|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409 |
Want to try, The Lord's Prayer? Our Father who art in Heaven--,
Someone want to pick it up? hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us, and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom and the power, and the glory, forever and ever. Amen. So, can we be forgiven our sins? If we can be forgiven our sins, can we be forgiven for the sin of not forgiving that POS Zero? Inquiring minds...... Just say that I (you) respect the office of POTUS, but not the ZERO POS....
Last edited by Raspy; 07/01/22. Reason: spelling
Illegitimi non carborundum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,800
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,800 |
The way scientists operate is they form a hypothesis and then do research to prove it. However, every piece of evidence that disproves their hypothesis is disregarded and disgarded and they then continue the search for anything that *does* corroborate their theory.
Here is what separates Judeo-Christianity from all other "religions" (I hate "religion", but what else do you call it?): My God does not require any assistance from me to "prove" His existence. He takes care of that all by Himself and has since "The Beginning", quite literally. My Bible is scientifically proven on every front. King Solomon stated that, "...the wind blows to the south and then around to the north; around and around goes the wind and on its circuits, it returns" Ecc 1:6. The Bible clearly stated that the world was round somewhere around 3,000 years ago... then the "scientists" came along.
Let's examine the scientific facts: The big band (yes, I believe in the big bang, I just know the Banger! hahahaha) happened in a trillionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second, or exactly what I would expect to happen if God *spoke* it into existence
The 2nd law of thermodynamics says that everything decays over time, yet evolutionists claim everything improves and gets better
The law of conservation of mass says that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. The evolutionist agrees with this... except for the creation of *everything in the universe*... from nothing
Astrologists have long known that the moon moves a few inches further away from the earth every year. Reverse-engineer that 13.8 billion years and the moon would not only have been inside the earth's gravitational pull, but it would've been about 12" off the surface and never would've escaped
But here's the real "proof": probably the premier scientific research facility on earth, The Smithsonian Institution set out decades ago to "prove" the fallacy of the Bible... years later, they stated it was one of the most accurate books ever written. When compared to The Book of Mormon, The Quran, whatever Hindu book is used, etc. they called disproving them basically child's play. They found Jericho, they found Sodom and Gomorrah, Noah's Ark was found and gold-covered chariot wheels were located at the bottom of the Red Sea!
Most of the scientific forefathers *were* Christians and with every discovery they made, they became even more certain of the role of the Hand of God. They were doing God's work to uncover all of His glorious creation. Look at all of the elitist, leftist institutions of higher education and almost every one had their beginnings in the deepest of Christian research. Then the intelligencia decided years ago that their "hypothesis" was that The Bible was complete fiction and thereby began not only the throwing out of every giant, blaring fact, but the absolute *burying* of them and of any scientist that dared attempt the publishing of them, along with them.
In the 1950's archeologists discovered human femurs that were over 5 feet long (Nephilim in the Bible). Dinosaur bones were found with soft tissue still attached. They found the writings of Marco Polo circa 1,200 where he described living animals that perfectly matched our rendition of a tyrannosaurus rex. The Bible described "Leviathan" and "Behemoth" which the same "intelligencia" then jettisoned as folklore while touting their latest bone discovery from "65,000,000 years ago"
As for the Bible being "translated for 2,000 years and completely unreliable", God once again proved His promise that His word would never fade away. You see, a Bedouhan shepard was looking for a lost animal, but was very hesitant to go in the cave where he suspected that it ran. Dangerous predators were known to live in them, so he first threw a stone inside the entrance. When he heard the sound of pottery breaking, he investigated and found the first cache of the Dead Sea Scrolls. First-century copies of the same books of the Bible that we can purchase at the local Walmart. They were translated, compared and contrasted to the Bibles that we can purchase at the local Walmart and found over a 99.5% accuracy and absolutely zero doctrinal variance (some words were used that had the same meaning: cat vs. feline type of words).
I could cite much more, but I fear our Aussie comrades (among many others in this thread) are just not ready for the Teacher (Jesus, not me! hahahaha) to appear. Refer my above response to Raspy. Man has been around far, far longer than the bible - man invented gods. Trying to leverage science to favour faith fails every single time. You have to prove your god first, everything else is "bafflegab", Did man invent God or did he discover the truth of God's existence? Trying to leverage "science" to favor materialism and naturalism (by assuming a priori the truth of methodological naturalism and the non-existence of God) fails every time. You have to prove that the universe is entirely and exclusively material first, everything else is "bafflegab". You dudes need to prove the supernatural first before anything that might stem from it is worth further consideration. In the meantime our knowlegable experts will continue working in the real world with the facts that we have. They ain't scared of no ghosts.
Whatever you said...everyone knows you are a lying jerk. That's a bold assertion. Point out where you think I lied. Well?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,109
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,109 |
Thought I’d enjoy this post, but all the Antichrist ruined it for me! As for the Holy men doing good, that’s why I’m nothing but a sinner and always will be. Only thing I can do is ask forgiveness for my shortcomings! Never been much on the fake people that claim to be saints! I’m too real for that!! Yes I am a believer and consider myself a Christian and try to do good deeds but I am far from any saint! More like a daily sinner!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 569
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 569 |
Notice I don't try to use Scripture to prove my points to a non-believer of the facts of those Scriptures? I just gave scientific facts that were from the scientific research of the darned Smithsonian Institution(!)... not exactly Jesus-freaks. You keep demanding we prove something (which we provide proof of), and you then completely disregard the proof while re-demanding proof.
You *demand* that we provide definitive proof, immediately, for every possibility, but then allow yourself a complete cop-out by saying, "Scientists are still working on that one".
On a small-scale, look at your house and then prove to me that there was a builder. The building *IS* the proof of the builder, even if they died hundreds of years ago (I don't know where you live), you still *KNOW* there was a builder. A painting *IS* the proof of a painter. If you saw the word "WATER" spelled out in the sand, you would call me a complete FOOL for trying to tell you that the word appeared completely by chance, by the waves, with no intelligent assistance... that's just a 5 letter word and you're expecting me to believe that a genetic code with BILLIONS of components in EVERY DNA strand was complete happenstance. Apply the same standards that you demand toward your own sources, please! They are complete nonesense!
Fact: The Bible has never been proven wrong (despite the most diligent of efforts for hundreds of years by minds much more qualified than yours or mine).
Fact: Its a *SCIENTIFIC IMPOSSIBILITY* that *NOTHING* created *EVERYTHING*. The laws of physics *demand* intelligent design.
We all came from one-celled animals, right? Where'd they come from? Where'd the water come from that they were swimming in? Let's look to another evolutionist theory: if its true that "As things were necessary, so they were developed over the course of millenia", then what about the things that had to be there from the beginning? Without the epiglottis, you die... first meal... period. So where's the time for the evolution of that little gem? Oh, that just happened to be there right off the bat. How about the eye? There's over 37,000,000 light sensors in each one and during gestation, each one has to meet up with its only counterpart or the eye does not function... 37,000,000 times... by chance... for every human in existence. And without the eye (they needed time to develop, right?) how did sub-humans find one another to breed to possibly get those odds a'churnin'?. Without time for the testicles and ovaries to develop, how did they reproduce to end up with testicles and ovaries? There's only 3 of the THOUSANDS of examples in litereally every scientific field.
Even if you're right; what have I lost? I *LOVE* this beautiful life and giving thanks to my Creator for it... who cares? What have I lost?
But what if I'm right? What will *you* have lost? Everything. We're watching you running gleefully toward a cliff and you're chastising us for warning you that you can't actually flap your arms and save yourself.
Now go ahead and demand that we prove something to you.
Last edited by CAPITALIST; 07/01/22. Reason: Spelling
"Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry." - Thomas Jefferson
"Normal" isn't coming back; Jesus is!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,633
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,633 |
[quote=mauserand9mm]Looks like the theists have run out of steam. Antlers is in misdirection mode, CCCC is producing bafflegab and Raspy is patting them all on the backside and saying "good job". Over and above the other of your failures, you are delusional if you believe what you posted. Just remember that any premise beginning with "God made..." or "God created..." is invalid despite any evasive side arguments. You should remember that any premise based upon the presumption of no God or beginning with “I don’t know why/what/how [blank] happened but God didn’t…..” is invalid despite your deflection and obvious confusion. Just because you wrongly believe what you posted doesn’t mean it’s true. 😉 There is hope when someone will say "I don't know or I don't understand". If a Stephen Hawking tells you with a certainty that this universe began when all this matter collapsed into a particle smaller than an atom and created an explosion that turned loose all the matter and has sent it at incredible velocity out into space which in turn produced our finely tuned rhythmic rotating and orbiting universe and that is all there is to it. Well, there isn't any hope of bringing that person back to thinking there is a supernatural first cause. Believing that there is a supernatural cause is an assumption, an illusion of knowledge where no knowledge exists. ''I don't know how the universe came to be'' is the honest position. Faith doesn't provide the answers, it just gives believers the illusion of answers. If there is a God, whatever that may be, God appears to have no interest in dealing with us openly. Instead we have self appointed representatives assuming to speak on behalf of whatever God they are spruiking. Most scientist do know how the universe came to be...despite some materialists proposing “time before the Big Bang”, there is no evidence for it all. I didn't mean the big bang. The universe may be a part of a larger system, cyclic, a one off fluke, quantum instability/fluctuations, or whatever...it hasn't been established, it is not known. Nor has it been established or ruled out that time had a beginning. It is not known. That is the point of my remark [
Despite Physicists such as Victor Stenger postulating “Pre-Big Bang time”, or what Stephen Hawking calls, “Imaginary Time” there is no proof for it, whereas, there is much proof for there being a beginning. This is why it is rejected by most Cosmologists because the evidence points to a "singularity" of the beginning of space, time, energy and matter. Far from time being meaningless in the moments of the Big Bang, the timing of the expansion rate from the moment of the Big Bang was critical. It is not known, nothing has been established in that regard, and no reason to invoke faith, that because we don't know, God did it. The correct position is: we don't know. You are correct, we do not absolutely know.......but, from my perspective, my (I think interesting) research shows that the universe was caused by the God of the Bible is a reasonable one since the universe supports this conclusion. For example, the cause of the universe must logically be greater than the effect of the Universe — since no effect can be greater than its cause. We know that at the Big Bang, all space, time, energy and matter, came into existence. Therefore, the First Cause of this must be logically greater than this effects. Therefore, the Cause is not subject to space ~ it must be omnipresent; the Cause is not subject to time ~ it must be eternal; the Cause is not subject to any limits of energy/power ~ it must be omnipotent (all-powerful); and, the Cause cannot be material ~ it must be immaterial. Added to this, the universe is exquisitely fine-tuned and displays the hallmarks of purposeful, thoughtful design, which points to the First Cause being both personable (only personal agents are capable of thought) and omniscient. These are the unique and exclusive attributes of the God of the Bible.[/quote] ''The universe is caused'' is an assumption. We don't know that the universe is caused. Time is relative. Physics breaks down within a singularity, the universe may be cyclic, or something that nobody has yet imagined. ''It is not known means ''not known, we don't know.'' An assumption like 'it must be caused' is an assumption of knowledge. Then infinite regress - what caused the cause? What caused that cause and that cause, and on it goes. Believers break the rule of everything that complex must be caused by invoking an ultimate cause: god is eternal, so needs no cause, which is another assumption.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,633
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,633 |
The statement that "[s]cience is the study of the material world is itself a non-empirical, non-scientific philosophical/metaphysical claim. It even has a name: "methodological naturalism" and it is not coterminous with or the same as "science", properly understood. Are you saying science does not study the material world? That fields of study such as astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, etc, is an illusion? That it's all a great deception?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 6,024
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 6,024 |
The statement that "[s]cience is the study of the material world is itself a non-empirical, non-scientific philosophical/metaphysical claim. It even has a name: "methodological naturalism" and it is not coterminous with or the same as "science", properly understood. Are you saying science does not study the material world? That fields of study such as astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, etc, is an illusion? That it's all a great deception? Of course not.
Tarquin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,409 |
[quote=CCCC][quote=mauserand9mm]Looks like the theists have run out of steam. Antlers is in misdirection mode, CCCC is producing bafflegab and Raspy is patting them all on the backside and saying "good job". Over and above the other of your failures, you are delusional if you believe what you posted. Just remember that any premise beginning with "God made..." or "God created..." is invalid despite any evasive side arguments. You should remember that any premise based upon the presumption of no God or beginning with “I don’t know why/what/how [blank] happened but God didn’t…..” is invalid despite your deflection and obvious confusion. Just because you wrongly believe what you posted doesn’t mean it’s true. 😉 There is hope when someone will say "I don't know or I don't understand". If a Stephen Hawking tells you with a certainty that this universe began when all this matter collapsed into a particle smaller than an atom and created an explosion that turned loose all the matter and has sent it at incredible velocity out into space which in turn produced our finely tuned rhythmic rotating and orbiting universe and that is all there is to it. Well, there isn't any hope of bringing that person back to thinking there is a supernatural first cause. Believing that there is a supernatural cause is an assumption, an illusion of knowledge where no knowledge exists. ''I don't know how the universe came to be'' is the honest position. Faith doesn't provide the answers, it just gives believers the illusion of answers. If there is a God, whatever that may be, God appears to have no interest in dealing with us openly. Instead we have self appointed representatives assuming to speak on behalf of whatever God they are spruiking. Most scientist do know how the universe came to be...despite some materialists proposing “time before the Big Bang”, there is no evidence for it all. I didn't mean the big bang. The universe may be a part of a larger system, cyclic, a one off fluke, quantum instability/fluctuations, or whatever...it hasn't been established, it is not known. Nor has it been established or ruled out that time had a beginning. It is not known. That is the point of my remark [
Despite Physicists such as Victor Stenger postulating “Pre-Big Bang time”, or what Stephen Hawking calls, “Imaginary Time” there is no proof for it, whereas, there is much proof for there being a beginning. This is why it is rejected by most Cosmologists because the evidence points to a "singularity" of the beginning of space, time, energy and matter. Far from time being meaningless in the moments of the Big Bang, the timing of the expansion rate from the moment of the Big Bang was critical. It is not known, nothing has been established in that regard, and no reason to invoke faith, that because we don't know, God did it. The correct position is: we don't know. You are correct, we do not absolutely know.......but, from my perspective, my (I think interesting) research shows that the universe was caused by the God of the Bible is a reasonable one since the universe supports this conclusion. For example, the cause of the universe must logically be greater than the effect of the Universe — since no effect can be greater than its cause. We know that at the Big Bang, all space, time, energy and matter, came into existence. Therefore, the First Cause of this must be logically greater than this effects. Therefore, the Cause is not subject to space ~ it must be omnipresent; the Cause is not subject to time ~ it must be eternal; the Cause is not subject to any limits of energy/power ~ it must be omnipotent (all-powerful); and, the Cause cannot be material ~ it must be immaterial. Added to this, the universe is exquisitely fine-tuned and displays the hallmarks of purposeful, thoughtful design, which points to the First Cause being both personable (only personal agents are capable of thought) and omniscient. These are the unique and exclusive attributes of the God of the Bible.[/quote] ''The universe is caused'' is an assumption. We don't know that the universe is caused. Time is relative. Physics breaks down within a singularity, the universe may be cyclic, or something that nobody has yet imagined. ''It is not known means ''not known, we don't know.'' An assumption like 'it must be caused' is an assumption of knowledge. Then infinite regress - what caused the cause? What caused that cause and that cause, and on it goes. Believers break the rule of everything that complex must be caused by invoking an ultimate cause: god is eternal, so needs no cause, which is another assumption.[/quote] From me (Raspy)..... If one is going to consider Cosmology seriously, it is incumbent on one to take seriously the full range of data appropriate to that enterprise. That is, the data needed for the attempted scope of such a theory must include data to do with the meaning of life as well as data derived from telescopes, laboratory experiments, and particle colliders. It must thus include data about good and evil, life and death, fear and hope, love and pain, writings from the great philosophers and writers and artists who have lived in human history and pondered the meaning of life on the basis of their life experiences. This is all of great meaning to those who live on Earth (and hence in the Universe). To produce books saying that science proves there is no purpose in the universe is pure myopia. It just means that one has shut ones eyes to all the data that relates to purpose and meaning; and that one supposes that the only science is physics (for psychology and biology are full of purpose).
Last edited by Raspy; 07/02/22.
Illegitimi non carborundum
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,484
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,484 |
While Christianity draws many roots from the old covenant, the early days of Jesus’ New Covenant ekklesia were marked by some big decisions that set it on a new trajectory. And those decisions…made by Jesus’ own handpicked Apostles and leaders…continue to guide and shape and challenge His movement today.
There was a Council in about 50 AD…a church meeting…that was so important because it defines our relationship with the Mosaic Law. And if that relationship hasn’t been clearly defined for some people nowadays…or if it’s clearly been misdefined…it might be one of the things that has tripped people up in their faith.
When Jesus’ New Covenant ekklesia launched, it’s foundation wasn’t a book (the Bible didn’t exist), and it wasn’t the Mosaic Law. The foundation of the early church was clearly an event — it was the resurrection of Jesus. This is where they got their confidence and their fearlessness, their traction and what they preached.
The first Christians were all about Jesus’ resurrection because they had experienced this event, they were eyewitnesses. And the earliest Christians were all Jewish, but they’d embraced Jesus as their Messiah, along with His teachings; even though their consciences were still hardwired into the Mosaic Law that they’d grown up with.
So they had the old covenant (the Law of Moses) that they’d been raised on, and they had the New Covenant that Jesus established, and it was difficult for many of them not to mix and match these two different covenants. It took em’ about 20 years to break that habit, but they eventually did. But some people nowadays still choose to mix and match those two different covenants.
Every day on this side of the ground is a win.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,530
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,530 |
Having, at the outset, declared myself not holy, every now and then I take a look at this thread - thinking that maybe the decent and honest efforts of some "holy guys" here may have made some difference with the non-Christians who invited themselves in. Nope - and, it seems - no hope.
Why is it that those who express total disbelief in the Supreme Being; those who in no way share the faith, hope and eternal security of Christians; those unfaithful who demand exacting evidence and proof of whatever - also find it so compelling to insert themselves into a discussion about God and then continually and insistently deride, besmirch and even attack the mores of professed Christians?
In the example here, if Christians are fully willing and content to leave the atheists to be what they proclaim, but also have been wiling to try to share with the atheists some of the roots and foundation of their faith, why would an atheist apply such time and energy in negative attacks on the faithful?
With regard to human behavior and the work of God, there is a significant and telling cause for this dichotomy. This thread provides compelling evidence for those whose minds are open.
NRA Member - Life, Benefactor, Patron
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,484
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,484 |
Why is it that those who express total disbelief in the Supreme Being; those who in no way share the faith, hope and eternal security of Christians; those unfaithful who demand exacting evidence and proof of whatever - also find it so compelling to insert themselves into a discussion about God and then continually and insistently deride, besmirch and even attack the mores of professed Christians? Because the two from Australia clearly can’t stand it that you and other’s who strive to follow Jesus actually believe what you do. It clearly grates on em’. It clearly consumes em’ and eats em’ up. It clearly bothers them to no end. And their presence and behavior on every single one of these type threads that you clearly and accurately described above…as have MANY other members here…clearly has zero to do with “sorting fact from fiction” or “open and honest questioning”. Regardless, they’re harmless. Even the likes of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett can’t make a single dent in the original version of Christianity that was implemented and modeled by Jesus and His earliest followers. The softballs that are lobbed by the two from Australia routinely get crushed outta the park.
Every day on this side of the ground is a win.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,800
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,800 |
Why is it that those who express total disbelief in the Supreme Being; those who in no way share the faith, hope and eternal security of Christians; those unfaithful who demand exacting evidence and proof of whatever - also find it so compelling to insert themselves into a discussion about God and then continually and insistently deride, besmirch and even attack the mores of professed Christians? Because the two from Australia clearly can’t stand it that you and other’s who strive to follow Jesus actually believe what you do. It clearly grates on em’. It clearly consumes em’ and eats em’ up. It clearly bothers them to no end. And their presence and behavior on every single one of these type threads that you clearly and accurately described above…as have MANY other members here…clearly has zero to do with “sorting fact from fiction” or “open and honest questioning”. Regardless, they’re harmless. Even the likes of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett can’t make a single dent in the original version of Christianity that was implemented and modeled by Jesus and His earliest followers. The softballs that are lobbed by the two from Australia routinely get crushed outta the park. ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/S4BfylF.gif) ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/Hg5UjXy.gif) You two should get a room. Just remember, the premise "God created _________" is invalid.
Whatever you said...everyone knows you are a lying jerk. That's a bold assertion. Point out where you think I lied. Well?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,280
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,280 |
you want an Infinite Being to think and act like you think He should. It's wrong to expect common sense from a god who supposedly created us in his own image? If any god wants all the people of Earth to behave in a certain way then it makes no sense to go about it this way. It's not that I am closed minded to the possibility of a god. But I refuse to believe that he would be a dumbass. Which is what Christianity would have me believe he is. If I wanted everyone at my company to know about a new set of guidelines for behavior then we would hold a meeting where they are all told directly. And each new employee would be personally instructed as well. I wouldn't leave vague and ambiguous pieces of information here and there for people to find and interpret 47 different ways. There are what, like 200 different denominations of Christianity in the US alone. Why reveal yourself to a few goat herders 2000 years ago and then never directly speak to anyone here again? Well, unless you count the 900 foot tall Jesus Oral Roberts claimed he saw in Tulsa. But that may have been medication related. Also the system of post life eternal justice supposedly set up by the Christian god has got to be the most fracked up nonsense possible. Men had to have dug this out of their ass. No way an omnipotent god came up with this crap. Consider that both of these outcomes are absolutely possible according to Christians and somehow makes sense to them. Case one: Some guy is born in India to Hindu parents. In fact his whole extended family is Hindu. In fact his whole home town is Hindu. In fact the whole region of the country he is in is Hindu. So surprise surprise he grows up to be Hindu. But he's a nice hard working honest fellow who harms no one. He meets a woman; falls in love. He treats her well and never harms her or cheats on her. They have kids and he's a very attentive and responsible father to them. Finally after a LONG life of honest hard work and harming no one he dies. And being Hindu (not Christian), HE IS FLUNG INTO A PIT OF FIRE WHERE HE BURNS SCREAMING AND CRYING FOR ALL ETERNITY WITHOUT HOPE OF REPRIEVE OR IT EVER ENDING!!! Just what that lowlife SOB deserved huh? Case two: A man is born in Texas to Southern Baptist parents. He's a bad seed from the word go. Always in trouble with the law. Cruel and dishonest as they come. At some point he begins raping and killing children. Finally after killing 20 or more he is caught, convicted and sentenced to death. But he is from a Christian family. And on the day he is to be put to death he decides as they are leading him down the hall to the execution chamber to turn his life over to Jesus Christ. You know all 10 minutes he has left. And if he is sincere, and who wouldn't be 10 minutes from death, he goes to heaven and basks in the glow and everlasting ecstasy of god. A just reward for a life well lived. Then there is the ridiculous one size fits all nature of the Christian afterlife. Hitler directly sends 6 million Jews to their death in camps and starts a world war that causes the death of another 60 million people in Europe and Russia. Afterlife punishment? Eternal hell fire. Ok I'm good with that. Some guy who ate meat on a Friday? Afterlife Punishment? Same as Hitler Eternal hell fire. LOL! Yeah that's fair. Surely only a god could have created a plan that perfect. If the Christian god is real then he would have to be an unjust monster. Which flies pretty hard in the face of the loving god image Christians try to use in their recruitment pamphlets. Whew! I have no idea where you came up with this nonsense. You rank right up there with DBT and MM for theological ignorance ….. so, inquiring minds want to know….. can you back up your comments….. No….you can’t but it would be fun to see you try.
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,280
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,280 |
There have a number of comments about “faith” and “hope” with some hiding behind “modern day” definitions of both these terms.
Let’s take a look at “ hope.”
In society today, “hope” is not backed by anything. It rests on a foundation of uncertainty at best. When someone says “I hope this or that..”. There is no certainty and no promise and one is left with ….what?
Hope could be based on my experience of my own ability or perhaps my strong right arm…. But, that is a type of hope is filled with uncertain outcomes as well. Might as well trust in the whimsy of similarly uncertain “fate.”
Modern day/earthly hope is based on a desire for something good…. to happen or come my way or ?
Biblical hope is very very different….it also is a desire for something good to happen but it is based …. has a foundation… that is quite different.
Romans 5:5 refers to the hope that arises out of God’s indwelling….”and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.”
I have explained to DBT and others that the Christian does indeed have “proof” of God through the indwelling. We also have “hope” that is based on the Living God within us.
This hope is indeed based on a firm foundation.
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,280
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,280 |
One more comment before I go….
I heard a statement attributed to Andy Stanley…. Goes something like this:
“There was this guy that walked on the earth….
Tells everyone he’s going to die…then after 3 days he says he’s gonna come back to life…..then he pulls it off!
Hey, we should just go with this guy.”
The tax collector said: “Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner.” Jesus said he went home “justified.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,484
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,484 |
We are not under the Law, we are under Grace. When Apostle Paul and Barnabas were about 300 miles north of Jerusalem in the Gentile city of Antioch, they were telling people there that God had done something in the world, and for the world. And these Gentiles began embracing Jesus and the Gospel. The message they were being given by Paul and Barnabas was simply that God had done something in the world, He sent His son to pay for their sins, embrace Him as your Savior, and follow Him. And that message was way better to them…and made much more sense to them…than the paganism that they’d grown up with. Meanwhile back in Jerusalem, the mix and match Jewish Christians heard what was goin’ on in Antioch and they weren’t havin’ it. They didn’t like Paul tellin’ these Gentiles that they don’t need to keep the Mosaic Law…that Moses was out and Jesus was in…so they sent their own missionaries to Antioch behind Paul to correct what they considered to be his horrible theology. And they told these brand new Gentile Christians in Antioch that keeping the Law of Moses was necessary for their salvation and inclusion in the early church. They told em’ if they were gonna follow Jesus, if they were gonna be saved from their sin, if they were gonna get the full benefit of Jesus’ death on the cross, and if they were gonna be included in the church, then they had to keep the Law of Moses. There was a lotta drama. These mix and match Jewish Christians were even telling them that unless they were circumcised according to the custom of Moses, that they could not be saved…! Circumcision was the mark of the old covenant for Jewish men. And they were telling these brand new Gentile Christians that not only did they need to get in on the Mosaic Law to be saved, but they also had to have a surgical procedure done…! Down there…! That likely didn’t sit well with the Gentile men. Understandably so.
Every day on this side of the ground is a win.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,530
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,530 |
You two should get a room. Just remember, the premise "God created _________" is invalid. Nothing - zero - you have posted here is worth remembering, and it will not be. Kindly report that to your boss - what's his name? - Lucifer.
NRA Member - Life, Benefactor, Patron
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 867
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 867 |
Wabigoon, GWP guy Bill from Canada 🇨🇦 Sorry to bother you. After the two videos awhile back, & then this 30 page ??? I'm confused (even more so than before) could you find it in your heart to have a private back and forth about this topic??? Bill out. 👣🐾👣🐾🇨🇦
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 13,060
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 13,060 |
We are not under the Law, we are under Grace. When Apostle Paul and Barnabas were about 300 miles north of Jerusalem in the Gentile city of Antioch, they were telling people there that God had done something in the world, and for the world. And these Gentiles began embracing Jesus and the Gospel. The message they were being given by Paul and Barnabas was simply that God had done something in the world, He sent His son to pay for their sins, embrace Him as your Savior, and follow Him. And that message was way better to them…and made much more sense to them…than the paganism that they’d grown up with. Meanwhile back in Jerusalem, the mix and match Jewish Christians heard what was goin’ on in Antioch and they weren’t havin’ it. They didn’t like Paul tellin’ these Gentiles that they don’t need to keep the Mosaic Law…that Moses was out and Jesus was in…so they sent their own missionaries to Antioch behind Paul to correct what they considered to be his horrible theology. And they told these brand new Gentile Christians in Antioch that keeping the Law of Moses was necessary for their salvation and inclusion in the early church. They told em’ if they were gonna follow Jesus, if they were gonna be saved from their sin, if they were gonna get the full benefit of Jesus’ death on the cross, and if they were gonna be included in the church, then they had to keep the Law of Moses. There was a lotta drama. These mix and match Jewish Christians were even telling them that unless they were circumcised according to the custom of Moses, that they could not be saved…! Circumcision was the mark of the old covenant for Jewish men. And they were telling these brand new Gentile Christians that not only did they need to get in on the Mosaic Law to be saved, but they also had to have a surgical procedure done…! Down there…! That likely didn’t sit well with the Gentile men. Understandably so. I would tend to believe the "mix and match" Jewish Christians being led by the apostles chosen by Jesus himself would be the side to believe in this controversy. Jesus warned about imposters. I'm not believing Peter, John, James, et al would have Jesus' doctrine wrong. Paul was known to have hallucinations.
Patriotism (and religion) is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
Jesus: "Take heed that no man deceive you."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,484
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,484 |
I would tend to believe the "mix and match" Jewish Christians being led by the apostles chosen by Jesus himself would be the side to believe in this controversy. Jesus warned about imposters. I'm not believing Peter, John, James, et al would have Jesus' doctrine wrong. Paul was known to have hallucinations. The mix and match Jewish Christians belonged to the party of the Pharisees, and they are the one’s who stood up and said “the Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the Law of Moses.” 20 years after the resurrection…which is when all of this was taking place…there were a buncha Pharisees who’d become Christians. But they were still so bound to the Mosaic Law that they were trying to integrate it with the Gospel; ‘they’ were the mix and match group of Jewish Christians.
Every day on this side of the ground is a win.
|
|
|
|
|
209 members (2500HD, 160user, 69sportfury, 01Foreman400, 300s, 14 invisible),
1,747
guests, and
995
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,625
Posts18,474,102
Members73,941
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
