or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Religious Thread: BEWARE! ;) (Discussion on end times)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Religious Thread: BEWARE! ;) (Discussion on end times) - Page 2

post #41 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by powerdoc:
<strong>

Strange there is a huge contradiction between the god related by the old testimony : a god very rigid : follow me in the way of right or you are doomed (excuse me for this simplistic resume) and the god of Love describe by Jesus Christ.
Jesus has sacrified his life for the sake of Humankind even if this humankind was not very gratefull, and the god described by the old testimony is ready to destroy and rebuilt if the things does not go in the right way. It's seems to me it's 180 % opposite.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The difference is Jesus. Before Jesus there was no payment for sin except death. The only way to atone for your sin was to sacrifice an animal on an alter to God, its blood was shed to atone for your sins. But this only covered past sins, not future sins. And not everyone practiced this so their sins just began to pile up and get worse. After quite a while God would get fed up like with Sodom and Gomorrah, and the Flood, and just wipe the slate clean. Unfortunately this would happen not by animals dying to atone for their sins, but by the people reaping the judgement of death.

When God sent his son Jesus to die on the cross for the sins of the world he, a perfect man, took the judgement for all the sins of the world on himself and took away the need for any more to die for sins sake. He paid that price for us because we could not pay it.

So, to sum up, God used to seem much more harsh because sin would get between Him and His people. He tried to give them a way to atone for it through sacrificing animals, but that did not fix the problem, it only put it off for a bit. He eventually decided that the only way for the problem to be resolved was if a perfect man were to choose (get that, the man had to make the choice by himself) to die for everyone elses sins. And now we no longer live under Gods judgement because of that. Since we no longer live under that judgement, it would make God seem quite a bit brighter and happier, wouldn't you say?

Bear in mind this is a very brief overview of atonement and I may have missed some points here or there, but I thing it is valid overall. Anyone care to fix any misstatments or fill in any blanks?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #42 of 140
[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>

The difference is Jesus. Before Jesus there was no payment for sin except death. The only way to atone for your sin was to sacrifice an animal on an alter to God, its blood was shed to atone for your sins. But this only covered past sins, not future sins. And not everyone practiced this so their sins just began to pile up and get worse. After quite a while God would get fed up like with Sodom and Gomorrah, and the Flood, and just wipe the slate clean. Unfortunately this would happen not by animals dying to atone for their sins, but by the people reaping the judgement of death.

When God sent his son Jesus to die on the cross for the sins of the world he, a perfect man, took the judgement for all the sins of the world on himself and took away the need for any more to die for sins sake. He paid that price for us because we could not pay it.

So, to sum up, God used to seem much more harsh because sin would get between Him and His people. He tried to give them a way to atone for it through sacrificing animals, but that did not fix the problem, it only put it off for a bit. He eventually decided that the only way for the problem to be resolved was if a perfect man were to choose (get that, the man had to make the choice by himself) to die for everyone elses sins. And now we no longer live under Gods judgement because of that. Since we no longer live under that judgement, it would make God seem quite a bit brighter and happier, wouldn't you say?

Bear in mind this is a very brief overview of atonement and I may have missed some points here or there, but I thing it is valid overall. Anyone care to fix any misstatments or fill in any blanks?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for your theological answer.
post #43 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by powerdoc:
<strong>
Thanks for your theological answer.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You're welcome.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #44 of 140
Noah, these atrocities you speak of. You justify them how?

All you do, unintentionally, is show the hatred and evil that is the christian religion.
http://freehenson.da.ru/ - chased out of America because he exposed the evils of Scientology. So much for freedom.
Reply
http://freehenson.da.ru/ - chased out of America because he exposed the evils of Scientology. So much for freedom.
Reply
post #45 of 140
I would like you NoahJ to tell me how killing an innocent animal in any way atones for another beings sins... How does that make any sense...?

I think it is a sick and disturbing way of laying blame and punishment on others not responsible for your actions...

its a cop-out...

------------------------------------

© FERRO 2001-2002
post #46 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by xenu:
<strong>Noah, these atrocities you speak of. You justify them how?

All you do, unintentionally, is show the hatred and evil that is the christian religion.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The atrocities? You mean animal sacrifice you find in the old testament? The Christian religion, based on Jesus Christ, does not, nor has it ever, practice this form of atonement. there was not a need after his death on the cross. Sorry, your argument is basically flawed. The sacrifices were practiced by Jewish priests, which has little to do with Christianity in the respect that you speak of.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #47 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by FERRO:
<strong>I would like you NoahJ to tell me how killing an innocent animal in any way atones for another beings sins... How does that make any sense...?

I think it is a sick and disturbing way of laying blame and punishment on others not responsible for your actions...

its a cop-out...</strong><hr></blockquote>

First of all, the use of innocent animals is not used any longer, and was not required after the death of Christ. So let us not pretend that it is something that is still going on, it is not.

Second of all, the only way to atone for sin before Christ was teh shedding of innocent blood. Animals were not, and for the most part still are not, considered to be worth more than the life of a human. So in order to atone for ones sins you had to kill an animal and then offer that blood up to God in atonement. You could not offer up yourself, or another human for two reasons. Killing a human is another form of sin, and thus you cannot make up for sin by committing sin, and second, not one human was innocent or without sin and thus could not be a "perfect sacrifice" for atonement. Christ became that man later on.

And last of al and to restate so that there is no question. This is not the way things are anymore. There is not need for sacrifices or blood to atone for sin as this was covered at the cross. How this shows Christianity as an evil religion is lame at the very best and fatally flawed at the worst. Never done by Christians, never required by Christians, never will be done by Christians. If anything, it shows Christians another thing they have been set free from by Christ's death on the cross, and subsequent resurrection.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #48 of 140
[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>

First of all, the use of innocent animals is not used any longer, and was not required after the death of Christ. So let us not pretend that it is something that is still going on, it is not.

Second of all, the only way to atone for sin before Christ was teh shedding of innocent blood. Animals were not, and for the most part still are not, considered to be worth more than the life of a human. So in order to atone for ones sins you had to kill an animal and then offer that blood up to God in atonement. You could not offer up yourself, or another human for two reasons. Killing a human is another form of sin, and thus you cannot make up for sin by committing sin, and second, not one human was innocent or without sin and thus could not be a "perfect sacrifice" for atonement. Christ became that man later on.

And last of al and to restate so that there is no question. This is not the way things are anymore. There is not need for sacrifices or blood to atone for sin as this was covered at the cross. How this shows Christianity as an evil religion is lame at the very best and fatally flawed at the worst. Never done by Christians, never required by Christians, never will be done by Christians. If anything, it shows Christians another thing they have been set free from by Christ's death on the cross, and subsequent resurrection.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Huh... First off, I think we all know its not required anymore...

As for above... you avoided the question, Sure, you detailed the reasons why they kill innocent animals...

[quote]the only way to atone for sin before Christ was the shedding of innocent blood. Animals were not, and for the most part still are not, considered to be worth more than the life of a human. So in order to atone for ones sins you had to kill an animal and then offer that blood up to God in atonement<hr></blockquote>

here is where this special-logic evades me...

The question was how does killing another life-form make any sense... why is all this killing neccessary? What function does it serve...? Why all this sacrificial destruction... How does killing make you atoned of your sins...???

the intent is to call into question the cruel and unusual methods of the god you are so avid to defend...

------------------------------------

© FERRO 2001-2002

[ 04-25-2002: Message edited by: FERRO ]</p>
post #49 of 140
[quote] The question was how does killing another life-form make any sense... why is all this killing neccessary? What function does it serve...? Why all this sacrificial destruction... How does killing make you atoned of your sins...???

the intent is to call into question the cruel and unusual methods of the god you are so avid to defend... <hr></blockquote>

Why is all this killing neccessary? Well I believe that it is necessary because we live in a sinful world, and that just is the way it is. I simply cannont explain it (I will reasearch it further and get back to you). I have no doubt God could have come up with a different way for the ancients to atone for their sins. However, this is the way He chose to do it.


[quote] the intent is to call into question the cruel and unusual methods of the god you are so avid to defend... <hr></blockquote>

I don't see how killing an animal for sacrafice was cruel and unusual? Are you talking about cruel and unusual for the animal? If so, I belive God gave us dominion over the animals. They are essentially a "rescoruce" that we must be carefull to use responsible. Sacraficing animals is just one way the ancients used that "resource". This is one of those things I don't think we as humans can fully comprehend. According to the Bible something must be punished for sin. (Back then, animals were punished and their blood spilt. Now however, Jesus Christ took the sins of an entire world the cross.) If this "cleansing" did not occur God (who is perfect) would not be able to reside in the same "temperal plane" as his creation that he loves so much.

(Ya, I know "temperal plane" sounds cheesy but I couldn't think of a better term, and I'm a trekkie )

Its late, and I'm tired so much of this post probably dosen't make much sense in its present form. Wanna help me out Noah?

edit: one more thought, animals were "scape-goats". They took the place of humans on the alter. God loves us more then he loves the animals, thus we come first. (hmm... that sounded harsh...)

[ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: GolferGuy1 ]</p>
post #50 of 140
[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>

John 3:16-17
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[2] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

2 Peter 3:8-10

8But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. 10But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare.

As you say, it is your choice. And in the end you are held accountable for your choices. It is not God's fault what choice you make, He gave us freedom of choice so that when we do choose Him it is out of true love, not as a programmed robot.

[ 04-24-2002: Message edited by: NoahJ ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Why are you quoting the bible? It's not a reliable source.

Why is the bible holy?

It's god's words.

How do we know it's god's words?

It's in the bible.

But why is the bible holy?

It's god's words.

But how do we know it's god's words?

It's in the bible.

Sorry, it's a circular argument. It doesn't work. It would be analogous to completly making up a research paper and the only thing in your works cited list is that very research paper. It doesn't work.
post #51 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by FERRO:
<strong>Huh... First off, I think we all know its not required anymore...

As for above... you avoided the question, Sure, you detailed the reasons why they kill innocent animals...</strong><hr></blockquote>

I avoided no question that I can see. If you think I am missing it, please restate.

Xenu posted: Noah, these atrocities you speak of. You justify them how?

All you do, unintentionally, is show the hatred and evil that is the christian religion.


And thus my response. He makes it seem as though Christians are performing these actions even now. And Still i don't see the word atrocities fitting. And I bet the same word, Atrocities, does not fit in his vocab for abortions... If its an animal, atrocity, if its an unborn child, choice... No more off topic than what he posted in this case.

[quote]<strong>here is where this special-logic evades me...

The question was how does killing another life-form make any sense... why is all this killing neccessary? What function does it serve...? Why all this sacrificial destruction... How does killing make you atoned of your sins...???

the intent is to call into question the cruel and unusual methods of the god you are so avid to defend...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Cruel and unusual? How so? Did they torture the animal? Did they make it suffer? Is the animal worth more than the person? Your posts all seem to point in that direction. However one thing you all seem to miss, is how did this line of questioning start?

Evil God, cruel God. Your God is so nasty. How can you follow a God like that?

And yet you completely discount how He sent His SON, His only SON to pay for your sins. Do you feel like you deserve that? I know I don't. Sure, back when they were doing animal sacrifice to atone for sin that was not a very long term solution. God saw the problem and came up with a solution that was good for the rest of time.

Maybe you might be thinking, why did he wait so long? My only thought on that was, the world had to see that they could not do it on their own. Can you be perfect from now on? I know I cannot. It is not possible.

The question of why death...

Romans 6:22-23

22Â*Â*Â*But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life.
23Â*Â*Â*For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.


It answers all your questions. And before anyone goes off about being a slave to God think on this:

Matthew 6

23Â*Â*Â*But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!
24Â*Â*Â*"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.


The passage was specifically pointed to a rich man who could not give up his wealth to follow Jesus, but the point still stands. You cannot serve two masters. Either you follow God or you follow someone else. If you follow Jesus then by definition you are following God.

John 10

29Â*Â*Â*My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.
30Â*Â*Â*I and the Father are one."


This was in answer to the Jews in the temple area who were trying to find a reason to kill him. They asked him to say out loud that he was the Christ so they could have a reason to stone him to death. He obliged and then some.

You can argue all you like about God being evil, mean, unjust, whatever. However you all fail to catch that God has spent all of history trying to give us a way to draw near to Him. Now that we have an open door all most people seem to say is, "It's not fair, I have to accept that free gift? Why should I have to follow the rules laid out for eternal life. That's it, I am not going to believe, take that you bad Christians."

The problem seems to be people's willingness to give up their perceived freedom to follow a leader that they see as restricting them and forcing His will on them. To that I say, when was the last time God twisted your arm to follow Him? It does not happen, and even when you are a Christian your arm is not twisted. I have the choice every day to either follow God or go my own way. Freedom of choice is still there. However I choose to follow my maker, you choose to follow yourself. Where have I lost freedom by force? Why does this make me stupid? How does this make God evil? Are your parents evil for enforcing their rules on you when you were a child as well?

This was a bit random,it is late. If you have questions keep them coming. I will answer what I can. Thanks GolferGuy, you covered some good ground. I agree with all of what you said I think. It is late. I will read again tomorrow and see if there is more that needs to be added. Nice to not be alone here, not that I mind, but I like to hear that there is agreement, otherwise I must be doing something very wrong....
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #52 of 140
[quote]Originally posted by GolferGuy1:
<strong>

I don't see how killing an animal for sacrafice was cruel and unusual? Are you talking about cruel and unusual for the animal? If so, I belive God gave us dominion over the animals. They are essentially a "rescoruce" that we must be carefull to use responsible. Sacraficing animals is just one way the ancients used that "resource". This is one of those things I don't think we as humans can fully comprehend. According to the Bible something must be punished for sin. (Back then, animals were punished and their blood spilt. Now however, Jesus Christ took the sins of an entire world the cross.) If this "cleansing" did not occur God (who is perfect) would not be able to reside in the same "temperal plane" as his creation that he loves so much.

(Ya, I know "temperal plane" sounds cheesy but I couldn't think of a better term, and I'm a trekkie )

Its late, and I'm tired so much of this post probably dosen't make much sense in its present form. Wanna help me out Noah?

edit: one more thought, animals were "scape-goats". They took the place of humans on the alter. God loves us more then he loves the animals, thus we come first. (hmm... that sounded harsh...)

[ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: GolferGuy1 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

So your answer to the question is: Becuase...

Jeeez, didnt see that coming...

[quote]I don't see how killing an animal for sacrafice was cruel and unusual?<hr></blockquote>

WTF?... So next time I swear or take the lords name in vain I am going to kill someones cat...

does that make any sense...?

What would that person say...

"Cat Owner: Why the hell did you kill my cat...?"

"Killer: Ughhh... becuase I took the lords name in vain... And God told me if I kill something, I will be OK with him then..."

does that make any sense...?

Do you get the point...

I hope NoahJ can come up with something better than that...

------------------------------------

© FERRO 2001-2002
post #53 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>Why are you quoting the bible? It's not a reliable source.

Why is the bible holy?

It's god's words.

How do we know it's god's words?

It's in the bible.

But why is the bible holy?

It's god's words.

But how do we know it's god's words?

It's in the bible.

Sorry, it's a circular argument. It doesn't work. It would be analogous to completly making up a research paper and the only thing in your works cited list is that very research paper. It doesn't work.</strong><hr></blockquote>

No, it is not the same thing. The Bible is over 60 books combined into one by many different authors. It has undergone the strictest and most stringent research and people have tried to find the flaws in it over and over. Sure it has been translated, and that is subject to human interpretation, but even the different translations have not varied much, if at all in the actual meaning.

The Bible is the word of God. And yes, it is holy because it is God's words. How do we know it is God's words, because it is written down in the Bible that it is. It may seem circular, but it has withstood the scrutiny of time and nobody has come up with any argument that convinces me otherwise. As for why i quote the Bible, it is what my faith and religion are based on. What do you recommend I quote? The media? Someone else who quotes the bible? You? Go to the source. It is not an essay that quotes itself. It spans too much history to fall into that category. Show me the fatal flaw, the silver bullet. Remove Jesus Christ from the equation and my religion becomes nothing, worthless. If you can do that, then I am beaten. But you cannot. Christ is real, the bible is the word of God, and I am going to bed. Goodnight.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #54 of 140
Noah, unless you believe every last word in that bible of yours and follow it to the letter, you have no right quoting from it. I've already explained why it's an invalid source anyway, but if you insist on using it to bring up all these convenient quotes, you have to believe and FOLLOW ALL OF IT. Fundamentalist or bust baby. If you really believe that the bible is god's words, it's arrogant for you to even try to pick and choose which ones you want to follow.
post #55 of 140
[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>

No, it is not the same thing. The Bible is over 60 books combined into one by many different authors. It has undergone the strictest and most stringent research and people have tried to find the flaws in it over and over. Sure it has been translated, and that is subject to human interpretation, but even the different translations have not varied much, if at all in the actual meaning.

The Bible is the word of God. And yes, it is holy because it is God's words. How do we know it is God's words, because it is written down in the Bible that it is. It may seem circular, but it has withstood the scrutiny of time and nobody has come up with any argument that convinces me otherwise. As for why i quote the Bible, it is what my faith and religion are based on. What do you recommend I quote? The media? Someone else who quotes the bible? You? Go to the source. It is not an essay that quotes itself. It spans too much history to fall into that category. Show me the fatal flaw, the silver bullet. Remove Jesus Christ from the equation and my religion becomes nothing, worthless. If you can do that, then I am beaten. But you cannot. Christ is real, the bible is the word of God, and I am going to bed. Goodnight. </strong><hr></blockquote>

It is not my job to disprove it. It is your job to prove it. There is no proof because religion takes something called faith. Faith, by definition, is illogical.

Faith - Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

You cannot use logical arguments to try to prove the bible because if you do you lack faith. It's a catch22 and you are on the wrong end of it.
post #56 of 140
[quote]I avoided no question that I can see. If you think I am missing it, please restate.<hr></blockquote>

I think you missed it again...

[quote]Cruel and unusual? How so? Did they torture the animal? Did they make it suffer? Is the animal worth more than the person?<hr></blockquote>

See there it is... It's not about torture, It's not about suffering, It's not about the animals worth...

It's about purpose... what good does killing an innnocent animal do...

I hear you say it clears your sins from you, you get attonement...

How...?

I dont expect a Becuase... Circular argument from you this time...

It doesnt make any sense, "Becuase the bible tells me so..." wont cut it...

Its a cop-out...

there are alot of things that just dont compute... killing chickens whenever "you" screw up is just stupid...

------------------------------------

© FERRO 2001-2002

[ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: FERRO ]</p>
post #57 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by FERRO:
<strong>

See there it is... It's not about torture, It's not about suffering, It's not about the animals worth...

It's about purpose... what good does killing an innnocent animal do...

I hear you say it clears your sins from you, you get attonement...

How...?

I dont expect a Becuase... Circular argument from you this time...

It doesnt make any sense, "Becuase the bible tells me so..." wont cut it...

Its a cop-out...

there are alot of things that just dont compute... killing chickens whenever "you" screw up is just stupid...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thank you for restating.

Ok, first of all you are missing one important point. In your previous posts and this on you speak of you yourself killing the animal and then you go on to talk about killing cats and chickens and such. It did not work that way. The animal were very specific. Bulls, rams, turtle doves etc. They had to be killed by a priest at the temple. And there was supposed to be a contrite spirit from you.

If you grab a neighbors cat and kill it you just sinned in two ways. You stole and destroyed your neighbors property, and you made your own sacrifice to God in an impure manner. The first is bad enough, the second could bring the wrath of God down on you. There was a Hebrew king who decided before a battle to do his own sacrifice to God becasue he was tired of waiting for the priest to show up. God was not pleased at all and the bible states that they lost that battle because of his arrogance.

Now, to answer your more specific question.

It's about purpose... what good does killing an innnocent animal do...

Perhaps this will help you understand and perhaps not. If not, then you will just have to be dissatisfied.

The word Atonement mean roughly, to cover over sin by making an equivalent payment or ransom, so that adequate recompense is made for the offense in question. We need atonement so that we do not have to live under the wrath of God. Because God desires to save his people, forgive their sins, and reconcile them with Himself, he furnished a way of salvation by accepting in their place the death of an innocent life (the animal sacrificed). This animal bore their guilt and penalty, and covered over their sins by its shed blood.

Leviticus 17:11 (God speaking to Moses)

11 For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life.

So if you cannot accept that there is nothing more that can be said. It is out of the mouth of God Himself. I will not second guess God's motives, if I do than that means that I feel that I am greater than God which is not the case.

I hope that helps, if not, sorry.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #58 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>

It is not my job to disprove it. It is your job to prove it. There is no proof because religion takes something called faith. Faith, by definition, is illogical.

Faith - Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You cannot just pull out one definition of faith and then expect it to cover everything. Talk about taking something out of context and twisting it for your own purposes. At least I take the time to put things in context and let somone know how I arrived at a conclusion.

From the Dictionary.

faith Pronunciation Key (fth)
n.
  • Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
  • Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief. See Synonyms at trust.
  • Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.
  • often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
  • The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
  • A set of principles or beliefs.


As you can see faith can mean many things. You can pick one defintion if you like, but that does not make your definition right than anyone elses wrong.

[quote]<strong>You cannot use logical arguments to try to prove the bible because if you do you lack faith. It's a catch22 and you are on the wrong end of it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

What? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> I am afraid that this argument of yours is so rediculous that I am not going to be able to answer it right now. It is going to take time to digest and see if it is even worth answering given my previous answer to you...

{edit} fixed some formatting issues, all words are unchanged

[ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: NoahJ ]</p>
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #59 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>Noah, unless you believe every last word in that bible of yours and follow it to the letter, you have no right quoting from it. I've already explained why it's an invalid source anyway, but if you insist on using it to bring up all these convenient quotes, you have to believe and FOLLOW ALL OF IT. Fundamentalist or bust baby. If you really believe that the bible is god's words, it's arrogant for you to even try to pick and choose which ones you want to follow.</strong><hr></blockquote>

And it is quite arrogant of you to believe you have the authority, morally or intellectually, to tell me what I can or cannot believe or quote in my faith. My relationship with God is between me and God. Not you, me, and God. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> You do not know what I beleive, what scriptures I follow, or do not, or if there are any that I do not follow. As far as you know, I could be wholly fundamentalist and you could be spitting into the wind.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #60 of 140
Thread Starter 
As much as I am enjoying our off topic discussion, (no really, I am!) I feel it is time to post a bit more on the topic that was origionally stated.

In my last post I talked about the rapture. I felt it was important to bring that up first as I will not be placing it in my timeline as i go on with this thread. Why? Because I do not know when it will happen as I stated in my previous post, and because that even in itself when it does happen should erase any doubt in anyones mind here due to the fact that it happened. So whenever it happens, it will be a huge event and one that changes a lot of minds about end times prophecy.

The next part of my posting will discuss the first events leading up the the wrath of God being poured out on the Earth. I am currently putting together a timeline of the first events and some of these will include events that should be seen in Israel in paticular. Stay tuned folks...

Oh, and please, keep posting your thoughts. Be civil, but be honest and open as I have been.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #61 of 140
[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>

Thank you for restating.

Ok, first of all you are missing one important point. In your previous posts and this on you speak of you yourself killing the animal and then you go on to talk about killing cats and chickens and such. It did not work that way. The animal were very specific. Bulls, rams, turtle doves etc. They had to be killed by a priest at the temple. And there was supposed to be a contrite spirit from you.

If you grab a neighbors cat and kill it you just sinned in two ways. You stole and destroyed your neighbors property, and you made your own sacrifice to God in an impure manner. The first is bad enough, the second could bring the wrath of God down on you. There was a Hebrew king who decided before a battle to do his own sacrifice to God becasue he was tired of waiting for the priest to show up. God was not pleased at all and the bible states that they lost that battle because of his arrogance.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Your missing the point... Its not about killing someones cat, It was to serve to illistrate a point...

If I do something wrong and the only way for me to be forgiven or atoned is to go around killings things... Wether its a mule or cat or bull or scruffy the dog...

I am sorry becuase that just doesnt make any sense...

Again this is to serve to illistrate a point "I know it doesnt work that way according to the bible anymore" so dont off topic about how things arent anymore and aviod the questions intent...

[quote]FERRO: It's about purpose... what good does killing an innnocent animal do...?

NoahJ: Perhaps this will help you understand and perhaps not. If not, then you will just have to be dissatisfied.

The word Atonement mean roughly, to cover over sin by making an equivalent payment or ransom, so that adequate recompense is made for the offense in question. We need atonement so that we do not have to live under the wrath of God. Because God desires to save his people, forgive their sins, and reconcile them with Himself, he furnished a way of salvation by accepting in their place the death of an innocent life (the animal sacrificed). This animal bore their guilt and penalty, and covered over their sins by its shed blood.

Leviticus 17:11 (God speaking to Moses)

11 For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life.

So if you cannot accept that there is nothing more that can be said. It is out of the mouth of God Himself. I will not second guess God's motives, if I do than that means that I feel that I am greater than God which is not the case.<hr></blockquote>

Again you have avioded the question here by reitterating the proccess, I want to know how blood does this...

Are you going to give me a "becuase the bible tells me so..."

Having said this...

[quote]And it is quite arrogant of you to believe you have the authority, morally or intellectually, to tell me what I can or cannot believe or quote in my faith. My relationship with God is between me and God. Not you, me, and God. You do not know what I beleive, what scriptures I follow, or do not, or if there are any that I do not follow. As far as you know, I could be wholly fundamentalist and you could be spitting into the wind.<hr></blockquote>

It sounds to me as if you are stating things from the bible as if they are rock solid arguments and then saying that your faith in the material is how you see fit to "pick and choose" your beliefs... that your god is a personal one and "whats what" is between you and your god.

However it seems quite arrogant of you to decide what to believe and then tell us "whats what"... given that you beliefs on this matter are solely based on your faith of the material that you choose to believe in...

Sure NoahJ, You have stirred the pot...

And what rises to the top is an empty argument deviod of substance...

If what you say is so, the application of faith to define truth only applies to you. I dont want to hear "Well thats what I believe and If you disagree, thats too bad becuase its between me and my god..."

thats the point (we?) I am trying to make...

You cant just pick and choose and then judge actions others by it, According to you... What I believe to be true... That is between me and your god...

And if so... the argument is mute, becuase if it is completely up to the individual to decide whats what... then you cant go around telling people "whats what"...

you have no authority...

------------------------------------

© FERRO 2001-2002

[ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: FERRO ]</p>
post #62 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by FERRO:
<strong>Your missing the point... Its not about killing someones cat, It was to serve to illistrate a point...

If I do something wrong and the only way for me to be forgiven or atoned is to go around killings things... Wether its a mule or cat or bull or scruffy the dog...

I am sorry becuase that just doesnt make any sense...

Again this is to serve to illistrate a point "I know it doesnt work that way according to the bible anymore" so dont off topic about how things arent anymore and aviod the questions intent...</strong><hr></blockquote>

A poor illustration then.

I have avoided nothing. As I have said, You can believe it or not. God granted us the atonement of blood as stated in the verse. Read it. It was set aside by God for the people of Israel to atone for sins. God said this what what was needed and so this is what was done. How much more clear can I be? This atonement was temporary and thus had to be done over and over. However the need for this was erased when Jesus died on the cross and his blood was shed for you and I.

Now I answered your questions. you are refusing to see that answer as acceptable. I cannot change that and so I am not going to further the argument. You will only get a restatement of the same facts unless you care to bring in any new questions.

[quote]<strong>It sounds to me as if you are stating things from the bible as if they are rock solid arguments and then saying that your faith in the material is how you see fit to "pick and choose" your beliefs... that your god is a personal one and "whats what" is between you and your god.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Nope, wrong. But you can read into it whatever you please.

[quote]<strong>However it seems quite arrogant of you to decide what to believe and then tell us "whats what"... given that you beliefs on this matter are solely based on your faith of the material that you choose to believe in...</strong><hr></blockquote>

I love how you are all the moral authorities and I am the arrogant SOB. Where do you derive your authority here? Your supposed intellectualism? Your superior morality? I would like to know what make my opinion of less value than yours.

[quote]<strong>Sure NoahJ, You have stirred the pot...

And what rises to the top is an empty argument deviod of substance...</strong><hr></blockquote>

In your opinion. Which is based on nothing but your own beliefs about the material that I choose to believe in. Your argument carries no more weight than mine, it is however a convenient way to make it seem as though you have the superior vantage.

[quote]<strong>If what you say is so, the application of faith to define truth only applies to you. I dont want to hear "Well thats what I believe and If you disagree, thats too bad becuase its between me and my god..."</strong><hr></blockquote>

I was making a point that you seem to have missed. First of all, I have never stated that I am the end all of knowlege on this subject. I place that disclaimer in nearly EVERY POST I MAKE in this thread. Look for it. Also, I am not pushing this on you and have made it clear that it is my interpretation of my realtionship with God. However, if you speak with any other Christians on the issue I think you will find that I am not alone in these beliefs, and they might be able to give you a different point of view that is the same but form another angle that I am missing in the current format and forum. Sure, my relationship with God is personal, and sure I have told you what I believe to be the correct view on this discussion, but I did not say this is "whats what" and there is no other way that is right. I am constatnly asking for anyone to show me where I am wrong and to fill in any blanks or misstatements.

[quote]<strong>thats the point (we?) I am trying to make...

You cant just pick and choose and then judge actions others by it, According to you... What I believe to be true... That is between me and your god...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Your salvation is between you and God, yes. I have not judged anyone in this thread that I can recall (show me judging you or anyone in my posts). If you are feeling judged it is not by me.

[quote]<strong>And if so... the argument is mute, becuase if it is completely up to the individual to decide whats what... then you cant go around telling people "whats what"...

you have no authority...</strong><hr></blockquote>

An oversimplification based on a faulty argument that carries no weight. I merely state things as I see them. Any authority I have is given by God, if He has given me no authority in this then such is life, if He has then your opinion on my authority is irrelevant. You may choose to ignore my arguments and decide they hold no authority over you and that is fine, but whatever authority is held is not decided by you and I.

When it falls to pesonal attacks it seems that the argument has struck a few nerves. I will continue to answer new questions, but the on on Atonement in the OT has been answered as best i can. If you have new questions or are not satisfied keep asking. I will glad to answer your questions as best I can.

I am still waiting for answers to a few questions I posed to you. I am being open and honest, how about a little reciprocity.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #63 of 140
Maybe slightly off topic...but related for sure:
I know a number of "born-again" Christians and they will swear blind that the age of the Earth is about 6000 years (I have met Jehovah's Witnesses who also believe this).

Is this from the accounts in Genesis and adding up all the timelines in the "A begat B begat C etc" series? Are these "born-agains" deriving their claim from Bishop Ussher, who was the Archbishop of Armagh, Ireland and started the 6000-year-old-Earth theory in the early 17th century?

James Ussher (1581-1656), Archbishop of Armagh, Primate of All Ireland, and Vice-Chancellor of Trinity College in Dublin was highly regarded in his day as a churchman and as a scholar. Of his many works, his treatise on chronology has proved the most durable. Based on an intricate correlation of Middle Eastern and Mediterranean histories and Holy writ, it was incorporated into an authorized version of the Bible printed in 1701, and thus came to be regarded with almost as much unquestioning reverence as the Bible itself. Having established the first day of creation as Sunday 23 October 4004 BC, by the arguments set forth in the passage below, Ussher calculated the dates of other biblical events, concluding, for example, that Adam and Eve were driven from Paradise on Monday 10 November 4004 BC, and that the ark touched down on Mt Ararat on 5 May 1491 BC `on a Wednesday'.

<a href="http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/ussher.htm" target="_blank">http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/ussher.htm</a>

I know the thread referred to "end-times" but rather than start another one on "start-times", I thought it was more appropriate to include here. So Noah, as someone who appears to believe implicitly in the Bible as the "word of God", what is your take on this 6000 year old Earth theory, which is one of the mainstays of "Creation Science" and a favorite amongst fundamental Christians?

You also mention the "Rapture", another favorite amongst some "born agains":

<a href="http://www.ricter.com/wordline/rapture.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ricter.com/wordline/rapture.htm</a>
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
post #64 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>Maybe slightly off topic...but related for sure:
I know a number of "born-again" Christians and they will swear blind that the age of the Earth is about 6000 years (I have met Jehovah's Witnesses who also believe this).

Is this from the accounts in Genesis and adding up all the timelines in the "A begat B begat C etc" series? Are these "born-agains" deriving their claim from Bishop Ussher, who was the Archbishop of Armagh, Ireland and started the 6000-year-old-Earth theory in the early 17th century?

James Ussher (1581-1656), Archbishop of Armagh, Primate of All Ireland, and Vice-Chancellor of Trinity College in Dublin was highly regarded in his day as a churchman and as a scholar. Of his many works, his treatise on chronology has proved the most durable. Based on an intricate correlation of Middle Eastern and Mediterranean histories and Holy writ, it was incorporated into an authorized version of the Bible printed in 1701, and thus came to be regarded with almost as much unquestioning reverence as the Bible itself. Having established the first day of creation as Sunday 23 October 4004 BC, by the arguments set forth in the passage below, Ussher calculated the dates of other biblical events, concluding, for example, that Adam and Eve were driven from Paradise on Monday 10 November 4004 BC, and that the ark touched down on Mt Ararat on 5 May 1491 BC `on a Wednesday'.

<a href="http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/ussher.htm" target="_blank">http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/ussher.htm</a>

I know the thread referred to "end-times" but rather than start another one on "start-times", I thought it was more appropriate to include here. So Noah, as someone who appears to believe implicitly in the Bible as the "word of God", what is your take on this 6000 year old Earth theory, which is one of the mainstays of "Creation Science" and a favorite amongst fundamental Christians? </strong><hr></blockquote>

Another twist to an already interesting and quite broad topic.

Truthfully I am unclear on this one. I believe in the creation account, but how God chose to handle creation I am unsure of. The Big bang, or just poof, there it is with all the age built in or some other way I am not sure. I think one can be sure that from Adam and Eve to now about 6000 years seems about right. However from that time foreward we are working on a human timeline, or at leastformt he tmeptation foreward when death was introduced and time became relevant.

The bible states that time to God is relative. A day is as a thousand years. I suppose when one is eternal time does not matter much in the grand scheme of things, since it is something you are outside of and not bound by.

[quote]<strong>You also mention the "Rapture", another favorite amongst some "born agains":

<a href="http://www.ricter.com/wordline/rapture.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ricter.com/wordline/rapture.htm</a></strong><hr></blockquote>

That is a great link. I am currently readin it. Some wonderful insight! It appears well studied and thought out. Not a lot new so far, but I am only about 1/4 of the way through. As I said, the rapture is one of the more questioned doctrines of the bible when it comes to end time prophecy. However he (the author) throws in the possibility that the earth will not be destroyed at the end, I will read and see how his conclusions are reached to see if maybe I am persuaded differently than I believe now... Good find.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #65 of 140
Thread Starter 
Wow! :eek: SJO, thank you so much for this link. First page read and it makes a LOT of sense. Did you read this too? Any thoughts?

You are probably the first person who has been able to supply a link or evidence that has shaken one premise of my faith so that I have had to take a step back and look again. I thank you, sincerely.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #66 of 140
[quote]God granted us the atonement of blood as stated in the verse. Read it. It was set aside by God for the people of Israel to atone for sins.<hr></blockquote>

"Because the bible tell me so"....

[quote]I love how you are all the moral authorities and I am the arrogant SOB. Where do you derive your authority here? Your supposed intellectualism? Your superior morality? I would like to know what makes my opinion of less value than yours.<hr></blockquote>

You ask people to "show you where you are wrong" but you cycle into a "circular the bible tells me so defense"...

[quote]originally posted by: Exercise in Frivolity
<strong>Why are you quoting the bible? It's not a reliable source.

Why is the bible holy?

It's god's words.

How do we know it's god's words?

It's in the bible.

But why is the bible holy?

It's god's words.

But how do we know it's god's words?

It's in the bible.

Sorry, it's a circular argument. It doesn't work. It would be analogous to completly making up a research paper and the only thing in your works cited list is that very research paper. It doesn't work.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Exercise in Frivolity had a good point...

If we both hold oppinions on something the only difference between us is i require a little more substance to believe in something than "the bible tells me so..." defense.

[quote]In your opinion. Which is based on nothing but your own beliefs about the material that I choose to believe in. Your argument carries no more weight than mine, it is however a convenient way to make it seem as though you have the superior vantage.<hr></blockquote>

I will settle with that...

[quote]I was making a point that you seem to have missed. First of all, I have never stated that I am the end all of knowlege on this subject. I place that disclaimer in nearly EVERY POST I MAKE in this thread. Look for it. Also, I am not pushing this on you and have made it clear that it is my interpretation of my realtionship with God.<hr></blockquote>

Good enough for me...

[quote]However, if you speak with any other Christians on the issue I think you will find that I am not alone in these beliefs, and they might be able to give you a different point of view that is the same but form another angle that I am missing in the current format and forum. Sure, my relationship with God is personal, and sure I have told you what I believe to be the correct view on this discussion, but I did not say this is "whats what" and there is no other way that is right. I am constatnly asking for anyone to show me where I am wrong and to fill in any blanks or misstatements.<hr></blockquote>

You dont really want to be corrected... It seems that your faith is of the utmost importance to you... no matter how illoigical it may be...

[quote]An oversimplification based on a faulty argument that carries no weight. I merely state things as I see them. Any authority I have is given by God, if He has given me no authority in this then such is life, if He has then your opinion on my authority is irrelevant. You may choose to ignore my arguments and decide they hold no authority over you and that is fine, but whatever authority is held is not decided by you and I.

When it falls to personal attacks it seems that the argument has struck a few nerves. I will continue to answer new questions, but the on on Atonement in the OT has been answered as best i can. If you have new questions or are not satisfied keep asking. I will glad to answer your questions as best I can.

I am still waiting for answers to a few questions I posed to you. I am being open and honest, how about a little reciprocity.<hr></blockquote>

I am being honest as well... And since I clearly hear you saying that you concede that your words are only expressions of an oppinion and are just as subject to error as any oppinion... then I cant for the life of me see this discussion ever ending... If your willy-nilly "the bible tells me so..." faith is all you require... then I know of some cheap swamp land I could sell you... "dont worry" its fine land... really, no really...

Would you just have faith in me or would you check it out... ?

You seem so avid to call into question the thoughts and oppinions of others, yet this discussion wouldnt need be if you applied a the same avid skeptisism to your own beliefs instead of pretending to have a rock solid defense with faith...

Which by definition is a belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

------------------------------------

© FERRO 2001-2002

[ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: FERRO ]</p>
post #67 of 140
[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>

And it is quite arrogant of you to believe you have the authority, morally or intellectually, to tell me what I can or cannot believe or quote in my faith. My relationship with God is between me and God. Not you, me, and God. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> You do not know what I beleive, what scriptures I follow, or do not, or if there are any that I do not follow. As far as you know, I could be wholly fundamentalist and you could be spitting into the wind.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You didn't answer the question. Do you follow every little thing that the Bible tells you to do? You are quoting the Bible saying that it is the word of god. Yet, if you don't follow everything, you are saying that you know more than god because his words really don't apply to you. ANSWER THE QUESTION INSTEAD OF DODGING IT.
post #68 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>

You didn't answer the question. Do you follow every little thing that the Bible tells you to do? You are quoting the Bible saying that it is the word of god. Yet, if you don't follow everything, you are saying that you know more than god because his words really don't apply to you. ANSWER THE QUESTION INSTEAD OF DODGING IT.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I dodged no question. I stil dodge no question. Why resort to personal attacks? Have you lost all other form or method of banter?

I cannot answer your question fully as I do not know 100% if I follow everything in the bible. Let it rest at, I make every effort to follow all the guidelines set forth in the scriptures.

Now I await your picking of some obscure law or rule so that you can throw it in my face and see if I follow it. (You are lame if you do, and quite childish too.)

You are not interested in discussion. You are seeking to tear me down and through that to tear down any argument I set up and my religious beliefs. Sad.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #69 of 140
Noah, what do you call someone who causually discusses the murder of billions of people, as if it doesn't matter(tribulation)?

I call them followers of evil.

What do you call someone who would do such a thing?

I call them evil.

You condone atrocities in the name of your evil god. No wonder christians are called sheep.

One thing about christians, they will always be uncaring and arrogant.
http://freehenson.da.ru/ - chased out of America because he exposed the evils of Scientology. So much for freedom.
Reply
http://freehenson.da.ru/ - chased out of America because he exposed the evils of Scientology. So much for freedom.
Reply
post #70 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by FERRO:
<strong>"Because the bible tell me so"....<hr></blockquote></strong>

Where else would one get their religious information from if not their holy scriptures? A fortune cookie? Magic 8 ball? Tarot Cards? Maybe a ouija bord? Get real man.

&lt;Cut a bunch of stuff.&gt;

[quote]<strong>You dont really want to be corrected... It seems that your faith is of the utmost importance to you... no matter how illoigical it may be...</strong><hr></blockquote>

I do not pretend to know everything, which you say you have suggested. While accepting that you cannot accept that I am willing to be corrected? Yes my faith is of utmost importance to me. But not in the way you state. Faith is worthless if it is grounded in false information. If you have something that shows this to be the case show it. I will look it over. SJO has done just that and I hold up my response to her as evidence that I am willing to be corrected if justified.

[quote]<strong>I am being honest as well... And since I clearly hear you saying that you concede that your words are only expressions of an oppinion and are just as subject to error as any oppinion... then I cant for the life of me see this discussion ever ending... If your willy-nilly "the bible tells me so..." faith is all you require... then I know of some cheap swamp land I could sell you... "dont worry" its fine land... really, no really...

Would you just have faith in me or would you check it out... ?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Lame dude. Real lame.

[quote]<strong>You seem so avid to call into question the thoughts and oppinions of others, yet this discussion wouldnt need be if you applied a the same avid skeptisism to your own beliefs instead of pretending to have a rock solid defense with faith...

Which by definition is a belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Read my posts again. You are obviously speaking of someone else. I am willing to take a second look at my beliefs if justified. But for you to say, "The bible is false. Throw it out and listen to what I have to say." is not justification. You have to do better than that. SJO has...
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #71 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by xenu:
<strong>Noah, what do you call someone who causually discusses the murder of billions of people, as if it doesn't matter(tribulation)?

I call them followers of evil.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I call them historians as well. How many history classes did you sit through and cry when you heard about the holocaust? You follower of evil.

The tribulation has not happened yet, and when it does happen it will be absolutely the worst thing that has ever happened or will ever happen again on the face of the planet. This is a great point of distress for me. For you to say that I and others like me are heartless is outrageous. you do not know me and presume to know how I feel about this based on a few posts I have made.

[quote]<strong>What do you call someone who would do such a thing?

I call them evil.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I call Him God. What you fail to bring into the discussion is whether or not He has the authority to pass this judgement on the Earth or not.

[quote]<strong>You condone atrocities in the name of your evil god. No wonder christians are called sheep.

One thing about christians, they will always be uncaring and arrogant.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You certainly have shown what you seem to hate most. Uncaring arrogance. You care not for my feelings or thoughts, beliefs or opinions. And you arrogantly think to show me as evil and uncaring because I don't agree with you.

I have shown neither, and if I have I would like you to quote them. Please.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #72 of 140
[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>

I dodged no question. I stil dodge no question. Why resort to personal attacks? Have you lost all other form or method of banter?

I cannot answer your question fully as I do not know 100% if I follow everything in the bible. Let it rest at, I make every effort to follow all the guidelines set forth in the scriptures.

Now I await your picking of some obscure law or rule so that you can throw it in my face and see if I follow it. (You are lame if you do, and quite childish too.)

You are not interested in discussion. You are seeking to tear me down and through that to tear down any argument I set up and my religious beliefs. Sad.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Why would it be childish to show you one of god's laws that you do not follow? They are god's laws, aren't they? You do still believe the bible is god's words, right? Who are you to say which of god's rules are "obscure" or not? Are you god? Nope. Didn't think so.
post #73 of 140
[quote]Faith is worthless if it is grounded in false information.<hr></blockquote>

Faith - Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.

Faith isn't grounded on information (evidence) at all. Faith is worthless if you don't know the definition of it.
post #74 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>

Why would it be childish to show you one of god's laws that you do not follow? They are god's laws, aren't they? You do still believe the bible is god's words, right? Who are you to say which of god's rules are "obscure" or not? Are you god? Nope. Didn't think so.</strong><hr></blockquote>

It is the spirit of how the information is shown, not the information. Get real.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #75 of 140
[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>

It is the spirit of how the information is shown, not the information. Get real.</strong><hr></blockquote>

So in other words, god's word doesn't matter. I understand you...hypocrite.
post #76 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>
So in other words, god's word doesn't matter. I understand you...hypocrite.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Huh? How you got that from what I just said will be a mystery for all eternity.

Anyone else care to explain it to me, I obviously need a secret decoder ring or something.

You have been searching all this time for some way to make me into what you think all Christians are. Sad, really sad. I am done talking to you. All you are interested in is tearing me down, not conversation.

[edit]I think I understand why you think that now, it only goes to show you how much you hope that I am the evil Christian you think I am. I was speaking of something completely different than what you are interpreting with that quote. I am not speaking of the Bible itself, but the spirit in which I could see you pulling snippets and tossing them at me hoping to trip me up, just as you are doing now. In that light it is not the information that is the problem, it is the persons reason for presenting it.

1 Corinthians 10

31Â*Â*Â*So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.
32Â*Â*Â*Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God--
33Â*Â*Â*even as I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved.


[ 04-27-2002: Message edited by: NoahJ ]</p>
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #77 of 140
[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>

Huh? How you got that from what I just said will be a mystery for all eternity.

Anyone else care to explain it to me, I obviously need a secret decoder ring or something.

You have been searching all this time for some way to make me into what you think all Christians are. Sad, really sad. I am done talking to you. All you are interested in is tearing me down, not conversation.

[edit]I think I understand why you think that now, it only goes to show you how much you hope that I am the evil Christian you think I am. I was speaking of something completely different than what you are interpreting with that quote. I am not speaking of the Bible itself, but the spirit in which I could see you pulling snippets and tossing them at me hoping to trip me up, just as you are doing now. In that light it is not the information that is the problem, it is the persons reason for presenting it.

1 Corinthians 10

31Â*Â*Â*So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.
32Â*Â*Â*Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God--
33Â*Â*Â*even as I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved.


[ 04-27-2002: Message edited by: NoahJ ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Selective quotes. Selective perception. I know your type.
post #78 of 140
Noah, you have shown that your god is evil, and that you are a follower of an evil god.

You don't like that? Sorry, that's your problem.

What I hate? Uncaring, arrogant people. Hypocrites who say they hate the holocaust, then discuss what their god will do to humanity over a cup of tea.

[ 04-27-2002: Message edited by: xenu ]</p>
http://freehenson.da.ru/ - chased out of America because he exposed the evils of Scientology. So much for freedom.
Reply
http://freehenson.da.ru/ - chased out of America because he exposed the evils of Scientology. So much for freedom.
Reply
post #79 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>

Selective quotes. Selective perception. I know your type.</strong><hr></blockquote>

So now I am a "type". You refuse to answer any of my questions. Don't even acknowledge them. I answer all you questions repeatedly, whether to your satisfaction or not and I am the one who is being difficult? I don't see it.

[edit] Any better answer to my post than a personal attack?

[ 04-28-2002: Message edited by: NoahJ ]</p>
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #80 of 140
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by xenu:
<strong>Noah, you have shown that your god is evil, and that you are a follower of an evil god.

You don't like that? Sorry, that's your problem.

What I hate? Uncaring, arrogant people. Hypocrites who say they hate the holocaust, then discuss what their god will do to humanity over a cup of tea.

[ 04-27-2002: Message edited by: xenu ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't hate anyone. Least of all you. I dislike being stereotyped by those who do not know me, but think since I use the word Christian and quote bible verses that they have me pegged.

I still don't see the evil part. I really wish you would be a bit more specific. You act as though your point has made itself when you have done nothing but muddy the waters with your vague generalities.

And I am a Hypocrite? Is this a cup of tea? Why are we having this conversation? If you knew that there was a train wreck going to happen and you had no evidence that anyone would believe but knew in your heart it would happen what would you do? Nothing? Hope that those on the train died well and that you conscience did not weigh you down too much?

I am merely trying to have an open discussion and bringing forth points about a period of time that you do not even think is going to happen. And wow, the reaction I am getting it is like I am in the process of killing 1/3 of all humanity right now. What are you so afraid of that you need to attack me like this? If you don't care then read or don't read. I am not forcing you to stay. Nobody is. you don't know what emotions I experience as we are talking. And you are foolish if you think you do. I don't mind you questioning the basis of my thread. I don't mind you questioning the Bible, or even God. None of those are in my control. But when you start to question me, it becomes a personal attack based on little more than a few sentences in a thread on a message board with no personal interaction. you do not have enough information to even know if i am male or female, young or old, white or black, jew or gentile. Yet you seem to think you know me intimately enough to pass judgments about who and what I am, and how I think and feel. Amazing. And I am the judgemental one here.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Religious Thread: BEWARE! ;) (Discussion on end times)