Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles
Title: If A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words, Then What Do These Memes Say? (Parts VIII & I)
Source:
The Potters Clay
URL Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa6ulv9aQno
Published: Oct 10, 2018
Author: The Potters Clay
Post Date: 2019-10-07 12:02:10 by Liberator
Keywords: Truth, Memes, Hmmm
Views: 45896
Comments: 340
A little Meme action... Poster Comment: Get bored easily? No time to watch long videos? MEMES TO THE RESCUE! Short & Sweet. These are found at a Christian You Tube called, 'The Potters Clay'... These are REALLY good. Fun stuff. I promise. Spectacular AND clever. It doesn't matter what your core belief is; you will come upon several memes that will stop you dead in your tracks and challenge you. (STRONG SUGGESTION: To adjust and slow these memes down, go to your YouTube 'Settings', then adjust 'Playback Speed to .75. It will give you more time to contemplate the meme, since they move along pretty fast.) When you have the time, please give them all a look; I consider them a crash-course in Earth-Science Truth, Logic, and Reason.
If you haven't seen them, checkout the rest!
A Flat Earth Picture is Worth a Thousand Words - Part I
https://youtu.be/ptar5YtS_Sk
A Flat Earth Picture is Worth A Thousand Words - Part II
https://youtu.be/FchgUVA4SxE
A Flat Earth Picture is Worth a Thousand Words - Part III
https://youtu.be/Kth6X1g7bWk
A Flat Earth Picture is Worth a Thousand Words - Part IV
https://youtu.be/eVk3DIwf66c
A Flat Earth Picture is Worth a Thousand Words - Part V
https://youtu.be/qJAsGkP99rg
A Flat Earth Picture is Worth a Thousand Words - Part VI
https://youtu.be/z2a6g-nfQRU
A Flat Earth Picture is Worth a Thousand Words - Part VII
https://youtu.be/9Xsh2LJ1SvY
A Flat Earth Picture is Worth a Thousand Words - Part IX
https://youtu.be/X-D54GbpPjQ
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 282.
#12. To: Liberator (#0)
I watched both. I find them, to varying degrees, flawed. I'm not willing to rehash the science, at least right now. But setting science aside, I'd just speak to the conspiracy factor. If the earth is flat, then it's an absolutely enormous conspiracy going back some 15 generations to perpetuate this round earth lie. And the number of people that would have to be in on it in this day and age is huge. Not just NASA and astronomers, but meteorologists, navigators, and even satellite TV equipment manufactures. Every parent knows how it is, and so does everyone who's ever been a kid. If you tell one lie, you later have to tell another lie to cover up for your first lie. And then a 3rd lie to cover for the second. It goes on and on and eventually the whole house of cards collapses under its own weight. If the earth is flat, then the lie about the earth being round amounts to an absolute huge house of cards. Then again, I guess you would counter that the house has collapsed. For you. Fact is though, it's only collapsed for a tiny fraction of people. If you were right, this would have fallen over a very long time ago. And that's even ignoring the question of what perpetuating this round earth theory was ever supposed to achieve in the first place. If it was to marginalize the story of Genesis in the Bible, then they could have done that in any number of other ways that would be safe from being disproved, unlike something so basic as the shape of the earth.
Thanks for checking them out. Some of the memes aren't going to be A+. But some of them are. (Which meme or memes did you find "flawed" btw?) ...Setting science aside, I'd just speak to the conspiracy factor. If the earth is flat, then it's an absolutely enormous conspiracy going back some 15 generations to perpetuate this round earth lie. I think we can both agree that acceptance of Globe Earth was first making headway near the time of Galileo and Copernicus, which would have been @ the 1500s. It was not fully accepted by a consensus until the mid-1800s -- at coincidentally the same time "institutional Science" (controlled by certain Elites with an agenda) was insisting that "Evolution" was fact AND that Dinosaurs were older than Man. By the late 1800s and early 1900s Globe Earth was still being challenged strongly, believe it or not... The is is now a Publisher called, 'Dead Authors Society' that enables one to purchase a plethora of re-released old books. I'd read, 'Terra Firma: The Earth Not A Plane, Proved From Scripture, Reason, and Fact' (Author: David Wardlaw Scott). It was published in 1903. What especially fascinating about the book and perspective as written is the degree of knowledge about our realm -- even in 1903 -- style of writing, ideological and scientific battles at that time being waged over how our world should be perceived. (I think you and others would find it a great read.) Regarding any difficulty in catapulting any so-called, "Conspiracies" -- well, it's been quite easy. Institutional Science via schools were co-opted, where they *still* manage to convince the public via these secular humanist schools that 'Evolution' and 'Stone Age Man' is indeed a "Fact" -- even though it's been proven impossible. Regarding our realm, Institutional Science and its cabal have simply rigged the system and what they insist are "natural laws" like "gravity", formulas like "the theory of relativity" and one that explains earth "curvature" -- ALL of which not only remain 'theories' but are proven false. The number of people that would have to be in on it in this day and age is huge. Not just NASA and astronomers, but meteorologists, navigators, and even satellite TV equipment manufactures. Right. And many *would* tell you they already *know* the truth of the matter (or risk ostracization and unemployment. *I* can't believe even how much *I* assumed and denied of my own eyes.) Many of those memes can't be denied, btw. There are 8 more Meme Vids that provide further food for thought and additional "scientific" and observational contradictions FWIW. Every parent knows how it is, and so does everyone who's ever been a kid. If you tell one lie, you later have to tell another lie to cover up for your first lie. And then a 3rd lie to cover for the second. It goes on and on and eventually the whole house of cards collapses under its own weight. True. And Globe Earth remain the biggest, clearest case of adulthood Easter Bunny and Santa Claus (besides, 'Evolution, 'Big Bang', and "We from the Gummint and here to help.") If the earth is flat, then the lie about the earth being round amounts to an absolute huge house of cards. Then again, I guess you would counter that the house has collapsed. For you. Fact is though, it's only collapsed for a tiny fraction of people. If you were right, this would have fallen over a very long time ago. Aye-aye on all the above. (Except your last statement; The reason the PTB are freaking out about Flat Earth/NASA is...Knowledge of the truth is growing exponentially...And collapsing like many other things we've been told is "the truth.") And that's even ignoring the question of what perpetuating this round earth theory was ever supposed to achieve in the first place. (The Big Picture: please see my Post #17) If it was to marginalize the story of Genesis in the Bible, then they could have done that in any number of other ways that would be safe from being disproved, unlike something so basic as the shape of the earth. FWIW, besides Genesis, the shape of the Earth is also discussed in Psalms, Job, and Isaiah. But to your premise, multiple civilizations for thousands of years had already presumed its shape not only to be Flat, but having a Dome or Firmament over it. I didn't make that up; That's a fact. Again, "Globe/Ball" earth has only been advanced as a theory since the 1500s, and "fact" only since the mid-1800s.
This is all I see fit to respond to, with I'll do with a simple "of course". Anyone looking over long distances will have the impression the land is flat, with the exception of ships sailing over the horizon which might be mistaken for disappearing in the distant mist. There's no reason ancients living thousands of years ago should be considered a scientific authority. If we don't consider them an authority when they said that all matter could be subcategorized into one of: Earth, Air, Fire & Water, and if they didn't understand even basic things air pressure, bacteria, steam engines and the like, then why would or should they be considered an authority on the shape of the earth?
....and if they didn't understand even basic things air pressure, bacteria, steam engines and the like, then why would or should they be considered an authority on the shape of the earth? Several separate civilizations (or "authorities" of the day) ALL conceptualized similar configurations of our earthly realm as can be seen below. What are the odds?? NONE conceptualized any realm that was remotely a "ball" or globular. These concepts were more accepted even as recently as the 16th century. The elements of the earth are a whole different category. Why should the previous 5,000 years of mankind's knowledge of nature and science be invalidated? They weren't scientifically uneducated and ignorant of technology. In many ways it could be said that they were more advanced and regressed after the Fall of the Roman Empire. What of the Pyramids the world over? All the Chinese and folk herbal remedies and treatment? Roman sewer systems and aqueducts? And so forth. It really wasn't until the mid-19th century and beyond that man began harnessing "high tech" and discoveries on a macro level. Much of the biological by the mid-20th century. Why dismiss and invalidate all past civilizations' scientific credibility, discoveries and truth on the basis of realm concepts? Moreover, hasn't "modern science and tech" had to build on past tested scientific evidence, truths and technologies? "Science" has claimed a "Big Bang" and "Evolution" are "FACT"; Based on what? At the World's museums "Science" claims a "Prehistoric Man" -- that he indeed evolved from Apes. Based on what? Same of the age of fossils and dinosaur bones. Same of both the age of the Universe and alleged near-infinite size. By what criteria does "Science" claim "empirical evidence" in any of these cases? (HAVE those theories been supported by any evidence -- as per "Scientific protocols"? With respect to the actual shape of this earthly realm, I'd mentioned in a prior post that by the turn of the 20th century there was still a big battle raging over the actual shape of the earth. Serious question to you or anyone else: By whose authority, by what criteria IS the earth said to definitively be a "globe"? Because IF it's NASA, they and their credibility is already an ongoing problem and challenge. If it's flight, the horizon is proven to rise as flat -- whether the horizon at ocean level, the horizon at cloud-level, "space" at low-altitude balloon level.
You really are big on that "whose authority?" question, and not just on religious topics. I really don't have the time or inclination to continue on this. Not now. You are wrong on this. I am satisfied that you have chosen to believe the earth is flat, and that the power of that belief overwhelms the physical evidence of a spherical earth that is all around us. So much in this world wouldn't be as it is if the earth was flat, like flying from Chile to New Zealand in 13 hours at commercial jet speeds. That is such a basic piece of evidence that blows flat earth out of the water all by itself. TC posted this vid about the psychological term for describing an inability to accurately understand or comprehend certain subjects. I forget the term. I know I'm terrible at some subjects and good at others. One area I'm good at is math and, as it pertains to the flat earth subject, geometry. If you are not good at spacial comprehension, and it seems you are not, then that's okay. But I can, with full confidence and respect, say to you that you are so very, very wrong in believing the earth is flat. Every single argument for a flat earth falls flat on its face. Every. Single. One. The power we have to believe things that are not true is one of the most underrated powers known to man. Almost no one appreciates how true that is. And that truism is one reason why I cannot believe that God would judge us on what we believe, rather, what we do with what we believe. Best to you...
I am. But aren't you as well? After all, on who or what source shall we base "truth"? (or credibility?) You are wrong on this... I could accept your premise -- IF it were based on refutations. But all I ever see is THIS one by you: ...So much in this world wouldn't be as it is if the earth was flat, like flying from Chile to New Zealand in 13 hours at commercial jet speeds. That is such a basic piece of evidence that blows flat earth out of the water all by itself. It does no such thing. It's been this very same citation of flight times from Chile to New Zealand I keep seeing as THE prima facia "evidence" and a guarantee by you as well as Flat Earth opponents by search engines that our realm is a "Globe." Strange.) It is on this one basis ALL other evidence to the contrary should be dismissed?? Meanwhile, I've lost count of what must be hundreds of pieces of evidences I've submitted that prove the earth is NOT a "GLOBE," and still you claim, "every single argument for a flat earth falls flat on its face. Every. Single. One." Why engage in cognitive absolutism without examining the tangible, provable data, science, observations, and facts? Please refute ANY of the memes. Just one. One area I'm good at is math and, as it pertains to the flat earth subject, geometry. Alrighty then. Great! Then explain the following geometric out- of-the-way paths this (below). It is said that Santiago-Sydney flights (close to your examples of Chile to New Zealand, right?) go into the Northern hemisphere making stop-overs at LAX and other North American airports before continuing back down to the Southern hemisphere. Such ridiculously wayward detours make no sense on the globe but make perfect sense and form nearly straight lines when shown on a flat Earth map. Curious geometry: (200 Proofs The Earth Is Not A Spinning Ball)
The nearest airport to Sydney is Kingsford Smith Airport (SYD) and the nearest airport to Santiago is Arturo Merino Benitez Airport (SCL). Your flat earth map says Sydney to Santiago is 25,400km (15,782 nautical miles or 18149 statutory miles). According to round earth maps, the distance is 11,340km (6,250 nautical miles or 7053 statutory miles). According to this page, Quantas and LAN Airlines both declare the flight time is 12.5 hours duration. You can find other sites that go as high as 14 hours but the general range is established. Typical estimates for modern intercontinental airlines is 500mph with some a little faster or slower. The regularly scheduled non-stop Qantas flights are QF27 and QF28 (eastbound and westbound) and these are daily flights advertised as 12.5 hours flight time. You can verify flight prices and times and duration and live flight status of Qantas QF27 and QF28 flights by referring to these flight route numbers in any search engine. So a trip from Santiago to Sydney on Flat Earth Airlines (15,782 miles) would normally require the airliner to fly for 31.5 hours @ 500mph, in keeping with your Flat estimate . For Flat Earth Airlines plane to make that trip in just 12.5 hours, it would have to fly almost 1300mph. However, if you fly on Round Earth Airlines between those two cities - a distance of 6,250 miles - it will take you . . . exactly 12.5 hours. Just as the airlines have advertised for years. Keep in mind that airlines advertise 14 hours but they include at least a half-hour at both departure and arrival for airport delays, boarding, etc. The flight time is always less than what the airlines advertise. Also, some of these sites confuse nautical miles for statute miles so keep that in mind when you make calculations and make sure you know which number the airline is using. Airlines also have extra prep time for very long flights over the oceans and crew layover times that can affect the advertised flight time. Expedia: Santiago to Sydney non-stop flights Well, I'm kinda meandering here a bit. Let me just point out something: there can be no non-stop flights whatsoever between Sydney and Santiago using Boeing/Airbus airliners. They would fall into the ocean with empty fuel tanks if they tried to make a 25,400km flight. Aerospace-Technology.com: The top 10 longest range airliners in the world I could go on at length but I really don't want to contribute to making the world a stupider place.
The question of proof to the skeptic fascinates me, whatever the subject. So, let me ask you something. If I put you in the cockpit of a long-range airc aircraft. Say, flying due north from New York. So you could look out the fron front window the whole time and see the instruments, and gave you detailed flig flight map so you could follow along the route with your finger. Every few hour hours we would land to let you rest/sleep, etc., so that you always knew where you you w you you were in fixed reference to the ground. Then we took back off and continued the the the the route, flying over the north pole, then across through Russia, and down the othe oth othe other side of the world, map in hand, stopping to sleep. Then up again, over the th the the South Pole, and back up this side of the world to New York, would you then beli b beli believe that the world was round? What about if we went up further, into space, and you watched the world turn be below you, would you believe it then? What would it take to convince you to believe that the world really is round?
I always wonder if kooks would abandon their multiple kook theories if you thoroughly disproved their major kook theory. I think they wouldn't. Being a CT nutjob or full-blown multi-kook is a mental habit and deep-set personality characteristic. If you disprove one kookery, they'll just find another one. But then, I've never been able to put it to the test thoroughly. Which is what you are proposing.
I don't care about the "kook" label. I've heard many epithets hurled at me be because of things that I know that I cannot prove to others because I have no me means to do so. I am fascinated by adamant deniers - of God, for example - or, in this case, of the the spheroidal nature o the the spheroidal nature of the Earth. It does not make me angry, in the slightest degree, that people are Flat Ea Earthers. I just wonder what it would take to demonstrate to them that the Ea Earth is, in fact, a spheroid. I'm pretty sure that no amount of book waving for finger-wagging would do it, just a just as no amo just a just as no amount of that has ever been able to convince me of a single thing concer concerning Go concer concerning God and his existence. I required independent, empirical evidence of the of the sort of the of the sort that I would accept. Nobody provided me that, or tried, but God did. did. So I did. did. So I know there's God, because I know God. Since that time, others have vehemently wagged fingers and books at me telling me t me that I me t me that I DON'T know God, that I am delusional, etc., but I just laugh inside at t at them a at t at them and feel a little bit sorry for them, for reasons I needn't further elab elaborate. I've thought about it. I think the world is round because I don't see any pa particular reason to question it. I've sailed the world around, northern and so southern hemispheres, seen that the stars are different down under, seen what lo looks to me like a curved earth, watched ships rise out of the sea on one ho horizon and sink into the sea on the other. That this is because the earth is cu cur cu curved makes sense to me. The notion that there is a giant conspiracy...about AN AN AN ANYTHING...always sounds nutty to me, and makes me wonder why the person ch chooses to reject things that they reject. Still, it doesn't BOTHER me that people think the earth is flat. Heresy doesn't provoke any ire in me.
I would not say it makes me angry either. I've repeatedly said we are all challenged with certain deficiencies. The only thing that does irritate me in this and similar cases is when someone who doesn't understand something purports to do so while completely walling off what I consider basic logic. I guess it's when the time and effort I expend to debate and, what I would consider "enlighten" simply goes absolutely nowhere. That is when it becomes frustrating. I'm sure what I've just said is just as applicable to the my opposition as it is me on whatever subject. Many Christians say there is not enough faith in the world. I say the opposite. There's too much faith in the world. Faith in things that are simply not true. Our capacity to believe things is grossly underestimated and unappreciated.
For years and years you claimed to be a Christian. What is it that changed your mind? Or were you never really a Christian and you just said that because you were raised with Christians or something like that? Or you just said it without thinking about what it was? Seriously what changed your mind to believe in someone who suggests things to people while they are in a trance like state?
Tell me, Stone, how do you/we qualify a "real Christian"? How do you quantify what constitutes "real" belief? What does it really mean to "believe"? Vicomte13 just posted a bit about the meaning of the term concluding the difference with the term "faith" meaning "trust" more than "belief". I do not know about the tech defs of terms between languages. That's not my area, but I do concur that "belief", if it is to be on par with "head knowledge", regardless of whether the knowledge is correct or not, is not something that God cares about. The pseud-documentary called "The Secret", espouses a "Law of Attraction", which claims that whatever attitude you have in your heart is what will come to fruition in your life, whether good or bad. Leaving aside the question of how true that is (I think it is credible) I do think that describes what faith really is. It's not clenching your fists with your eyes shut trying to force your brain cells into aligning with a certain intellectual understanding, kinda like the child's fable story entitled "The Little Engine That Could" which I think we all know (a story that sure, is applicable for accomplishing challenging physical tasks) but it simply not applicable when it comes to understanding God. No, when it comes to God, understanding or acknowledging the truth doesn't come forcefully. It comes from being open minded, which you are not. You proved it by your prior post about how debating the question of 7+8=9 is a waste of time. In the same way, in your mind, debating the age of the earth is similarly a waste of time. You don't care why I and a great many people think it's far older. Unlike you, I am open minded. I always have been, even while I claimed to be a Christian. And my open minded nature allowed me to explore beyond the Bible. As a matter of theology, I subsequently found Michael Newton's work very credible. It fully qualified God as having all the patience the Bible talks about him having, in spite of the Bible's overall claim of the end of human life being the time when God's patience runs out. I find the theology of sin to be rather "messy" and always have, even while a Christian. Messy because sin must be done with intent, and intent is simply not qualifiable in many cases, particularly with very young children. Our comprehension of right and wrong varies abstractly. Under Newton, one's actual theological understanding of God isn't important. This solves the problem of God condemning people to hell for all eternity because of their sinful nature in spite of the fact that they may never had any opportunity to even hear about this one theological message about Jesus dying for our sins even though "Jesus" a name we are not spelling or pronouncing correctly as we have the wrong language. (But somehow, God knows who we mean anyway, right, so He allows us that leeway but not any other kind of leeway?) Sure you have your explanation about how it's okay for God to condemn people -- or allow them to condemn themselves. I, on the other hand, have an explanation for how that doesn't happen at all. If "faith" is indeed not mere head knowledge, but rather expresses actual trust, then I think I can say that I have faith that God doesn't act this way with non-Christians, and will not act that way with me. I will point out, as I have before, that over 90% of what Christianity teaches is compatible with Michael Newton's findings. Namely in terms of loving others, the Golden Rule, putting others first before yourself, loving your enemies, embellishing virtues and quashing vices. All of that is 100% the same. The only thing different is the theology of sin (though even there, there is some overlap), a final judgment after one life, the idea that our humanity is modeled after God, and of course, the question of how many times a soul can incarnate into a human body. And yes, I think it is accurate to say that Christianity does espouse that we did incarnate when soul merged with the human body. The difference is that Christianity says this can only happen once, while according to Newton, it can happen multiple times. In that light, "reincarnation" is not such a far-fetched theology. Michael Newton makes more theological sense. At least to me. Everything falls in place with this model. Contemporary accounts which are easy to find claim past life experiences, and the one account I've posted of several times of the young boy recalling being a pilot that was shot down and killed in WW2 being exceptionally compelling as he allegedly was even able to recall shipmate names at a veteran reunion. Sure you write that off as demons, but then again, you're close minded. You won't listen to any arguments that contradict the Bible, just as Liberator won't, it seems, listen to any arguments that the earth is round. I may not be a Christian, Stone, but it doesn't mean I don't have faith. God is better than anything you or I can possibly imagine. You may agree with that statement superficially, and yet you nonetheless still keep God in a box, not allowing him to be anything more than what the Bible depicts. You think that under God's watch and in accordance to a design that He signed off on, the vast majority of his children will end up burning in hell for all eternity. I say, God is better than that. And under Newton, God IS better than that. Our path is more than a single lifetime. Why shouldn't it be? And I have found what I believe to be validation in my own life that I have had past lives. No, not lives I can remember consciously, but experiences in past lives that would explain certain fears I've had in this life, and fears I am overcoming. Our journey is far longer, far more sophisticated, far deeper than a single lifetime could possibly offer. It all makes more sense.
A Christian is a human being who is indwelt by God's Spirit. That's basically it.
With that definition, under Newton, everyone is a Christian. Edit: Spelling that out, it's because all souls are born of God. It is that reason why we are considered children of God. It has nothing to do with our humanity (which is why evolution doesn't matter). What matters is our origins as souls, and all of us, as souls, originated from God.
In Christian belief, a person is born with a human spirit. However, that human spirit does not function the way it should, and that person experiences emptiness, which then causes that person to seek to fill the void, so to speak. That person will seek and try many things to fill the emptiness, but nothing ever truly satisfies. Oh, maybe for a little while that person will find excitement, relationships, possessions, ect. but in the end, they are still empty. However, when God's Spirit enters in, the human spirit becomes as it was intended, alive and in communion/fellowship with God. We have been created for this very reason, to have inward fellowship with God. If, as you say, all souls are born of God, why does humanity experience such supreme emptiness? Contrariwise, why does the Christian experience such supreme fullness, peace and joy, that wells up from a source not of a persons making, but of God dwelling within?
You illustrate the paradigm difference between conventional Christian belief and the Newton model I subscribe to. Not just Christian belief but also Judaism and Islam. All 3 of these faiths tend to phrase it as though the soul or spirit is an add-on to the physical body. A person is born "with" a human spirit. This expression implies the physical body is the primary identity of the person, of who and what we are, with the soul being a lessor component thrown in as a bonus. Under Newton, however, the soul **IS** the person, with the human body being the "add-on". It is the soul that defines the vast majority of our personal identity and even personality. Modern science has discovered DNA which has been accepted and presumed to be the defining element of all that we are, shaping our personality, favorite colors, virtues and vices. Under Newton, some qualities are indeed defined by our human structure, sexual preferences being one, but most of what we are is defined at the soul level. We are hybrid entities, mostly soul/spirit, but with a lessor human component, which would include capabilities of the human mind. The human body can be compared to a temporary rental unit instead of something that we own "for life" for the soul, and a rental unit that, once it stops working is disposed of and can be replaced at a future time. Stated another way, we do not say that shoes have feet, gloves have hands, or that hats have heads. We say feet have shoes, hands have gloves and so on. Saying a body has a soul is the same as the former when in fact it is a soul that may or may not have, or wear, a body. Certainly this is why fundamentalist Christians have a problem with evolution. Given the assumption that our DNA defines our full identity, it follows that if we are descended from apes, that apes define our origins. Under Newton, that is not a problem as our human nature is only incidental and does not define our true origins as souls. Under Newton, we have an alternate and more sensible explanation for why we are uniquely valuable to God over any other biological life form on earth. Fundamental Christianity, on the other hand, because it maintains our uniqueness revolves around human nature as being special and unique above all other life forms, has to impart something spiritually unique about the human body, about our DNA that other animals do not possess. It must rely on our humanity reflecting the "image of God", which is often inferred to be the human body itself. Under Newton, that's not the case at all. We incarnate into human form because the human body allows for social interaction which permits all manner of spiritual lessons to be learned. If intelligent life exists on other planets, we could just as easily incarnate into alien bodies for the same purpose. The human race is not who we are. It's what we use, and in spiritual terms is completely disposable, as is planet earth itself. I won't attempt to explain why emotions are experienced as it is something that can't be quantified, but I will say that any emotions associated with a certain religious faith do not necessarily validate the theology of that faith.
We incarnate into human form... So there is a God in the Newton model. What role does God play in your incarnation into human form? Is God central to your being? Or is God on the periphery, while you, your spirit, your being is central to your existence? If God isn't central to your existence, but is relegated to some ancillary role while you reincarnate, can you really say that this meets the definition of "God"? It seems that you have a self centered belief as opposed to a God centered belief.
In Newton's books, the actual term that is frequently cited for God is "The Source". My impression is that is the term repeatedly selected by clients to describe God but I won't swear to it. Obviously as an English, human term, it's definition is likely incomplete as, of course, English is certainly not the language of the spirit world. Rather, clients under hypnosis are using English to describe memories they are recalling of the spirit world. I'm sure you can empathize with that sort of issue in comparing English to Greek and Hebrew versions of the Bible. I'm not sure where you are going with that question, but it seems a very deep question and I'm not really inclined to recite the whole book. If you are asking about whether our purpose in life is all centered around God or centered around ourselves, I'd probably say it's centered around everyone, including God, and including ourselves. As we grow, all around us also benefit, so it's not like it's even possible to grow in a self-centered way that doesn't benefit everyone. Consider an analogy to be the average family. The life of parents in a healthy family are pretty much centered around the children, in helping them grow and learn wisdom and knowledge. Why then would it, should it, be different between us and God? The idea that we are nothing and God is everything, which is a frequent theme in Christianity, is inaccurate. If God created us "in His image", which is one biblical description I agree with and which I think is largely how things work in the Newton model, then to say we are nothing is inaccurate. We are special. Not because God arbitrarily decided that we were special. We are special because we, as souls, were born of God. We are special because of our origin and nature. And that has absolutely nothing to do with human DNA or evolution or anything having to do with planet earth.
When I look into the clear night sky I see mass (stars, planets, whatever) and wonder, how did this get here? When I try to look beyond the stars, I wonder, where does this end? I try to imagine what is beyond what I can see, and then what is beyond that, and what is beyond that! And I realize I am looking into infinity...and my brain bogs down. (Try it some time) My brain can't deal with something that has no end because I am a finite creature trying to comprehend the infinite. So my point is this: God is EVEN BIGGER than the infinite universe! He made the universe! Merely by speaking it into existence. Out of nothing. So when the Bible says we are as nothing compared to God...we understand that we are indeed "as nothing". Dust. The unsurpassed beauty of Christianity is that we know a God Who, although is All-powerful, All-knowing, Self-existent(Try to comprehend that), has condescended to not only dwell among us, but to actually serve us, and make a way for us to live with Him forever. That, Ping, is the love of God... God is infinitely more than the "The Source". And that is the kind of God you need and do not have...yet.
I can empathize with much of what you say. But I don't see the connect with your final statement. Neither term, "God" or "The Source", can adequately describe all God is. And this conversation isn't about describing all that he is. It's about how life works. You subscribe to a theology written many thousands of years ago, ascribing some divine truthful authority for it. I, on the other hand, subscribe to a more basic & human explanation for Biblical origins. You admit the universe is incomprehensibly large, and yet maintain it is comprehensibly young. I consider the universe both incomprehensibly large and incomprehensibly old. You insist biological life is too miraculous for any explanation other than divine creation to explain it. I say divine creation does not necessarily exclude utilizing evolution. You suggest God is infinitely more than what we can imagine (true) and yet would create a system that would see so many perish for all eternity simply for not understanding or believing a certain theology. I ask why it is God would make understanding a theology, which is something serviced by the human mind, a condition to enjoying eternal life when even mortal parents would not approve of condemning their own kids to death for not understanding, say, basic mathematics. But your final statement implies that you know me, and you really don't. You base the claim on my academic understanding. I think God is better than that. He really has to be, and the Newton model essentially removes limits on God that Biblical Christianity has in place. It works better in every way I can see. If God condemns me for all eternity because of my theological understanding, then He'll condemn me for being an honest man. If you know God as you claim you do, can you honestly tell me that that is something God would actually do?
I can tell you that there is no injustice whatsoever in God. If there were He would not be God. God is not capable of any wrong or imperfection. When He deals with mankind, including you, it is with perfect justice, perfect love, etc. Understanding is not the basis of Christian theology...it is by faith that God finds us acceptable. Child like faith no bigger that a mustard seed. Not everyone can "understand" because that requires mental capacity, but the capacity to have faith is found in everyone. When God created the Universe, He created it with age built in. Adam and Eve were created to be in the prime of life. Everything God spoke into existence was created with the exact appearance of the age He so chose. Some theologians speculate that Adam would have been created to be the age that Christ was when He died on the cross. You say I don't know you, true, but I know human nature. We are all pretty much the same. We all share the same fallen condition. We all need our Creator, to speak to us, to love us and accept us as we are, to restore us to beings that are fit for that eternal life for which we crave.
Okay, if that is the case, then even if the earth and universe were created just 6000 years ago, then there is no conflict with scientists saying it is billions of years old, because both could be true. Right? It seems child-like faith is accepting something as true without study or analysis, and that is what you are saying people must do when accepting Christianity.
This is a very weak argument that watchman is offering. This equate Christian belief with children being taught to believe in the fairy tales, Santa Claus and the Ishtar bunny. It makes of Christianity a non-rational belief system, one that can be sustained only by heavily indoctrinating children in it from an early age.
That is my take as well. The moral seems to be that we should just believe (have faith) as a child would. That is, without question. But that is precisely what 1 billion Muslims have done, have they not? And these non-Christians will all burn in hell for eternity for doing exactly what people are expected to do in accepting Christianity? Oh, but Christianity is the one true faith and Islam isn't. That seems to be what the retort comes to. I've pointed out a few times that if there is a problem with faith when it comes to religion, it's not that we don't have enough, it's instead that we have too much. It is no coincidence that entire countries of many millions of people that are predominently of one religion remain that religion even after generations of people come and go, and that is true no matter what the religion is, whether it Chrisitianity, Islam, Hindu or whatever. Why? Because we, as people, are most apt to do exactly as watchman says we should do: Accept and believe as a child would. Children most often grow up into adults firmly believing whatever religion their parents taught them, no matter what it is. If it were otherwise, we would see religious beliefs homogenously mixed throughout the world as everyone would question faith and migrate to the one that makes the most logical sense to them. But clearly, that is not what happens in the real world. As I've said: The capacity of the human mind to believe things that are not true is greatly underappreciated. So in my book, we MUST apply some rational critique of any theological understanding of God and not simply accept what a religious institution says, what our parents say, or what an old book says. As I see it, the Bible is a compilation of ancient writings that had the benefit of revisions and editing for poetic and literary enhancement as it was passed down verbally from parent to child until such time as it was codified Subsequent writings were done quite often with the author having the benefit of knowing what more ancient texts said, which could very often explain claims of fulfilled prophesy. Combine all that with our overcapacity to believe things, and you have a Christian religion that considers the Bible to be the Word of God. Having said that, I will say that Christianity is a good faith, and in terms of how we are called to live, the Newton model is actually about 100% compatible with Christianity. So I believe there is a lot of theological truth in Christianity. The differences are only in doctrine of judgement, sin, reincarnation, redemption and items of that sort.
You have a point there. Religion is less often a problem for busy people. It's when people have decades of leisure time to browbeat everyone with their opinions or when a TV evangelist or imam sees an opportunity for fame and fortune in hawking ever-more-radical and extreme religious rhetoric and theology that you have the most problems. Not by the government or by libmedia. They rely on it as a foundation of their existence. I refrained from saying so but I think Newton would be rather shocked at these notions of him as some sort of theologian. He was a radical and only marginally Christian. There were far more doctrines in orthodox Christianity that Newton rejected than theology that he did believe and advocate for in the context of his scientific beliefs. By 1672, he had started to record his theological researches in notebooks which he showed to no one and which have only recently been examined. They demonstrate an extensive knowledge of early church writings and show that in the conflict between Athanasius and Arius which defined the Creed, he took the side of Arius, the loser, who rejected the conventional view of the Trinity. Newton "recognized Christ as a divine mediator between God and man, who was subordinate to the Father who created him." He was especially interested in prophecy, but for him, "the great apostasy was trinitarianism." Newton tried unsuccessfully to obtain one of the two fellowships that exempted the holder from the ordination requirement. At the last moment in 1675 he received a dispensation from the government that excused him and all future holders of the Lucasian chair. In Newton's eyes, worshipping Christ as God was idolatry, to him the fundamental sin. Historian Stephen D. Snobelen says, "Isaac Newton was a heretic. But ... he never made a public declaration of his private faith—which the orthodox would have deemed extremely radical. He hid his faith so well that scholars are still unravelling his personal beliefs." Snobelen concludes that Newton was at least a Socinian sympathiser (he owned and had thoroughly read at least eight Socinian books), possibly an Arian and almost certainly an anti-trinitarian. In a minority position, T.C. Pfizenmaier offers a more nuanced view, arguing that Newton held closer to the Semi-Arian view of the Trinity that Jesus Christ was of a "similar substance" (homoiousios) from the Father rather than the orthodox view that Jesus Christ is of the "same substance" of the Father (homoousios) as endorsed by modern Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics and Protestants. However, this type of view 'has lost support of late with the availability of Newton's theological papers', and now most scholars identify Newton as an Antitrinitarian monotheist. Although the laws of motion and universal gravitation became Newton's best-known discoveries, he warned against using them to view the Universe as a mere machine, as if akin to a great clock. He said, "Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done." Along with his scientific fame, Newton's studies of the Bible and of the early Church Fathers were also noteworthy. Newton wrote works on textual criticism, most notably An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture and Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John. He placed the crucifixion of Jesus Christ at 3 April, AD 33, which agrees with one traditionally accepted date. He believed in a rationally immanent world, but he rejected the hylozoism implicit in Leibniz and Baruch Spinoza. The ordered and dynamically informed Universe could be understood, and must be understood, by an active reason. In his correspondence, Newton claimed that in writing the Principia "I had an eye upon such Principles as might work with considering men for the belief of a Deity". He saw evidence of design in the system of the world: "Such a wonderful uniformity in the planetary system must be allowed the effect of choice". But Newton insisted that divine intervention would eventually be required to reform the system, due to the slow growth of instabilities. For this, Leibniz lampooned him: "God Almighty wants to wind up his watch from time to time: otherwise it would cease to move. He had not, it seems, sufficient foresight to make it a perpetual motion." Newton's position was vigorously defended by his follower Samuel Clarke in a famous correspondence. A century later, Pierre-Simon Laplace's work "Celestial Mechanics" had a natural explanation for why the planet orbits do not require periodic divine intervention. Scholars long debated whether Newton disputed the doctrine of the Trinity. His first biographer, Sir David Brewster, who compiled his manuscripts, interpreted Newton as questioning the veracity of some passages used to support the Trinity, but never denying the doctrine of the Trinity as such. In the twentieth century, encrypted manuscripts written by Newton and bought by John Maynard Keynes (among others) were deciphered and it became known that Newton did indeed reject Trinitarianism. Returning to your point, Newton's model is indeed compatible with Christianity if by Christianity you do not mean the idea that Jesus Christ is the savior of mankind. To Newton, there was no Trinity. And neither he nor anyone else has ever found the word "trinity" in the Bible. By any honest historical measure of Christian orthodoxy, Newton was a dire heretic and a radical. Newton's disagreements with Leibniz and Spinoza can be simplistically reduced to the proposition that God must periodically rewind the celestial clocks to keep the planets in motion and the sun in its assigned position. Newton said God didn't need to do that. So Newton's views on science informed and really dominated his religious sentiments.
Isaac Newton was essentially right about those things, including the April 3, 33 AD date of the crucifixion. (On April 3, 33 AD, a Friday, the moon in the Levant rose in full eclipse - a "blood moon". He was right that Jesus was subordinate to God the Father - at least during his life. Now Jesus is Lord of mankind, and at the end he will be the judge of all things. But Jesus, as the son, was not Father - both are divine. That is how they are both "God" - both share divinity. One was fathered by the other. This isn't really hard to see from the writings. The degree of adamancy of the Trinitarian versus Arian fight is, and always was, excessively violent and un-Christian. Newton was right that this was the doctrine that set the Church on a decidedly bad path, for it was over the doctrine of the Trinity that the Church began carrying out executions in the 380s AD, and with that, tainted itself forevermore.
It probably is the single greatest fight over heresy in Christian history. And I'll remind you that my hero, Saint Lucifer of Cagliari, Sardinia, was right in the thick of things, throwing punches with the best of them, publicly denouncing the Roman emperor as an apostate king in writing, refusing orders to reconcile with Arian bishops, demanding the right for Athanasius to face his accusers in court, and declaring his willingness to die for his beliefs so the emperor could just sod off if he didn't like them. A very passionate guy. Even the fall of Constantinople and the TULIP thing never caused quite so much havoc.
Yep, and it's a pointless and stupid fight. It was of SUCH important to Jesus that he spent zero percent of his time on it. No reason to believe he cared, or cares. But the killing and the ostracism of Christians from each other over it - Jesus forbade that. So Jesus DOES care a lot more about the behavior of divided Christians over the matter than the matter itself, obviously. Equally obviously, Christians are headstrong and know better than Jesus. Which is why their churches are all dying. Can a new Church of Jesus be made that puts it all back together again? Not without miracles that overthrow the iron grip of deterministic science on the bulk of minds, no. Existing Christianity will fight the same dull, pointless fights until the last two geriatrics in the pews of the last church die with their backs turned to each other, and without miracles there's no reason to think that God exists, or that even if God exists, he cares what people think. The existing miracles don't do it. It would take a new prophetic figure doing miracles - preferably great healing miracles (I believe that limb regeneration on live TV would be required to shut up the most stubborn opponents) - to be able to really make the change (if nothing else, every amputee and born blind or deaf or paralytic healed would be a true believer). It would be more potent if the prophetic figure could both heal the paralytic and blind and CAUSE paralysis and blindness, and raise the dead and strike dead as well, for that would set up an actual risk profile, a probably confrontation with a government, and the sudden dissolution (by mass striking dead) of some major state, which would certainly create a following.
Can a new Church of Jesus be made that puts it all back together again? Not without miracles that overthrow the iron grip of deterministic science on the bulk of minds, no. Existing Christianity will fight the same dull, pointless fights until the last two geriatrics in the pews of the last church die with their backs turned to each other... Actual Christians certainly do readily acknowledge NOT knowing anything more or "better" than Jesus. And ARE "Christian" Churches actually "dying"? Is that your observation or experience? Might be time to change gears, Vic. (Or are these last days simply a case of the wheat being divided from the tares?) I don't know if it is a case of today's Christians "fighting fight the same dull, pointless fights until the last two geriatrics in the pews of the last church die"; I'm witnessing a lot of passion, fellowship, growth, and commitment by Believers. We're now at the point where we're all personally accountable. And if anyone truly hungers for the Truth and the Word instead of the politics, they'll focus on THAT. ...Without miracles there's no reason to think that God exists, or that even if God exists, he cares what people think. "Miracles" happen every day in the respective hearts of the broken, the fallen and the disbelieving when they pray to Jesus for His Presence and Belief & Faith in Him. The account of Saul/Paul also testifies to God's existence, hands-on involvement and of personal miracles. And anyway, God's/Jesus' "miracles" are already documented in Scripture (unless you now disbelieve Scripture.) The existing miracles don't do it. It would take a new prophetic figure doing miracles - preferably great healing miracles. If that's all it takes, the anti-Christ or counterfeit Savior might fit that bill. "Narrow is the way." If people demand NT-type "miracles" in order to believe these days, than they are sadly watching too many "Super-Hero" flick and are simply making lazy choices on their respective eternal fate and Salvation.
ACTUAL miracles of healing, the REAL thing. They do not happen, but by the po power of God. Can Satan heal the blind? The cripple? The paralytic? Regnerate limbs? Raise the dea th the dea the dead? No. Jesus asked the same question: "Can Satan cast out Satan?" Some Churches may be growing at the margins, while Christianity as a whole s s shrinks. BUT does that even matter? A few more people here or there believe in s s something. Is the poverty being attacked and reduced? Is the distress w w weakening?
People will see what they want to see and perceive ANY supernatural act as "an act of God." That's the problem. Jesus asked the same question: "Can Satan cast out Satan?" Good point. But then again as watchman has noted and inferred -- there are weak churches, with those of weak faith, who think they are amply "armed." They can and will easily be duped by anti-Christ or false messiah who will wield demonic power, capable of great deception. Some Churches may be growing at the margins, while Christianity as a whole shrinks. BUT does that even matter? YES. EVERY saved soul always matters, doesn't it? THAT person may save other souls. And so forth. A few more people here or there believe in something. Is the poverty being attacked and reduced? Is the distress weakening? Whom do you think has been preventing this evil world from caving in upon itself? The moral, the wise, the Godly. Moreover, this fallen mortal realm was never intended to be Heaven, Vic. You're giving way too much weight to "poverty" as the primary dilemma for man -- Salvation is. Scripture itself tells us the poor will ALWAYS be with us. If anybody has actually been helping the poor, it's been Christian charity. That said, it is NOT up to government to confiscate wealth and re-distribute it. That my friend is called, THEFT. "Distress" you say? NEVER in history has there been less "distress" among poor people. Who do you think in helping Africa fro starving to death?
God commanded that the people of the state he set up give 10% of their production, plus their first fruits harvest, plus their head toll (in total around 24% of their annual income) to the state he set up. He commanded the state he set up to receive those imposts, and to use some of them to support the judges and administrators, and most of it to support the classes of the poor within the land. And he commanded the judges of the state he set up to prosecute and punish those who did not pay their taxes. He commanded every individual to pay what was owed over to his state, and also to lend their excess to their poor neighbors, if asked, without interest, and to drop any portion of that debt that was not repaid after seven years. There was nothing voluntary about any of it, and it was entirely involuntary.
Let's cut to the chase: Does God allow men to kill other men? Jesus said that killers were consigned to the Lake of Fire at final judgment. Who has to worry about that? Do murderers? What about people who order murder but don't commit it themselves? What about those who aid and abet murder? Does Paul have anything to worry about? What about soldiers who kill? What about cops? What about people who kill an innocent by accident? What about people who kill in self defense? What about people who torture animals? Discuss.
Does God allow men to kill other men? If Scripture is our reference, YES. Jesus said that killers were consigned to the Lake of Fire at final judgment. (Is there not a difference between "killing" and "murder"? You're also familiar with Ecclesiastes, right?) Who has to worry about that? Do murderers? What about people who order murder but don't commit it themselves? What about those who aid and abet murder? Does Paul have anything to worry about? Judgement Day and the blood of Jesus will sort all that and all other sins out. (Why would Paul have anything to worry about??) What about soldiers who kill? What about cops? What about people who kill an innocent by accident? What about people who kill in self defense? What about people who torture animals? Discuss. (Again, please reference Ecclesiastes and Jesus' Gift of Grace & Salvation. He knows our heart.) Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 KJV 3 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: 2 A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; 3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; 4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; 5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; 6 A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; 7 A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; 8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.
There is an issue of literalism here. When the armies of Israel were commanded to fight and conquer other nations like Canaan, there was no such prohibition against killing. Killing the enemies of the nation of Israel or those who resisted armed conquest of their lands by the nation of Israel was allowed and even praised and rewarded by God. So is the prohibition, "Thou shalt not kill" so absolute and literal that it should be read as "Thou shalt not kill unless you are an ancient Jew and the God of Israel has commanded your leader/king to conquer and kill the inhabitants of land that God promised to the Jews". Because God did order a lot of killing in the Old Testament, much of it for conquest, much of it for ritual deviation or profaning the sacred or for forbidden sexual relations, just to name a few of the things that God commanded ancient Israel to kill for. Jews were ordered to stone to death a lot of different people committing various offenses under Old Testament (therefore Old Covenant) laws.
Don’t kill is an absolute, except for self defense (in which case it’s enforcing don’t kill on the would- be killers. All of those other cases under the Jewish law are specific exceptions for Israel, for God ruled Israel directly. Ancient Israel is gone, but Jesus says that killers today go into the lake of fire. So, trying to drag in Jewish Law that allowed killing is Judaizing.
A little help, please. What verse are you referring to?
Vic isn't a bible believer. I also notice he is adding to scripture adding the word mortal. Vic is a bit of a fool.
Well, Jesus gives a list of sins that earn the lake of fire at final judgment. He gives two overlapping lists. ALL sins are not on that list. Indeed, a great number of sins pointed out by God are not on the list. Half of the Ten Commandments are not on the list, while things not among the Ten Commandments are on that list. So, how shall I describe the list of specific sins that earn one the lake of fire? I need a word. "Mortal" seems reasonable enough. These are the sins that result in the second death. Sounds pretty "mortal" to me. By contrast, sins such as theft or dishonoring your father, or breaking the Sabbath, or coveting, are NOT on the list of "Lake of Fire" - second death - sins. "Mortal" is a nice short word that distinguishes between the lists of sin that earn one the fire, versus the ones that don't. James says "Break one, break them all", but Jesus obviously disagrees. Thank goodness, then, that James' ideas on the matter are not printed in red like Jesus's words are. In this way, given the conflict between two different parts of the Bible, we can decide whether we think that James is the final authority, or Jesus. Likewise, we have Jesus sayin over and over again at the end of revelation that all of the souls will be called forth from Hades and Death, resurrected, and judged by their works. And of course we've got Paul disagreeing with that. Once again we've got red-letters conflicting with black-letters. "Bible" contains both, and the conflict. How does one resolve the conflict? You resolve it by denying there is a conflict, even though there clearly is. I resolve it by looking to the highest authority, which - to a Christian - is Jesus's Father, followed by Jesus himself. All Jesus' father said that was pertinent to this was "listen to him" (Jesus). So what Jesus says, goes. Where James and Paul and John disagree with Jesus, Jesus trumps, obviously.
"But I say unto you that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." - Jesus
You are pulling Matt 5:22 out of context, thereby missing the whole point Jesus is making...that (Matt 5:20) unless your righteousness EXCEEDS that of the most righteous scribes and Pharisees, you not qualified for heaven . In other words, there is no one righteous, not even one (Rom 3:10). There is no one who at one point or another doesn't break The Law. You don't have to murder someone to break The Law, all you have to do is call them a fool and you are as deserving of hell as any murderer. Backing up to Matt 5:17 we see the explanation of 5:22, and the reason Christ came into this world...to fulfill The Law (that we cannot keep!) He fulfills it for us. He keeps The Law that we cannot keep. And our faith in Him credits us with righteousness. You're a good man, Vic. You have never murdered anyone. But if you have ever been the least bit angry, or told even a white lie, you are as guilty of hell as any killer.
And you REALLY believe that this is what Jesus meant by his teaching?
Did you not just read Matt 5:20? Jesus said it, I believe it.
So, where Jesus said that men are judged by their works, do you believe that? Or do you go with Paul?
You will either be judged by your works (leading you to the Lake of Fire), or you will be judged by your faith in the atoning work of Christ (which will lead to eternal life with Christ). Still wanna go with your works, which are as filthy rags?
That's not what Jesus said.
How convenient that you have tossed out the Pauline epistles. Now you will tell me this verse from Ephesians is not the Word of God. Question: are you trying to get into heaven by your works? So you can boast?
Why are you ignoring the direct and repeated words of Jesus, whom you claim to be your savior? Obviously you don't believe HIM, or don't like what he said, so you go casting around to find somebody else who said something you like better. You do not seem to even recognise how often Jesus said that at the resurrection men will be judged by their works. It's as though all those words he said were of no account, and only the words you like are. The difference between me and you is stark. There is a CLEAR dichotomy between the words of Paul, which you quote, and the words of Jesus regarding judgment by your works, which you don't seem to be familiar with (!). Faced with this dichotomy, you throw out Jesus and cling to Paul. I read BOTH, which is why I see the clear dichotomy (you don't seem to even KNOW that Jesus said men will be judged by their works, because the confected theology that some men will be while others are not is nowhere to be found in the Bible). And, faced with the clear contradiction, I - very reasonably - decide that Jesus is the highest authority. You don't even recognise what he said, but you are so desperate to lecture me about religion, you just dig yourself in deeper and deeper. And you don't actually ANSWER what I say. I point out what Jesus SAID, and you simply sidestep it, ignore it, and challenge me about Paul. I will answer your challenge about Paul: Paul appears here to contradict Jesus. Therefore, Paul is wrong here, at least on the strong sense of what he seems to say, which you seem to believe. Faced with a clear conflict, I follow Jesus. I don't "throw out" the Pauline epistles, I simply recognise that Jesus outranks Paul in every way. It's YOUR tradition that elevated every word in the Bible to being the equal of every other word - thus when God speaks that's of the same strength as when a demon argues with Jesus (if you were consistent in your application, but you are not: your tradition cherry picks to find something comfortable). I don't do that. I read Jesus, first, and place him, first, and he's clear. Where Paul, John, James, etc. agree with him, that's great. Where they depart from what he said because of some belief of their own, I follow Jesus, which is the only rational thing to do if one believes that Jesus is the Son of God. You and your tradition don't do that. You follow your preachers and your preferences. That's fine, for you. I don't go out of my way to criticise the obviously unsound and really quite ridiculous decision to follow some man over the Son of God - but I also recognise that people are not going to change their minds about things they've become stubborn about. So I leave it be. Your type actually feels superior to Catholics, and you cannot restrain your tongues, and go into full-blown judgment mode. This, of course, severs any real communications, because the cut-and-paste religion you believe doesn't even hold together logically. You believe Paul over Jesus. That's your right, but it's such a fundamentally flawed way to look at God that there's really nothing more to say. But your ilk will not leave it alone. Like Jehovah's Witnesses you have to keep pounding on the door, spouting your sacrilegious nonsense. Jesus is King. Jesus is Lord. That means that the words of Jesus stand ABOVE the rest of the words in the New Testament and are the norms. God said that: This is my beloved son, listen to HIM." Pretty simple. He said you're judged by your works. Paul said you're not. Jesus trumps. End of discussion. But you're still arguing it. All I can do is shake my head and walk away from such bibliolatry.
Listen to you, going on and on. You accept the authority of Jesus? Hear Him...Jesus speaking to Ananias about Paul... But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel... Acts 9:15 Show me some exact verses you are talking about. Then we can discuss it. Only one or two examples please. I don't have all day, you know. Oh, you better believe I do. I've watched a multitude of friends struggle with that catholic stuff. Even after they have been reborn they continue to suffer from the insidious, ingrained stronghold of their catholic upbringing. I won't hold back any longer. Speaking of Jehovah Witnesses, have you ever tried to win them to Christ...it's impossible. Not so with catholics. I have led many catholics to Christ, even though they struggle as I mentioned. (Just like you are struggling right now, Vic) I'm as stubborn as a mule and kick like one, too. That's right. But this is all I have time for right now. I'll be back soon to see what verses you have come up with as to those contradictions you speak of.
I'll not be engaging in that game. You want to lecture me. If you don't know what Jesus said, front and back, then you have nothing to teach me. I'll stick with him.
Just put the verses up. I don't want to lecture you. I simply want to clear up any discrepancies. You're making wild accusations that need to be looked at.
Gladly. That will be my next 10, or 50, messages to you - as long as it takes, to put up all of the relevant verses. I'm not even going to bother with explanation. Jesus is usually clear.
I am Alpha and Omega ... who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty. Write down in a book what you see, and send it to the seven Churches - to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea! Do not be afraid. I am the first and the last, the living one. I am he who was dead, and now you see me alive for timeless ages! I hold in my hand the keys of death and the grave. Therefore, write down what you have seen, both the things which are now, and the things which are to be hereafter. The secret meaning of the seven stars which you saw in my right hand, and of the seven golden lampstands is this: the seven stars are the angels of the seven Churches and the lampstands are the Churches themselves. Write this to the angel of the Church in Ephesus: These words are spoken by the one who holds the seven stars safe in his right hand, and who walks among the seven golden lampstands. I know what you have done; I know how hard you have worked and what you have endured. I know that you will not tolerate wicked men, that you have put to the test self-styled 'apostles', who are nothing of the sort, and have found them to be liars. I know your powers of endurance - how you have suffered for the sake of my name and have not grown weary. But I hold this against you, that you do not love as you did at first. Remember then how far you have fallen. Repent and live as you lived at first. Otherwise, if your heart remains unchanged, I shall come to you and remove your lampstand from its place. Yet you have this to your credit, that you hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which I myself detest. Let every listener hear what the Spirit says to the Churches: To the victorious I will give the right to eat from the tree of life which grows in the paradise of God. Write this to the angel of the Church in Smyrna: These words are spoken by the first and the last, who died and came to life again. I know of your tribulation and of your poverty - though in fact you are rich! I know how you are slandered by those who call themselves Jews, but in fact are no Jews but a synagogue of Satan. Have no fear of what you will suffer. I tell you now that the devil is going to cast some of your number into prison where your faith will be tested and your distress will last for ten days. Be faithful in the face of death and I will give you the crown of life. Let every listener hear what the Spirit says to the Churches: The victorious cannot suffer the slightest hurt from the second death. Write this to the angel of the Church in Pergamum: These words are spoken by him who has the sharp two-edged sword. I know where you live - where Satan sits enthroned. I know that you hold fast to my name and that you never denied your faith in me even in the days when Antipas, my faithful witness, was martyred before your eyes in the very house of Satan. Yet I have a few things against you - some of your number cling to the teaching of Balaam, the man who taught Balak how to entice the children of Israel into eating meat sacrificed to idols and into sexual immorality. I have also against you the fact that among your number are some who hold just as closely to the teaching of the Nicolaitans. Repent then, or else I shall come to you quickly and make war upon them with the sword of my mouth. Let the listener hear what the Spirit says to the Churches: I will give the victorious some of the hidden manna, and I will also give him a white stone with a new name written upon it which no man knows except the man who receives it. Write this to the angel of the Church in Thyatira: These are the words of the Son of God whose eyes blaze like fire and whose feet shine like the finest bronze: I know what you have done. I know of your love and your loyalty, your service and your endurance. Moreover, I know that you are doing more than you did at first. But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel who calls herself a prophetess, but who by her teaching deceives my servants into sexual immorality and eating idols' meat. I have given her time to repent but she has shown no desire to repent of her immorality. See, now, how I throw her into bed and her lovers with her, and I will send them terrible suffering unless they repent of what she has done. As for her children, I shall strike them dead. Then all the Churches will know that I am the one who searches men's hearts and minds, and that I will reward each one of you according to your works. But for the rest of you at Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, and have not learned what they call 'the deep things of Satan', I will lay no further burden upon you, except that you hold on to what you have until I come! To the one who is victorious, who carries out my work to the end, I will give authority over the nations, just as I myself have received authority from my Father, and I will give him the morning star. He shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the potter's vessels shall be broken to pieces. Let the listener hear what the Spirit says to the Churches. Write this to the angel of the Church in Sardis: These are the words of him who holds in his hand the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars: I know what you have done, that you have a reputation for being alive, but that in fact you are dead. Now wake up! Strengthen what you still have before it dies! For I have not found any of your works complete in the sight of my God. Remember then what you were given and what you were taught. Hold to those things and repent. If you refuse to wake up, then I will come to you like a thief, and you will have no idea of the hour of my coming. Yet you still have a few names in Sardis of people who have not soiled their garments. They shall walk with me in white, for they have deserved to do so. The victorious shall wear such white garments, and never will I erase his name from the book of life. Indeed, I will speak his name openly in the presence of my Father and of his angels. Let the listener hear what the Spirit says to the Churches. Then write this to the angel of the Church in Philadelphia: These are the words of the holy one and the true, He who has the key of David. He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens. I know what you have done. See, I have given you a door flung wide open, which no man can close! For you have some little power and have been faithful to my message and have not denied my name. See how I deal with those of Satan's synagogue, who claim to be Jews, yet are no Jews but liars! Watch how I make them come and bow down before your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. Because you have obeyed my call to patient endurance I will keep you safe from the hour of trial which is to come upon the whole world, to test all who live upon the earth. I am coming soon; hold fast to what you have - let no one deprive you of your crown. As for the victorious, I will make him a pillar in the Temple of my God, and he will never leave it. I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which comes down out of Heaven from my God. And I will write upon him my own new name. Let the listener hear what the Spirit says to the Churches. Then write this to the angel of the Church in Laodicea: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God's creation: I know what you have done, and that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish that you were either cold or hot! but since you are lukewarm and neither hot nor cold, I intend to spit you out of my mouth! While you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and there is nothing that I need, you have no eyes to see that you are wretched, pitiable, poverty-stricken, blind and naked. My advice to you is to buy from me that gold which is purified in the furnace so that you may be rich, and white garments to wear so that you may hide the shame of your nakedness, and salve to put on your eyes to make you see. All those whom I love I correct and discipline. Therefore, shake off your complacency and repent. See, I stand knocking at the door. If anyone listens to my voice and opens the door, I will go into his house, and dine with him, and he with me. As for the victorious, I will give him the honor of sitting beside me on my throne, just as I myself have won the victory and have taken my seat beside my Father on his throne. Let the listener hear what the spirit says to the Churches. ... Then I saw a new Heaven and a new earth, for the first Heaven and the first earth had disappeared and the sea was no more. I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, descending from God out of Heaven, prepared as a bride dressed in beauty for her husband. Then I heard a great voice from the throne crying, "See! The home of God is with men, and he will live among them. They shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and will wipe away every tear from their eyes. Death shall be no more, and never again shall there be sorrow or crying or pain. For all those former things are past and gone." Then he who is seated upon the throne said, "See, I am making all thing new!" And he added, "Write this down for my words are true and to be trusted!" Then he said to me, "It is done! I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the thirsty water without price from the fountain of life. The victorious shall inherit these things, and I will be God to him and he will be son to me. But as for the cowards, the faithless and the corrupt, the murderers, the traffickers in sex and sorcery, the worshipers of idols and all liars - their inheritance is in the lake which burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death." ... "See, I come quickly! I carry my reward with me, and repay every man according to his works. I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the Beginning and the End. Happy are those who wash their robes, for they have the right to the tree of life and the freedom of the gates of the city. Shut out from the city shall be the depraved, the sorcerers, the impure, the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices a lie! "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to you with this testimony for the Churches. I am both the root and stock of David, and the bright star of the morning!"
Then he who is seated upon the throne said, "See, I am making all thing new!" And he added, "Write this down for my words are true and to be trusted!" Then he said to me, "It is done! I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the thirsty water without price from the fountain of life. The victorious shall inherit these things, and I will be God to him and he will be son to me. But as for the cowards, the faithless and the corrupt, the murderers, the traffickers in sex and sorcery, the worshipers of idols and all liars - their inheritance is in the lake which burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death." Rev. 22:12-16 "See, I come quickly! I carry my reward with me, and repay every man according to his works. I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the Beginning and the End. Happy are those who wash their robes, for they have the right to the tree of life and the freedom of the gates of the city. Shut out from the city shall be the depraved, the sorcerers, the impure, the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices a lie! "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to you with this testimony for the Churches. I am both the root and stock of David, and the bright star of the morning!" So you took Rev. 1-3, Rev. 21:1-8 and Rev, 22:12-16, removed all the chapter and verse numbers, and ran them together...thanks alot. Next time provide all the chapter/verse numbers! Without chapter/verse I can't refer to specific verses, and people reading here will be confused, as well. Give me a sec to sort out this mess you've made.
Then he who is seated upon the throne said, "See, I am making all thing new!" And he added, "Write this down for my words are true and to be trusted!" Then he said to me, "It is done! I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the thirsty water without price from the fountain of life. The victorious shall inherit these things, and I will be God to him and he will be son to me. But as for the cowards, the faithless and the corrupt, the murderers, the traffickers in sex and sorcery, the worshipers of idols and all liars - their inheritance is in the lake which burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death." Rev. 22:12-16 "See, I come quickly! I carry my reward with me, and repay every man according to his works. I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the Beginning and the End. Happy are those who wash their robes, for they have the right to the tree of life and the freedom of the gates of the city. Shut out from the city shall be the depraved, the sorcerers, the impure, the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices a lie! "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to you with this testimony for the Churches. I am both the root and stock of David, and the bright star of the morning!" Of the passages you have presented, Rev.21:1-8 is not actual judgment, but is referring BACK to judgments that have already taken place. Rev.22:12-16 is an admonition to everyone: make sure you find yourself in the right judgment! There will be judgments for those who BY FAITH have washed their robes in the atoning blood of Christ...and the rest, who's (faithless) works will be insufficient to attain the right to the tree of life. When you read "Then I saw a new Heaven and a new earth, for the first Heaven and the first earth had disappeared", this is obviously a future time BEYOND the Great Millennium (the 1000 year reign of Christ on Earth). Primarily, Christ is referring back to the Bema Seat Judgment for BELIEVERS, and also the Great White Throne Judgment for UNBELIEVERS (Rev. 21:11-15). Note: there are at least seven judgments that have taken place by the time you read Rev.21. Those judgements include the judgment of Christians who were martyred in the Tribulation, the Old Testament Saints, the Sheep/Goat judgment, Satan/fallen angel judgment, ect. I can point these judgments out to you with Scripture references but it gets a bit lengthy for this forum. To reiterate, salvation is not by works, but by faith in Jesus Christ.
By all means list them.
For cryin' out loud... Believers...the Bema Seat...their Christian life...2Cor.5:10 OT Saints...end of Trib...faith in coming messiah...Dan. 12:1-3 Martyred Trib saints...end of Trib...faith/works...Rev.20:4-6 Surviving Jews...end of Trib...faith in Christ...Ez20:34-38/Mt25:1-13 Surviving Gentiles...end of Trib...Sheep/goat...Joel3:1,2/Mt25:31-46 Satan/fallen angels...end of millennium...Jude6/2Pt2:4 All unsaved people...end of millennium...for rejection of God...Rev20:11-15 (This is a very simplified list of the various judgments) In all the judgments pertaining to humans, salvation is always by faith, not works done in unbelief Edit: the question is, Vic, which judgement will you find yourself in?
Your very simplified list does not pass muster. I will accept the words of Jesus as revealing what will happen, given his divinity. Jesus' revealed a much simpler structure of judgment and life after death than the complicated tarte-a-la-creme that you've presented. Prove it with Jesus.
It's called Systematic Theology, freshman level. Perhaps you'd like to present Jesus' version, clearly, concisely using verses with chapter and number this time;) And a slice of Tart Tatin a la creme if you please.
He can't do that. He thinks Jesus was a liar when he said all scripture was.... Vic is also a pretender. He pretends he only believes the red writing and asks you to only use red words. Then he believes this catholic cult made up purgatory and is quite domatic about it. Yet Jesus never said that in red. Or any other part of the Bible for that matter. I think Vic basically has a good heart (if I ignore his calling for the murder of all right wingers to solve the worlds problems) but he gets things mostly wrong.
Agreed. I pity him. His heart is hardened toward God, refusing to hear the "whole counsel of God".
You're not God. We're done.
We're done. Jesus said all the scriptures were to be studied. Don't get mad at someone because you don't like the truth. I mean someone who said they wanted to murder all right wingers shouldn't be upset when someone says that their heart is hardened.
THAT. IRONY.
There is no irony. Your flat earth bullshit isn't biblical or scientific. It is for gullible people.
It is BOTH. And until you let go of the unscientific, un-biblical LIES and BS that this lying secular-based world have foisted upon you, you remain their slave. TO WIT: This same "Science" that you trust confirms and teaches "Evolution" -- do you believe that? That means, This same "Science" that you trust confirms and teaches the 'Big Bang' and a gazillion year old Universe -- do you believe that? If so, you, Bill Nye, De Grasse Tyson, and the rest of the militant anti-God atheists believe THE SAME EXACT THING. Meanwhile, the Bible sez God's earthly realm is surrounded by a Firmament, "The waters ABOVE (above the highest sky) divided by the waters BELOW" (the oceans). There IS no "Outer Space." NASA = LIES. More than that -- IT MOCKS US. God also NEVER once spoke of a "Globe or ball" earth. God spoke of a "face" of the earth. Btw, look up, 'Michelson-Morley experiment. It proved the earth does NOT spin; That we are indeed NOT spinning/moving. AT ALL.
There are no replies to Comment # 282. End Trace Mode for Comment # 282.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestWhen you have the time, please give them all a look; I consider them a crash-course in Earth-Science Truth, Logic, and Reason.
#20. To: Pinguinite (#12)
I watched both. I find them, to varying degrees, flawed.
#21. To: Liberator (#20)
But to your premise, multiple civilizations for thousands of years had already presumed its shape not only to be Flat, but having a Dome or Firmament over it.
#22. To: Pinguinite, ALL (#21)
There's no reason ancients living thousands of years ago should be considered a scientific authority. If we don't consider them an authority when they said that all matter could be subcategorized into one of: Earth, Air, Fire & Water...
#23. To: Liberator (#22)
By whose authority, by what criteria IS the earth said to definitively be a "globe"? Because IF it's NASA, they and their credibility is already an ongoing problem and challenge. I
#24. To: Pinguinite (#23)
(Edited)
You really are big on that "whose authority?" question, and not just on religious topics.
#34. To: Liberator, Pinguinite, A K A Stone (#24)
Curious geometry:
The 747-400, the most common variant in service, has a high-subsonic cruise speed of Mach 0.85–0.855 (up to 570 mph or 920 km/h) with an intercontinental range of 7,260 nautical miles (8,350 statute miles or 13,450 km).[16]
So are 300-400 people per day just dying when their airliners crash into the sea and no one ever mentions it or NASA is somehow deceiving us all? Are you stating that these non-stop flights do actually fly over the United States at any time, day or night, and none of the passengers ever notice all those brightly-lit cities along the way or that huge continental land mass? There are 300-400 people flying these non-stop flights, generally on a daily basis and none of them ever notice they were flying over South America and North America on their way between Chile and Australia? Or is NASA just deceiving us all by getting Qantas to advertise these flights but they never actually take the passengers on those flights after they book them and pay for them? Boeing and Airbus take pride in manufacturing some of the world's longest range airliners. The Boeing 777-200LR - with a massive range of 17,395km - tops the list, followed by the Airbus A340-500 with a range of 16,670km.
#35. To: Liberator (#34)
#36. To: Vicomte13 (#35)
What would it take to convince you to believe that the world really is round?
#37. To: Tooconservative (#36)
#54. To: Vicomte13 (#37)
It does not make me angry, in the slightest degree, that people are Flat Earthers. I just wonder what it would take to demonstrate to them that the Earth is, in fact, a spheroid.
#60. To: Pinguinite (#54)
There's too much faith in the world. Faith in things that are simply not true. Our capacity to believe things is grossly underestimated and unappreciated.
#68. To: A K A Stone, Liberator, Vicomte13, watchman, Tooconservative (#60)
For years and years you claimed to be a Christian. What is it that changed your mind? Or were you never really a Christian and you just said that because you were raised with Christians or something like that? Or you just said it without thinking about what it was? Seriously what changed your mind to believe in someone who suggests things to people while they are in a trance like state?
Or were you never really a Christian...
#84. To: Pinguinite (#68)
how do you/we qualify a "real Christian"?
#86. To: watchman (#84)
(Edited)
A Christian is a human being who is indwelt by God's Spirit.
That's basically it.
#87. To: Pinguinite (#86)
With that definition, under Newton, everyone is a Christian.
#90. To: watchman (#87)
In Christian belief, a person is born with a human spirit.
If, as you say, all souls are born of God, why does humanity experience such supreme emptiness? Contrariwise, why does the Christian experience such supreme fullness, peace and joy, that wells up from a source not of a persons making, but of God dwelling within?
#95. To: Pinguinite (#90)
Under Newton, we have an alternate and more sensible explanation for why we are uniquely valuable to God over any other biological life form on earth.
#97. To: watchman (#95)
So there is a God in the Newton model.
What role does God play in your incarnation into human form?
Is God central to your being? Or is God on the periphery, while you, your spirit, your being is central to your existence?
If God isn't central to your existence, but is relegated to some ancillary role while you reincarnate, can you really say that this meets the definition of "God"?
It seems that you have a self centered belief as opposed to a God centered belief.
#99. To: Pinguinite (#97)
The idea that we are nothing and God is everything, which is a frequent theme in Christianity, is inaccurate.
#102. To: watchman (#99)
God is infinitely more than the "The Source". And that is the kind of God you need and do not have...yet.
#103. To: Pinguinite (#102)
If you know God as you claim you do, can you honestly tell me that that is something God would actually do?
#104. To: watchman (#103)
When God created the Universe, He created it with age built in.
Understanding is not the basis of Christian theology...it is by faith that God finds us acceptable. Child like faith no bigger that a mustard seed. Not everyone can "understand" because that requires mental capacity, but the capacity to have faith is found in everyone.
#108. To: Pinguinite, watchman (#104)
It seems child-like faith is accepting something as true without study or analysis, and that is what you are saying people must do when accepting Christianity.
#113. To: Tooconservative, watchman (#108)
This equate Christian belief with children being taught to believe in the fairy tales, Santa Claus and the Ishtar bunny. It makes of Christianity a non-rational belief system
#117. To: Pinguinite, Vicomte13, watchman (#113)
Oh, but Christianity is the one true faith and Islam isn't. That seems to be what the retort comes to.
You should brace yourself but...the Muslims say the same damned thing about Christianity! Who knew? I've pointed out a few times that if there is a problem with faith when it comes to religion, it's not that we don't have enough, it's instead that we have too much.
As I've said: The capacity of the human mind to believe things that are not true is greatly underappreciated.
Having said that, I will say that Christianity is a good faith, and in terms of how we are called to live, the Newton model is actually about 100% compatible with Christianity.
Newton was not a conventional orthodox Christian in any sense. So I can see why you might like him but not the others here. Newton was obviously a very original thinker, something that was not apparent for many years after his death. The religious establishment has also sought to conceal his true opinions, something rather instructive about the nature of concentrated official religious power. The same thing happened with the religious beliefs of Thomas Jefferson, in particular the contents of the Jefferson bible. And Newton would likely have applauded the Jefferson bible, given what we know. I may post separately on the Jefferson bible and its history; it is very interesting and not widely known. Wiki: Isaac Newton: Religious Views Although born into an Anglican family, by his thirties Newton held a Christian faith that, had it been made public, would not have been considered orthodox by mainstream Christianity; in recent times he has been described as a heretic. So I believe there is a lot of theological truth in Christianity. The differences are only in doctrine of judgement, sin, reincarnation, redemption and items of that sort.
#119. To: Tooconservative (#117)
#123. To: Vicomte13 (#119)
The degree of adamancy of the Trinitarian versus Arian fight is, and always was, excessively violent and un-Christian. Newton was right that this was the doctrine that set the Church on a decidedly bad path, for it was over the doctrine of the Trinity that the Church began carrying out executions in the 380s AD, and with that, tainted itself forevermore.
#153. To: Tooconservative (#123)
It probably is the single greatest fight over heresy in Christian history.
#165. To: Vicomte13 (#153)
Christians are headstrong and know better than Jesus. Which is why their churches are all dying.
#169. To: Liberator (#165)
(Edited)
#194. To: Vicomte13, watchman (#169)
(Edited)
ACTUAL miracles of healing, the REAL thing. They do not happen, but by the power of God.
#197. To: Liberator (#194)
it is NOT up to government to confiscate wealth and re-distribute it. That my friend is called, THEFT.
#198. To: All (#197)
#203. To: Vicomte13, ALL (#198)
(Edited)
Let's cut to the chase:
#205. To: Liberator (#203)
(Is there not a difference between "killing" and "murder"? You're also familiar with Ecclesiastes, right?)
#208. To: Tooconservative (#205)
#209. To: Vicomte13 (#208)
but Jesus says that killers today go into the lake of fire
#212. To: watchman (#209)
(Edited)
#219. To: A K A Stone (#212)
I also notice he is adding to scripture adding the word mortal.
#220. To: All (#219)
#221. To: Vicomte13 (#220)
but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."
#222. To: watchman (#221)
#223. To: Vicomte13 (#222)
And you REALLY believe that this is what Jesus meant by his teaching?
#224. To: watchman (#223)
#225. To: Vicomte13 (#224)
#234. To: watchman (#225)
You will either be judged by your works (leading you to the Lake of Fire), or you will be judged by your faith in the atoning work of Christ
#239. To: Vicomte13 (#234)
That's not what Jesus said.
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. Eph. 2:8,9
#243. To: watchman (#239)
Question: are you trying to get into heaven by your works? So you can boast?
#244. To: Vicomte13 (#243)
I - very reasonably - decide that Jesus is the highest authority.
Paul appears here to contradict Jesus.
Your type actually feels superior to Catholics, and you cannot restrain your tongues, and go into full-blown judgment mode.
I also recognise that people are not going to change their minds about things they've become stubborn about.
But your ilk will not leave it alone.
#246. To: watchman (#244)
I'll be back soon to see what verses you have come up with as to those contradictions you speak of.
#248. To: Vicomte13 (#246)
I'll not be engaging in that game. You want to lecture me.
#250. To: watchman (#248)
Just put the verses up.
#254. To: watchman (#250)
Just put the verses up.
#258. To: Vicomte13 (#254)
Rev. 21:1-8 Then I saw a new Heaven and a new earth, for the first Heaven and the first earth had disappeared and the sea was no more. I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, descending from God out of Heaven, prepared as a bride dressed in beauty for her husband. Then I heard a great voice from the throne crying, "See! The home of God is with men, and he will live among them. They shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and will wipe away every tear from their eyes. Death shall be no more, and never again shall there be sorrow or crying or pain. For all those former things are past and gone."
#259. To: All (#258)
(Edited)
Rev. 21:1-8 Then I saw a new Heaven and a new earth, for the first Heaven and the first earth had disappeared and the sea was no more. I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, descending from God out of Heaven, prepared as a bride dressed in beauty for her husband. Then I heard a great voice from the throne crying, "See! The home of God is with men, and he will live among them. They shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and will wipe away every tear from their eyes. Death shall be no more, and never again shall there be sorrow or crying or pain. For all those former things are past and gone."
#260. To: watchman (#259)
Note: there are at least seven judgments that have taken place by the time you read Rev.21. Those judgements include the judgment of Christians who were martyred in the Tribulation, the Old Testament Saints, the Sheep/Goat judgment, Satan/fallen angel judgment, ect. I can point these judgments out to you with Scripture references but it gets a bit lengthy for this forum.
#261. To: Vicomte13 (#260)
(Edited)
By all means list them.
#263. To: watchman (#261)
#264. To: Vicomte13 (#263)
complicated tarte-a-la-creme
Jesus' revealed a much simpler structure of judgment and life after death
#265. To: watchman, vicomte13 (#264)
Perhaps you'd like to present Jesus' version, clearly, concisely using verses with chapter and number this time;)
#268. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13 (#265)
He pretends he only believes the red writing
I think Vic basically has a good heart
#270. To: watchman, A K A Stone (#268)
I pity him. His heart is hardened toward God, refusing to hear the "whole counsel of God".
#275. To: Vicomte13 (#270)
You're not God.
#277. To: A K A Stone (#275)
Don't get mad at someone because you don't like the truth.
#279. To: Liberator (#277)
No drama. Rather, the desire to avoid a very harsh exchange.
#282. To: A K A Stone (#279)
(Edited)
Your flat earth bullshit isn't biblical or scientific.
Replies to Comment # 282.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]