Total posts: 8,861
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
I am just saying, people will debate this anyway, and ignoring answers wont really make them go away.
I agree. My point is that the OP HIMSELF! - CatholicApologetics who's thread this is has no intention HISELF of answering any question that ONLY HE deems "argumentative" or deems NOT to be a "genuine question". He made that very clear in his warning that I have reposted HERE> #5 Hence my simple enquiries HERE..#5 for clarification of some of the dictates he has laid down.
What he really means is that he won't take on any questions that challenges his comments, opinions or claims. He's a coward. He's afraid of any awkward questions that challenge that pea brain of his that only he believes is a theological intellectual brain.
He failed to adress my question in his first Sunday school Day 1 sermon. maybe he deemed it "argumentative " or NOT to be a "genuine question". Or it was just too fkn awkward for him to address. I will go with the latter, BK
Put simply, he just wants to be let free to sermonise to us all and go unchallenged. Just like that clown Reverend Tradesecret always used to do and was famous for. In fact the Reverend has all his DNA over that OP if you were to ask me.
Here's a thought. Let's see if you can help the clown out,BK. Tell me , what would be a "genuine question" concerning his Answer and the Conclusion that he gives in his OP HERE > #1
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
The scriptures teaches to go out into all nations and preach the gospel to every creature.
Well that is a massive twist of the Great Commission if ever I read it.
Lets have a look.
Matthew 28:16-20 KJV
All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
Not a peep about all creatures is there, you liar"? Did they to baptise these "creatures", too?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Best.Korea
@CatholicApologetics
I feel like telling that topic is not debatable usually tempts people to debate and attack it knowing that poster wont respond.
Exactly, BK. He's telling us that he has no intention of discussing his own comments. reply's or answers. And won't be challenged on them, or any answer he offers.
So while there are ways to make topics on forum non-debatable, I kinda doubt that putting a "no debate" rule does anything to achieve it. I doubt mods would enforce it, and there is no way for poster to enforce it by simply stating it.
Well the way he enforces it is to simply ignore anything that only he deems as he says "argumentative" or not a "genuine question". as he clearly states above in his OP, it was part of his warning, a proviso of specific stipulations, conditions, and limitations. Also known as a caveat. He thinks we are all stupid and cannot see through his bullshit. As I said, he was simply covering is arse.
Maybe a better way would be for anyone who makes an argument to just ask him to convert it into question, or ask "So what is your question?"
But that wouldn't apply to CatholicApologetics the OP. He's already laid down his rules and dictates for how he intends (hopes) this thread to go. As I said, his dictates are in place to stop you/ us questioning him himself - the OP. i.e. he won't be questioned and he won't be argued with.
He's an arse that doesn't know he's an arse. Just like that other arse the Reverend Traedesecret that used to try to pull exactly the same bullshit. He must have forgot that not all of us have short memories.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
@Best.Korea
@CatholicApologetics
I like to preface these posts with a quick warning: I am not perfect. Like all of us, I am flawed and in need of God’s grace. I am bound to make mistakes, so I ask for your patience as I learn throughout this journey. Yet, I would like to remind everybody that the imperfections I have do not take away from the truth I hope to convey. For example, if I misrepresent a Church teaching, it is a direct consequence of my actions, not the teaching itself being false. I encourage you to correct me charitably if I err and to pose genuine questions in the comments, but keep in mind these posts are not meant to debate and I may not respond to argumentative comments.
Well that is your arse well and truly covered , then.
Regardless.
What do you consider a "genuine question"?
If your posts "are no meant for debate" , what is the reason form them?
Give me an example of an "argumentative comment"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
Tradesecret,wrote @MallIt was the ordination of Jesus as priest, and possibly king and prophet.His baptism was different in the sense of the purpose. The form was the same.
Jesus, according to scripture was "begotten by the holy spirit" Luke 1:35, by all accounts. Let that sink in, Reverend.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Jesus came to join His disciples. He was walking on the water to get to the boat. Matthew 14:25. disciples watching Jesus from the shore.
It was dawn. With the sun just pepping it head above the horizon. Jesus was standing on a jetty. With dawn light at his back. This would give the appearance of Jesus walking on water.
Some theologians tell us that this became a running joke among his disciple. ie lord it looked like you were walking on the water. Sounds about right to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@CatholicApologetics
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Was Jesus baptized by John?The baptism of Jesus (Matthew 3:13-17) - The identity of ...Jesus came to John the Baptist. while he was baptising people in the River Jordan. John tried to make him change his mind, but Jesus answered, “In this way we will do all that God requires.” So John agreed.
Yes this was the confrontation that I mentioned above and which believe a baptism John was forced to perform on his rival, Jesus.
John 1:32 Then John said, “I saw the Holy Spirit come down on Jesus as a dove from heaven. The Holy Spirit stayed on Him. 33 I did not know Him then. But God sent me to baptize with water. God said to me, ‘The Holy Spirit will come down and stay on Him. He is the One Who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 I saw this happen. I am now saying that Jesus is the Son of God.”
But no mention of Jesus baptising John " the greatest prophet that ever lived" with the holy spirit is there?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
You are quite good at telling what Jesus' baptism was not about, (although the bible does tell us) but fail at every turn to tell us what Jesus' baptism was, actually about.I never claimed I knew it all but the scripture was plain that Jesus was sinless
But you have . You have told us that Jesus was not baptised to wash away his sins - which, according to the bible is exactly the reason for the rite of Baptism.. You have also told us that Jesus was not baptised for reasons of repentance.
and therefore,did not have a need of a repentance baptism.
You see! you are saying it again!
Unless you have an ace up your sleeve, which I would like to see, that tells otherwise.
I don't have to. The Bible on quite a few occasions makes it clear the reason for baptism . You just cannot accept that this baptismal rite also applied to Jesus for exactly the same reason as for anyone else. So you have been trying to rewrite the bible with maybe's and guesses because you have no answers.
I can accept that you don't have an answer to my question- well not a straight answer.
Just read this transcript of your attempts at trying to get around this little, very genuine biblical dilemma.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
Tell me: What sins had Jesus committed that he needed baptism by John?None. It was a ritual cleaning for the sacrificial lamb. It started his ministry. Jesus said it would fulfill all righteousness, though I do not know what that means entirely.So then are you claiming that the baptism Jesus received from John was nothing to do with "repentance" , as per your claim it is above?Yes, if Jesus is sinless, then he has no need for repentance.So Jesus was sinless but was baptised in a ritual that was said to "wash away your sins" as in one of many examples:“And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.” (Acts 22:16)And neither did he have the need to "repent" although - as you say - "John baptized with a baptism of repentance".But you then attempt cover this little dilemma by having us believe that Jesus' baptism had nothing to do with either washing away of sins nor was it to do with repentance but was all to do with-as you say - " It was a ritual cleaning for the sacrificial lamb. "#67Just so I am clear, Who was the sacrificial lamb?It was Jesus Christ.So then why did the Jesus, "the sacrificial lamb"#67 need cleansing?To fulfill all righteousness, I.E. the law, I guess. It wasn't because he was sinful. The baptism may only have been significant to the ministry purification and not the sacrifice.
Quite a bit of guess work going there, David.
You are quite good at telling what Jesus' baptism was not about, (although the bible does tell us) but fail at every turn to tell us what Jesus' baptism was, actually about.
I think you - that is, yourself - call this clutching at straws and pure speculation.
Created:
Posted in:
This is what God ordained, authorized, and comissioned him to do. John 1:33 “And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him...
So he was well aware then by that time of exactly who Jesus was. John says he seen the holy spirt descend, he heard the voice and he was forewarned that the Messiah would be the one that the spirit laded on,,, "like a dove". But still John, when in prison had to have it reaffirmed. In other words, John had clear doubts.
John the Baptist giving his testimony has this to say:
John 1:33 “And I knew him not.
Is this true?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
Tell me: What sins had Jesus committed that he needed baptism by John?None. It was a ritual cleaning for the sacrificial lamb. It started his ministry. Jesus said it would fulfill all righteousness, though I do not know what that means entirely.So then are you claiming that the baptism Jesus received from John was nothing to do with "repentance" , as per your claim it is above?Yes, if Jesus is sinless, then he has no need for repentance.So Jesus was sinless but was baptised in a ritual that was said to "wash away your sins" as in one of many examples:“And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.” (Acts 22:16)And neither did he have the need to "repent" although - as you say - "John baptized with a baptism of repentance".But you then attempt cover this little dilemma by having us believe that Jesus' baptism had nothing to do with either washing away of sins nor was it to do with repentance but was all to do with-as you say - " It was a ritual cleaning for the sacrificial lamb. "#67Just so I am clear, Who was the sacrificial lamb?It was Jesus Christ.
So then why did the Jesus, "the sacrificial lamb"#67 need cleansing?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
You appear to have skipped this, David.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@CatholicApologetics
Could you address my question here> #41 considering this is your Sunday School?
Instead of any story about miraculous conception, virgins, exiles, , arrests , trial, torture, blood scourging, crowns of thorns, and crucifixion, and rising from once being dead why couldn't god simply have waved his hand and tell the people of all nations of all the world that their sins have been forgiven and that he has banished and scourged all sin and evil from the earth for eternity and never shall it return.?
John’s question in Luke 7:18–23 does not necessarily stem from a personal crisis of faith or distrust in the baptismal event he had administered.[.........]He sent his disciples to question Jesus so they might see and hear the truth directly from Him.
[A] Strange then for John- "the greatest prophet that had ever lived" - that the vision he had of the holy spirit and hearing the voice of god himself wasn't enough to confirm that Jesus was the one to come.
We would have to why he didn't question Jesus a little more on his credentials. But instead we have some sort of conflict concerning who should be baptising whom?
Matthew 3:13
Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. 14 But John tried to deter him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”
Why would John "the greatest prophet that ever lived" be so confused believing that it is himself that should be undergoing this baptismal ritual and not Jesus?
In doing so, John set the stage for his own followers to transfer their allegiance to Christ.
I agree . John's massive army of followers did join ranks with Jesus after John's murder.
Moreover, John’s call for confirmation highlights the mystery of God’s plan for salvation.
Yes. That enigmatic excuse always seems to pop up when any of these biblical ambiguities raise there problematic heads
Even though John recognized Jesus at His baptism and heard the Father’s voice, he may have struggled to reconcile the prophesied Messianic reign with the harsh realities he was experiencing in prison.
Speculation. And see [A] above.
This does not indicate loss of faith so much as a longing to grasp more fully the divine plan.
That is speculating about your earlier speculation/s.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
@Shila wrote: Even if it was UFOs it would still be a miracle to see alien life.IlDiavolo wrote: That is not a miracle. A miracle would have been if these ignorant people had realized it was an alien ship.
Good point D.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
In Luke 7:18-23, why did John the Baptist ask Jesus if he was the Messiah since he baptized Jesus and heard God speak about Jesus?
Indeed. John the baptist, said by Jesus to be "the greatest prophet that had ever lived". Yet when imprisoned had to ask Jesus "are you the one to come" Matthew 11:3
THIS!! after claiming that he had seen " the spirit descend like a dove and says that he heard the voice of god saying " “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”Luke 3:22
You couldn't make it up..... but they did ...... unless god was actually talking about John himself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
Tell me: What sins had Jesus committed that he needed baptism by John?None. It was a ritual cleaning for the sacrificial lamb. It started his ministry. Jesus said it would fulfill all righteousness, though I do not know what that means entirely.So then are you claiming that the baptism Jesus received from John was nothing to do with "repentance" , as per your claim it is above?Yes, if Jesus is sinless, then he has no need for repentance.
So Jesus was sinless but was baptised in a ritual that was said to "wash away your sins" as in one of many examples:
“And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.” (Acts 22:16)
And neither did he have the need to "repent" although - as you say - "John baptized with a baptism of repentance".
But you then attempt cover this little dilemma by having us believe that Jesus' baptism had nothing to do with either washing away of sins nor was it to do with repentance but was all to do with-as you say - " It was a ritual cleaning for the sacrificial lamb. "#67
Just so I am clear, Who was the sacrificial lamb?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
Your brain is gobbledygook.
No need for that. Lets not reduce this discussion to insults on someone else's excellent thread.
John the Baptist was "washing away sins" before Jesus arrived on the scene.It did not "wash away the sins". You are reaching for straws.....
That's not what scripture tells us.
You would know that is was a washing of repentance
And how does washing away "repentance" work then. ? Do babies "repent" before they are christened or baptised?
In fact Jesus was forgiving sins before he was crucified and believed to have died.True, but that was before the death and creation of the church.
So.
Also, God can do whatever he wants while he is on Earth, and he did.
Very poor and childish excuse of a answer. Still, never mind.
Tell me: What sins had Jesus committed that he needed baptism by John?None. It was a ritual cleaning for the sacrificial lamb. It started his ministry. Jesus said it would fulfill all righteousness, though I do not know what that means entirely.
So then are you claiming that the baptism Jesus received from John was nothing to do with "repentance" , as per your claim it is above?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
@DavidAZZ
Romans 6 talks about the sin is destroyed due to baptism because we identify with the death or sacrifice of Jesus.
Romans came after Christs death.
Regardless.
Your response is Gobbledegook. John the Baptist was "washing away sins" before Jesus arrived on the scene. In fact Jesus was forgiving sins before he was crucified and believed to have died.
Tell me: What sins had Jesus committed that he needed baptism by John?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
@DavidAZZ
Shila wrote: Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Which tells me that even Jesus himself had lost his faith .
DavidAZZ wrote: You [Shila ]say that Jesus's death would have removed all sin once and for all, but sin is still around and ever multiplying. That is true if you are referring to a worldwide problem. Sin is obviously in the world and many people are taking part of it.
Well Hebrew actually states that sins were washed away" once and for all ".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
This doesn't explain why it took a bloody, vile, agonising torturous death to save us from our sins, does it ?Sure doesn't and I've said before that it is only speculation why it happened just like that.do you drink coffee or tea or neither in the morning?
Irrelevant to the thread. And Irrelevant to my question. Which I remind you was:
Instead of any story about miraculous conception, virgins, exiles, , arrests , trial, torture, blood scourging, crowns of thorns, and crucifixion, and rising from once being dead why couldn't god simply have waved his hand and tell the people of all nations of all the world that their sins have been forgiven and that he has banished and scourged all sin and evil from the earth for eternity and never shall it return.?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
The solution did not make the problem go away, the problem of sin continued to multiply. Therefore the solution was a failure. Jesus’s sacrifice was not necessary and was done in vain.I would agree IF the solution was to dissolve sin entirely, but this is not the case with the death of Jesus. It gave an opportunity for us to choose or decide if we want the sacrifice in our place for sin for our own lives.
This doesn't explain why it took a bloody, vile, agonising torturous death to save us from our sins, does it ?
And let us not forget, this is the part that Gabriel left out when telling his mother Mary about her son's future, but instead let her go merrily bounding off to tell her cousin the "good news".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
In the case of the question asked, “Why did God send Jesus to die for our sins which only continue to multiply when he could have removed sin once and for all?"The solution did not make the problem go away, the problem of sin continued to multiply. Therefore the solution was a failure. Jesus’s sacrifice was not necessary and was done in vain.
Nice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
The idea of why did he do the whole virgin birth, blood scourging, etc, etc, is beyond me and one could only speculate,
Its beyond me too. But I do expect a answer . So we'll all wait for CatholicApologetics to address my own question.
free will
the idea of "free will" goes nowhere in answering my own#41 question. Especially when we consider psalm and Isaiah that tells us that God's sovereignty ensures that nothing happens outside his will.
But lets not derail what promises to be an interesting thread.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
@CatholicApologetics
To answer the second part of the question ("Why did God send Jesus to die for our sins?"), we need to understand a crucial concept. The question is framed very ambiguously.
No it isn't . Shila posed a direct , very clear and understandable fair question and only someone that wished to reframe it so to be able to give a answer would call it "ambiguous" so as to explain it via a sermon . I could be wrong , we'll see.
Specifically when it states "Why did God send Jesus." I find that this presupposes that Jesus is not God Himself. A better phrasing would be, "Why did God the Father send God the Son to die for our sins?"
But Jesus/ god all the same. Everyone reading here knows exactly what Shila meant and intended.
This delves within the dogma of the Holy Trinity, the teaching that there are three distinct Persons within the Godhead: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, who are all God but not each other. In order to preemtively address confusion, allow me to give an analogy to visualize this concept. The Trinity is like the sun: God the Father is like the sun itself, Jesus is like the light that illuminates the sun and creation, and the Holy Spirit is like the heat from the sun which warms and affects creation. However, this analogy could be interpreted to be heretical (Arianism), as it could be said that the light and heat are bi-products or creations from the sun. In the end, all analogies, metaphors, and illustrations break down. There is no 1:1 comparison with a triune God. All analogies fall short because the Trinity is a divine mystery.
Ok, that's your opinion..... and the sermon I seen coming. So, back to Shilas' simple straightforward question
Even if you do not understand the Trinity, the one thing to remember while answering this question is that Jesus is God. The reason He came down to die for our sins is quite simple: He did that out of His boundless love for us, desiring to restore the broken relationship between humanity and God, to free us from the bondage of sin and death, and to offer us the gift of eternal communion with Him, reflecting the infinite depth of God’s mercy and the value He places on each soul.
OK . So it was god himself that came down. Do you not see how unnecessary and convoluted this story and your sermon is? No? Then I'll show you.
Instead of any story about miraculous conception, virgins, exiles, , arrests , trial, torture, blood scourging, crowns of thorns, and crucifixion, and rising from once being dead why couldn't god simply have waved his hand and tell the people of all nations of all the world that their sins have been forgiven and that he has banished and scourged all sin and evil from the earth for eternity and never shall it return.?
PS it was a brilliant question from Shila.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
What was the content of your rushed and mumbled prayer while also being busy and preoccupied with your sound system?Like I said, I used to run the sound equipment for the church so at the time, I had to use the same sound equipment from the church building out at the camp site. So I was rushing right after service to start wrapping up cords, microphones, speakers, the soundboard, etc. The next service was the next night at the camp, so I needed everything in order so I didn't have to make a trip back into town if I forgot something.
You appear to have missed my question. I asked for the content of the prayer you said for the girls leg.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
I do believe in miracles and have seen a few myself,When?There was a girl that I grew up with that when she was 16 or so, one of her legs stopped working. Her nerves were not responding and so she had to walk around with a cane. The doctors were baffled as to the condition or a cure so she was left figuring that she was a cripple for life. She had been prayed for multiple times for months and nothing happened. Then one night as I was wrapping up the sound stuff for camp meeting (I was running the sound at the time) this girl came to the front after church to be prayed for again and she went through the same old way, ask for prayer from the preachers, raise hands and close eyes, hoping God will do something. TBH, I did a quick mumbled prayer while wrapping up cords and mentally lining up my sound equipment. I was busy and she never got healed before. Then she opened her eyes wide, a huge smile on her face, she looked down as she moved her lame leg about. She never has had that cane again. That is the miracle that I saw that I cannot deny or anyone's word of mouth.
Without the background no one knows what what caused her to gain control of her leg.Could have been psychological?
TBH, I did a quick mumbled prayer
I am really interested in this part so please indulge me.
What was the content of your rushed and mumbled prayer while also being busy and preoccupied with your sound system?
You said " I seen a few myself, ".
What about the others? Can you tell us about those?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
I do believe in miracles and have seen a few myself,
When?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
I do believe in miracles and have seen a few myself,
When?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
and one with God the Father
Which simply means in agreement/ on the same side..
Note even Jesus calls God the Father.
Indeed . Clearly indicating both to be separate beings. And also note that Jesus often refers to himself clearly as the "son of man".
If this not be the case, why do we have verses such as " My god why have you forsaken me"? "Jesus prayed to his father"? "Father take this burden from me"?
Surely we are not to believe that Jesus was pleading with himself? Prayed to himself ? And asked himself to be unburden, himself?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
The video you posted is people screaming in English. Which means it is not of Fatima, because Fatima is in Portugal...Yes which I was up front about. That video was in france/
May have been a voice over?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
UFO's in medieval art have always interested me. Such as The Baptism of Christ by Dutch artist Aert de Gelde in 1710.One has to ask, what was the inspiration?The knowledge that we are not alone.
I have to agree Shila.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgim
here is a mass sighting of the virgin Mary in egypt over a few yearsthere's also Lourdes and the miracles associated with that apparition site. and the incorrupt body of the visiionary who is incorrupt to this day.
Yep. Been happening ever since the world began. Sumerians speak about them as does a few characters from the biblical age.
And there is this:
5 Bizarre Accounts From History of UFO Sightings (74 BC - 1896) // Primary Sources
UFO's in medieval art have always interested me. Such as The Baptism of Christ by Dutch artist Aert de Gelde in 1710.
One has to ask, what was the inspiration?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Sound all very biblical with people watching flocks Luke 2:8 and having visions and hearing voices that no one else hears:St Paul and his Road to Damascus moment.This is what is making me a bit more skeptical of that story as well.
It may be a case that something unusual occurred and when the church got wind of the story decided to embellish it with their own take on what "really" happened.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
I have read quite a bit of this over the years.
I suppose that if one is silly enough to stare at the sun too long they will see it dance across the sky and in all directions.
It is said that it was reported at the time that 3 children were watching their flocks (May 13 1917) when they had a vision of "a woman in a bright glow". This happened months before the sky phenomenon and the woman hadn't said that she was the Virgin Mary only that she was "from heaven and that they - the children - should return every month until October" when a public miracle would take place "so that everyone may believe". .. Believe what exactly!? Why didn't she just "appear from a bright light" to the thousands assembled on any other of the months she was supposed to meet the kids!?
What I found interesting is that the children say that they first seen a flash of bright light "falling and from the light came the woman". All very UFO. 🤔
Only one of the children heard the "Voice of the Lady". On the second occasion (June) Lucia, the oldest of the three was seen to "address an unseen entity whose answers were not heard by 50 others in attendance.
Sound all very biblical with people watching flocks Luke 2:8 and having visions and hearing voices that no one else hears: St Paul and his Road to Damascus moment.
Created:
-->
@Shila
What happened has already happened, and what will be has already been.The plagues in the Bible were purposefully sent by God with a forewarning.
If you say so. I don't believe it. But a forewarning for what?
What are the 10 plagues in the Bible?The Ten Plagues of Egypt in Order | Exodus | HistoryThe Ten Plagues of Egypt in Order are: water turning to blood, frogs, lice, flies, livestock pestilence, boils, hail, locusts, darkness, and the killing of firstborn children. These plagues are recorded in the Bible, and were sent by God after Pharaoh refused to let the Israelites leave Egypt.
All explainable if you have the time and patience to research them. You could start here: It is believed that a volcano on the island of Thera erupted around the same time as the Exodus.
As the Passover story tells it, after Pharaoh refuses Moses' entreaties to let the enslaved Israelites go free,
This is worthy of a thread of its own.
I have always wondered why God had to cause Pharaoh's heart to harden and cause him to be stubborn?
Who knows what Pharaoh would have done had god not interfered? It seems to me that this was more gods doing than it ever was Pharaoh's. If the story is true of course. I believe Pharaoh wanted them gone is more likely the case.
Created:
-->
@Shila
God is famous for sending plagues.
As it was believed at the time. But not so much now. There was a time in the days of the ancients that a natural disaster was said to have been sent from god as a punishment for some "sin" or another committed by mankind. Mankind was always to blame according to the Priests of the age. And of course, mankind had to repent and give god his due sacrifice (tax) of one kind or another. Usually it was through MORE of his hard earned take-home pay to the temple.
And, believe it or not, nothing has changed . Mankind is still blamed to this day for the natural disasters that are happening today, "climate change" is the perfect example.
Climate change is a natural occurrence and one only has to understand the basics of the movement of the other heavenly bodies and their ever changing movements in relation to our Earth. I could describe this in more details but I am sure it would simply fall on deaf ears.
Of course, the new age priests (Governments) and the new age gods (Corporations) understand that many of us mere mortals are much more knowledgeable today than those poor ignorant ancient souls from millennia ago, so have come up with a new idea in the new age of how to still blame and deprive mankind of more of his hard earned take-home pay.
Instead of telling us that we have "sinned against god" we are told that "climate change" is all our fault because WE have polluted our Earth with all kinds of poisons and trash i.e. they have conflated pollution with what are natural occurrences and tell us we have to hand over MORE of our hard earned take -home pay to put right what WE have created : carbon tax. And many have fallen for this bullshit.
Is all one has to do is ask these new age climate clowns _ what it was they believed caused the last ice age and what caused it to thaw. ........
......and the five times before that ?
What happened has already happened, and what will be has already been.
Created:
-->
@Mall
And I , for the life of me, cannot fathom out why you believe that bible thicko Sidewalker is my "buddy". But , have it your way. "Ask your buddy that. I'm just giving you that person's rhetoric and rational as funny as it is.
Well I was asking you simply because it is only you that has made a wild and delusional claim that he - Sidwalker - is my "buddy"!? But failed to give the slightest reason as to why you should believe it. Still, as I said, have it your way.
Created:
-->
@Mall
One person stated that homosexuality is supported because biblically it is taught not to judge others I guess to mean not to speak against homosexuality or whatever.Which person?You buddy Sidewalker
I see. Well as usual that dense bible clown is wrong, as the BIBLE proves him to be if he does believe that the BIBLE tells its readers "not to speak out homosexuality". As I have already said, if we are to believe the thicko what he states and if as you say the BIBLE teaches us not to judge others then this contradicts the command that those that commit " homosexual abominations "against god should be put to death, doesn't it?
And I , for the life of me, cannot fathom out why you believe that bible thicko Sidewalker is my "buddy". But , have it your way.
Created:
-->
@Mall
One person stated that homosexuality is supported because biblically it is taught not to judge others I guess to mean not to speak against homosexuality or whatever.
Which person?
And if as you say the BIBLE teaches us not to judge others then this contradicts the command that those that commit
" homosexual abominations "against god should be put to death, doesn't it?
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
Due to the heterosexist ideals associated with gender norms, gay men often experience negative attitudes towards their own sexuality—internalized homophobia....
So! What's your point. thicko? For me at least , it is as I have repeatedly said:
Just like everything else on this thread, you have completely ignored and or forgotten that it is (as you put it) the "2,500 year old" BIBLE content and beliefs of the age that are discussed and debated on this religion forum, and, - certainly in my case - has nothing to do with my own personal opinion on what I think and or believe about homosexuality in the 21st century.
I can assure you that my reflections on the BIBLE in the 21st century are far removed from the opinions and attitude of those living and writing 2,500 years ago. But I don't expect a thick bible dunce such as yourself to even consider this.
Off you go now.
Created:
-->
@Mall
@WyIted
This is what I'm asking about . Is it only because it's not biblical?Correct, being a faggot is not biblical.
Well as much as you wish to pretend it isn't. Homosexuality is a part of BIBLICAL and gods law as written in the BIBLE. That is why it is written about in the BIBLE!
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
Shila, Mall, and Stephen,It's quite a stretch to think your prejudice and bigotry is based on the 2,500 years old attitudes of a foreign culture...it is more likely that science provides the explanation, I think.
Just like everything else on this thread, you have completely ignored and or forgotten that it is (as you put it) the "2,500 year old" BIBLE content and beliefs of the age that are discussed and debated on this religion forum, and, - certainly in my case - has nothing to do with my own personal opinion on what I think and or believe about homosexuality in the 21st century.
I can assure you that my reflections on the BIBLE in the 21st century are far removed from the opinions and attitude of those living and writing 2,500 years ago. But I don't expect a thick bible dunce such as yourself to even consider this.
To break down this simple fact for such a bible dunce as yourself I offer this vile example of something that I wouldn't agree with in the 21st century.
Judges 11:30-40 New English Translation
Making a promise to God.
30 Jephthah made a vow to the Lord, saying, “If you really do hand the Ammonites over to me, then whoever is the first to come through the doors of my house to meet me when I return safely from fighting the Ammonites—he will belong to the Lord and I will offer him up as a burnt sacrifice.” Jephthah approached the Ammonites to fight with them, and the Lord handed them over to him. He defeated them from Aroer all the way to Minnith—twenty cities in all, even as far as Abel Keramim. He wiped them out! The Israelites humiliated the Ammonites.
When Jephthah came home to Mizpah, there was his daughter hurrying out to meet him, dancing to the rhythm of tambourines. She was his only child; except for her he had no son or daughter. When he saw her, he ripped his clothes and said, “Oh no! My daughter! You have completely ruined me! You have brought me disaster! I made an oath to the Lord, and I cannot break it.”
Can you guess what happened to this poor young virgin, thicko ?
Created:
-->
@Mall
If you're asking about proving homosexuality being an abomination to God of scripture , there's no other way to prove that but to show it in scripture.
Exactly, Mall. There is no other nor better way than the BIBLE So why did you say this to me!?
Mall wrote: I tell this person like the individual going by the name of Stephen, keep the Bible out of this because you're ignorant of many other things in it. Don't just regurgitate the common known things. #86
I had to mention the BIBLE. I had to "regurgitate" what should be "commonly known" to ignorant bell ends such as "your friend". Although "your friend" will continue to deny what is clearly written in the BIBLE concerning gods hate for homosexuality and those that practice it. I had to show that homosexuality is an "abomination" to god . I had to show that god says that the punishment for homosexuality is death and the only way I could possible do so was by using the words of god himself as written in the BIBLE!
As I have already mentioned:
In Romans - that will be the New Testamant - refers back to the Old Testamant verse claiming the same.
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.
Leviticus 20:13
New Living Translation
13 “If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense.
Its the same abomination for Transvestites:
Deuteronomy 22:5 English Standard Version
“A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.
And just so we are clear, I am far from " ignorant of many things" where the BIBLE is concerned.
Created:
-->
@Mall
We'll help your friend out.
I am going to assume that by "friend" you mean the bible ignorant Sidewalker?
It's my experience that one cannot help another unless they begin to help themselves. Especially someone in complete denial such as Sidewalker is.
The person uses the Bible as a weak foundation to support homosexuality.
You haven't made clear who exactly "the person" is. Why is that?
Regardless:
this is nothing new about believing Christians , if indeed that is what "the person" is, I don't know what he is? (He hasn't the balls to admit what he is when asked.?) Believing Christians will simply deny what the BIBLE itself has to say and they do this in a number of ways going as far as to simply lie about what is actually written in scripture and accuse you of being exactly what it is they are themselves.
Homosexuality.
As I have shown_ The BIBLE makes clear what Gods stance is on the matter as I have also shown many times on this and many other threads that are discussing homosexuality in the BIBLE. Romans - that will be the New Testamant - refers back the Old Testamant and supports gods stance on the matter of homosexuality.
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 "the Person" that you refer to simply wants to deny this. That's because he's a complete twat in denial.
Above HERE> #86 you accused me of "discussing common known things" and to "keep the bible out of such discussions" adding that I shouldn't just "regurgitate the common known things".
I have asked you TWICE now to tell me, how would you have proven that god hates and despises homosexuality and finds it an "abomination" without referring to the actual scriptures and the actual verses in the BIBLE!? Please don't ignore me again.
Created:
-->
@Mall
I tell this person like the individual going by the name of Stephen, keep the Bible out of this because you're ignorant of many other things in it. Don't just regurgitate the common known things.
"common known things"? I was asked about something that is or should be common knowledge to anyone claiming christian and well read on the scriptures.
It is a BIBLICAL fact that homosexuality is a abomination to god that comes with a punishment of death. And lest we forget, the man and the woman were told to multiply on the earth. Hardly possible is it if there are twats such as Sidewalker that seems to support that which is an "abomination" to god.
Romans - that will be the New Testamant - refers back to the Old Testamant verse claiming the same.
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.
Only, that absolute dumb prick known as Sidewalker didn't know this and challenged me to prove my claim.
Tell me Mall, how would you have proven it without referring to the actual scriptures and the actual verses in the BIBLE!?
Created:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Would Jesus be ok with like a joke card ?
Like: I robbed a church and took everything that wasn't nailed down.
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
Because there is no directive whatsoever in the Bible to marginalize and ostracize gay people.....FK me! Have you ever read the bible for yourself. Both the Old and New Testaments condemns TO DEATH homosexuals to death as it does transvestites.As always, Stephen is completely full of shit, he doesn't know anything about the Bible, all he ever does is blather a bunch of made-up shit.You are just a dumb twat that needs others to show you what is actually written in the bible because you are too bone ideal to read it for yourself.I wouldn't make claims I couldn't' support.Except for yes, you did, just like you always make claims you can't support, except by reference to that psychodrama in your head.You said, "Both the Old and New Testaments condemns TO DEATH homosexuals to death as it does transvestites."I responded, "If he wants to show the New Testament verse that supports his delusional made up fantasy that the Bible supports his Bigotry, I'll walk all over his complete lack of knowledge about the Bible."
Like the rest of the BIBLE, I take you have never read Romans either then, thicko.
And comically, you think Leviticus is in the New Testament,
Nope. It's definitely OT.
Despite Stephen's lack of knowledge about the New Testament, despite the fact that he doesn't even know what books are in it, or what the New Testament is even about, (It is not about Stephen's bigotry). As anyone who has ever read the New Testament knows, it does explicitly condemn Stephen's bigotry.
What bigotry would that be, thicko?
And tag me when you respond to me, you sly fkr.
Created: