comes along with each religion.
When you will have completed any serious study of what is science, rather than how to apply science, you will know how universities and research truly works.
Well, I suppose I might be thinking of how it should be, and not how it is for most scientists. But I would content that it's not true science then.
Eveything is so simple in your world is it? You have not answered Kuhn's problem: who is to say what is to be considered more efficient or accurate?
I can't seem to find anything about Kuhn posing such a problem.
Who is to say? I'm not sure what you're getting at. Define the problem for me so I can properly address it.
They have the evidence of what they see in the world as proof of their claims.
Oh, so religous people can look and find evidence and their claims are proven, but scientists aren't so priveledged?
Same with science, its called a hypothesis.
But scientific assumptions are based on evidence, and have been challenged on the basis of evidence.
Do you actually read what you type man?

1-Tell me the last time you ever saw somebody come to be from nothing
You took that out of context. Read the whole sentence.
2-Even modern physics say: "Nothing comes from nothing"
-Lavoisier, physicist from the 19th century
That's outdated. Something DOES come from nothing all the time.
I think the definition of all-powerfull is self-explanatory.
Also contradictory. But even an allpowerful being has to EXIST before it can exercise it's power.

I want to post more, but have run out of time.
 
Dr Lou Natic says:
Even if someone burst out of their grave and hovered in the air 6 feet above it speaking in hebrew saying "god has risen me from the dead" this would by no means be proof that god did.
Is it possible you are just gullible?

======================

This proves my earlier point ......

If I could show you documented evidence of someone raised from the dead.....,
I mean medical records, time of death ect....would you believe...?
The bible says you probably would not.


Luke 16:31 - And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead

Some people will not believe, and unfortunatly were created "not" to believe, ....vessels of dis-honor, fitted for wrath and destruction, carnal, brute beasts...made to be taken and destroyed.

2 Peter 2:12 - But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption

Romans 9:22-23
"What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory"
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by mountainhare
That is also a type of 'LOVE'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Love of what, your belly?
Or maybe the love of a destroyed calf, bred soley for the purpose of slaughter, so we can tickle our fancy?
FUCK FUCK FUCK!!! READ MY LAST POST, YOU LOUSY ILLITERATE IDIOT! I talk about true love have 3 different parts. Passion, committment, and intimacy.
Just passion = Infatuation (a type of love)
Committment = Empty love (a type of love)
Intimacy = Friendship (a type of love)
All 3 = TRUE LOVE (the stuff that's in movie, ya know, romeo and juliet.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prove to me gremlins and pink polka-dotted unicorns don't exist
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


How original.
Well, come on? Prove to me that they don't exist. *idiot*

Firstly, there is no where in this thread, or to you, that I claimed, “God does exist”, but I have expressed in many ways, my belief in His existence.
Secondly, you…….. I repeat, yyyyou, sweetie, have claimed that “GOD DOES NOT EXIST”, here let me remind you of these claims.
“He should not waste his energy trying to destroy something THAT DOESN’T EXIST.”
“ That's right, there are quite a few types of love (UNLIKE GOD WHO DOES NOT EXIST)”
Now, a claim, is an assertion that something is true. It has nothing to do with whether it is positive or negative, it is all in the way you say it, and you said, “God does not exist.” Now, I don’t know about you, but that sounds like a straight out claim to me, and I’m sure, to anyone else of sound mind.
Now, about this burden of proof, falling on the claimant, I think you’ve got some proving to do, don’t you?
You have no brain. I've already said before that you have the burden of proof. It is impossible to prove a non-existence claim.

The fact that there is NOT ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE that God exists shows that it is EXTREMELY HIGHLY UNLIKELY that he exists. I am as certain that their is no god as the sun will rise tomorrow (and yes, their is always an EXTREMELY slight chance the sun will explode, get hit by a comet, blocked by the moon, etc.)
As for me saying there is no god, I believe that their is no god just like there are no pink-polka-dotted unicorns. No proof, no belief. That's how normal people think, my dear.

The second flaw would be; me, refusing to believe, you, does not constitute a claim, and therefore, by challenging me, you would be, effectively talking nonsense, much like you have done,
But you just asked me to prove that God doesn't exist! You're contradicting yourself, girl.
 
The second flaw would be; me, refusing to believe, you, does not constitute a claim, and therefore, by challenging me, you would be, effectively talking nonsense, much like you have done,

Lol calm down on the commas :D
 
FUCK FUCK FUCK!!! READ MY LAST POST, YOU LOUSY ILLITERATE IDIOT!
LOL!
Temper-temper, foolish boy, crying like a baby and stamping your feet, aint gonna win you any arguments.
Its not my fault you’re chatting a load of bollocks.:p
All 3 = TRUE LOVE (the stuff that's in movie, ya know, romeo and juliet.)
That sounds about right, coming from you.
Well, come on? Prove to me that they don't exist. *idiot*
If you get me the names of all the authors who have written literature on the subject of the existence of the said creatures, I will read up on it, and hopefully, i will be in a better position to answer your question, and as you are boring as well as stupid, I urge you to hurry, as my attention span is diminishing with each word I type.
I've already said before that you have the burden of proof. It is impossible to prove a non-existence claim.
I’m sure its much to your surprise, but because you say something, it doesn’t make it true, and if it is impossible to prove a non-existence claim, then why did you make one. :rolleyes:
I believe that their is no god just like there are no pink-polka-dotted unicorns.
You said, categorically, GOD DOES NOT EXIST, not, I BELIEVE GOD DOES NOT EXIST.
Liar! Liar! Pants on fire.
Hopefully that will make you feel more at home.
But you just asked me to prove that God doesn't exist! You're contradicting yourself, girl.
That’s because you made a claimy-waimy. Just for the record, let me remind you again.
“He should not waste his energy trying to destroy something THAT DOESN’T EXIST.”
“ That's right, there are quite a few types of love (UNLIKE GOD WHO DOES NOT EXIST)”

Love

Jan Ardena.
 
Alpha

Sorry alpha,

You clearly seem to confound theoretical science with applied science.

"Science has no dogma" that you so diligently reply all the time, is a misconception of science that people like you seem to cherish and entertain in order to comfort yourselves that man really knows something of this world in a certain way.

Once you will have bothered to consider great thinkers of science, and not only people how made science, like Kant, Russell, Bachelard, Quine, Kuhn and Popper.. it will be easyer for you to understand that science has dogmas, that it is uncertain and mostly theoretical and conventional knowledge.

What you retain of science is nothing more than what scientists want you to believe about them.

I have no intentions on wasting my time bikering about things that you clearly do not know and most likely do not want to know about science.

Peace.

P.S.

You have failled to illustrate any 'flaw' in Kuhn theories.
Putting quotes of me and not answering them intelligently... does not make you look intelligent. (Sorry)
 
Snakelord said
I Agree completely, (aside from Jesus being involved). Servitude=slavery. The problem i can perceive from eating the fruit was that mankind would find out he was a slave

Slavery. We have no free will, we have no independance- It's a do or die situation. Now we can see why the term 'fear of god' is used a lot. Where's this love you claim? Love does not make demands, love does not give do or die ultimatums.


============


Actually He comes in this day to serve us.
Christ said "he that would be great among you must first be the servant of all.
It's this "law" of opposites, between the spiritual and the natural that man in his carnal mind can not "see".

Jesus said: Satan thou are an offence to me, because thou ALWAYS savourest the things of the Men instead of the things that are of God.

Speaking of servitude, Jesus came down from above and died for us to redeem us back...He didn't have to.
Mankind chose to believe Satan's lie...just like the one snakelord preaches above
Mankind was deveived by Satan and fell, we were lost, gone forever.
This is why all things belong to Christ has the rights to Life, and He died to share them with us.
He is worthy of praise and honor and glory, He doesn't have to "make" anyone worship him.
We who know what He did for us, do it willingly from our hearts.
What man would want a women who only wants him for his money. That is a harlot. This is the denominations today.
Read the parable of the "seven women"

Isaiah 4:1 - And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.

Jesus wants what any man would want, true unfigned love.
Not some one who feels "forced", or treated unjustly, no this is the lies of Satan that try and descibe HIm in this manner.
Jesus is the perfect gentelmen. He will not force anyone to do anything against their will.

Now he weeds out the ones who do not truely love Him by hiding Himself from the world and the true value of His Words, the Words of Eternal Life.
He reveals this only to those who truly love Him, His bride.

1 Cor. 2:4
4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: 5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. 6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: 7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

This is the day we are to do no servile work.
After the seven church ages are over, and they are...we enter into an 8th day...
A holy covocation.
The type is in the feast of the tabernacles, there were 8 days in the feast.
This is the Bride age,The fullness of times,The coming of the Son of Man, being revealed from heaven..and He serves us.
He serves us at the wedding supper His Word....the true sayings of God. Rev.19
The Marriage of the Lamb takes place here, would God break His own law, and impregnate a bride he has taken for wife, before the marriage, ...?
No.
The mystery of God to be completed this day is Christ in you, the hope of glory.
The manifestation of the Sons of God in this day, are the result of the revelation of the Son of Man, coming in the fullness of His Word, no longer a partial understanding or revelation to His bride.
The two become one.
The second coming of Christ is in Bride form.
Read the scriptures....
When He comes, we shall be like Him.
He comes and His glory is to be revealed IN us.

When a son is still a child, He differs not from that of a servant, though he still be an heir.
But when the Son reaches the age of adoption....(placement into authority) He becomes heir of all.

Galations 4:1
1 Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; 2 But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. 3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: 4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ
 
Last edited:
Actually He comes in this day to serve us.

He does heh? Tell him to come round and mow my lawn.

When He comes, we shall be like Him.

The second coming of Christ is in Bride form

Ooooh we're all gonna be transvestites? At least now your wife will know why you've been wearing her knickers and makeup :D

When a son is still a child, He differs not from that of a servant, though he still be an heir.
But when the Son reaches the age of adoption....(placement into authority) He becomes heir of all.

Not entirely true, i suppose it depends on how parents choose to treat their children. My child certainly bears absolutely no resemblence to a servant, if anyone does its the parents who 'serve' their children and their needs.

7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ

Funny thing is it's the 'sons' of god that are serving god. Us servants do not serve. Doh!
 
Snakelords comments:
-He does heh? Tell him to come round and mow my lawn.

-Ooooh we're all gonna be transvestites? At least now your wife will know why you've been wearing her knickers and makeup.

-My child certainly bears absolutely no resemblence to a servant, if anyone does its the parents who 'serve' their children and their needs.

-Funny thing is it's the 'sons' of god that are serving god. Us servants do not serve. Doh!


===========

You act like you are interested in truth, then act like this whenever you can't deny it's staring you in the face.
You show you have no respect for anyone or anything.
You are a "mocker". I pity you.

Sodom and Gomorrha was part of your Sumerian culture, and in your love for their "ancient" texts, you've apparently taken thier "nature" upon you.
 
Last edited:
This is the story of the "mockers"

Jude 1:6
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. 8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities 9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. 10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. 11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. 12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; 13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. 16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage. 17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; 18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. 19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
 
You act like you are interested in truth, then act like this whenever you can't deny it's staring you in the face.

Only thing staring me in the face is my computer screen. You quote some unrelated jesus babble to me which i have returned in a humorous manner. I only gave my own interpretation to what was written, just as you do.

Jesus is coming back as a bride and we'll all be like him- symbolises we'll all be transvestites. Humourous or not you cannot prove otherwise, you just assume you can by quoting more irrelevant jesus babble that you try and attribute as being related. For example:

"There once was a cow who ate a load of grass and fell over" = if you live like a cow, taking everything from the land, you will be taken by satan.

pointless.

You show you have no respect for anyone or anything.

I have respect for that which earns my respect, for i was made in the image of god.

You are a "mocker". I pity you.

Do as you please.

The second part about servitude was not an attempt at humour but rather showing a point.

The writing claims children are servants but become men and heirs.. when things are quite the opposite. A child has all the power- he cries-you run to him, he falls over- you look after him, he wants food- you feed him. Servitude works the other way around.

Well if god wants me to spend eternity in hell because i made a humorous remark that's his choice. However the truth of the matter is god made me jest with you in order to test you. You failed- you judged me too quickly and hastily- god does not like this, (im sure you can remember where in the bible god/jesus etc talks about judging others).

Pick and choose whatever interpretation you want of anything- i guess it doesn't matter to you as long as you think you're right.

Example: God clearly states every single man MUST be circumcised. I'd say several billion people are going against gods rule and are obviously destined to hell for not chopping the end of their peeny off.

You are so quick to judge others. Over countless posts when someone asks questions and make debates you treat them in a manner unbecoming of one of gods children. The resentment you have for others is very apparent- including people of your own faith who you label as 'fraud christians' etc. As shown in the example above everyone is going against god in one way or the other. From the style with which god presents himself we will all be sent to hell because he points out the bad instead of seeing the good. Cain, who you deem as a son of satan yada yada, gave an offering to god. Instead of saying: "thnx, i actually prefer beef but the offering was nice of you" he looked at the bad and gave cain a bollocking for not supplying meat.

It's like a giant bag of pick and mix. You pick out anything you want to abide by or believe and ignore the rest. That makes you as much of a sinner as everyone else.
 
You say Sumerian culture was destroyed by atomic weapons...
------------------

Lets look at a "paralell" here.

The giants before the flood were desendants of Cain.
They created cities and science...(articifers of metal, and creater of musical instruments, the builders of cities)

These "serpent seed" were possessed of Satan and his angels.
Their bodies, or vessels were destroyed in the flood.
These "fallen angels" are typed as stars.
Stars are powered by nuclear fusion.
These spirits revealed to man, the power of the stars. By man "listening" to Satan, and not God.
The tree of knowledge. Only the character of God....incorruptable can hold such power.
By this they destroyed the world that was before the flood.

The world before the flood, was destroyed indirectly by an atomic blast, this is what threw the world out of it's orbit and off it's axis and caused the rain to fall.
Where did I get this....? Rev 10 :7

But Ham carried thier seed.
Through time after the flood their race was restored. In Sumer.
This was the restored culture of the giants, the "serpents seed".
Their mathimatics are the most advanced, and the most ancient of all the ancient cultures.
In time they may have again "discovered" the power of the stars.
It is possible because God it is written, destroyed them with fire and brimstone and He always lets man destroy man.
He does nothing, without doing it through man.

Jude 1:6
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

He identifies Himself upon the earth in man. God does nothing without man. The Bible said so. He always takes man, because it was man He had to use. And let the man--put him on free moral agency knowing that he would fall, in order to display His attributes as a Saviour, for there was nothing lost. And therefore, He chose man. He could've chose stars; He could've chose trees, but He chose man.

When He came down with the two angels to Abraham it was to "investigate" if what was being said was true..
The lights they see today and can't explain...these "saucers" are investigating angels.
Coming just as they did then. Right before the destruction.
When man destroys himself again...today it will be by listening to Satan's lies instead of the Words of eternal life.

The fires about to fall. These spirits are the same "religious demons" that were creating the tower of babel to get back to heaven.
They were the same ones in the Romans who crucified Christ, and destroyed Jerusalam.
These are the same ones held bound at the "Eurphrates" untill the restrainer, the Holy Spirit begins to lift...the river "drying" up to make way for the "kings"....

These spirits are the ones who came on Hitler , Eihtmen, and the likes to run the Jews back to thier homeland, to gather the world together for the battle of "the great day of God."
Where did the atomic weapons come from...Germany.
Where did all the advanced technolgy come from...Germany.
The same spirits that were in them are now the ecclesiastical demons in the false church of "christianty", ready for the greatest religious persecution of all time.
The Great Tribulation.
 
Last edited:
SEAL.OF.GOD.title JEFF.IN V-26 N-4 54-0514 (May 14, 1954)
115 047 Now, notice this, how the Bible... Get that. That organization, remember, there's where it lays, right there. And we find out, that when the Catholic church started back there, they got a phony baptism they come out with, sprinkling instead of baptizing. There's not one Scripture in the Bible for that. And just not only that, but the Holy Ghost, and water baptism in forms, and titles, and everything else, just making a mock out of the real. And there's not a minister in the land, that can show me one place where that was ever done in the early church. That's right. It's--it's not in the Bible. But they come out with it, and we bow right down to it. You see where we're going right back to?
And today you're wondering why we haven't got a revival. There's what it is, brother. What we need today is a good, old-time, Saint Paul's revival, and the Bible Holy Ghost back in the land again. That's what we need.
SEAL.OF.GOD.title JEFF.IN V-26 N-4 54-0514
117 048 Now... And they've took "the mark of the beast," or "the letter of his name," that they made a image to. The image was the organization just like the Catholic church. They organized it and made an image of the Catholic church. Is the Methodist church an image of it, the Baptist church, the Presbyterian church, the Pentecostal church, the Holiness church, the Pilgrim Holiness, and United Brethren? Every one that organized, patterned off of there. It never was in God's Bible. That's right. Organizations organizing...
God's the Leader. Take it on back as far as you want to. Look at Israel, coming up out of Egypt. And all those Moabs standing up there, fundamental, offering the sacrifices; seven altars, seven go... seven sheep, speaking of the coming of Christ; seven ox, a clean offering. Right there, his great prophet standing out there, Balaam, to curse Israel. And there was Israel... There was Moab, a great nation. There was the Amorites and all, great nation, organized together as a nation.
And Israel was scattered out there on the prairies with a bunch of tents. They were pilgrims and strangers, seeking a City to come, strictly interdenominational. And what did they do? They had signs and wonders following them. These didn't; and they were jealous of those. Them were spirits.
SEAL.OF.GOD.title JEFF.IN V-26 N-4 54-0514
121 049 God takes His man, but never His Spirit. He taken Elijah, and His Spirit come upon Elisha; several hundred years later, it come upon John the Baptist; predicted again in the last day.
The Devil takes his character, but never his spirit. That same religious teacher that condemned Jesus Christ because of His miracles and signs and wonders, and differed with Him on the Scripture, was flat enough to come and tell Him about it. That same spirit lives right down in ecclesiastical teachers today, for it's foreordained of God to come into that condemnation. That's what the Bible said. "Men of old, foreordained to this condemnation, to turn the grace of our Lord into lasciviousness." That's exactly right. In Jude the 3rd--the 3rd verse of--of Jude, you can find it. That's right.
 
LOL!
Temper-temper, foolish boy, crying like a baby and stamping your feet, aint gonna win you any arguments.
You'd be angry too if you spent your precious time typing up something, to find out that a certain idiot (not mentioning any names, right Jan???) can't read.

If you get me the names of all the authors who have written literature on the subject of the existence of the said creatures, I will read up on it, and hopefully, i will be in a better position to answer your question, and as you are boring as well as stupid, I urge you to hurry, as my attention span is diminishing with each word I type.
No literature. Just prove to me that unicorns don't exist. And a unicorn is a horse with a horn, is pink, invisible to the unbeliever, and moves the tectonic plates. When we die, we get to go the the unicorn's place, and eat candy floss.
Please disprove this unicorn.

I’m sure its much to your surprise, but because you say something, it doesn’t make it true, and if it is impossible to prove a non-existence claim, then why did you make one.
I know what you are saying. I will correct myself. I am pretty sure hat he doesn't exist. In otherwords, I believe God doesn't exist.
Please note Jan, that in an argument, you don't say "I think" or "I believe". Basic rules I learnt in debating classes. It weakens your argument. That's why I said "There is no God". It is a much more powerful and evocative statement. It is more direct and has more punch, while saying "I believe" makes your belief appear, erm, unfactual (is that a word???)
 
Originally posted by mountainhare
You'd be angry too if you spent your precious time typing up something, to find out that a certain idiot (not mentioning any names, right Jan???) can't read.
Okay, lets start again, and this time omit the insults, as war is rarely the answer to problems of simple disagreement.
I apologise for insulting you, the truth is, I don’t know you, so my insults were purely superficial.
No literature. Just prove to me that unicorns don't exist. And a unicorn is a horse with a horn, is pink, invisible to the unbeliever, and moves the tectonic plates. When we die, we get to go the the unicorn's place, and eat candy floss.
Please disprove this unicorn.
If there is no literature, on the subject of “the existence of unicorns”, then I am at a disadvantage, as I neither currently believe or dis-believe in their existence, and believe it would make the argument, pointless. My belief in God came about, not just through faith, but information passed down for thousands of years, and recorded in literature, which i am currently studying.
So my request is, please get more detailed information, especially from people who claim to have proof of their existence, and we’ll take it from there.

Please note Jan, that in an argument, you don't say "I think" or "I believe".
Then we must start a philosophical debate, and at least we can give reasonable explanations, by relating our ideas to our situation.
That's why I said "There is no God". It is a much more powerful and evocative statement.
That may be, but the fact remains that you are still making a claim, and can be required to prove it, if asked.
It is more direct and has more punch, while saying "I believe" makes your belief appear, erm, unfactual (is that a word???)
Facts come and go, chop and change, we should want to come to the point of truth, which only lies with the individual. Truth is where you begin to understand what and who God is.

Love

Jan Ardena.
 
You say Sumerian culture was destroyed by atomic weapons...

Eh? I think you've got me mistaken for someone else. Well i'll look at your post anyway...

The giants before the flood were desendants of Cain.
They created cities and science...(articifers of metal, and creater of musical instruments, the builders of cities)

Although in Genesis there's no mention of Nephilim before the flood i will concur with you that there might be some validity to this, (you see i don't always disagree) :)

The Garden of Eden was in Sumeria, (down by the Persian Gulf)-

Map

Apologies in advance but it appears (A) is not the pishon. I made that page on the basis of what i had found written in the bible itself. After doing so i searched around google and found many sites referring to pishon as being the Kuwait River that stems from the same place but is now a dried up river- and has been for 3,000 odd years. From what i saw many religious sites attested to this aswell. I can't argue with their details. However i think i did very well for a novice.

The story puports that after creating humans the gods came down and put man to work in their gardens. They taught man many things. If you read some of Samuel Noah Kramers books you'll see what the Sumerians actually achieved, it's a lot.

There's nothing to believe they were descendants of cain- for they created his parents and all mankind. That's like saying god is a descendant of Moses.

The nephilim dont appear until way after the flood and as such could have only be descendants on Noah or his children. In sumerian they watched the flood from the hilltop and weeped for those who were dying.

These "serpent seed" were possessed of Satan and his angels.

Frankly that's nothing more than pure ungrounded speculation.

It's amazing the answer with you people is always 1 or 2. There's never a 3 or 4 etc..

Think about it- we now have to acknowledge and believe giants exist/existed. If it's not either god or satan it's not acknowledged and if it is acknowledged it's attributed to being satan or god. The fact is if you take the bible as truth satan is not an issue here. Big giant men were on the earth helping mankind progress scientifically and it appears they did a brilliant job of it. There were some horrible giants, (Goliath etc), but we must look at how they were, what they did and where they were from, not say: "it's satan". That's not an answer.

These "fallen angels" are typed as stars.
Stars are powered by nuclear fusion.
These spirits revealed to man, the power of the stars. By man "listening" to Satan, and not God.

Well is these angels are stars, then maybe satan means the worlds core and god means the sun. We either acknowledge it as truth, we acknowledge it as ancient interpretation of things they didnt understand or, like you, we just pick and choose to suit ourselves.

The tree of knowledge. Only the character of God....incorruptable can hold such power.

Well man ate from that tree. We too have that power- especially if we're descendants of cain like you have suggested on numerous occasions.

The world before the flood, was destroyed indirectly by an atomic blast, this is what threw the world out of it's orbit and off it's axis and caused the rain to fall.
Where did I get this....? Rev 10 :7

ummmm Rev 10:7 "But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of god will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants and prophets."

Im sorry but i fail to see any mention of destroying the world indirectly by atomic blast... Have you been smoking pot?

If there is no literature, on the subject of “the existence of unicorns”, then I am at a disadvantage, as I neither currently believe or dis-believe in their existence, and believe it would make the argument, pointless. My belief in God came about, not just through faith, but information passed down for thousands of years, and recorded in literature, which i am currently studying.
So my request is, please get more detailed information, especially from people who claim to have proof of their existence, and we’ll take it from there.

There is extensive literature on Unicorns. Funnily enough in some bibles Adam names the very first animal a unicorn. That's all the evidence you need is it not? The unicorn appears in the bible many times... does that make it as factual as god?

In eastern history there's mention of the ki-rin which was by description a unicorn. Perhaps the first report of a unicorn was the ki-rin, detailed by emperor fu hsi. In Persia, India and other places it was known as the karkadann.

from "Le Bestiare Divine" by Guillaume: "The unicorn represents Jesus Christ, who took on him our nature in the virgin's womb, was betrayed to the Jews, and delivered into the hands of Pontious Pilate. Its one horn signifies the Gospel truth, that Christ is one with the Father..

The unicorn is known the world over. There's nothing to suggest at some time horses having horns -like rams, elephants, rhinos, goats etc etc etc etc. To me believing there was once an animal that had a horn is a lot more safe to say than there's a big invisible being. We can prove there are horses, we can prove many animals grow horns and other bone protrusions.. what's to say horses never had them? Especially if it mentions them in your book of absolute truth.

Then we can go on to creatures like dragons- spoken of throughout history- and yes, spoken of in the bible. If you are going to say: "There is god, fact." then you have no choice but to believe in unicorns and dragons because god said so.
 
Back
Top