God is not supernatural

Author: Tradesecret

Posts

Total: 82
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,311
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Do you see how hard it is for me to be a TRUE Christian in the 21st century,

I do Brother. A rod and a burden that has been falsely created for your back by others I am afraid to tell you. It was those that decided it would be a good idea to claim the Jesus of the first century  was also the same old ancient god  Yahweh  of the Hebrew and Jews. 
 And yet, as yourself has clearly pointed out _  "The old has passed away; behold, the new has come." ( 2 Corinthians 5:1) "   but for some reason these early Christians seem to want to hang on to the ancient and cruel, intolerant vile  god of the ancients, and have forced this dogma into you from  childhood ( I suspect) thereby causing you to carry a burden of their own ignorant misunderstandings. 

So I see your struggle and hope that one day you will be able to at least free yourself of the creature that makes all those commands and dictates that cause children to suffer and die for no reason at all. 




Jesus does change His mind in 2 Corinthians 5:1, and where He does NOT change His mind in Numbers 232:19?   Whew, its a tough faith to follow at times. :(

Well I am confident that the Reverend Tradesecrete will be along soon to relive you of your dilemma (in this instance at least) by telling explaining the "context" of both these verses that you have either, misread, do not understand and have taken out of context yourself.   For which I am sure you will truly grateful for.




Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,311
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
not when It comes to these scriptures I don't.   After all my initial beliefs about them,  I still stand by my over all opinion that - in the New Testament in particular-  these scriptures are telling another story of  a violent struggle for power among the many religious sects and factions.. I believe the story is there to be wheedled out from the many clues that betray the accepted story of man born of a virgin among straw and cows in a shed to became the messiah  of the Jews / saviour of Christendom . 
LOL!
Which part of my reply did you find funny. You asked a fkn question, I answered. So be polite enough to explain what you found so humorous.



So it does have an agenda? 

 In what sense . And it was just a few post ago that you  were crying and accused me of "mocking you" and you call me "it".  And I believe that  you are confusing agenda with purpose.  You really do not know anything at all do ,"Lawyer,   Pastor ,   Chaplin"  REVEREND!!!?  #20<<<<<<<<<< Now that really IS something to "LOL"  about.



 I have been waiting for you to reveal even a tiny bit.

Then you should have simply asked  if  it was troubling you so much.  .  But that has been your problem all of your pitiful life hasn't it. You have never asked anything about anything at all. You have just been told and "passed it on" and without question. 
 I have made it clear on many of  my threads what I believe concerning these unreliable scriptures. I haven't  ever hidden the fact.


You have been very careful. LOL!

 Nope.  Again, what the fk are you laughing about? Are you unbalanced? why the hysterics?   I have always been open. I have said many times that I believe that there is another story below the surface of the ambiguous and unreliable biblical stories.  So  what and why you are wetting your nickers with laughter over it is beyond me. 


Well at least it explains somewhat the warped views you have.

 I have no warped views. If anyone here has warped views princess it is the cretinous that believe a man can walk on water and can  bring  to life  dead rotten stinking corpse's  that have been  buried 6ft under for days, weeks and hundreds of years!!!  Where as I simply believe that these so called "miracles" have other explainable meanings. 

 So you tell me princess, which one of those opinions and beliefs sounds more "warped".

  

And also why you NEVER reveal your true sources. I would be embarrassed too. 

 I have told you many times.  The source for my questions come DIRECTLY from  the scriptures themselves. I read them, and  I scrutinise them,  and they throw up questions time and time again,  You are just too fkn bone idle to do your own research of the bible itself never mind any extra biblical  materiel that may or may not support the claims made by these gospel writers in the scriptures.   

 Yet here you are , claiming to be  "qualified"  as A Lawyer and A  Pastor and A  Chaplin #20  to teach these scriptures to others, I think you called it "passing on" what you have been told. .   If ever I have said anything that requires me to supply a source then I do. As I did when you  reminded about my Son of God claim, which  not ONLY contained BIBLICAL sources but supporting evidence from people that are REALY "qualified" to confirm or deny one claim or another. 

 But I will tell you what REVEREND!?  The next time you believe a comment or claim of mine deserves a source, then please don't be afraid you point it out. 

 Just a reminder that  you have ignored or forgotten my request numerous times now . here>>>>> #10  Why?

 And this too seems to have slipped your memory  #54 but needs addressing a the earliest possible date. 




fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
Stephen's #4 gives a Google definition of "superbatural." As usual, any other English dictionary but the OED falls short. As it happens, the word originates in antiquity of Latin and French, seeing its use in English originating in an absolute knowledge as of 1443, but perhaps as early as 1425, having a relation to divine, as well as occult and paranormal works beyond, or at least different from, and additional to those of nature, Here is OED's definition:

"Belonging to a realm or system that transcends nature, as that of divine, magical, or ghostly beings; attributed to or thought to reveal some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature; occult, paranormal."
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@fauxlaw
The authority of Oxford as pertaining to the English language is unquestioned, surely.

It should be evident that God transcends nature. Therefore, there should be no controversy about God being considered "supernatural".



Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,294
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Tradesecret
I have been watching The Witcher recently. Are the monsters Geralt kills on the show supernatural?
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mopac
The authority of Oxford as pertaining to the English language is unquestioned, surely.

It should be evident that God transcends nature. Therefore, there should be no controversy about God being considered "supernatural".
No one is denying that God transcends nature. The issue is about whether or not God as divine and does divine things naturally or whether God is just a super or more evolved human who thereby does things supernaturally. 

The Dictionary definitions produced so far make an assumption.  This assumption is that God fits within the particulars of those things that fall into a super evolved human.  Hence, believers in God are labeled at superstitious, believers in magic, and beyond science. 

Yet the Bible describes God as above and beyond any laws of principles of science and nature.  It describes God as eternal.  The Greek and Roman Gods according to Plato are subject to the laws of science and nature.  They are also not eternal - even though they have exceedingly long lives.  The dictionary definition capture these greek and roman gods, because in many respects they are simply an extension of humanity. But the Bible describes its God not as an extension of humanity but as the creator life.  

God is God.  

I say God is God.  And that puts him into rarified territory.  Attributing things to him that he does as supernatural is therefore like saying a bird is supernatural because it can fly. Or suggesting that an insect is supernatural because it can walk on water. Or calling a chameleon supernatural because it can change color or adapt to its environment.  It would be ridiculous to do that.  And it is ridiculous to call God supernatural as well because he does things that humans cannot. 
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
 have been watching The Witcher recently. Are the monsters Geralt kills on the show supernatural?
I have not watched the show.   I cannot answer the question. 
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,294
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Tradesecret
Like dragons and basilisks and ghouls and shit like that.
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Tradesecret
I understand what you are saying.

I am not seeing supernatural as superhuman. Rather, I am seeing God as something that transcends nature itself, being even the determiner of nature.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Like dragons and basilisks and ghouls and shit like that.
I don't know.   I have never really put my mind to whether they are supernatural or not.  Certainly in my mind they are probably fairytale stories.  

Are they supernatural? I do not know. Do they have special powers that humans don't? It is possible - I suppose. But does that make the supernatural? 

They certainly are not human. 

8 days later

YeshuaBought
YeshuaBought's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 141
0
1
5
YeshuaBought's avatar
YeshuaBought
0
1
5
Yes Yahweh the God of the Bible is, supernatura;. He has to be, to be a Spirit.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@YeshuaBought
Yes Yahweh the God of the Bible is, supernatura;. He has to be, to be a Spirit.
Explain your position. 
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



TRADESECRET, a Bible 2nd class woman NOW, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO,  Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, an admitted sexual deviant, and had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery, Satanic Bible Rewriter, 


Listen, have you ever thought about helping your fellow pseudo-christians in coming to terms with their equal to your Gender Reassignment Surgery, and Sexual Deviancy?  Obviously you have had to do this relative to these ungodly propositions, therefore why not post in how you dealt with them that goes directly against our Serial Killer Jesus’ direct words within the scriptures, praise!

Jesus says to help others in sharing your experience so others can learn in how you dealt with them which may ease their pain:

“Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.” (Hebrews 13:16)
“Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.” (Philippians 2:4)

You can also include my posts to you below showing you to be one of the biggest hypocrites to Jesus’ true words in the following links, where you can thank me later.



TRADESECRET'S DIRECT QUOTE IN ADMITTANCE OF BEING A SEXUAL DEVIANT, WHERE BEFORE HE/SHE SAID THEY WERE NOT!:    " ................. Yeah, Us Indians - and I can say I am Indian because I lived there for a while - have a serious problem with sex. We are deviants - but this is ok - because we are just modeling our goddess. She would be proud of us. I am not proud - but she would  ...............  They are quite nice. We meet lots of other persons who share our sexual deviancies - it is like going home. All of our brothers are there - and dads and uncles."



THE FOLLOWING LINK IS WHERE TRADESECRET HAS OBVIOUSLY HAD GENDER REASSIGNMENT SURGERY AND HAS YET TO DISCUSS THE TOTAL OUTCOME:

Tradesecret's moniker photo is a MALE
u3wfsw47i77ksirnghjr3vqmhuxl3hdh.jpg

Tradesecret's Biography where the Gender is MALE 

Tradesecret's Biography where the Gender IS NOW FEMALE!


The membership, and those that are also guilty of your Satanic crimes against Jesus, will be awaiting your help in how you dealt with these two biblical crimes in your forthcoming reply, and for these members sake, DO NOT RUN AWAY in the name of Satan, but in helping your fellow pseudo-christians!  

Thank you.,




zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,217
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Certainly in my mind they are probably fairytale stories.
Yep, just like the GOD that exists in your mind.

Though to be fair, various GODS started out as  very naive creation hypotheses.....

Acquired knowledge quickly disproved these old ideas......But some people still derive a great deal of pleasure from them.

Christmas is no different to Halloween......Just different costumes and a tad more expensive.

ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Every time you post to a thread, you make is so that I don't have to. : )

God is the source, sustainer, and creator of nature, in what way is He then supernatural? God is not creation, true, but that doesn't mean God is thus unnatural.

Mopic said, "...yet God became creation". This is untrue and not supported anywhere in the bible. The bible tells us that Jesus was never created, and is the same today, yesterday, and forever. All things were created by Him and for Him. Jesus existed before He appeared on Earth, and still does now.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,311
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@ethang5
Jesus existed before He appeared on Earth, and still does now.

 Whatever caused you to believe that?  Where is your evidence? 
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
not when It comes to these scriptures I don't.   After all my initial beliefs about them,  I still stand by my over all opinion that - in the New Testament in particular-  these scriptures are telling another story of  a violent struggle for power among the many religious sects and factions.. I believe the story is there to be wheedled out from the many clues that betray the accepted story of man born of a virgin among straw and cows in a shed to became the messiah  of the Jews / saviour of Christendom . 
LOL!
Which part of my reply did you find funny. You asked a fkn question, I answered. So be polite enough to explain what you found so humorous.



So it does have an agenda? 

 In what sense . And it was just a few post ago that you  were crying and accused me of "mocking you" and you call me "it".  And I believe that  you are confusing agenda with purpose.  You really do not know anything at all do ,"Lawyer,   Pastor ,   Chaplin"  REVEREND!!!?  #20<<<<<<<<<< Now that really IS something to "LOL"  about.



 I have been waiting for you to reveal even a tiny bit.

Then you should have simply asked  if  it was troubling you so much.  .  But that has been your problem all of your pitiful life hasn't it. You have never asked anything about anything at all. You have just been told and "passed it on" and without question. 
 I have made it clear on many of  my threads what I believe concerning these unreliable scriptures. I haven't  ever hidden the fact.


You have been very careful. LOL!

 Nope.  Again, what the fk are you laughing about? Are you unbalanced? why the hysterics?   I have always been open. I have said many times that I believe that there is another story below the surface of the ambiguous and unreliable biblical stories.  So  what and why you are wetting your nickers with laughter over it is beyond me. 


Well at least it explains somewhat the warped views you have.

 I have no warped views. If anyone here has warped views princess it is the cretinous that believe a man can walk on water and can  bring  to life  dead rotten stinking corpse's  that have been  buried 6ft under for days, weeks and hundreds of years!!!  Where as I simply believe that these so called "miracles" have other explainable meanings. 

 So you tell me princess, which one of those opinions and beliefs sounds more "warped".

  

And also why you NEVER reveal your true sources. I would be embarrassed too. 

 I have told you many times.  The source for my questions come DIRECTLY from  the scriptures themselves. I read them, and  I scrutinise them,  and they throw up questions time and time again,  You are just too fkn bone idle to do your own research of the bible itself never mind any extra biblical  materiel that may or may not support the claims made by these gospel writers in the scriptures.   

 Yet here you are , claiming to be  "qualified"  as A Lawyer and A  Pastor and A  Chaplin #20  to teach these scriptures to others, I think you called it "passing on" what you have been told. .   If ever I have said anything that requires me to supply a source then I do. As I did when you  reminded about my Son of God claim, which  not ONLY contained BIBLICAL sources but supporting evidence from people that are REALY "qualified" to confirm or deny one claim or another. 

 But I will tell you what REVEREND!?  The next time you believe a comment or claim of mine deserves a source, then please don't be afraid you point it out. 

 Just a reminder that  you have ignored or forgotten my request numerous times now . here>>>>> #10  Why?

 And this too seems to have slipped your memory  #54 but needs addressing a the earliest possible date. 





I don't have anything to add. I just love the fact that Stephen got so ripped here. LOL! AND I have to repeat it. LOL!
Utanity
Utanity's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 375
0
2
2
Utanity's avatar
Utanity
0
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
God is real and does real things. When someone is supernatural that means doing magic tricks. God did only real tricks because he is the one and only god.
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Utanity
God is real and does real things. When someone is supernatural that means doing magic tricks. God did only real tricks because he is the one and only god.
So who are you? What is your other name? Certainly you pretending to be dumber than you need to be? I don't think you are Stephen, Brother????

You certainly have me intrigued. 
Castin
Castin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,222
3
2
7
Castin's avatar
Castin
3
2
7
-->
@Mopac
The Orthodox Church itself rejects your conception of the church. Also, we reject the claim that the church is a denomination. This type of ecclessiology only serves to justify the existence of protestant sects that are detached from the church.

The ancient and venerable Saint Basil the great has this to say about your baptism...

"...they who were broken off had become laymen, and, because they are no longer able to confer on others that grace of the Holy Spirit from which they themselves are fallen away, they had no authority either to baptize or to ordain."

Now, it is the position of the church that under certain circumstances a bishop may make acceptable a baptism done by heretics, but this can only be done on entering the church and receiving chrismation. Apart from the church, there is no baptism.

A more recent Orthodox saint, Hilarion Troitsky writes, “Outside of her, whatever is called ‘Church’ is a congregation of heretics that have lost the one faith in the one Lord and consequently the baptism which is performed by them is not the Christian baptism.”

Even in the acts of the apostles we see that after Philip the deacon baptized the Samarians, it was still necessary for a bishop, priest, or in this case an apostle to come give the gift of The Holy Spirit.

"...when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women... Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost."

As St Basil up there said, those who are not with the church cannot be priests, they are laymen. Laymen cannot administer the sacrament of the seal of The Holy Spirit.



St Gregory the dialogist writes...

"And indeed we have learnt from the ancient institution of the Fathers that whosoever among heretics are baptized in the name of the Trinity, when they return to holy Church, may be recalled to the bosom of mother Church either by unction of chrism, or by imposition of hands, or by profession of the faith only. Hence the West reconciles Arians to the holy Catholic Church by imposition of hands, but the East by the unction of holy chrism."

St Leo the great writes...

"For it is the unity as such of ecclesiastical society that avails unto salvation, so that a man is not saved by Baptism to whom it was not given in that place where it is needful that it be given."



The point is, you may think you were baptised, and you may think you received The Holy Spirit, but the church has taught since the beginning that these things are not done independently of the church. The fathers of the church did not have the same understanding of ecclessiology that you do.
I don't know, every time you come in here calling Protestants heretics of the "true church" it kind of makes me like them more.

I mean, wow. "You were not really baptized." Was he not really saved, then?
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Castin
I don't know, every time you come in here calling Protestants heretics of the "true church" it kind of makes me like them more.

I mean, wow. "You were not really baptized." Was he not really saved, then?
Hi Castin,

Don't stress to much on my account. I think if we asked Mopac or indeed, even a Catholic priest whether or not a couple were married in any church but the OC or RC - whether they would think that we actually married is a bigger issue. 

When a church does not recognize other church's authority to baptize or have communion - it also often includes marriage. I would imagine that if we asked Mopac - that he would think that my spouse and I were actually living in sin because we have not been married before God in the OC. I know Catholics take a similar view. 

Interestingly, it is the same view Baptists have in relation to baptism. They don't recognize the authority of the Catholic, the OC, the Presbyerian, the Uniting Church, the Episcopalian or indeed any church which sprinkles or baptizes infants in their baptism. To me this is the same as saying I am living in a de-facto relationship. 

On the under other - I might disagree with some of the teachings in each of these churches, yet, I accept their authority to practice these differences in good faith since they are churches of God. 

IF the teach the divinity of Christ. If they teach the Trinity.  If they teach the atonement of Christ. If they teach his death and resurrection and so far as they have been set up covenantally - they are in my opinion Christian Churches. 
Castin
Castin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,222
3
2
7
Castin's avatar
Castin
3
2
7
-->
@Tradesecret
Eh, kudos for taking it with such grace then. That just sounds like some authoritarian bullshit to me. The exact kind of authoritarian bullshit that caused the Protestant movement to begin with.
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Castin
Hey Castin, I see your BS meter is still functioning. : )

38 days later

Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
I don't know, every time you come in here calling Protestants heretics of the "true church" it kind of makes me like them more.

Well, the truth doesn't always conform to our prejudices about what it should be.

I mean, wow. "You were not really baptized." Was he not really saved, then?
If there was a singular moment of salvation, the scriptures would not say to "work out your salvation with fear ans trembling" to those who are already in the church.

Protestants who teach otherwise are not expressing the orthodox or Christian position.


Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Tradesecret
If you were to enter the church, a bishop may make acceptable your baptism in Chrismation, but apart from the Apostolic church there are no valid sacraments. 

I also don't believe the church would say you were in sin for being married while not in the church.



Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Castin
That just sounds like some authoritarian bullshit to me. The exact kind of authoritarian bullshit that caused the Protestant movement to begin with.
There has never been a time in the history of the church where congregations apart from the church were considered Christian. Rather, they would be recognized as heretics. 

Whether it appeals to your personal sense of aesthetics is largely irrelevent. 
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@Mopac
I've looked at different beliefs on eternal insecurity (the idea of a believer losing their salvation). They all have their significant problems.

It would appear that "if" a believer could lose their salvation, it would be pretty difficult in that they have Jesus' intercessory prayer to contend with.

Peter failed at losing his salvation even when denying the Lord Jesus, which is a serious offense.

Do you think walking in fear of God necessitates fear of losing one's salvation?


Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,341
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Mopac
And why not?

Your church does not believe our church has any legitimate authority.  So why would you consider our ceremonies valid? 

It seems inconsistent to me if you do.  


Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Tradesecret
Not only do we not consider your church's sacraments invalid, but we consider your church heretical, as did the fathers of the ecumenical councils.
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@RoderickSpode
Peter repented.


The problem with eternal security is that it leads people to arrogantly boast of their own salvation, which they themselves don't truly know they have. It also very easily leads to a dead faith without works(no faith) and even a dead conscience that feels no conviction from sin.

Walking with God necessitates a life of repentence. Which means to confess when you sin, and turn away from evil.