21 Sep 09
Originally posted by galveston75Thanks for the warning.
Well Satan has already won in his attempts to fool ones into thinking he does not exist as he's done with you. It's a very basic tacticle play that an enemy would take in a second to defeat an enemy in a war or with mind control.
I could give you many, many scriptures to show you how Satan uses this tactic as well as obvious others to push his control ...[text shortened]... t see the one who can destroy you, but you do not draw close to the one that can protect you.
21 Sep 09
Originally posted by souvereinwhat has been my experience that love becomes a God, which is quite something different than God is love. thus sentimentality rules the day and reason, knowledge and understanding account for nothing!
Somebody on this forum wrote that Jesus came to fulfill the Law.
To me the most important, crucial and too often forgotten message of him was 'Love each other'. Isn't that the essential fulfillment of the Law?
All other texts become then tools to that goal and can be adjusted when time and place needs that.
21 Sep 09
Originally posted by menace71Okay, if you're right, then we are back to the point where someone sayd that all prophecies in the bible are true, and I say that the prophecies in the bible don't work out.
I think Peter meant that to God time is irrelevant. He (if we/you believe in God) 1000 years is nothing to God because he is outside of time. I think a lot of Christians jump on that scripture however to use it for there own interpretation.
Manny
Some are flat out wrong! Some are not yet fulfilled, and therefore not prophecies yet. Some must be interpreated heavily to be found correct. Some are easy ones that even a child can guess.
Nostradamus and the bible are at the same level.
The Genesis 3:3 is still of the category flat out wrong.
21 Sep 09
Originally posted by 667joeThis is an argument I have heard many times and was hoping for a cogent, well thought out and appropriate explanation from a Christian, since I have not heard one thus far.
Could someone explain why the bible is accepted as the ultimate word of truth when there is no proof it is the word of god or even that there is a god? Also for the sake of argument, let's say there are 100 religions in the world. Inevitably the believer is positive his is correct and the other 99 are wrong. That is to say the atheist and the believer ag ...[text shortened]... ch can not be absolutely proven is not a sign of wisdom but rather a sign of wishful thinking?
It seems I am still waiting.
Nobody has come up with an indisputable, objective reason why the Christian faith (or a particular denomination of it) has more validity than the other 99 religions (actually, there may be more than 99 religions right now. If you go back through history, it is more like several thousand!).
Nobody has suggested that, had they been brought up in a Hindu environment, they would not hold the Hindu religion with as much certainty as they currently hold the Christian one. The Bible says that it is the Truth. But then so does the Qu'ran, the Torah, the Vedas, and the writings of every other religion including Scientology.
Soloman's kingdom did not last forever despite God's promise and this is explained by saying that there must be another, invisible kingdom that still lasts to this day and will continue. This is clearly handwaving. God's inconsistent description of time periods, contradictions in Genesis, the general jealousness and ruthlessness of the deity throughout the OT. This is not an all-knowing, all-loving god, it is a description of a human (and a child at that) with divine powers. He is created by us, not the other way round.
That was a bit of a rant, I do apologise! I have had a large glass of wine 😵.
There is a critical thinking summer camp that has been running in America and I gather recently started in England too. At the start of the camp, the children are told that there are a pair of invisible unicorns living in the grounds. They make no sound, leave no markings, cannot be detected by any physical means, and yet all the camp staff believe fervently in their existence. The children are invited to prove that they do not exist. I do hope that many young minds are opened by this exercise.
--- Penguin.
21 Sep 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Penguinthe Christian religion is fundamentally different because it is founded on this principle, please note,
This is an argument I have heard many times and was hoping for a cogent, well thought out and appropriate explanation from a Christian, since I have not heard one thus far.
It seems I am still waiting.
Nobody has come up with an indisputable, objective reason why the Christian faith (or a particular denomination of it) has more validity than the other y do not exist. I do hope that many young minds are opened by this exercise.
--- Penguin.
(John 13:34-35) . . .I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another; just as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves.”
you will note that the emphasis is on loving others the same manner in which Christ loved? what was that? self sacrificing love, putting others interests ahead of ones own, even if it means detriment to self.
the problem is that Christians do not live as Christ did.
Solomon Kingdom, was in fact an extension of his fathers David, and it was to David that God made the promise that his Kingdom would last to time indefinite, as Christ was a descendent of David and a King, of Gods Kingdom, of which David was a representative of while on earth (all the Israelite from Saul onwards were simply supposed to represent God, for he was ultimately the King of Israel), it stands to reason that it now stands to time indefinite, it being heavenly in nature and therefore incorruptible. Perhaps because of your lack of Biblical knowledge you were unable to draw this conclusion.
As for the rest of the post it seems to betray the same folly as most other types of purely human endeavour, it may aid the thought process, but it is devoid of the divine and therefore, in my opinion spirituality.
21 Sep 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieyou will note that the emphasis is on loving others the same manner in which Christ loved? what was that? self sacrificing love, putting others interests ahead of ones own, even if it means detriment to self.
the Christian religion is fundamentally different because it is founded on this principle, please note,
(John 13:34-35) . . .I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another; [b]just as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves.”
you will ...[text shortened]... d the thought process, but it is devoid of the divine and therefore, in my opinion spirituality.[/b]
Any Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc care to comment on whether the message in John 13:34-35 makes Christianity fundamentally different to your own religion? I suspect that they all advocate self sacrifice and putting others interests ahead of ones own but I would need confirmation of this.
Solomon Kingdom, was in fact an extension of his fathers David, and it was to David that God made the promise that his Kingdom would last to time indefinite, as Christ was a descendent of David and a King, of Gods Kingdom, of which David was a representative of while on earth (all the Israelite from Saul onwards were simply supposed to represent God, for he was ultimately the King of Israel), it stands to reason that it now stands to time indefinite, it being heavenly in nature and therefore incorruptible. Perhaps because of your lack of Biblical knowledge you were unable to draw this conclusion.
Ok, fair call. I will admit to no biblical knowledge here. I have just looked up the reference (2 Samuel, chapter 7, verses 13-16) and you are quite right: the promise appears to be about David's kingdom, not Solomon's. I will not try to use this particular argument in future. FabianFnas, were you aware of this when you posted the question about 'Solomon's' kingdom?
As for the rest of the post it seems to betray the same folly as most other types of purely human endeavour, it may aid the thought process, but it is devoid of the divine and therefore, in my opinion spirituality.
It was a bit of a rant wasn't it! I still think the arguments are cogent though. If there is no divine then of course my post will be devoid of the divine. This says nothing about whether any of my points are correct.
--- Penguin.
21 Sep 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Penguinsure thing, but i tried to discern the intent of what was written and who can argue against having an open mind?
[b]you will note that the emphasis is on loving others the same manner in which Christ loved? what was that? self sacrificing love, putting others interests ahead of ones own, even if it means detriment to self.
Any Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc care to comment on whether the message in John 13:34-35 makes Christianity fundamentally different to y the divine. This says nothing about whether any of my points are correct.
--- Penguin.[/b]
21 Sep 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOpen yes. But this must be moderated by a healthy scepticism and general questioning attitude. Otherwise you may as well believe in invisible unicorns.
sure thing, but i tried to discern the intent of what was written and who can argue against having an open mind?
Any response then to my general comment that much of God's behaviour as depicted in the OT is similar to that of a petulant child?
--- Penguin.
22 Sep 09
Originally posted by FabianFnas"There is no God because there is no God."
Another (of the same type) circular argument. They are so amusing!
Another circular, of it's basic form, is the following:
"God exists because god exists."
Another one:
"The bible is the truth, because the bible tells us so."
"Evolution is the truth because man tells us so.."
That goes both ways. But then your's is correct because of mans limitless wisdom of how the universe was made.
22 Sep 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasWe should pick some prophecies and put them to the test.
Okay, if you're right, then we are back to the point where someone sayd that all prophecies in the bible are true, and I say that the prophecies in the bible don't work out.
Some are flat out wrong! Some are not yet fulfilled, and therefore not prophecies yet. Some must be interpreated heavily to be found correct. Some are easy ones that even a child ...[text shortened]... d the bible are at the same level.
The Genesis 3:3 is still of the category flat out wrong.
Manny
22 Sep 09
1 edit
Originally posted by menace71We can start with The Genesis 3:3. I haven't heard of any explanation that holds yet. Adam was suppose to die within short, said god. In reality he lived on for 940 years.
We should pick some prophecies and put them to the test.
Manny
There is no way to foretell the future, other than with statistical methods. The future is always hidden for us. Even the bible says that foretellers are wrong in the eyes of god. Prophecies are guesswork, nothing more.
It is very easy to make a prohecy and make it stick: "Obama will end his precidency in the future", Fabian the Prophet has spoken!
Or perhaps: "Today I will have a lunch of chicken", Fabian the Prophet has spoken! (They have a chicken of the today's menu.)
But are these prophecies? No, I don't think so.
22 Sep 09
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75I haven't heard these. I never used these.
"There is no God because there is no God."
"Evolution is the truth because man tells us so.."
That goes both ways. But then your's is correct because of mans limitless wisdom of how the universe was made.
Firstly, they are both circular, and therefore they don't work.
Secondly, Evolution is never said to be true of the only reason that one man said that, but because it is observed in action, researched upon, and there is no better explanation than evolution.
But I've heard, several times, with different worthings: "Creation is true, because the bible tells us." Meaning no further explanation is needed.
22 Sep 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasNo God gave Adam the choice if He wanted to do penance fir his sins, God knows the future and sometimes tells some people who tell others, no they are not prophecies but the first is like saying "time will exist in the future" not a prophecy but something everybody knows is going to happen anyways, of course we don't know when the world will end, the second is like saying "I will post this post", that's only implying what you INTEND to do, what a prophecy is, is something that will happen in the future that will affect people on a spiritual level, that not everybody can know without God's Help, which of course is revealed by God.
We can start with The Genesis 3:3. I haven't heard of any explanation that holds yet. Adam was suppose to die within short, said god. In reality he lived on for 940 years.
There is no way to foretell the future, other than with statistical methods. The future is always hidden for us. Even the bible says that foretellers are wrong in the eyes of god. Pr ...[text shortened]... hey have a chicken of the today's menu.)
But are these prophecies? No, I don't think so.
23 Sep 09
I could be off base but I think physical death is not what is meant. Spiritual death is what is meant I think. However maybe it was physical death that was meant. Maybe Adam was intended to live forever but because He ate from this tree is why he died a physical death it just took 900+ years is all. So yes He did not die right away but he died.
Manny