Total posts: 8,861
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
The prophets very consistently called the Israelites to worship God in Spirit and in Truth.
So where are these documents that YOU, as part of the fkn collective "we" have in your possession "to prove that The Trinity has always been a part of church teaching, that Jesus was considered divine even pre-nicea".
I am still waiting!!!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
When someone tells me they have something, it means they have it.He said "we" genius. We being his church.
Indeed, that would be the collective "we". and I am 100% sure that this is what Mopac meant . He can always correct me if I am wrong , He needs no assistance from an theological imbecile such as yourself.
OR ARE YOU CALLING MOPAC A LIAR NOW!!!!?
I'm calling you a liar, and posting your lie for all to see.
I didn't lie at all. I agree, it is they collective we. whats the matter with you. And Mopac says that the collective "we" have these documents. Your pissing in the wind for the sake of argument AGAIN.
Added: 02.03.20 02:15PM Post 20 aboveThat isn't true, and we have documents to prove that The Trinity has always been a part of church teaching, that Jesus was considered divine even pre-nicea.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
So what if it's unnatural?
Is it unnatural? And keep in mind that it is a capital crime according to Christians and their god. It is more baggage that the silly simple minded Christians of the time took on when they adopted this vile god and all his fkn dictates, without understanding this religion and the culture of the age.
It is still a crime to practice homosexuality in over 70 Christian countries and this is because the god that Christians adopted says it is an "abomination" and the penalty is "death". Just as barbaric as the god of the Quran , then.
Leviticus 20:13 New King James Version (NKJV)
13 If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.......
......but he loves you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
You made the point and called it a contradiction. Are yo confused?
Are you one of those Americans who just cannot grasp even basic English?.
I am English and I made a point of highlighting the contradictions. AND FFS learn some basic English. And get used to it, your god made many fk ups during his creation period..
(1) If man is supposed to "be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it" how can this happen for those who are genetically fkd by the carelessness of your god, the creator of all things. (2) Why create such a human who is genetically fkd that he doesn't find the opposite sex sexually attractive so wouldn't be able to ""be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it".
Your clutching at straws princess. Homosexuals cannot reproduce among themselves BECAUSE GOD CREATED THEM WITH A GENETIC DISORDER, And then had the fkn bollocks to blame the Homosexual and ordered he be killed if he rams his rod into the shit-pipe of another male.
Leviticus 20:13 New King James Version (NKJV)
13 If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.
13 If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.
It was a failure on your gods part. never mind eh , because it doesn't seem to bother the homosexuals at all does it.
Created:
Posted in:
I never claimed that he thought him to be dead,
This is what you wrote at post #8 above.
"The father feared his son may be dead because of not seeing him for so long but rejoiced when he found out he was still alive". There is no indication in the-whole of this story that the father thought for one second that his son was literally "dead" . Nothing at all.
that that is a common fear among parents of missing children
Yes but " Missing Children" is not the same as knowing your son decided of his own free will to go in search of pastures new. This was simply a metaphorical "death" and a metaphorical "lost". the father was using idioms which was understood as the common parlance of the time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
...why god created a man that was only sexually attracted to someone of the same sex.When did God do that? Was it before He declared everything as good?
Not the point you silly little man. Everything is gods creation according to you. You cannot bend around this massive fk up by your god can you.
I am sure now that the theist will jump to defend their god and this blinding contradiction...Another "blinding" contradiction. ......So where then is the contradiction
It is. I mean, how is it that we man is supposed to " be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it", when there are those that simply cannot because of the genetic fk up created by non other than your god.
Keep trying princess. The contradiction is as clear as day. This was a complete and utter balls up by your god. And then instead of making a correction to the genetic makeup of these males, he simply told them they couldn't have sex with other men like they should do with women or they will be killed. your god , JUST LIKE YOU cannot admit when he has fk up, so gods default is to blame someone else - the man - and punish him for it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
He doesn't know that "asleep" is the term used for the dead in Christ.
I am still waiting for your explanation as to what it means to be, as you put it _ "dead in Christ" . These were your words not my words but you keep failing to explain what it means.
so when you are ready princess, I am all fkn ears. Off you go.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Why are you prattling about something I didn't talk about? The topic is not Josephus,Stop lying this is what you wrote at post #14 above:
Nope. post 14 is all your post darling, not mine and this is what you state : notice the number 0#14
Forum posts: 3,113335Added: 02.07.20 02:10PM--> @SalixesDo you honestly believe that just because the name of Christ was "mentioned" by other obscure and dubious sources it any way validates the existence of such aDo atheist know how many historical characters are mentioned by only one source that they take as validated? No.Jesus is mentioned by more than 15 ancient sources. That is better than for Plato or King Tut. Ever hear an atheist doubt the existence of either of those?
So just for once, stop with your lying bullshit and address the questions that arose from your own statement.
I remind you:
Josephus is a classic among ancient sources. What's more, Josephus is a classic ancient source of theological history. Are you denying this , princess?
Jesus is mentioned by more than 15 ancient sources.
How many times do you believe Jesus the Christ is mentioned by historian Josephus?
Ancient SourceS. Learn to read.
Is not the works of Jewish historian Josephus 37 AD - 100 AD regarded as an ancient source in your tiny mind then?
Jesus is mentioned by more than 15 ancient sources.
OK now name them and the citations.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Is not Josephus regarded as an ancient source in your tiny mind then?I did not mention Josephus homer.
Yes I know . You mentioned "ancient sources". And I asked you, is not Josephus 37 AD - 100 AD, regarded by you as an ancient source in your tiny mind then? . Why are you struggling with this simple question. it requires only a yes or now reply.
Why are you prattling about something I didn't talk about? The topic is not Josephus,
Stop lying this is what you wrote at post #14 above:
Added: 02.07.20 05:47PM--> @ethang5 Jesus is mentioned by more than 15 ancient sources.
YOU brought the idea of JESUS IN "Ancient sources" into the conversation, not me!!! I have simply picked up on what you have declared. And asked you at post #15 above " how many times do you believe Jesus the Christ is mentioned by historian Josephus" 37 AD - 100 AD?
You see princess, FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS THE JEWISH HISTORIAN is a classic example of the "ancient sources" that YOU brought into this thread. I didn't, YOU DID!
So now you have avoided both simple questions and instead returned to your well established behavior of lying, evading and and attempting to create an argument over something the YOU introduced into the conversation. You are simply no good on your own are you. You are literally spent and void of simple answers to the simplest of questions created by your own comments and statements.
This is why you never ever have created more than a few threads of your own in this religion sub forum; The last one being well over a year ago!!!!!!! And one of those only three is not really religion related:
Nabal Added: 11.19.18 06:19AM
Art as Proof Added: 08.15.18 05:59PM
Does Humanity Need A God Story? Added: 08.08.18 03:33PM
THIS TELLS ME THAT YOU ARE ONLY HERE TO AGITATE AND DISRUPT OTHER MEMBERS THREADS AND TOPICS.
Jesus is mentioned by more than 15 ancient sources.
How many times do you believe Jesus the Christ is mentioned by historian Josephus?
Ancient SourceS. Learn to read.
Is not the works of Jewish historian Josephus 37 AD - 100 AD regarded as an ancient source in your tiny mind then?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Is Homosexuality Unnatural?
To those that participate in sinking themselves to the nuts into some other mans dirty shit-pipe, it is, I assume, the most "natural" thing in the world.
I'll give it a pass.
I think it is one of gods a genetic fk ups, personally. But then I do wonder why he sat back once he'd finished busying himself with all creation and declared that it was "all good".
" God saw all that he had made, and it was very good"..Genesis 1:31,
So everything was ok as far as god was concerned..... wasn't it? No, hang on a minute, sorry , I jumped the gun there didn't I ? God also declared something about the `man that he had created lying with another man like he would a woman` being taboo. I take this to mean homosexuality is simply not on and a big no go.
I am sure now that the theist will jump to defend their god and this blinding contradiction, by telling us all that, (1) we do not understand the scriptures, (2) it was an authors mistake, (3) it was a mistranslated (4) and a multitude of other reasons and excuses as to why god created a man that was only sexually attracted to someone of the same sex. I mean, didn't god utter those immortal words in Genesis:
" As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it.” ?????????????????????
Is Homosexuality Unnatural?
But I do wonder if homosexuals ever ask themselves this very question. Or do they consider themselves to be genetically fkd up?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ronjs
Don't see your point
Metaphors and idioms is my point.
You have no evidence to support your claim that the father of the "dead" son believed him to be literally "dead" no more than you have evidence that the father believed his son to be literally "lost". The father is using two metaphors and idioms of the day.
In English, this son was neither dead nor lost. And hadn't just disappeared into the night.
idiomatic
/ˌɪdɪəˈmatɪk/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
- 1.using, containing, or denoting expressions that are natural to a native speaker.^^^^^^^^^^
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
He doesn't know that "asleep" is the term used for the dead in Christ.
Only Spiritually "dead" , is what I believe you are trying to tell me. Or you can simply explain what "dead in Christ" means to you.
I have said quite clearly that the father in this so called "dead" son story is speaking only in metaphor in my OP but you have ignored that and instead chosen to thrown out this lying accusation : Post 9 above
To people like Steven[..... ] words in the bible can have only one meaning. Metaphors, similes, and figure of speech are tricks of theists.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Jesus is mentioned by more than 15 ancient sources.How many times do you believe Jesus the Christ is mentioned by historian Josephus?Ancient SourceS. Learn to read.
Is not Josephus regarded as an ancient source in your tiny mind then? Born: 37 AD, Jerusalem, Israel
Died: 100 AD, Rome, Italy
And have you never heard of or studied his classics? Of course you haven't have you. You have never studied anything , not even the scriptures that you have had read to you since childhood, you poor , poor thing.
Here you go , All available on Amazon and cheaper on Ebay.
THE GENUINE
WORKS
OF
FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS
THE
JEWISH HISTORIAN.
Translated from the Original Greek, according to
Havercamp’s accurate Edition.
CONTAINING
Twenty Books of the JEWISH Antiquities,
WITH THE
Appendix or Life of JOSEPHUS, written by himself:
Seven Books of the JEWISH WAR:
AND
Two Books against APION.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I am amazed you haven't been flagged for your brazen flaunting and the utter disregard and contempt you have shown for these simple basic rules.I'm not breaking any board rules, your irrational hate is not the standard of the mods.
You have openly admitted to posting on this site, quotes that a member here made ON ANOTHER SITE!!!!! !!!! That is a flagrant disregard for the rules. SEE >>>
--> @ethang5 post 29
Added: 02.06.20 04:46AM--> @ludofl3xHuh? Where did this guy do that? Please highlight, here's the post just in case:On DDO, and old posts here before he was banned.
So not being content with breaking the rules by often cross threading quotes from the same site (this site) that you now, in further disregard and contempt for moderation and its rules, you defiantly brag about and use quotes from a completely different site too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
I am amazed you haven't been flagged by the OP for your personal attack on him and your brazen flaunting and the utter disregard and contempt you have shown for these simple basic rules.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Jesus is mentioned by more than 15 ancient sources.
How many times do you believe Jesus the Christ is mentioned by historian Josephus?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ronjs
The father feared his son may be dead because of not seeing him for so long ...
There is nothing in the story that gives the slightest indication whatsoever that the father had believed his son to be literally "dead" or had died in some far off place. You are clutching at straws.
We use that term today when referring to someone who has done us wrong
We do. And we also use the other metaphor that this father used, don't we: ' once lost [his way] and now found '. Another is he /she has "gone off the rails '.
The fact is, is that not one of these stories about supposed "dead" people is actually about anyone being literally dead . As the biblical evidence above shows.
we might call someone a deadhead when they do something stupid,
Indeed and when they come to their senses - as did the wayward son in Luke 15:17 and they stop behaving "stupid" we sometimes refer to them as having "seen the light" don't we? But it doesn't mean that these "stupid" people had never seen daylight, does it.
When we take closer look at the “dead daughter” story we can see that either Jesus lied or he didn’t perform a miracle or both;
“behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshiped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live. And when Jesus came into the ruler's house, and saw the minstrels and the people making a noise. He said unto them, Give place: for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth. And they laughed him to scorn. But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose”.Mathew 9: 18-25.KJV
So we see, if the “certain” ruler’s daughter is dead has her father believes she is, then Jesus lied exactly as he did to those disciples who were with him in the case of Lazarus where he first told them Lazarus was not dead but asleep. And if she (the daughter) was not dead, then there was no miracle performed but a ritual “raising”. It seems Christians or at least these Gospel writers, want it both ways.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Dito princess, this has to be one of your biggest goofs ever>I bet the mods roll their eys and do facepalms as they read your clunky posts.
Added: 02.06.20 04:46AM--> @ludofl3xHuh? Where did this guy do that? Please highlight, here's the post just in case:On DDO, and old posts here before he was banned.
So not being content with breaking the rules by often cross threading quotes from the same site (this site) that you now, in further disregard and contempt for moderation and its rules, you defiantly brag about and use quotes from a completely different site too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
I am amazed you haven't been flagged for your brazen flaunting and the utter disregard and contempt you have shown for these simple basic rules.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Bitterness will kill you goober.
I am not "bitter", princess. I am just amazed at you total disregard for the rules, as I have shown and explained below.
ethang5 wrote post 13 above
Why not now? You simply reject and brush aside the rules as if they do not apply to you anyway. You care not for the rules of cross contaminating threads and direct attacks against the person as it is,
And the utter disdain that you display towards moderation by treating ALL moderation with complete and utter disregard and contempt since you were banned is not only disrespectful but shameful too. But you simply do not care, do you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Added: 02.06.20 04:46AM--> @ludofl3xHuh? Where did this guy do that? Please highlight, here's the post just in case:On DDO, and old posts here before he was banned.
So not being content with breaking the rules by often cross threading quotes from the same site (this site) that you now, in further disregard and contempt for moderation and its rules, you defiantly brag about and use quotes from a completely different site too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
I am amazed you haven't been flagged for your brazen flaunting and the utter disregard and contempt you have shown for these simple basic rules.
Created:
Posted in:
So it appears then that referring to he or she being "dead" doesn't actually mean a literal "death". it simply means a metaphorical death which the educated (those with ears Matthew 11:15) of the time clearly understood.
This again can be seen in the case of Ananias and his dear wife Sapphira. They had held back funds from the movement that should have gone to "the poor". And for their "sin" had simply "dropped down dead". i.e they were cast out to be among the metaphorical "dead". https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+5&version=NIV
What then do we make of the other stories concerning so called "dead" people? The "dead" daughter of Matthew 9:18-25 and the widows "dead" son?Luke 7:11-17
And there is of course the most famous raising of all time, the raising of the "dead" Lazarus, whom Jesus loved. And strangely, only mentioned in one gospel.
Apart from the metaphorical coming back to life from being "dead", the story of Lazarus and the "dead" daughter have something in common: Jesus on both occasions clearly says they are both "only asleep": "for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth" Matthew 9:24 "“Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.”John 11:11.
When we consider all the BIBLICAL evidence concerning these so called "dead" people it is clearly noticeable that these individuals are simply not ready for the grave and literally "dead" at all but they have been deemed to be "dead" " for one sin or another by their peers, priest or parents and had "lost their way". In today parlance this could mean simply rebelliousness and defiance, i.e it is simple idiomatic language denoting expressions that are natural to a native speaker.
And interestingly this is exactly what the father of the wayward wasteful son actually says. Immediately after using the first "dead" metaphor the Father speaks using a second metaphor which holds exactly the same meaning as the first .
24 For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate. Luke 15:11-32https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+15%3A11-32&version=NIV
And all the above BIBLICAL evidence can now explain this enigmatic ambiguous verse:
“And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead”. Matthew 8:21-22.KJV
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
ethang5 wrote post 13 above
Why not now? You simply reject and brush aside the rules as if they do not apply to you anyway. You care not for the rules of cross contaminating threads and direct attacks against the person as it is,
And the utter disdain that you display towards moderation by treating ALL moderation with complete and utter disregard and contempt since you were banned is not only disrespectful but shameful too. But you simply do not care, do you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
I have a preoccupation in exposing the facts about Christianity.
There is nothing better than beating a lying, deceitful religious hypocrite with his own stick.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
There explanation as to why this son should believe he had sinned against "heaven"Honor your parents.
Are you just desperately scratching around for an explanation.
This son, by the way, hadn't defied his father had he? He hadn't openly resisted or refused to follow any advice or demand made of him by his father, either.
This metaphorical "death" of the son seemed to be the understood language of the day.: if you didn't believe in or follow the laws and dictates of god you were classed as "dead" to believers.
And it appears that this once "dead" son only returned because where he was living at the time: "there was a severe famine in that whole country" Luke 15:14,
otherwise, who knows, he may never had returned home but preferring to remain "dead".
Created:
Posted in:
Jesus Raises a "Dead" Girl
"behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live.
And when Jesus came into the ruler's house, and saw the minstrels and the people making a noise. He said unto them, Give place: for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth. And they laughed him to scorn. But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose”.Mathew 9: 18-25.KJV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+9%3A18-25&version=KJV
Was this "dead" girl just another one of those metaphorical "deaths" that the naughty squanderer playboy son had suffered during his "sinning against heaven"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Customer 1: I would like you to issue a wedding license. But I must tell you though that my husband-to-be has short hair and is cleanly shaven. (Leviticus 19:27 Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard. ) I hope that poses no problem for you.Christian Marriage Registrar: Oh, No of course not. I will be glad to issue you with a wedding license.Customer 2: I would like you to issue a wedding license. But I must tell you though that my husband-to-be has tattoos on his body (Leviticus 19:28 Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves) I hope that poses no problem for you.Christian Marriage Registrar: Oh, No of course not. I will be glad to issue you with a wedding licenseCustomer 3: I would like you to issue a wedding license. But I must tell you though that my wife-to-be will be wearing a wedding dress made from polyester and silk. (Leviticus 19:19 Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.)I hope that poses no problem for you.Christian Marriage Registrar: Oh, No of course not. I will be glad to issue you with a wedding license.Customer 4 : I would like you to issue a wedding license. But I must tell you though that my fiance is another guy, We are gay. (Leviticus 18:22 Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman. ) I hope that poses no problem for you.Christian Marriage Registrar: There's the door. . . . . . Now use it.
This is the baggage that came with the god that Christians adopted without having the slightest understanding of the time , the place or the culture of the time that this god was being worshiped.
Now it is left to the modern educated 21st Christian to find excuses for, explain away, and defend all the actions of this self confessed vile, jealous god of war and all his dictates. If the church could ditch this OT god tomorrow without controversy and accusations of hypocrisy, they would but they are not about to admit that they had been wrong for over 2000 years, any time soon , are they.
This vile being was the god of the Hebrews and Israelite's and certainly not the god of Christians.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Are Christians Bigoted?
Of course they are. but they are tolerant of non believers (or pretend to be so) which is more than can be said for a religion such as Islam which makes no bones about what it think about non Muslims and what should be done with them, i.e. it is more open and honest.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
I was checked into a hotel room recently and found a bible sitting on the desk.Obviously the room hadn't been cleaned properly and there was some rubbish left behind.
"Obviously the room hadn't been cleaned properly as there was some [other] rubbish left behind too".
I hope you don't mind, but I correct that for you.
Created:
Posted in:
You repeat your lame posts with everyone.
That's right. And will keep doing so while you and anyone else insists on misquoting and misrepresenting what I say, And with deceitful intent to promote your own agenda, in your case.
And it hasn't gone noticed that you have rudely and impertinently ONCE AGAIN turned someone else's thread into a personal argument with me by not showing the slightest proper respect to the OP. You just cannot resist can you?
You are a fkn disgrace!!!!!
Created:
-->
@ethang5
So in simple English , You have lied and repeatedly lied about what is in your own scripture because you cannot explain them away without doing so.
Those verses are clearly NOT INCLUSIVE of any other peoples or nations.
Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the lord, not even in the tenth generation (Deuteronomy 23:3).
SO! Can you explain to those reading here what it is that you find INCLUSIVE about Ammonites or Moabites being EXCLUDED and forbidden from entering the assembly of the Lord? or simply stop with your persistent and continuous lies.
And god also forbids intermarriage with these foreign tribes (Deut. 7:3; Ezra 9:2, 10:10; Nehemiah 13).
And the exclusiveness, intolerance and racism is eye watering in those verses above showing absolutely no INCLUSIVENESS whatsoever!
Lets take them one at a time and maybe you can explain the "INCLUSIVENESS" in these bias racists verses;
Deuteronomy 7:3 King James Version (KJV)
3 Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.
Why don't you explain to us where the inclusiveness you keep insisting on is shown in that verse? Or stop telling bare faced lies!
Ezra 9:1-2 King James Version (KJV)9 Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites,
Why don't you explain to us where the "inclusiveness" you keep insisting on is shown in that verse above? Or stop telling bare faced lies!
Ezra 10:10 King James Version (KJV)
10 And Ezra the priest stood up, and said unto them, Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel.
Why don't you explain to us where the "inclusiveness" you keep insisting on is shown in that verse above? Or stop telling bare faced lies!
Nehemiah 13 On that day they read in the book of Moses in the audience of the people; and therein was found written, that the Ammonite and the Moabite should not come into the congregation of God for ever;
Why don't you explain to us where the "inclusiveness" you keep insisting on is shown in that verse above? Or stop telling bare faced lies!
I repeat-
so what is to be made of this "Make disciples of all the nations", from (Matthew 28:19) when the sc
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Please stop lying. Mopac did not say he had them in his possession.
There is no lie there princess. This is Mopac's post clearly saying they have these documents. You are trying far too hard to find fault so have to invent lies about others allegedly lying. This simply shows how spent and desperate you are, not to mention how far beyond a fkn joke you also are..
Added: 02.03.20 02:15PM Post 20 aboveThat isn't true, and we have documents to prove that The Trinity has always been a part of church teaching, that Jesus was considered divine even pre-nicea.You don't understand The Trinity, and neither does the west because the filoque that the Latins added to the creed perverted the doctrine into something unrecognizable.The problem here Stephen is that you are one of those pseudognostic types who rejects the divinity of Jesus and thus the incarnation. So integral is the incarnation to the doctrine of salvation that it is inseparable from enlightened Christianity. A Christianity that rejects the divinity of Jesus is no longer Christian.There is nothing difficult about the trinity if you understand incarnational theology. It's simple. God's Word and Breathe share in His divinity. To deny this is to deny God's presence in the world.
When someone tells me they have something, it means they have it.
OR ARE YOU CALLING MOPAC A LIAR NOW!!!!?
Created:
Posted in:
This is the famous story as told by Jesus in parable. It tells of the son who squander his inheritance and the goes groveling back to his daddy. Yes I get it, it is a typical trope used often by bible authors and characters and preachers.
22 “But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. 23 Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate. 24 For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate. Luke 15:11-32https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+15%3A11-32&version=NIV
But what is interesting in this story is the language i.e the metaphor that the father uses of the son once being "dead" and then "alive" again.
The story ends at 32 with the The Father repeating the saying to a disgruntled brother of the "dead" son. 32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.
In any language we understand that one cannot be dead and then alive again except when Jesus, or a biblical author says so and a Christian takes it literally.
But notice, there is no mention here of anyone asking Jesus for instance, how did the boy die? Who brought him back to life? No one questioned or contradicted Jesus saying that ' one cannot die and come back to life ' either. And the reason for this is because those who had ears understood perfectly what Jesus meant.
This wild child obviously hadn't died and wasn't brought back to life again either, but we have to acknowledge that the Father referred to him as being "dead" but what he meant here was that the son had been a very naughty boy but had acknowledged his mistakes and returned to the fold of his father "alive" again.
21 And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son.https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+15%3A11-32&version=KJV
How had this boy sinned against heaven?
There is no explanation as to why this son should believe he had sinned against "heaven" or should be described by Jesus as being "dead" for doing so.
What was different about this "death" than say the alleged "deaths" of Jairus' daughter or Widow's son?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Repeating ........
I repeat my posts simply because when you quote my posts you slyly and deceitfully edit them and present them out of context and also present them in a way that promotes your own deluded and pervert bias agenda,. So while you are allowed to continuously get away with this blatant deceit, I will simply keep re-posting MY whole quote over and over if I have to and in full context.
Normal people ask questions of people making threads too. This is a debate site, something the both of you need to realize.
I agree, But it is all one sided where you are concerned. You simply pose of your own questions over that of the OP' and totally ignore the questions that are the whole theme of the thread and then have the balls to say he is running away and or "dodging" YOUR questions that are irrelevant to the topic of the thread..
This is nothing short of purposeful antagonistic behavior intended to disrupt the flow of a conversation and shout down the OP. Which is your normal MO.
There is simply nothing honest or genuine about you ethang, You are just a compulsive liar who cannot help himself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
You seem to be having trouble seeing this below concerning your own proclamation, Mopac. Do you need it emboldened and underlined as I have to do continuously for Popoff5?
and we have documents to prove that The Trinity has always been a part of church teaching,
Lets see those ancient documents and let us see where the Jews proclaim Jesus was god in three persons and one god alone.
It's simple.
You may be right. You can show us how simple all of this is when you have let me see those ancient documents you claim to have in your possession and let us see where the Jews proclaim Jesus was god in three persons and one god alone.
Created:
Stephen then says "And staying with the Old Testament, we don’t find an all-inclusive message there, either."But this is a cleverly worded lie. The message has never changed. It has always been all-inclusive. What changed was who it would be preached to.
There is absolutely nothing clever about quoting the scriptures verbatim.
It there for anyone who is not too idle to look it up for themselves. The EXCLUSIVENESS is there in black on white.
No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the lord, not even in the tenth generation (Deuteronomy 23:3).
SO! Can you explain to those reading here what it is that you find INCLUSIVE about Ammonites or Moabites being EXCLUDED and forbidden from entering the assembly of the Lord? or simply stop with your persistent and continuous lies.
And god also forbids intermarriage with these foreign tribes (Deut. 7:3; Ezra 9:2, 10:10; Nehemiah 13).
And the exclusiveness, intolerance and racism is eye watering in those verses above showing absolutely no INCLUSIVENESS whatsoever!
Lets take them one at a time and maybe you can explain the "INCLUSIVENESS" in these bias racists verses;
Deuteronomy 7:3 King James Version (KJV)
3 Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.
Why don't you explain to us where the inclusiveness you keep insisting on is shown in that verse? Or stop telling bare faced lies!
Ezra 9:1-2 King James Version (KJV)
9 Now when these things were done, the princes came to me, saying, The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations, even of the Canaanites, the Hittites,
Why don't you explain to us where the "inclusiveness" you keep insisting on is shown in that verse above? Or stop telling bare faced lies!
Ezra 10:10 King James Version (KJV)
10 And Ezra the priest stood up, and said unto them, Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel.
Why don't you explain to us where the "inclusiveness" you keep insisting on is shown in that verse above? Or stop telling bare faced lies!
Nehemiah 13 On that day they read in the book of Moses in the audience of the people; and therein was found written, that the Ammonite and the Moabite should not come into the congregation of God for ever;
Why don't you explain to us where the "inclusiveness" you keep insisting on is shown in that verse above? Or stop telling bare faced lies!
I repeat-
so what is to be made of this "Make disciples of all the nations", from (Matthew 28:19) when the scriptures themselves clearly show no such thing as the inclusiveness of all nations. ?
Created:
Posted in:
Normal people ask questions of people making threads too. This is a debate site, something the both of you need to realize.
I agree, But it is all one sided where you are concerned. You simply pose of your own questions over that of the OP' and totally ignore the questions that are the whole theme of the thread and then have the balls to say he is running away and or "dodging" YOUR questions that are irrelevant to the topic of the thread..
This is nothing short of purposeful antagonistic behavior intended to disrupt the flow of a conversation and shout down the OP. Which is your normal MO.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
and we have documents to prove that The Trinity has always been a part of church teaching,
Lets see those ancient documents and let us see where the Jews proclaim Jesus was god in three persons and one god alone.
It's simple.
You may be right. You can show us how simple all of this is when you have let me see those ancient documents you claim to have in your possession and let us see where the Jews proclaim Jesus was god in three persons and one god alone.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Then the same thing that has happened to you will happen to him. People will conclude that he is not interested in dialogue
Oh dear. You do love your assumptions don't you and speaking for all people again too..
Normal people ask questions of people making threads too. This is a debate site, something the both of you need to realize.
I agree, But it is all one sided where you are concerned. You simply pose of your own questions over that of the OP' and totally ignore the questions that are the whole theme of the thread and then have the balls to say he is running away and or "dodging" YOUR questions that are irrelevant to the topic of the thread..
This is nothing short of purposeful antagonistic behavior intended to disrupt the flow of a conversation and shout down the OP. Which is your normal MO.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Jesus was considered divine even pre-nicea.
Not by the Jews he wasn't. If Jesus had called himself god or even the son of god he would have been stoned to death and not hung on a cross for sedition.
and we have documents to prove that The Trinity has always been a part of church teaching,
Lets see those ancient documents and let us see where the Jews proclaim Jesus was god in three persons and one god alone.
You don't understand The Trinity, and neither does the west because the filoque that the Latins added to the creed perverted the doctrine into something unrecognizable.
If it is "unrecognizable", then how can you proclaim to recognize it as true and unadulterated?
The problem here Stephen is that you are one of those pseudognostic types who rejects the divinity of Jesus and thus the incarnation.
I do. I haven't shown any different. Whats your point. I don't see it as a problem.
There is nothing difficult about the trinity if you understand incarnational theology.
I think you mean ' if you - belive - incarnational theology'.
It's simple.
You may be right. You can show us how simple all of this is when you have let me see those ancient documents you claim to have in your possession and let us see where the Jews proclaim Jesus was god in three persons and one god alone.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Now watch him dodge my questions.
Why shouldn't he? He has every right to ignore ALL of your questions, considering that it is his thread. You have totally ignored his questions and simply piled in with a load your own questions as if by doing this it makes his questions invalid. It doesn't, it negates ALL of your questions.
If you have questions simply start your own thread, That is what any normal person would do.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
* A gay couple?(Leviticus 18:22 Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman. )
The U.K. Supreme Court has ruled that two devoutly Christian owners of a bakeshop in Belfast were justified in refusing to bake a cake for a local gay rights activist.https://www.themonastery.org/blog/u-k-supreme-court-sides-with-christian-bakers-in-gay-marriage-cake-dispute
Court Sides with Christians
.] "In the end, the court decided that it was unfair to force the couple to endorse a message that so blatantly conflicted with their religious beliefs.
"Christian groups frequently lament how their rights and religious freedoms are slowly being taken away".
Indeed they are. And Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the world. Yet, it appears that Islam is being pandered to all across the globe while Christians are being butchered by the thousands. Indeed the "religion of peace" stuck again in the UK just yesterday.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
Why do you believe all those "things" above are stupid?Because they're wrong on so many levels.
OK. Chosen at random, how many levels do you believe No 10 to be wrong and why?10. Christians have killed people!I don't think that is the worst.
That wasn't the question though, was it? I have emboldened and underlines it for you. You can't miss it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
The so called "trinity" was decided by Vote at Nicaea as was the divinity of Jesus over 300 years after Jesus was believed to have existed.
Try reading something other than these ambiguous unreliable biblical half stories. Such as the works of many Anglican clerics who speak on a theological level. These clergymen provoked considerable controversy with their collection of Essays on Jesus' divinity, such as the Myth of God Incarnate.
The idea of the trinity ( GOD the father GOD, the Son & GOD the holy spirit) OR to have three Persons, each of Whom is God, isn't new and not even an original Christian creation or idea. And yet to believe that there is only one God was, and still is, a huge challenge to Christians so they will make it all up as you go along in the hope of satisfying not just the inquisitive questioner, but to justify their own faith and belief to themselves. And believe it you do. So how about answering my question instead of ignoring it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
Why do you believe all those "things" above are stupid?Because they're wrong on so many levels.
OK. Chosen at random, how many levels do you believe No 10 to be wrong and why?
10. Christians have killed people!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
The Fact is Christians don't hate homosexuals. I am not even sure they dislike them.
You appear to be speaking for all Christians simply by stating it as "fact".
The Bible is full of many kinds of genre so it is ridiculous to use it in exactly the same manner throughout. Interestingly, it tends to be the Christian who attempts to use it properly while the anti-Christian often (not always) chooses to interpret it and use it literally.
That is nothing more than opinion. And for you to keep prefixing the word "Christian" with the word "anti" won't make your own interpretation of the scriptures any more credible than my own or anyone else's who have looked at and studied these scriptures, for over 40 years in my case.
Who ....? Why....? What ? if so, what and why?
Posing questions of your own on someone else' thread go nowhere near answering the question posed by the OP
The OT law for example was written to the people of Israel,[....................] It was not written to Christians in that same sense.
It was not written for Christians at all. I have stated many times here, that, the early Christians lumbered themselves with the OT god and the OT scriptures when they adopted a religion that they had absolutely no understanding of. And now, the modern Christian has to try and explain away all these vile OT scriptures and explain away all the violence meted out by this OT god.
They have to invent excuses, change words, and whole meanings of verses and downright lie, to protect, shield and defend the actions of this self confessed violent, jealous god of war and murder.
But as someone has already pointed out ; The Christian faith states that Jesus is god and god wrote "If a man also lie with mankind, As he lieth with a woman, Both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13). This is not to mention that Jesus states that has not come to change the "law" Matthew 5:17.
The thing about sin is - who gets to define what it is?
Ask a Christian, ask a Jew and ask a Muslim, they will all have their own different interpretations and versions of what are deemed to be crimes against god and gods will.
For the Christian sin is defined by God as "falling short of his standards".
I am not sure if you are just trying to play down what the consequences are for a homosexual " falling short of his standards". Or if you are trying to simplify what crimes/sins against god and his will actually are. But god / also known to Christians as Jesus the Christ, makes the punishment for homosexuality a capital crime, does he not?
If the Opening poster is correct - then all Christians hate all things. This is clearly absurd.
Is rape and murder just "falling short" of Gods standards? Do you not see how ridiculous and "absurd" your statement is?
Created:
Well the problem here should leap from the page to those who consider themselves devout Christians:
Who did Jesus actaully come to earth to save?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dynasty
Why do you believe all those "things" above are stupid?
Created:
Yes, yet again we have more puzzling and confusing instructions given by the Christ to his disciples. I am referring to what has been called "The Great Commission". Simpy put it is an instruction by the Christ to his disciples to go out into the world and make more disciples.
"Make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19). https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+28%3A19&version=NIV
But if we back up a little in the same gospel we can read that this instruction is not as inclusive as it appears later:
"These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.” (Matthew 10:5–6).
This was not then the universal message that appears at Matthew 28:19 but an instruction to go to the "lost sheep of Israel" only. i.e. Jews and not all Jews either it appears the Samaritans - Israelite descendants were off the guest list too.
It appears too that this - not so - inclusive instruction doesn't apply to all the people of "all nations" either, when we read the words from the lips of the Christ himself and his encounter with the Canaanite woman:
Jesus rejected her plea to heal her daughter, saying; “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
The woman came and knelt before him and begged and pleaded. “Lord, help me!” she said.
He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” (Matthew 15:24–6).
Canaanites are included in a list of nations to exterminate on the instructions of god in the book of Joshua
And staying with the Old Testament, we don’t find an all-inclusive message there, either.
No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the lord, not even in the tenth generation (Deuteronomy 23:3).
And god also forbids intermarriage with these foreign tribes (Deut. 7:3; Ezra 9:2, 10:10; Nehemiah 13).
So what is to be made of this "Make disciples of all the nations, from (Matthew 28:19).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
EXACTLY now Palestine is Pro-Ran and we LOSE another territory,
"we"? They should be left to sort it all out for themselves. but you can't please all the people all of the time. Some will agree with me and others will say opposite.
Iran has created a wall of countries that support them
Yes Iran has. So what are you saying?
We are losing so incredibly bad,
"we"? what is it that you believe you are losing?
and killing solemmni didn't change anything,
That's debatable.
we didn't back it up with trying to get Iraq on our side,
"we"? Why would they want to support and be on the "side" of the USA after the USA and GB waged an illegal war on them. And they want us both out altogether.
we and the stupid american public was worried about a WW3
I am not sure you are correct on that. The only people I heard screaming WW 3 every two fkn minutes was the MS left wing media.
THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN
See! even you knew "that would never happen".
Created: