Total posts: 3,520
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Firstly, what is good?Are the words of the bible "good"? Or are they just words and that is all they are?
Great question. So please answer the first question and then perhaps we can wrestle with your question. We need some kind of baseline, would you not agree?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
SoooooChristians can't do good as Christians.Is very different to.A Christian can't do good as ( a Christian )
I know you are just teasing, but you still raise lots of interesting ideas.
Firstly, what is good?
Secondly, Who determines something is good?
Created:
-->
@janesix
I have usually felt God was a He, and benevolent. I may be biased towards a male God as i was raised in a predominantly Christian American culture, and the benevolence may be wishful thinking. My beliefs are based on my personal experiences, which may be hallucinations, which I know I have had in the past. I am comfortable at this time with not knowing who God is, who is a comfort to me. That's enough for me at this time.
Given the title of your topic, how can you be confident that you have felt God was a he or benevolent? I note your comments about tradition, personal experience, perhaps hallucinations and wishful thinking. But I must express that I am puzzled as to how you think God can comfort you - yet not know anything about God? How can you know that about God?
When you talk about comfort from God, are you talking about a feeling? Or is it something else?
Created:
-->
@janesix
You cant know even from analyzing the creation, because we have no idea why things were created.I suppose some people could have superior knowledge to mine, yet you have no idea if your knowledge is truly correct. How could you?
Hi janesix,
This is often the basis of how agnostics argue their point of view.
The thing I find troubling about it is the inherent self-contradiction within it.
"We can know nothing about God". Well almost. Logically, if that statement is true, then there is ONE thing you do know about God. What is this ONE thing?
"that we can know nothing about God".
And the problem of course is - if we can know one thing - i.e. that we can no nothing about God, then we are in a dilemma.
How can we on one hand - know nothing and yet know ONE thing. For agnosticism to be correct in the presumption that we can know nothing about God, then we would not even consider the question of whether God existed or not. God would never have been conceived in our brains.
Yet as soon as God does register in our brains - the agnostic principle - that we can no nothing about God is self-defeated and actually becomes evidence that God does exist. A self contradictory statement is a logical proof of the reverse situation. Hence, it proves God can be known. It is similar to the notion of absolutes.
When someone says - "there are no absolutes" - they are actually saying "There are ABSOLUTELY no such thing as absolutes.". Obviously a self contradiction that proves the existence of absolutes. Hence we can be confident that not only do absolutes exists, but so does God. This is the logical extension of the position.
Of course, it does not prove what kind of absolutes exist, nor what kind of god exists. Those are further questions to explore.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I don't believe in ghosts.? There are at least 17 biblical verses that spring to my mind about Ghosts but you don't believe in ghosts.🤣As for ghosts. LOL! I don't believe in ghosts. Yes, the Holy Ghost or Spirit is not a ghost per se.Then what is it if not a ghost as THE BIBLE claims it is? And didn't a woman speak to a ghost on behalf of Saul?
God is not a Ghost, if you are using the term ghost to refer to a person who was alive and is now dead, wandering around the earth trying to ease their pain. Or even if they are not trying to ease their pain - just scaring people. God is a Spirit. That means he is not material in the way humans are. But it does make him a ghost - like a dead person trying to get to heaven or whatever. Most translations do not use the term ghost because it is misleading in our culture.
It is true that a seer was asked by King Saul to raise the ghost of Samuel. I suspected you might raise this example. We can read about this in 1 Samuel 28. What happened there is in the narrative. What does it mean in respect of ghosts. I can't say for sure. What we do see is something that looked like an old man wearing a robe and who seems to know what God is going to do - tear the kingdom from Saul and give it another. Was it the ghost of Saul or another kind of spirit? I don't know. I am content to think it was Samuel's spirit. It does not make me believe in ghosts. Not in the sense of lost souls trying to find a way to a better place or in the sense of trying to right a particular wrong or seeking forgiveness. Here clearly, Samuel was resting - and was awoken. His response to Saul was - now you are cursed. Or perhaps he was reiterating that since God has turned away from Saul, that his fate was sealed. Certainly there is the interesting element here that since God had turned away from Saul, that Saul wanted information from somewhere else.
Was Samuel a ghost? Perhaps - but not in the sense most of understand ghosts. This is an interesting case.
No I don't pray for the dead. There is no point.I agree but then we have Peter I believe praying for the "dead"Tabitha, or Dorcas when Jesus himself said praying for the dead was pointless. Then again doesn't the bible suggest that Jesus prayed for the "dead" Lazarus? <<< That is a question and not an assertion.
There is a difference between praying for the dead - asking God to forgive their sins and praying that God will raise them back to life. I, personally am not in the habit of praying for either. I am not Jesus nor am I Peter. For the record, I did not die on a cross either. Peter had witnessed these things in the presence of Jesus. I have never witnessed the same. A few charismatics I know, testify they have. I am a skeptic. Yet, I also recognize that my faith does not lay in that particular direction. I am probably too caught up in the experience of people's emotions around death - I don't want to raise hopes and see them dashed. This is probably why I would not pray for them to be raised from the dead. But it is also the reason I would not seek their forgiveness of sins now they are dead. Raising people's hope for them on either score would be wrong in my view. If they were not a believer - then their families know this already - and pretending that this person's sins have been forgiven or that they are going to heaven will not bring comfort to those who know the truth. For those who think everyone goes to heaven anyway - there is no point talking about forgiveness anyway. My job is not to raise false hope. It is to present the truth. Death is the line in the sand.
Besides - I am not catholic. I can't pray for people's forgiveness.I know your not a Catholic. So are you saying that because you are not a Catholic that it is not your choice that you can't pray for the dead, Reverend "Tradey"?
No not at all. I am saying it is how I understand the Bible and what my role is. But thanks for asking.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
YOUR OUTRIGHT BIBLE STUPIDITY IS SHOWN ONCE AGAIN: “I am not catholic. I can't pray for people's forgiveness.”Whether being a “Cafeteria Catholic” or not, you once again turned into a BUFFOON relative to biblical axioms regarding your quote above, where you can pray for peoples forgiveness if need be! H-E-L-L-O?!
It is a happy day when you AT LEAST try and give some reasons for your assertions. Perhaps there is hope for you yet. Again, I won't hold my breath. Yet for the record, none of these verses directly provide evidence supporting that people can pray for people's forgiveness after they are dead.
1. This passage precludes that you can ask forgiveness for others: “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people,” (1 Timothy 2:1)
You need to distinguish between how a Catholic prays for forgiveness and others. Catholics - absolve people's forgiveness. Protestants say with Jesus that only God can forgive sins. Hence our argument for why Jesus is God. The Pharisees believed only God can do it. Jesus did it. They thought that was blasphemy. Why? Because it is a clear indication by Jesus that he had authority as GOD to forgive sins.
This verse here urges Christians to pray to God for all people. My view is that this is only talking about alive people. If you wish to extend to this dead people, good for you. I don't see any reason to do so. Once someone is dead, the line is drawn in the sand. Life is when forgiveness is granted. Not after death.
2. This passage substantiates that you can pray for members forgiveness, lets say, in showing you your complete Bible stupidity and ignorance: “But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,” (Matthew 5:44)
This verse does not substantiate asking for forgiveness for those who are dead. I agree we should pray for our enemies. Pray that they fall to their knees and repent to God for their sins - so that God might forgive them. This verse is again talking about alive people. Not dead people. It is impossible for a dead person to repent - therefore impossible for them to be forgiven. Luke 17:1-3 clearly indicates that repentance is required for forgiveness. "If they repent, forgive them".
3. In the following prayer request for you, you can pray to Jesus for peoples forgiveness: “Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God.” (Philippians 4:6)
Again, a great verse. But again, nothing to do with the dead. It is possible that you might like to extend this to dead people. But dead people in my view fall into two categories. One they are in Heaven with Jesus, so have everything they need. Or two they are in Hell - being punished for their sins. The parable of Lazarus and the rich man - indicates poetically the state of the person who has died without Christ. No forgiveness for them.
4. Here is a prayer request relating to your SEXUAL DEVIANCY as proven by Jesus and myself umpteenth times, where you can pray for forgiveness in this despicable act of yours: “Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” (Matthew 26:41)
I am not a sexual deviant. I deny once again your lies. This verse is urging people to watch and pray - and to avoid temptation. It is nothing to do with dead people being forgiven.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Well Bother D,
Thanks for the compliment. After all, "Imitation is the sincerest of flattery."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I don't have an issue with judging. the bible does not say - don't judge - it says - get your house in order before you judge someone else.
Or as Jesus puts it - take the log out of your own eye and then you will be able to see to take the splinter out of someone else's eye.
Judging means making determinations. It means discernment. Making an assessment.
The fact that you are using this text -is nuts.
'
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Stephen,
No I don't pray for the dead. There is no point.
I pray for their families. Once someone is dead - they have to face their own consequences. Choices they made in life. Families are the ones who suffer from death.
Besides - I am not catholic. I can't pray for people's forgiveness. You just show your ignorance.
As for ghosts. LOL! I don't believe in ghosts. Yes, the Holy Ghost or Spirit is not a ghost per se. I am not bothered in the least by your skepticism.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DeadFire27
I DON'T KNOW:I joined this site as a traditional Christian, but, after my humiliating loss to Bones (my first debate), well, I started to doubt myself. I had never actually questioned God before, but the points against it make sense.However, there is a reason I don't personally identify with Atheism either.Death.Where do we go?There is no scientific evidence anywhere which proves where our spirits go, so the only option I can see is a deity. Or deities.So, agnostic. And until someone proves where we go when we die, I'm staying this way.
Death is a good thing to think about. Death by the way proves evolution WRONG. Interestingly, evolutionists would suggest that death is essential for evolution and within that though there is some sense - yet the heart of evolution is - "life". Death is an end.
Nevertheless, I am sorry that a debate with Bones made you question your faith - not that questioning your faith is bad - although losing it seems to demonstrate your faith was weak in the first place.
I have met many atheists who have disgarded atheism because of an argument - mostly because they had never really understood their position. Mostly these days in schools it is assumed that atheism is correct - but it is not given much intellectual basis so many atheists end up stop being atheists. SO what I am saying is don't be too hard on your self. Most people don't think too deeply about these things. Bones is no exception. Ask the right question and he too will have some self doubt.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Whose GOD/GODESS/GENDER NEUTRAL DEITY?Which GOD/GODESS/GENDER NEUTRAL DEITY?What GOD/GODESS/GENDER NEUTRAL DEITY?GOD/GODESS/GENDER NEUTRAL DEITY in what format?1. An eternal floaty about, supernatural bloke/woman/gender neutral, as mentioned in archaic legends.....Is just as much the impossibility of something from nothing as everything else is.2. Alien ancestor/s....Alien ancestors are a possibility, but logistically unlikely....And are also, ultimately subject to the above limitations of 1.3. Or simply, the principle that gives material evolution purpose.....I tend to loosely run with this option.....An ongoing sequence of events, though nonetheless still subject to the ultimate limitations of 1. and 2.The fact is, no one is actually able to know or explain, how anything can exist.(We are all constrained by what we have been to conditioned to think. relative to ongoing data input, but defined to a greater extent by formative data input).And the opposite of something, is just as bewildering a thought.And personal experiences are exactly that.....Self contained, data processed responses....One thinks, therefore one is.So one thinks a GOD is, therefore a GOD is only a thought.
Yep - another irrational post.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Yes. I had personal experiences that make me absolutely certain.I'd accept anyone accusing me of being an agnostic but I'm not a soft atheist, instead I'm a deist.The god I believe/know to be real is, in human psyche terms, sociopathic and apathetic. She is also rather feminine, we are here to impress and entertain her.You can think I'm insane, I accept that. I can't make you go through what I did, including clinicial depression where you screamed in your head at god to give you a reason to live and then the reasons came the next day, indisputably. You don't know my life or story, I'm telling you there's something out there and it's apathetic and sadistic but not without redeeming features. The god doesn't want us all to suffer, that's not entertaining to watch, it's more fun if pleasure and characters to root for are mixed in.Everything in reality actually fits this type of god, the rest falls into place after you first reach out and get your own answers (won't be the same as mine).
I thank you for your thoughts - but so subjective it is hardly evidence for me. Although I agree that everything in reality fits the picture of God in the Bible, your explanation does not fit. But kudos to you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
My no is as certain as the no which I give to people asking me whether there are invisible naked men dancing my room right now.
Wow! talk about not understanding the question posed?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@949havoc
Yes.I speak to him multiple times daily, to the extent that its gone beyond knowing him as a father; he's Dad. The communication is not one-way. Not that I always have response, because I don't, sometimes. But I have had a frequency that assures me I am being heard, understood, and answered. Often, the answer is no, not now, or occasionally no, not at all, stop asking. But often enough, the answer is yes, and that agreement has often been a challenge to do more myself to serve him. And I never approach without being grateful for what I've already received. More often than not, all such communications are nothing but being grateful. I've learned to ask for nothing, and that, alone, has brought abundant blessing.
Hmmm. I do believe in Go. Yet to suggest that God is real because I speak to it is unhelpful. To say that God speaks by frequency of an assurance is also unhelpful. It reveals that God is unable to speak to me in my language. What kind of God would do that?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Well that is really a matter of fact - and you are WRONG!
Created:
-->
@Stephen
@Bones
Added09.24.21 08:29PM-->@BonesOne of the best and most productive things one can do is admit when they have gotten something wrong. People shouldn't be hustled when they come to a new conclusion, it is a good thing - it is a sign that the conversation is moving and it is a sign that the person who changes their mind is intellectually capable of more than 1 dimensional thinking. People who never change their mind are either mentally incapable of interpreting information or simply not interested in the pursuit for knowledge.Trade, we have no quarrels and I do not wish to start here, but your friend could learn a lesson from this.Well in this case referred to by the Reverend "tradey " Tradesecrete above it wasn't a question about me being wrong in my comment about there being many sons of god, or about me changing my opinion, Bones. I was only admitting and apologising for me being wrong in the fact that had asked me a question where I believed he hadn't and that I genuinely had missed.My opinion on there being other human "sons of god" in the bible hasn't changed. But the cretin "tradey" Tradesecrete didn't even know that there were other human (kings) sons of god in the bible and was insisting that there wasn't and asked for proof of my claim to which and in response, I proceeded to create a whole thread that proved me to be correct.So even allowing for this Pastor and Chaplin's bible ignorance he should have known that (A) there are at least two kings that we know of that were directly called son of god by god himself and (B) he should have known that the whole nation of Israel were specifically called sons of god also by god himself.He doesn't even know his title/s as Pastor and Chaplain is to be addressed "Reverend". Can one be more ignorant?
Let's make sure the record is straight as Stephen always has his own agenda.
Stephen refused to believe he had missed anything. This is his ordinary form. I think he is a liar.
I concede as I have in the past that I was not of the understanding that EVERY king of Israel was called a Son of God. Stephen has yet to prove this by the way. David was called a son of God. As was Solomon. And yes often kings and monarchs of other nations were labeled that. But none of the other kings of Israel or Judah were ever called the Son of God. And Stephen is yet to demonstrate otherwise. This is the point. I take the view that Israel was a nation "apart". Including the very distinct view that there was only one God and he was not tribal.
Stephen's position is that Jesus, being named son of God refers to his Davidic kingship title (which incidentally I am not opposed to) yet he has not yet been able to demonstrate this at all. I think that Jesus or the authors of the gospels - when referring to this term were NOT referring to his Davidic lineage (although both believed his Davidic lineage was indeed true) but to another more profound meaning. That of his divine heritage, going back to the stories of his birth - clearly enunciating his mother's virginity and the Holy Spirit's intervention.
As to my own title? Stephen was wrong. I never said I was ordained nor that I had a title. (Nor have I denied it) He made presumptions and I could not be bothered correcting him. It was not worth it. Stephen of course finds it very difficult to accept he is wrong. He finds it incredibly difficult to apologize - especially to those he despises. I take it as a compliment. I think he is a fool and VERY stupid. But that is not to suggest he is not well read or intelligent. It means when it comes to matters of Christianity he is ignorant. And this he shows over and over again.
Bones, none of this is meant to suggest anything else apart from what I have said. It is right to respond on my part to the misinformation that Stephen has provided. Again, all these things are a matter of record.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@949havoc
Thanks for your commentary. I admit to a certain ignorance of the WCF; I've read from it, but admit not all of it. I shall endeavor to do so. There is, however, an early item mentioned in it, "Since God no longer reveals himself to his people in those earlier ways,[5] Holy Scripture is absolutely essential.[6]". The [5] reference is Hebrews 1: 1-2, which. does not imply that at all. It acknowledges God speaking to prophets [OT] and that the Word was given directly by Christ "in these last days" speaking of their current, first century. But those "last days" are not ours; we are different days, altogether. It appears first-century Christians, particularly during Christ's ministry, believed the coming of the kingdom of heave would occur in their lifetimes, thus use of the "last days" verbiage. B?ut that was not the case at all. We're two thousand years distanced from then, and we're still waiting. it does not say that God stopped speaking to man, so why is it interpreted that way? I believe he still reveals to us today [I should have mentiojned that in my #1], and not just by historic scripture, which, I agree, is essential.
Hebrews 1:1-3 clearly states that in times past - God spoke in various ways - but now he speaks through Jesus. This includes his words as he directed the Apostles and others who wrote the NT.
The last days in the time of the Apostles are the times of the Last Days of the OT covenant with Israel. This finished in AD 70. The NT was written prior to AD 70.
We are not living in the LAST DAYS anymore. We are living in the "Age to Come". Hence God has stopped revealing revelation to us - prior to the Day of judgment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Why are you putting my name on here?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
Not "coincidence" please.An old friend that I havent talked to in years died a few days ago. I found out about it yesterday afternoon.I was reminded of her a few hours before that, someone said a name similar to hers and I briefly thought about her. When I hadn't for a long time.She wasn't close, but a good friend and person.I beleive she is still here, some where and how.
I don't think it is coincidence. But nor do I necessarily think it is supernatural.
You care for this person - even though you have not talked to them in many years. And did not consider her close.
Yet to think of her for the first time in years - perhaps - simply on the basis of a similar name hours or days before she passed?
Our brains are pretty amazing. And so are our thoughts about different people.
Often we think of someone at the same time they are thinking of us. I don't know what that means. And I certainly don't know what it means in your case.
I don't believe in ghosts. I believe when we die - we either go to God or we don't. So I don't have the type of explanation that you might be seeking.
Yet, I have had thoughts about people I know - just before they die. I am not sure what this is supposed to mean. Or that it is meant to mean anything.
I never pray for a person once they are dead. I pray for their family and networks that are left behind. Once someone is dead - they are dead. Finito.
Still I hope you find some meaning in what has happened to you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Janesix,It was a premonition directly from my serial killerJesus, as he likes to do at times to the heathens like you, in letting you know that He is around you at all times. WhenJesus reminded you of her a few hours before her death, He was giving you a sign to possibly save her from her death if you came to Jesus to be one of His followers! But, you didn't, therefore you blew it. sorry."Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths." (Proverbs 3:5-6)"When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come." (John 16:13)YOUR QUOTE OF WISHFUL THINKING: "I beleive she is still here, some where and how."If you were her friend, then she is probably burning in the sulfur lakes of Hell as we speak, as in "guilt by association!" (Revelation 21:8)
Mocking Jesus and Christians is one thing. Leading others up the path is another thing altogether. Again I refer you to Luke 17:1-3.
Why don't you get a life and grow up?
This sort of thing is unacceptable.
Janesix is asking a question based on her interpretation of her experience, not seeking to be bashed by someone who has no clue about Jesus.
I find it profoundly disturbing that you misrepresent Jesus and Christianity with your garbage.
The FACT that you have been abused as a child is itself disturbing - but this is not a persuasive reason to attack an entire religion mocking it to relieve your own grief. It is sad and pathetic really.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
When you mean all things - do you mean living things - like animals and birds and fish? Would you also include trees and shrubs etc.? And what about rocks and earth and fire? Would you also possibly include angels and demons etc?All things. People, beings, rocks, elements, every atom in the universe.
So it sounds like you are pantheistic. God is everything and everything is god.
So for you God is the creator of life or is he / she the life? Do you distinguish between God and everything else? Or is god part and parcel of everything?Yes but I use gods to mean beings like Odin or the God of Abraham. Infinite Intelligence is what I would call the creator of all things. No not really we are all part of that force.
Yes, Pantheism then. Sort of Hindu, Budhha and new age all wrapped into one.
Ok. But that is the distinguishing feature of the God of the Bible. The creator of all things. Not just a tribal god or deity. The God of the bible cannot die either because he is the creator of life.He says he is but for me he is the tribal god of the Jews who is a creation god for that pantheon. Just like Odin is a creation god in Heathenism and Prometheus in Hellenistic Polytheism. Not all gods die. Most use magic to avoid it.
Ok. so which gods don't die. And what is this magic you are talking about?
Ok. So why is the verses about life and death in the NT more believable than other parts? You must surely have a means of deciding which is one is more stuffed up than the others? I happen to think the NT is excellent. And that the Bible, namely the OT and the NT are more reliable than every other book. The bible talks about spirit being mortal and that immortality is conditional.I think the New Testament is almost all rubbish. Jesus was a Buddha type figure if he lived at all and is not a mix of people from the time.
Why do you think that? What are you measuring it against to come to such a conclusion? How is Jesus a Buddha type? I take the view that Jesus and Buddha are just about opposites in everything they did and taught. Historians by consensus agree Jesus lived.
Interesting. I would agree with you about Karma. I am not sure what you mean by universal truths. Where are these and who made them and how do we find out about them?Infinite Intelligence created everything. Some are natural laws and some we know when in in spirit form. We loose a lot while in human form with an ego.
What is infinite intelligence? Is it god? What is a natural law? How do you know we loose a lot in human form? Do you sometimes leave your human form?
Thanks for your responses. This is really interesting. I am of the view that Satan will be punished for ever. What is natural law? Surely you have heard of a thing called tough love. Love sometimes is demonstrated by removing the enemy. The ultimate lesson is love? Where do you get that idea? I think worship is the ultimate thing to do. I really find it interesting how much you are opposed to the concept of punishment. Of course there are natural consequences to things. Not all consequences are punishments. But judgment is what judges do. And then the police come and place a person in punishment. I agree there is a difference between punishment and discipline. The first is an end. The second is a means. But sometimes - the journey has to come to an end. The destination is always beckoning. For example, Hitler was not needing discipline or to learn. Because of his evil, the only thing left was punishment. That he took his life, meant he escaped temporal punishment - yet he sent himself into the eternal judgment room of God. And my view is that God's judgment on Hitler was deserved.https://passionplacement.com/7-natural-laws-fundamentals-to-unlock-growth-in-business-life/ I have seen sources with way more but these are the most commonly discussed. The only enemy is ego. There is no universal boogey man waiting to tear you down. Working with a god may be a matter of worship but the ultimate goal for us is to give love to others. Punishment achieves little on a eternity time frame. Again why create a human, set it up to fail then punish it for all eternity cause it doesn't get the rules. It makes God look petty, shallow and sadistic. Judges also protect victims, grant restitution and decide who is correct within the laws. You see judgement as something only the evil or bad get. The good are judged too. What if Hitler was sent to teach a lesson to all humanity? Did he has to endure some punishment in the afterlife, sure. Will he every progress in the afterlife, no idea. Either one of use could be right or wrong. Without proof we can only live our own truth and not judge others for theirs. Unless theirs hurts others. If you are hurting others using religion it's hard to give that religion any credit for authenticity.
The bible does not say God made a human - then set it up to fail. I don't think that either. And I think it is a STRAWMAN to say it is. Our world works with both carrots and sticks. Punishment is part of any just system that wants justice. To remove punishment is to remove justice. I don't see judgment as only evil. I am a lawyer. I often want judgment that says my client is innocent. And this happens and it is a good judgment.
I think saying Hitler was sent to teach a lesson implies that something sent him. Who would send Hitler to kill so many people as a way of teaching? That sounds vindictive and arbitrary. Not to mention cruel and mean. If that is you infinite intelligence, then I could not in good faith worship such a thing.
You are correct. both of us can't be right. both of us could be wrong. Yet if i am wrong, then the worst that can happen - is I end up in heaven. On the other hand, you, if you are wrong, then you have a nasty future ahead of you. Either way, I cannot lose. You on the other hand - better be right for your sake.
Created:
-->
@Bones
One of the best and most productive things one can do is admit when they have gotten something wrong. People shouldn't be hustled when they come to a new conclusion, it is a good thing - it is a sign that the conversation is moving and it is a sign that the person who changes their mind is intellectually capable of more than 1 dimensional thinking. People who never change their mind are either mentally incapable of interpreting information or simply not interested in the pursuit for knowledge.Trade, we have no quarrels and I do not wish to start here, but your friend could learn a lesson from this.
I concede that admitting when you have done something wrong is typically a positive thing.
I personally think that if someone can show me where I am wrong, it is a good thing. I like to improve myself. Of course, someone thinking that they have shown me to be wrong is different to being wrong. Some things are more subjective that others realize. I don't think Stephen admitted he was wrong because it was the right thing to do. He had no choice left if he wanted to maintain any sort of credibility. If he and the Brother were not so intent on mischaracterizing people for whatever their motives are - then most of the venom goes out of this site. Other people get on with discussing things and they do so with mostly good grace. Yes sometimes others irk each other - but not with the same venom.
I have no grudge with you either Bones. For the record, I don't typically read everyone else's posts so I don't generally know whatever else is talking about. I read posts directed at me or if they land on a thread I started. I don't see the or follow the chit chat between others. Of course sometimes I do, but I don't make a habit of it.
Me, I take each person on face value. And I always give people the benefit of the doubt. But when they start to attack personally. Such as Brother and Stephen, then they reveal they are no longer interested in discussion, so inevitably, the posts turn nasty. Of course they never admit their attacks are personal or nasty. That would be the right thing to do. Hence why Stephen never apologized because it was the right thing to do - in his case it was the ONLY thing he could do - and that dragged out of him. Some people are characterized by graciousness. Others are not. Apologizing once does not make the rule. It is how people respond 99% of the time that reveals their character.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
So you want me to find it?
Ok.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Hi Stephen,
I was wondering whether you were still alive or not.
I did not make a mistake in relation to whether I was a reverend or not. You simply made a conclusion which was wrong. It did not worry me - because having a title or letters after my name is not a thing I crave or need.
You did not just forget my question to you - you on many occasions indicated I lied when I asked you. You really did not expect me to produce the question. But when I produced it - it shut you up quite properly. You had no choice but to apologize. Saying you were doing it because it was the proper thing to do is laughable. You don't care about doing what is right. What a joke.
Starting a new thread was your penance - over compensation. Don't pretend it was anything else.
I don't tell lies. I own up to mistakes. I apologize and have done so many times. For you though - it is like pulling cat's teeth.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@949havoc
Good for you.
I think your wrong. But there you have it. What basis could I possibly have to say that unless I have a measuring stick?
Does the Christian religion have measuring sticks in respect of their doctrines?
Or does the Christian religion simply let anyone decide whatever they want?
Yes, we have the Scriptures. The OT and the NT. Some denominations add the Apocrypha. Yet people seem to interpret them anyway they like.
Then we have the creeds. The creeds from the ecumenical councils seem to provide a certain orthodoxy to the Christian religion. Of course, many denominations reject the Creeds. The LDS and the JW for example. The Orthodox church reject part of them and the RCC take a different view.
Coming into the Protestant Reformation there were a whole lot of Confessions and Documents drafted up.
And then of course there was also the counter - Catholic position. In the 20th and the 21st Century further documents and Statements have been drafted.
I grew up in a Church of Christ. It really had no standard but the Bible. Hence people were all inconsistent in their doctrinal standards. Similarly in the Baptist and Brethren circles. Unsystematic and inconsistent. Arbitrary - but based on the idea of the "priesthood of all believers". No need to have a clergy or hierarchical status within the church.
I now realize everyone has a theology of the bible and the way they interpret it. Mostly, however it is inconsistent and unsystematic. I hold to the WCF. It is a systematic way of understanding the doctrines in the Bible. It doesn't make them right. But it does provide transparency and a means of attempting to apply a consistent methodology. The WCF follows the reformed statements and the Creeds for the most part. It acknowledges that EVERYONE who says that they base their ideas on the bible still has a manner in which they interpret it. It self-consciously attempts to systematize it - and uses the WCF as a framework to understand the bible. It removes the personal and subjective element from interpretation. The WCF was written by many people - and tested and tried over a long period of time. It is not perfect and acknowledges this. Yet is enables several important things which not having a confession cannot provide. It provides a measuring stick and a framework. It enables the doctrines to be articulated - and does so transparently. They are consistent. Obviously it removed arbitrariness.
Yet it also a document in history that is in accord with the Scriptures.
I suggest your position is wrong - next to the Scriptures as understood by the framework of the WCF.
Your position is not wrong - when you are the ultimate judge and allow your personal and subjective interpretation to understand the bible.
In fact in that latter position - no one is wrong. Everything is subjective.
Thanks for providing your personal understandings.. Unfortunately, your opinion is just your personal opinion and as such - it can be taken no further. And should be taken no further. I disagree with you that your position causes havoc. Why on earth would you think that? You are not asking anyone to believe you. If you were to join a church, your personal beliefs are irrelevant. The teaching of whatever church you attend and wish to join would expect you to subscribe to their position. If they don't have a position - then it still would not cause havoc - because if there is no position - there is no standard by which they could reject or confirm your views.
On your stated beliefs - I could not admit you as a member of our church. You could certainly attend our church, but you would be unable to become a member and have any membership rights and privileges. Your being there would not cause any havoc. We have lots of people who attend - who are not members and who have a variety of beliefs. Yours are not particularly extreme by any means. Yet they are not orthodox.
Again, thanks for your opinions.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Hmmm
I looked at each of those links - I am failing to see the problem.
I called you out on Luke 17 - just coz you can't find it - doesn't mean anything more than YOU ARE RUNNING AWAY from it.
Could I spend time looking for it? Surely I could. But given that it is the truth and you conveniently refuse to address it, is none of my concern.
Stephen like you forgot he had not answered my questions - and carried on pretty much like you are now - only for me to find it for him.
He hated it and was forced to apologise. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4969/post-links/213820
Is that what you would like me to do to you?
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
(IFF) GOD = EXIST (THEN) EVERYTHING THAT EXISTS = GOD
Thanks for responding. And that is also an interesting point but not the answer to my question.
My question is:
Why does a perfect God = perfect world?
Why does an imperfect God = imperfect world?
Certainly they are two options - but the other options would be
a perfect God = imperfect world
an imperfect God = perfect world
Interestingly the Bible presents a fifth option: God is a perfect but created a good world.
The good world had no flaws. Yet the good world was not yet perfect. - it was in probation. It could flip either way - perfection or broken.
One might reasonably ask: how can the world be not yet perfect and yet have no flaws?
And the answer would be linked not to an end - but to a process. A baby is born and will grow. Does it have flaws? It is not yet the perfect human? Or is it?
Yet the baby is not fully grown. And maturity will bring the very well formed human to perfection.
Is being immature or not fully grown - a flaw? Some might say yes? I would say no. Is it perfect? Certainly it is not all it could be.
The bible indicates that Humanity was still in a state of immaturity - or on probation. Maturing would give him access to the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
The test of maturity was - whether he would access it with or without permission.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
I see you are left handed by your photo.
I think that means you are probably in a bit of trouble then with your parishioners.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
The position was put. You did not like how it boxed you in. You changed the assumptions - to contain your own conclusions.
You made me smile - mainly because you rationalized it so quickly without actually realizing what you were doing.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Yep.
I figure even he needs some feedback occasionally.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
The fact that you want to pretend your facade has some merit is just scary.
Jesus as I have indicated on many occasions was not in the OT. He might have been prophecied about but Jesus the messiah was not born until the time of the NT. And his followers were not known as Christians for years - after his death.
The OT passages relating to war are valid culturally for the time and as such are good laws. I have no problem with them at all. It would be a pretty dumb thing to measure the past by the present time. Only a wingnut would do such a silly thing.
The OT passages relating to war ARE NOT talking about Christians at all. They are referring specifically to Jewish people. Not only that they were not even talking to Jewish people about how to find a wife. You take a passage and make it mean something it never was meant to mean - and then you try and extrapolate it to other applications. That is not only silly, but makes you look like a dill.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
I ... want to know why you are an ungodly ADMITTED SEXUAL DEVIANT, where you take this sickening sexual act of yours and include your brothers, dads, and uncles in your sexual deviancies?! Huh? Are you kidding us as this following link explicitly shows: https://ibb.co/0XTZRpr
Firstly, I have never admitted any such thing.
You are not even close to the first posts in that thread. Similarly in that post - the one you posted - include a mixture of at least three different contributors.
You will find if you even did a little research that I am not Indian. You will also find who did say each of those matters.
the problem you have is that you are - like every buffoon who ever lived - cut and pasted a post out of a context.
I have repeatedly denied the accusations made by Hari. And by you.
So now once I again I have answered despite it being a personal attack on me by you. - that is the end of the matter. If you raise it again I will report you.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Again, you just demonstrate your ignorance of Christians and of the Bible and of God. Still you are entitled to your own opinion and the implications of that opinion.
They believe in what is called universalism. This means everyone either goes to heaven when they die or they just cease to exist when they do die. There are even a branch of liberal Christians who hold to reincarnation.Liberal christians don't believe in reincarnation. Eastern faiths believe in that.
Eastern Religions do believe in reincarnation but so do many liberal Christians. I know quite a few from the Uniting Church in Australia who do.
Do All conservative Christians think China is evil? I suppose some do. But hardly ALL.I'm pretty sure the vast majority of Conservatives think China is evil.
I have never heard any Christians say China is evil. I have heard them call the communist party evil. The two are not the same thing. Perhaps you should ask them again to see if they are saying what you think.
Humanity willfully chose to break that one command despite the consequences. God gave humanity the capacity to consider immortality with Him or death without God.Humanity never consented to this.
Humans don't need to consent. There was no written contract. God gave life. He did not need human's permission. You must think God is not god but rather just another human equal to humans. What is your concept of God?
God as the creator has that prerogative.Just because you create a life does not mean you get the right to destroy the life. Otherwise, a biological parent would be legally and morally allowed to kill the kid they created.
Well actually the power to give life does give you that preroggative. For just as easily as killing a life - he can bring them back again. Human don't create life. We ourselves have been given the ability to reproduce - but not all of us can do it. This ability comes from God. Your argument is weak.
That is not just disobedience - it is TREASON.Eating fruits isn't treason.
I never said eating fruit was treason. Willfully disobeying the God of the universe is. Telling God - sorry mate I can do it better than you is equivalent to telling the king or the government "I will rule and you wont". IT is treason.
God never gave Adam choice to obey or not obey. He gave him life and he gave him freedom in that life.This is a contradiction.
Freedom only has meaning if there are limits to it. Without limits freedom is not freedom. God never gave a choice to disobey. There is no contradiction.
When a government make a law - e.g. not to speed. Is the government saying - hey, I am going to give you a choice. Speed or not speed. If you speed you get punished. If you don't you get to drive your car.The government didn't give us a choice here. The government is telling us what to do. The only choice that is a free choice is one with no punishments levied by a 3rd party.
That is right. It does not give you a choice. That is its prerogative as the government. Your last statement makes no sense.
Breaking the speed limit is not treason. Telling God to get stuffed is.Telling God to get fucked over you not liking his law is like telling Biden to get fucked over you not liking his law. Both are freedom of speech! It's not treason to disagree with the people in charge. God should grow a skin at least as thick as our politicians.
Yes, it is similar - except it is not about telling God to get @#$$ - it is like the Capital invasion. Treason. Freedom of Speech might be an American virtue but it is not a biblical one and for the record - not a real human right. It is treason to kick one out and replace yourself as government.
This response reveals why I think you lack understanding. Some Conservative Christians believe in Hell. Some don't. Also no Liberal Christian believes in Hell. They believe all are saved or if not, then you die and no longer exist.Most if not all Christians believe in hell. Conservatives think atheists are going there. Liberals think Trump supporters are going there.
No there are MANY MANY Christians who do not believe in Hell. Look at the mormon church look at the JW. look at the site - rethinking Hell. John Stott - many people Christians in history. Liberals don't.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
I cannot run away from someone who has nothing to run away from.
You need to demonstrate you have something I am worried about. People run when they are scared or worried or are unable to answer.
You need to ask a question - a real question - not just commentary. You do realize this, don't you? Or are you really missing the point?
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Get a life Brother.
I am not whining. I am pointing out that you are a crap debater. You don't know how to discuss a point. You have not proved anything except you are a buffoon.
You quoted some verses completely out of context. You applied Christianity to it. Everyone of the verses were from the OT - when Christians had not even been invented. Ask Stephen. He will agree that Christians did not happen until well after Jesus.
Yet you want to provoke a point. I am not playing. LOL. If you want me to play - you have to do better than what you have done.
Prove your point. I don't expect that you can - but it will be amusing for me to watch you try.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
@Fruit_Inspector
Well that is just about the "best" rationalization I have seen in a while. When the logic is unable to be refuted, we will simply say - sorry we can't use that we will use our own which implicitly will lead to our presumptions. In other words, change one set of assumptions with another set of assumptions and hope that no one notices.
What a cop out. Well and truly beaten by the implicit logic. Well done Fruit Inspector
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Well at least you remain consistently stupid. Good for you.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Absolutely nothing to address. Really quite sad - and even more so because you think this amusing.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Hello,
I am not persuaded you ACTUALLY understand Christian thinking. No offence meant, but continually you posit ideas purporting to be Christian but are not correct. Where do you get your information? Let me show you some examples from your positions below.
Liberal christains: Against cruel and unusual punishment and opposes the death penalty no matter what.
Liberal Christians believe everyone is going to heaven, i.e if they even believe in God. Most Liberal Christians do not believe in the concept of Hell. They believe in what is called universalism. This means everyone either goes to heaven when they die or they just cease to exist when they do die. There are even a branch of liberal Christians who hold to reincarnation. It is true that many liberal Christians oppose the death penalty, but ironically are ok with killing vulnerable babies.
Conservative christains: Thinks China is evil for punishing people for disagreeing with the Chinese government.
Wow! One has to wonder where this opinion has arisen? Do All conservative Christians think China is evil? I suppose some do. But hardly ALL. Do the ones that do think China is evil because its government punishes people? I would be surprised, but if you could produce some links to this thought it would be nice. I think the Chinese government does punish people for not obeying it. I think this punishment leaks out of China and around the world. Sanctions against America, Australia, Japan, Taiwan because each of these nations not only disagrees with China but refuses to tow the line they demand. I don't think China is evil even for this punishment. China is a nation. Its people are people like you and me. It is a nation ruled by the Communist Party and from the West's point of view - its punishment's are not so much for doing wrong but for dissenting. I think most people see evil characteristics in any dictatorship which commands it people without giving freedom and liberty of choice.
God: Anybody who refuses to worship me and agree with me on everything by faith burns in hell forever (a fate worse than death).
This is not the picture of the God of the Bible from the Christian point of view. It is admittedly a picture of God that people who are not Christians might see the God of the Bible portrayed.
Christians teach that God made humanity good and gave him choices - lots of choices - with only one command. Humanity willfully chose to break that one command despite the consequences. God gave humanity the capacity to consider immortality with Him or death without God. God as the creator has that prerogative. Humanity - chose to think God was a liar and would not punish him. Humanity thought poorly even though at that time there had been no punishment, no evil, everything was good. There was no scarcity.
In the Garden of Eden, Adam could have chosen to eat from any of the other trees - anything he wanted. God did not say - you must eat the apple and you must cut it and then boil it. God gave humanity freedom. Humanity didn't want freedom - he wanted to be rid of God. That is not just disobedience - it is TREASON. And Self determined suicide. And willingly.
Non-Christians tend to think God created everything but gave man a choice to obey or not obey. That of course is not what happened. God never gave Adam choice to obey or not obey. He gave him life and he gave him freedom in that life. Humanity chose death. And he chose everlasting death. When a government make a law - e.g. not to speed. Is the government saying - hey, I am going to give you a choice. Speed or not speed. If you speed you get punished. If you don't you get to drive your car. Now some people might like to think it is a choice. But the government does not agree with you. It is not giving you a choice - or else it becomes responsible for your choice. If you speed and killed someone, you could still say - but the government gave me a choice. But the fact is - when you speed - your choice - not the government giving you a choice - you are responsible. What the government is saying is this: speeding is dangerous and you may well kill someone. We are not giving you a choice to speed. We are making a law that tells you that if you speed and hurt someone you ALONE are responsible.
This is what God did in the Garden. HE said to Adam - don't eat from this particular tree - a tree where you choose to decide what is good and evil. If you do - it is dangerous and the suffering and pain and punishment you bring on yourself will be yours ALONE. Humanity told God to get stuffed. Just like many people tell the government to get stuffed everytime they speed. Breaking the speed limit is not treason. Telling God to get stuffed is.
For the record there is a division between conservative Christians on Hell. Some believe in everlasting torture in Hell. Others believe in everlasting death. The latter group take the view that God grants everlasting life only to those who believe in Jesus. They say that it is belief in Jesus which gives life and that therefore to say someone lives forever in Hell is impossible because that is not life.
Both types of Christains: This is fine.
This response reveals why I think you lack understanding. Some Conservative Christians believe in Hell. Some don't. Also no Liberal Christian believes in Hell. They believe all are saved or if not, then you die and no longer exist.
Also conservative Christians don't think God is responsible - but humanity deciding for themselves that they prefer life or death without God.
Me: If your against the death penalty or against cencorship, you should call out God for being worse than communists in China for sentencing people to fates worse than death for their freedom of speech.
Me. I think you lack a real understanding of Christianity.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Are you saying you have forgotten?
How convenient is that for you? I'll give you clue. It was this year. In the past 6 months.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Your comical gibberish gobbledygook argumentum ad ignorantium fallacy in trying so hard to shift the burden of proof to me is so sad to watch, whereas it is obvious that you haven’t even gotten your High School GED yet!" LOL! FACT, this is NOT my assertion, but the Bible's assertion, get it Bible fool? HELLO! Again, your “reading comprehension” skills go out the window, whereas I have to school you upon the English language along with your Bible stupidity, of which never ends with you!
'I. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: (appeal to ignorance) the fallacy that a proposition is true simply on the basis that it has not been proved false or that it is false simply because it has not been proved true. This error in reasoning is often expressed with influential rhetoric.' Argumentum ad Ignorantiam (lander.edu)
Wow! I'm not shifting the burden. You asserted - you prove. It is you who thinks your proposition is true. I have asked you to prove your point.
You have quoted the bible - in part but made commentary in relation to it. Nowhere in any of those verses are Christians mentioned. Nowhere is there in any of the verses - a direction to get yourself a Christian wife this way.
It is not me who failed school Brother. It is you who does not even understand the alleged fallacy you have now referred to. Please go back to school and learn logic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
The life force that is individual to all things.
When you mean all things - do you mean living things - like animals and birds and fish? Would you also include trees and shrubs etc.? And what about rocks and earth and fire? Would you also possibly include angels and demons etc?
The origin of all live and all things. The creative living force in the universe.
So for you God is the creator of life or is he / she the life? Do you distinguish between God and everything else? Or is god part and parcel of everything?
Most myths do not have the gods creating the universe but their area of the universe. They are able to contact us on Earth care of the dead. They are also able to die.
Ok. But that is the distinguishing feature of the God of the Bible. The creator of all things. Not just a tribal god or deity. The God of the bible cannot die either because he is the creator of life.
I think most religious text and religions have some truth in them even though man has fked them up. The New Testament is worse then most others. I don't believe spirit ever ceases to exist. It just changes form.
Ok. So why is the verses about life and death in the NT more believable than other parts? You must surely have a means of deciding which is one is more stuffed up than the others? I happen to think the NT is excellent. And that the Bible, namely the OT and the NT are more reliable than every other book. The bible talks about spirit being mortal and that immortality is conditional.
Spirit has a vibration to it. All living things do. It's starts at the atomic level. I don't believe we were created to be punished.
Yes that is still not making much sense to me. What do you mean a vibration? I don't think humans were created to be punished either. Yet, that does not mean that they are not or cannot be punished. In life people are punished - this is a fact. It also does not mean that they cannot do stuff which warrants their punishment.
Until you've reached a certain level of vibration you have to come back and learn.Is that like Karma? How do you distinguish it from Karma, realizing of course that Hindu philosophy teaches that everything is illusion.Karma is more about reward and punishment. I am taking about learning universal truths.
Interesting. I would agree with you about Karma. I am not sure what you mean by universal truths. Where are these and who made them and how do we find out about them?
I don't believe we were created to be punished. I think having kids to just torcher them is sick. What higher being would do that if we don't? You wouldn't bring a child into the world and lock it up forever because you didn't teach it right. Or because they made a mistake. Not to mention we are here to learn lessons. Some errors on our part are a part of experiencing the consequences of hurting ourselves or others.
Yes. I answered above. No one said anything about having kids to torture them. I don't think God creates people just to punish them. Yet, if my child deserved punishment I would give it to them. Kids intentionally do bad things. Sometimes they will not learn. Some people do not want to learn. They think they know it all.
It's also not in the Old Testament and very few other religions have a hell that's just a place of punishment most faiths might have a purgatory or at least a afterlife split into sections.Eternal Hell is premised partly upon the Greek idea that the Spirit is eternal. Although it is true that many religions don't have Hell, it is perhaps because they have a different system of punishment. I also think that the OT does talk about Hell. But you can have your own beliefs.If Christianity is based on the God of Abraham then why is the concepts of the Greek afterlife incorporated at all?
I think some of Christianity today has been influenced by Greek thinking. Possibly through Augustine. Hell is not Greek. Christianity does not incorporate the Greek afterlife? Christians do not as a general rule believe in immortal spirits. Yes many do. But not all. It is the Greek view on humanity that it has an immortal spirit. Christians hold to the view that immortality - is conditional. It is not automatic.
I don't believe the creator punishes anyone for eternity. There is no natural law of punishment. It's goes against the law of love. Which is the ultimate lesson. Love God and your neighbor. One can expect cause and effect but nothing in cause and effect implies punishment but merely consequence. A lion not making a kill is not punished by being hungry is it a consequence of not eating. We do have a period where once we die and realize our sins against others ( and in that way God) then our guilt keeps us from moving on. Once that guilt is processed we can being to grow and move closer to God.
Thanks for your responses. This is really interesting. I am of the view that Satan will be punished for ever. What is natural law? Surely you have heard of a thing called tough love. Love sometimes is demonstrated by removing the enemy. The ultimate lesson is love? Where do you get that idea? I think worship is the ultimate thing to do. I really find it interesting how much you are opposed to the concept of punishment. Of course there are natural consequences to things. Not all consequences are punishments. But judgment is what judges do. And then the police come and place a person in punishment. I agree there is a difference between punishment and discipline. The first is an end. The second is a means. But sometimes - the journey has to come to an end. The destination is always beckoning. For example, Hitler was not needing discipline or to learn. Because of his evil, the only thing left was punishment. That he took his life, meant he escaped temporal punishment - yet he sent himself into the eternal judgment room of God. And my view is that God's judgment on Hitler was deserved.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drlebronski
Hell gets quite a few mentions in the NT. Jesus speaks of Hell more than anyone else does.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I am more than willing to I certainly believe spirit is eternal.
What do you mean by spirit?
I don't think my definition of what God would be the same as yours.
ok.
When I say God I don't mean like the God of Abraham I mean Infinite Intelligence, the creator of all things.
Is Infinite Intelligence a thing or a person or something else? Would you care to elaborate?
The gods to me are merely evolved being that have a knowledge of dimensions that we humans don't have.
Why do you think this? Do you have any evidence of it? How can you know that they have evolved a deeper knowledge of dimensions than us? I am curious.
They are more in tune with how spirit works.
Ok. How do you know this?
Death is just when the body ceases to function.
That is certainly one definition.
Spirit is continual and eternal when the Bible says I knew you before you were formed that means that our spirit existed before it goes into our body and obviously if God talks about an afterlife it exists after we leave our body.
Ok. So I assume you take this part of the bible to be correct. Is it the only part or are other parts correct as well? And how do you determine which ones are correct and which ones are not? For the record, I am not convinced the bible says the Spirit is eternal. You are correct in that it talks about God knowing us before we were formed. But it also talks about death and the second death. John 3:16 clearly talks about life eternal and death as two opposites. Death seems to be non-eternal.
I certainly believe there are lower vibration beings and higher vibration beings and where you're at when you die can determine where you end up in an afterlife I certainly don't believe in hell and punishment.
I don't understand this vibration thing. Can you explain that further? I do believe in Hell and punishment. For me it makes sense that judgement occurs in the afterlife if it is not attained in the real world.
I also believe in reincarnation.
Ok.
Until you've reached a certain level of vibration you have to come back and learn.
Is that like Karma? How do you distinguish it from Karma, realizing of course that Hindu philosophy teaches that everything is illusion.
One can't learn if you're in hell being punished so I don't believe that exists.
I would think that Hell is not about learning but about punishment. Surely that is the sole purpose of such a destination and for some people who refuse to learn - that seems quite an appropriate place.
It's also not in the Old Testament and very few other religions have a hell that's just a place of punishment most faiths might have a purgatory or at least a afterlife split into sections.
Eternal Hell is premised partly upon the Greek idea that the Spirit is eternal. Although it is true that many religions don't have Hell, it is perhaps because they have a different system of punishment. I also think that the OT does talk about Hell. But you can have your own beliefs.
You don't just go to a place of torture because you didn't believe in gods you end up in a place like that based on your own behavior toward others. You can learn and grow out of that place.
Hell is not a place to learn. Hell is a place of punishment for rejecting God. If torture is part of that - then that is part of the punishment, It is not about belief or non-belief in God - it is about Treason on an eternal scale.
Thanks for your thoughts. I look forward to further discussion with you.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
I think the question is answer in Jesus' parable from Luke 16.
19 “There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’
25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
27 “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
30 “ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”
In case you miss it, I have boldened it and underlined it for you.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Tradesecret, first thing, please tell me of which gender you are using when addressing this post because it is still not determined in which “full time” gender you use at any given time, okay?
Male.
“You stated falsely… and then quoted some verses which have nothing to do with marriage……. That is baiting. ……And yet you intentionally baited them by quoting verses which are irrelevant for Christian marriages."
plus 10 +
With your erroneous and LYING statements above, and in prayer with Jesus last night, He wanted me to show the membership of this Religion Forum in just how Bible stupid, ignorant and a LIAR that you truly are! ALL of the inspired by Jesus passages in my initial post of this revealing thread is regarding in how a pseudo-christian man can get a wife in marriage, PERIOD! Now, it is up to YOU to show otherwise like you have erroneously stated above, or are you going to RUN AWAY from yet another post of mine to you like you usually do?
Well - actually NONE of the passages you quoted have anything to do with Christian marriage. You quoted them. This is your assertion. Please provide your explanation for each one and how it relates to Christian Marriage. While you assert - my response only requires an assertion back. That is enough to refute your assertion.
When you were speaking to Jesus last night, did he happen to talk with about Luke 17:1-3? I notice you still are running away from that question.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
Of course Reuters has actually set itself up as a truth decider.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I think you make a fair point.
Would you like to discuss this further. I would be pleased to.
Created: