Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: NicholasMarks on September 13, 2017, 09:47:42 PM
-
John 18:36
If Jesus wasn't from this world then he was from another...Heaven. Now our space age knowledge suggests he was from somewhere else way out in space. This puts a new aspect on things because this man of absolute truth was telling us a deep and intimate knowledge about Almighty God and there must have been a terrific amount of advanced science wrapped up in his reaching which included repair, resurrection and everlasting life...and he died to prove it to us. So shouldn't we be prepared to listen to what he has to say??
-
No.
-
No.
That's a shame Shaker because there is a huge amount of advanced knowledge set in the detail.
-
No it isn't a shame. I don't believe a word of what you say.
Still no.
-
John 18:36
If Jesus wasn't from this world then he was from another...Heaven. Now our space age knowledge suggests he was from somewhere else way out in space.
How do you think he got here?
-
No it isn't a shame. I don't believe a word of what you say.
Still no.
But it isn't what I say it is what the Holy Bible says...I'm just drawing obvious conclusions that follow a disinct pattern called righteousness
-
But it isn't what I say it is what the Holy Bible says...I'm just drawing obvious conclusions that follow a disinct pattern called righteousness
Others have researched the bible and concluded differently. So you must be doing it incorrectly.
-
But it isn't what I say it is what the Holy Bible says...I'm just drawing obvious conclusions that follow a disinct pattern called righteousness
If what you say is what the "Holy Bible" says (a contentious claim in itself) then the Holy Bible is the bonkers ravings of a lunatic.
-
How do you think he got here?
That's the advanced, scientific bit Seb but you aren't of the correct mindset to receive it...yet.
-
If what you say is what the "Holy Bible" says (a contentious claim in itself) then the Holy Bible is the bonkers ravings of a lunatic.
Funny how millions, like me, have found wonderful truth in that wonderful teaching whilst all those who need its teaching most condemn them and smear them and are totally hostile towards them. Perhaps its because it is the only teaching that condemns aggression and hostility...you reckon??
-
John 18:36
If Jesus wasn't from this world then he was from another...Heaven. Now our space age knowledge suggests he was from somewhere else way out in space. This puts a new aspect on things because this man of absolute truth was telling us a deep and intimate knowledge about Almighty God and there must have been a terrific amount of advanced science wrapped up in his reaching which included repair, resurrection and everlasting life...and he died to prove it to us. So shouldn't we be prepared to listen to what he has to say??
Anyone got a paracetamol?
-
Funny how millions, like me, have found wonderful truth in that wonderful teaching whilst all those who need its teaching most condemn them and smear them and are totally hostile towards them. Perhaps its because it is the only teaching that condemns aggression and hostility...you reckon??
Millions?
Are there millions of Christians who have found the truth that Jesus travelled to earth from another planet snd also millions who believe the truth that a planet is hurtling towards earth at this very moment?
Millions?
I'd be interested to see where you get your figures from?
-
Anyone got a paracetamol?
I've just taken two ibuprofen. Hopefully that will inure me from his ramblings....at least for some time. :)
-
Millions?
Are there millions of Christians who have found the truth that Jesus travelled to earth from another planet snd also millions who believe the truth that a planet is hurtling towards earth at this very moment?
Millions?
I'd be interested to see where you get your figures from?
i wonder why the word 'arse' manifested it's self into my mind?
-
That's the advanced, scientific bit Seb but you aren't of the correct mindset to receive it...yet.
there are many scientists in the world who are right now , working on some very complex issues in an attempt to understand the workings of the universe. Perhaps you should not waste time here , they need your help because you and your book have all the answers. Don't forget to take it with you!
-
John 18:36
If Jesus wasn't from this world then he was from another...Heaven. Now our space age knowledge suggests he was from somewhere else way out in space. This puts a new aspect on things because this man of absolute truth was telling us a deep and intimate knowledge about Almighty God and there must have been a terrific amount of advanced science wrapped up in his reaching which included repair, resurrection and everlasting life...and he died to prove it to us. So shouldn't we be prepared to listen to what he has to say??
No
-
Floo/Walter/Enki/Seb/Anchorman...
Well...It is a little sad when the overwhelming view on a forum section that invites all contributions concerning Jesus Christ don't want to talk about him. This is how confusion kicks in and as I am the only one who is here on that mission, perhaps I am the only one who isn't too confused.
You see...Seb made a valid point...How could Jesus have got from Heaven to planet Earth without the back-up of a wonderful science. Trillions of dollars are being spent to find out how this feat can be accomplished but there are many problems...problems which are explained a little better when we know exactly how the universe works and though it is still outside our knowledge base...it seems our all knowing God has got it cracked because there are some wonderful clues in the Holy Bible...You know the book...the one that Walter wants to ban from a forum page offered for the purpose of discussing Jesus Christ.
-
I'm afraid YOU'RE working from the POV that the Bible is ALL true...
Oh dear..... :o
-
Millions?
Are there millions of Christians who have found the truth that Jesus travelled to earth from another planet snd also millions who believe the truth that a planet is hurtling towards earth at this very moment?
Millions?
I'd be interested to see where you get your figures from?
Seb:
If you are even thinking about mentioning 'Nabiru', I'm gonna complain to the Illuminati.
-
Floo/Walter/Enki/Seb/Anchorman...
Well...It is a little sad when the overwhelming view on a forum section that invites all contributions concerning Jesus Christ don't want to talk about him. This is how confusion kicks in and as I am the only one who is here on that mission, perhaps I am the only one who isn't too confused.
You see...Seb made a valid point...How could Jesus have got from Heaven to planet Earth without the back-up of a wonderful science. Trillions of dollars are being spent to find out how this fete can be accomplished but there are many problems...problems which are explained a little better when we know exactly how the universe works and though it is still outside our knowledge base...it seems our all knowing God has got it cracked because there are some wonderful clues in the Holy Bible...You know the book...the one that Walter wants to ban from a forum page offered for the purpose of discussing Jesus Christ'
Have you ever considered that you might be the one who is confused, not the rest of us?
Maybe Jesus invented the first space rocket, so he could travel down from heaven in it? ;D ;D ;D
-
Floo/Walter/Enki/Seb/Anchorman...
Well...It is a little sad when the overwhelming view on a forum section that invites all contributions concerning Jesus Christ don't want to talk about him. This is how confusion kicks in and as I am the only one who is here on that mission, perhaps I am the only one who isn't too confused.
You see...Seb made a valid point...How could Jesus have got from Heaven to planet Earth without the back-up of a wonderful science. Trillions of dollars are being spent to find out how this fete can be accomplished but there are many problems...problems which are explained a little better when we know exactly how the universe works and though it is still outside our knowledge base...it seems our all knowing God has got it cracked because there are some wonderful clues in the Holy Bible...You know the book...the one that Walter wants to ban from a forum page offered for the purpose of discussing Jesus Christ'
I'm more than happy to discuss my Lord Jesus, NM, but your interpretation of the Scriptures is so far from anything resembling mainstream Christian thought that its' uniqueness stands as a testimony to inventiveness.
-
I'm more than happy to discuss my Lord Jesus, NM, but your interpretation of the Scriptures is so far from anything resembling mainstream Christian thought that its' uniqueness stands as a testimony to inventiveness.
Nice one! :D
-
Have you ever considered that you might be the one who is confused, not the rest of us?
Maybe Jesus invented the first space rocket, so he could travel down from heaven in it? ;D ;D ;D
Of course I have Floo...but Jesus' word stretches into these problems and straightens us out...that is just one reason that his faithful will not abandon him. They know by experience that straightening out our emotions lifts our health, and it is all embodied in the one science.
-
Have you ever considered Islam?
Or are you feeling better now ?!!?!? ;)
-
Of course I have Floo...but Jesus' word stretches into these problems and straightens us out...that is just one reason that his faithful will not abandon him. They know by experience that straightening out our emotions lifts our health, and it is all embodied in the one science.
Gobbledegook! ::)
But keep your posts coming, they are extremely entertaining. ;D
-
I'm more than happy to discuss my Lord Jesus, NM, but your interpretation of the Scriptures is so far from anything resembling mainstream Christian thought that its' uniqueness stands as a testimony to inventiveness.
Hmmm...thanks for that Anchorman...now go back to the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ who was slaughtered by the mainstream Biblical teachers of his day. A body of people Jesus was quick to divorce himself from. It all comes back to confusion and via confusion people become oppressed in their mind, body and spirit...that is why the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ sets us free...it restores, refreshes and lifts us out of confusion.
-
Have you ever considered Islam?
Or are you feeling better now ?!!?!? ;)
I've only ever considered Christianity but as Jesus taught it not how the iniquitous teach it.
-
Could you give me Jesus' email please?
-
Hmmm...thanks for that Anchorman...now go back to the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ who was slaughtered by the mainstream Biblical teachers of his day. A body of people Jesus was quick to divorce himself from. It all comes back to confusion and via confusion people become oppressed in their mind, body and spirit...that is why the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ sets us free...it restores, refreshes and lifts us out of confusion.
Confusion?
Yep.......
Accurate?
The Scriptures may well be indeed accuate, NM.
Your interpretation of them is, however, shall we say, unique?
-
I wonder if NM has ever thought of becoming a stand up comic, he would make a good living. ;D
-
Anchorman/trippymonkey/Floo...
Anchorman...There are so many inaccuracies between what Jesus said and did and what your mainstream churches says we should do to follow him that it almost borders on paganism.
Jesus teaches that a change of heart and direction...ie...following righteousness accurately...that we are pleasing Almighty God, and, at the same time, doing ourselves a big favour. Your mainstream says...just go to church on a Sunday and don't bother about the repair process delivered to repair us from our sins because they...the pagan priesthood...have decided that you are forgiven by your presence in their churches and not by faith and righteous obedience and they achieve it by using confusion tactics instead of Jesus Christ.
trippy...You already have Jesus Christ wi-fi address...it is contained in his 'word'...somewhere around the area of meekness and righteous obedience. Try righteous prayer as your first option...but remember respect and goodwill carry a lot of weight
Floo...No Floo...I've never considered being a comedian...the subject is far too serious but I do try to build a little righteous good-will in my dialogue because, well, we are a long time in the fiery lake of sulphur.
-
NM:
There is no rubbish about a planet, solar system, righteous blangmange powerd by dynamic energy, ot whatever in Scriptures.
You have given some nice theories based on thin air and speculation, with a sprinkling - a mere sprinkling - of unitarian theology thrown in to make it look 'Christian'. As I poined out, your theories have the dubious virtue of being unique.
You bang on about millions sharing your point of view and theories.
Who are they?
Can you give links to any organisation, religious group or whatever to which they adhere?
Can you provide links to show observations of an impending planetary/solar/blancmange collision with earth?
Or can you provide ANY scripture which mentions such a collision, or is this merely your theory based on speculation?
-
NM is unique, his posts have got more and more way out in the last year or two.
-
That's the advanced, scientific bit Seb but you aren't of the correct mindset to receive it...yet.
How would you know?
Why don't you try?
Afraid?
-
NM:
There is no rubbish about a planet, solar system, righteous blangmange powerd by dynamic energy, ot whatever in Scriptures.
You have given some nice theories based on thin air and speculation, with a sprinkling - a mere sprinkling - of unitarian theology thrown in to make it look 'Christian'. As I poined out, your theories have the dubious virtue of being unique.
You bang on about millions sharing your point of view and theories.
Who are they?
Can you give links to any organisation, religious group or whatever to which they adhere?
Can you provide links to show observations of an impending planetary/solar/blancmange collision with earth?
Or can you provide ANY scripture which mentions such a collision, or is this merely your theory based on speculation?
I've assumed he is on about this or something similar:
http://metro.co.uk/2017/08/15/death-planet-nibiru-is-going-to-hit-earth-on-september-23-killing-us-all-author-claims-6854506/
-
I've assumed he is on about this or something similar:
http://metro.co.uk/2017/08/15/death-planet-nibiru-is-going-to-hit-earth-on-september-23-killing-us-all-author-claims-6854506/
Strange that astronomers haven't seen it coming. ::)
-
Anchorman/Seb/Floo...
Anchorman...If, as I often state...follow Jesus Christ, accurately...offends your Christian belief system then you must be prepared to look at it again. That means reading what Jesus said and did. One of the things he said was avoid ritualism whilst paganism thrives on it so this is one area you might be able to get your head round. Also...if we get our attitude and faith in Jesus right we are promised access to God's spiritual waters...now this is the same material...dynamic energy...that echos over and over in the scriptures and I have simply put an understanding together that unifies it all, not in my name, but in Jesus Christ's name, and it highlights why those millions of people have come together in his teaching over the many generations...not from what I say, but because of the mighty power behind what Jesus says. Start by meekness and righteous respect in your prayers...from within a secluded place...out of earshot of others and you will be preparing yourself, accurately, to receive a share of God's living waters...at the behest of Jesus Christ.
Seb...But you have already displayed your talent for arguing round and round in circles without much care for the consequences...That isn't a game I play...I will tell you when I am ready.
Floo...Perhaps I am even more convinced now that what I have to say is important and accurate. What I am basically saying is that everything is energy and some of your favourite scientists have said the same thing...but I have configured this energy in such a way that the Holy Bible is given its rightful respect which is where your scientists go wrong.
-
Anchorman/Seb/Floo...
Anchorman...If, as I often state...follow Jesus Christ, accurately...offends your Christian belief system then you must be prepared to look at it again. That means reading what Jesus said and did. One of the things he said was avoid ritualism whilst paganism thrives on it so this is one area you might be able to get your head round. Also...if we get our attitude and faith in Jesus right we are promised access to God's spiritual waters...now this is the same material...dynamic energy...that echos over and over in the scriptures and I have simply put an understanding together that unifies it all, not in my name, but in Jesus Christ's name, and it highlights why those millions of people have come together in his teaching over the many generations...not from what I say, but because of the mighty power behind what Jesus says. Start by meekness and righteous respect in your prayers...from within a secluded place...out of earshot of others and you will be preparing yourself, accurately, to receive a share of God's living waters...at the behest of Jesus Christ.
Seb...But you have already displayed your talent for arguing round and round in circles without much care for the consequences...That isn't a game I play...I will tell you when I am ready.
Floo...Perhaps I am even more convinced now that what I have to say is important and accurate. What I am basically saying is that everything is energy and some of your favourite scientists have said the same thing...but I have configured this energy in such a way that the Holy Bible is given its rightful respect which is where your scientists go wrong.
Apart from posting your unique interpretation of the Bible on this forum, do you share it with others in real life, and if so what is their reaction?
-
Strange that astronomers haven't seen it coming. ::)
If we read the Holy Bible as well as watch youtube we get a more accurate picture of what it will look like and the impact it will have on this planet...which some scientists are saying is happening now. All I can really say at the moment is that Jesus Christ advised us about it and how to protect ourselves from it...including how his resurrection will help us...because he shows us that if we get it right we too will be able to achieve resurrection...that is if we obey the righteous rules of an indestructible, superabundant, invisible, righteous, dynamic energy, that Jesus teaches us about and which is owned by his father...Almighty God...and which is all around us all of the time.
-
If we read the Holy Bible as well as watch youtube we get a more accurate picture of what it will look like and the impact it will have on this planet...which some scientists are saying is happening now. All I can really say at the moment is that Jesus Christ advised us about it and how to protect ourselves from it...including how his resurrection will help us...because he shows us that if we get it right we too will be able to achieve resurrection...that is if we obey the righteous rules of an indestructible, superabundant, invisible, righteous, dynamic energy, that Jesus teaches us about and which is owned by his father...Almighty God...and which is all around us all of the time.
I have shared my words of wisdom with others Floo and their reaction is much the same as yours but I take the stance that many will try to enter the gate of righteousness but few will enter it. Or...narrow is the gate and few there are who find it. But I know that there are millions now following Jesus Christ's word accurately...and that is what matters...I'm just trying to pull in the stragglers. Even so, as a scientist in Christ I have seen many wonders attached to this very same science.
-
I've assumed he is on about this or something similar:
http://metro.co.uk/2017/08/15/death-planet-nibiru-is-going-to-hit-earth-on-september-23-killing-us-all-author-claims-6854506/
Oh, buckets.
I'm complaining to the Illuminati.
-
Anchorman/Seb/Floo...
Anchorman...If, as I often state...follow Jesus Christ, accurately...offends your Christian belief system then you must be prepared to look at it again. That means reading what Jesus said and did. One of the things he said was avoid ritualism whilst paganism thrives on it so this is one area you might be able to get your head round. Also...if we get our attitude and faith in Jesus right we are promised access to God's spiritual waters...now this is the same material...dynamic energy...that echos over and over in the scriptures and I have simply put an understanding together that unifies it all, not in my name, but in Jesus Christ's name, and it highlights why those millions of people have come together in his teaching over the many generations...not from what I say, but because of the mighty power behind what Jesus says. Start by meekness and righteous respect in your prayers...from within a secluded place...out of earshot of others and you will be preparing yourself, accurately, to receive a share of God's living waters...at the behest of Jesus Christ.
Seb...But you have already displayed your talent for arguing round and round in circles without much care for the consequences...That isn't a game I play...I will tell you when I am ready.
Floo...Perhaps I am even more convinced now that what I have to say is important and accurate. What I am basically saying is that everything is energy and some of your favourite scientists have said the same thing...but I have configured this energy in such a way that the Holy Bible is given its rightful respect which is where your scientists go wrong.
Sorry, NM;
I must have missed those links I asked you to provide in #31.
-
Floo/Walter/Enki/Seb/Anchorman...
Well...It is a little sad when the overwhelming view on a forum section that invites all contributions concerning Jesus Christ don't want to talk about him. This is how confusion kicks in and as I am the only one who is here on that mission, perhaps I am the only one who isn't too confused.
You see...Seb made a valid point...How could Jesus have got from Heaven to planet Earth without the back-up of a wonderful science. Trillions of dollars are being spent to find out how this feat can be accomplished but there are many problems...problems which are explained a little better when we know exactly how the universe works and though it is still outside our knowledge base...it seems our all knowing God has got it cracked because there are some wonderful clues in the Holy Bible...You know the book...the one that Walter wants to ban from a forum page offered for the purpose of discussing Jesus Christ.
As you have addressed me by name, you deserve an answer:
I am perfectly willing to talk about many subjects, including Jesus. Indeed, I hope to learn from such encounters. However I reserve the right to discuss such subjects with people who have at least some justification for knowing what they are talking about. can produce constructive arguments, don't attempt to berate those who reject what they say as not being righteous, don't attempt to scare people with silly ideas of an end times, don't presume to know how other people think and don't equate sinfulness with ill health. You are not one of those people, Nick.
I'm sure you will find me, yet again, as one who hasn't seen the light, is ignorant of your magnificent findings in the bible and is destined to burn in your 'fiery lake of sulphur' or whatever your nasty inventive mind can lend itself to.
-
If we read the Holy Bible as well as watch youtube we get a more accurate picture of what it will look like and the impact it will have on this planet...which some scientists are saying is happening now. All I can really say at the moment is that Jesus Christ advised us about it and how to protect ourselves from it...including how his resurrection will help us...because he shows us that if we get it right we too will be able to achieve resurrection...that is if we obey the righteous rules of an indestructible, superabundant, invisible, righteous, dynamic energy, that Jesus teaches us about and which is owned by his father...Almighty God...and which is all around us all of the time.
Chapter and verse, please.
-
I have shared my words of wisdom with others Floo and their reaction is much the same as yours but I take the stance that many will try to enter the gate of righteousness but few will enter it. Or...narrow is the gate and few there are who find it. But I know that there are millions now following Jesus Christ's word accurately...and that is what matters...I'm just trying to pull in the stragglers. Even so, as a scientist in Christ I have seen many wonders attached to this very same science.
If Jesus was around today he wouldn't have a clue what you are on about either.
-
As you have addressed me by name, you deserve an answer:
I am perfectly willing to talk about many subjects, including Jesus. Indeed, I hope to learn from such encounters. However I reserve the right to discuss such subjects with people who have at least some justification for knowing what they are talking about. can produce constructive arguments, don't attempt to berate those who reject what they say as not being righteous, don't attempt to scare people with silly ideas of an end times, don't presume to know how other people think and don't equate sinfulness with ill health. You are not one of those people, Nick.
I'm sure you will find me, yet again, as one who hasn't seen the light, is ignorant of your magnificent findings in the bible and is destined to burn in your 'fiery lake of sulphur' or whatever your nasty inventive mind can lend itself to.
When one has removed themselves from Biblical teaching it isn't surprising when they can't make sense of
Biblical instruction, enki...of which, Jesus Christ, himself, taught us...and it is certainly ok if you want to ignore his teaching...summed up in Revelation 21:8 as to who should be concerned of their future if they do. I am simply bringing together modern science and Biblical teaching and showing which is the more honest of the two...The one which says that at first there was nothing and this nothing erupted into everything in one nano second...or the teaching which says that only Almighty God truly knows what happened and here are some of his clues...That the dynamic energy which sits below all science has always been and always will be, and the 'word' made flesh through Jesus Christ contains the detail of that science because the two overlap in a wonderful, righteous way...and it is Jesus Christ who says, we, (those who are saved) will live in good-health, peace and good-will and harmony for all eternity, because this energy at Almighty God's disposal, is indestructible.
Your choice.
-
Chapter and verse, please.
Try Revelation...beginning to end Floo...but this knowledge is in various verses, in both the Old and the New Testaments.
-
NM:
There is no rubbish about a planet, solar system, righteous blangmange powerd by dynamic energy, ot whatever in Scriptures.
You have given some nice theories based on thin air and speculation, with a sprinkling - a mere sprinkling - of unitarian theology thrown in to make it look 'Christian'. As I poined out, your theories have the dubious virtue of being unique.
You bang on about millions sharing your point of view and theories.
Who are they?
Can you give links to any organisation, religious group or whatever to which they adhere?
Can you provide links to show observations of an impending planetary/solar/blancmange collision with earth?
Or can you provide ANY scripture which mentions such a collision, or is this merely your theory based on speculation?
I thought I had answered these points in various different ways Anchorman...but here goes again...
The solar system is a minute detail in a much greater universe and Almighty God created the lot...but what did he use?? Well, there is a willing candidate...a superabundant, indestructible, highly malleable, dynamic energy, or, God's mighty and powerful force, as identified in Isaiah 40:26 when God said 'look into the heavens who made these?' You see, we want to satisfy science as well as doubting Thomas' and this is how God, describes this raw material...which Jesus, being the 'word' of God made flesh, teaches us about, and how we can interact with it under the heading of God's fountain of living waters.
Now, what I do remember touching upon was that it isn't my teaching that millions have latched on to, it is Jesus Christ's teaching, and I am just another one of those with a slightly more modern take on the subject.
-
Hello Mr Marks, good to meet you.
I'd like to ask a few questions:-
1&2 - When you talk about people being in the sulphur for a long time are you speaking of being burned physically and, if so, do you interpret it as being never ending or just like being blown up and then oblivion?
3 - Have you any idea when all this is going to happen or is it just something you believe will happen at an unspecified time in the not too distant future?
I note that you say you have Biblical proof but if people do not believe the Bible is the word of God (whether literally or figuratively), that will mean nothing to them. It is not proof. You'll come up against that time & time again if you haven't already.
Thank you.
-
Try Revelation...beginning to end Floo...but this knowledge is in various verses, in both the Old and the New Testaments.
CHAPTER and VERSE! ::)
-
I thought I had answered these points in various different ways Anchorman...but here goes again...
The solar system is a minute detail in a much greater universe and Almighty God created the lot...but what did he use?? Well, there is a willing candidate...a superabundant, indestructible, highly malleable, dynamic energy, or, God's mighty and powerful force, as identified in Isaiah 40:26 when God said 'look into the heavens who made these?' You see, we want to satisfy science as well as doubting Thomas' and this is how God, describes this raw material...which Jesus, being the 'word' of God made flesh, teaches us about, and how we can interact with it under the heading of God's fountain of living waters.
Now, what I do remember touching upon was that it isn't my teaching that millions have latched on to, it is Jesus Christ's teaching, and I am just another one of those with a slightly more modern take on the subject.
I doubt even one person has latched onto your interpretation of the Bible. :o
-
I doubt even one person has latched onto your interpretation of the Bible. :o
My version always starts with...'Follow the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ'...That is what Jesus said as well...'Those that follow me (Jesus) will never die' but you can bet your bottom dollar that, by obedience to his teaching we attach ourselves to God's fountain of living waters which...by virtue of its star, galaxy, and atom producing, capacity, is indestructible...and this is a strict condition of that righteous code.
-
Hello Mr Marks, good to meet you.
I'd like to ask a few questions:-
1&2 - When you talk about people being in the sulphur for a long time are you speaking of being burned physically and, if so, do you interpret it as being never ending or just like being blown up and then oblivion?
3 - Have you any idea when all this is going to happen or is it just something you believe will happen at an unspecified time in the not too distant future?
I note that you say you have Biblical proof but if people do not believe the Bible is the word of God (whether literally or figuratively), that will mean nothing to them. It is not proof. You'll come up against that time & time again if you haven't already.
Thank you.
Thank you for your measured response Robinson. In answer to 1 & 2 I am convinced that Wormwood will swing around this planet causing much damage but when it breaks away from the gravitational force that holds it to the Earth it will momentarily drag out all electric energy that isn't secured down. This includes the spiritual energy which resides within us and which we become wildly depleted of whenever we are involved in a sudden, emotional shock. It will be snatched into what is described as a fiery lake of sulphur and because this energy is indestructible it will be retained for all eternity in that terrible place.
3...The Holy Bible gives all the clues...No one knows the hour or the day but there are signs to watch out for and these signs seem to be increasing daily...like a pregnant woman about to give birth.
4...The teaching is that Jesus' 'word' will be taught in all the inhabited Earth and then the end will come...and this is happening right now so we either ignore it else stake our future on it because righteousness is more than an accidental word...it is a universal science.
-
My version always starts with...'Follow the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ'...That is what Jesus said as well...'Those that follow me (Jesus) will never die' but you can bet your bottom dollar that, by obedience to his teaching we attach ourselves to God's fountain of living waters which...by virtue of its star, galaxy, and atom producing, capacity, is indestructible...and this is a strict condition of that righteous code.
I suspect Jesus wouldn't recognise your interpretation of what he is supposed to said. ::)
-
I suspect Jesus wouldn't recognise your interpretation of what he is supposed to said. ::)
You can take me out of the equation if you want Floo...but I strongly suggest you swap Coronation Street for a (the) Good Book...but this time read it as it is intended...honestly, open mindedly, and in realising that our brightest scientist doesn't have as much accurate knowledge about science than is contained within that book.
-
Hi there Nick, why don't you get together with our Alan Burns and start a joint website with him?
Our Alan's just about neck a neck with you in the religious further championships, you'd do well to get together with him, the only problem you might have is he's not quite so up to date with the electrics as you are but I'm sure you could sort that out between the pair of you.
Good to see you back, try to not take things so seriously it wont help you to acquire many converts and don't start on me I'm a lost cause where anything spooky's like religion's concerned.
Regards ippy.
-
Thank you for your measured response Robinson. In answer to 1 & 2 I am convinced that Wormwood will swing around this planet causing much damage but when it breaks away from the gravitational force that holds it to the Earth it will momentarily drag out all electric energy that isn't secured down. This includes the spiritual energy which resides within us and which we become wildly depleted of whenever we are involved in a sudden, emotional shock. It will be snatched into what is described as a fiery lake of sulphur and because this energy is indestructible it will be retained for all eternity in that terrible place.
3...The Holy Bible gives all the clues...No one knows the hour or the day but there are signs to watch out for and these signs seem to be increasing daily...like a pregnant woman about to give birth.
4...The teaching is that Jesus' 'word' will be taught in all the inhabited Earth and then the end will come...and this is happening right now so we either ignore it else stake our future on it because righteousness is more than an accidental word...it is a universal science.
Thanks for reply. Regarding our spiritual energy being trapped forever in that terrible place, will people be conscious of it & if so, in what way?
That was really what I was asking.
-
You can take me out of the equation if you want Floo...but I strongly suggest you swap Coronation Street for a (the) Good Book...but this time read it as it is intended...honestly, open mindedly, and in realising that our brightest scientist doesn't have as much accurate knowledge about science than is contained within that book.
I NEVER watch that soap! I read what is in that not so good book without using my imagination as you do!
-
Hi ther :De Nick, why don't you get together with our Alan Burns and start a joint website with him?
Our Alan's just about neck a neck with you in the religious further championships, you'd do well to get together with him, the only problem you might have is he's not quite so up to date with the electrics as you are but I'm sure you could sort that out between the pair of you.
Good to see you back, try to not take things so seriously it wont help you to acquire many converts and don't start on me I'm a lost cause where anything spooky's like religion's concerned.
Regards ippy.
Compared to NM AB is mainstream. ;D
-
Hi there Nick, why don't you get together with our Alan Burns and start a joint website with him?
Our Alan's just about neck a neck with you in the religious further championships, you'd do well to get together with him, the only problem you might have is he's not quite so up to date with the electrics as you are but I'm sure you could sort that out between the pair of you.
Good to see you back, try to not take things so seriously it wont help you to acquire many converts and don't start on me I'm a lost cause where anything spooky's like religion's concerned.
Regards ippy.
Thank you ippy...I take things seriously because it is a serious subject which involves us all..and...well...I would like to report back that everyone is saved who can be saved...That's the beauty of science it has its own momentum when it is revealed and all our salvations depends upon Jesus Christ's righteous science.
I'm sure Alan and I will, forumly, meet up at some point.
-
Sparky,
If...
There's your problem right there. If my auntie had cojones she'd be my uncle.
So what?
Suggest you invest your time in trying to get from that "if" to demonstrating your claim actually to be true before worrying about the implications if it is.
Good luck with it though.
-
NM's definition of science appears to be far removed from the actual definition, which doesn't include an overactive imagination. ::)
-
Sparky,
There's your problem right there. If my auntie had cojones she'd be my uncle.
So what?
Suggest you invest your time in trying to get from that "if" to demonstrating your claim actually to be true before worrying about the implications if it is.
Good luck with it though.
My 'if' is a politeness saying, well, I've worked it out but I don't want to make a big thing of it..because I know you haven't...It's Biblically called, meekness...You see, bluehillside, I want to inherit a share in this new heavens and new Earth.
-
Sparky,
My 'if' is a politeness saying, well, I've worked it out but I don't want to make a big thing of it..because I know you haven't...It's Biblically called, meekness...You see, bluehillside, I want to inherit a share in this new heavens and new Earth.
You claim not only that there is a universe-creating god who knocked it up especially to suit you, but that you know what this god thinks and wants and that "He" cares enough about little old you to intervene on your behalf from time-to-time and you claim to be "meek" about your beliefs? Good grief - such arrogance!
Anyways, if you think you've worked something out then rather than just assert your claims why not share that "working out" here so others can see that you're not just, you know, delusional after all?
-
Thanks for reply. Regarding our spiritual energy being trapped forever in that terrible place, will people be conscious of it & if so, in what way?
That was really what I was asking.
NM takes a few things from the Jehovah's Witnesses, but this appears to be one area where he definitely departs from one of their core teachings. Namely, the JWs don't believe hell to be a place of eternal torment (merely non-existence), whereas NM seems to get rather gleeful over the idea of people being roasted.
-
Compared to NM AB is mainstream. ;D
Both as daft about religion as each other Floo :o
ippy
-
NM takes a few things from the Jehovah's Witnesses, but this appears to be one area where he definitely departs from one of their core teachings. Namely, the JWs don't believe hell to be a place of eternal torment (merely non-existence), whereas NM seems to get rather gleeful over the idea of people being roasted.
Mind you that smell of bacon cooking, mmmmmm.
ippy
-
Mind you that smell of bacon cooking, mmmmmm.
ippy
hard to enjoy if you're the pig.
-
Mind you that smell of bacon cooking, mmmmmm.
ippy
Conclusive proof of the existence of God, according to Al Murray, the Pub Landlord :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyWN5017wD8
-
hard to enjoy if you're the pig.
Don't think the pig would know much about it N S.
ippy
-
Don't think the pig would know much about it N S.
ippy
I think with Nick's model it appears that the long pig knows every single second of it.
-
I think with Nick's model it appears that the long pig knows every single second of it.
Have to be a bit kindly to Nick from time to time, just a little poetic licence.
ippy
-
Nearly Sane/ippy/Dicky Underpants/bluehillside...
The science is simple...it's following it where it gets difficult...especially when you have divorced yourselves from Jesus Christ's accurate teaching.
You see...there are 3 key elements that make this science work. The most important is an indestructible, dynamic energy that is so abundant that if you rolled every galaxy out into this raw material there would be enough of it to make all all those atoms and their component parts in the style, shape and form that modern science analyses and tries to interpret.
Then we need 2 dimensions of the universe which are best described as the static...pre-big bang universe...where nothing moved very fast...and also our own, high-speed, expanding dimension, which sprung into action when all that 'dynamic energy' erupted.
Link these two dimensions with black-holes, both on the macro-scale, and the micro-scale, and we finish up with of a rush of this electric plasma, or dynamic energy, building galaxies, stars and atoms at a phenomenal rate and all the Biblical clues suggest Almighty God created this universe by giving this scientific understanding, life, and righteous meaning...and because it all happened millions of light-years ago we know that Almighty God is well versed in the 'word' that Jesus Christ made flesh, and this is why we should pay heed when they talk of serious, impending dangers...which they announced to us well over 2000 years ago.
-
I need another paracetamol.
I also need those links I asked you for in post #31, NM.
-
Nearly Sane/ippy/Dicky Underpants/bluehillside...
The science is simple...it's following it where it gets difficult...especially when you have divorced yourselves from Jesus Christ's accurate teaching.
You see...there are 3 key elements that make this science work. The most important is an indestructible, dynamic energy that is so abundant that if you rolled every galaxy out into this raw material there would be enough of it to make all all those atoms and their component parts in the style, shape and form that modern science analyses and tries to interpret.
Then we need 2 dimensions of the universe which are best described as the static...pre-big bang universe...where nothing moved very fast...and also our own, high-speed, expanding dimension, which sprung into action when all that 'dynamic energy' erupted.
Link these two dimensions with black-holes, both on the macro-scale, and the micro-scale, and we finish up with of a rush of this electric plasma, or dynamic energy, building galaxies, stars and atoms at a phenomenal rate and all the Biblical clues suggest Almighty God created this universe by giving this scientific understanding, life, and righteous meaning...and because it all happened millions of light-years ago we know that Almighty God is well versed in the 'word' that Jesus Christ made flesh, and this is why we should pay heed when they talk of serious, impending dangers...which they announced to us well over 2000 years ago.
Thanks for the warning Nick, love the dynamic energy, what happened to dynamos after they switched to alternators?
ippy
-
Sparky,
Nearly Sane/ippy/Dicky Underpants/bluehillside...
The science is simple...it's following it where it gets difficult...especially when you have divorced yourselves from Jesus Christ's accurate teaching.
You see...there are 3 key elements that make this science work. The most important is an indestructible, dynamic energy that is so abundant that if you rolled every galaxy out into this raw material there would be enough of it to make all all those atoms and their component parts in the style, shape and form that modern science analyses and tries to interpret.
Then we need 2 dimensions of the universe which are best described as the static...pre-big bang universe...where nothing moved very fast...and also our own, high-speed, expanding dimension, which sprung into action when all that 'dynamic energy' erupted.
Link these two dimensions with black-holes, both on the macro-scale, and the micro-scale, and we finish up with of a rush of this electric plasma, or dynamic energy, building galaxies, stars and atoms at a phenomenal rate and all the Biblical clues suggest Almighty God created this universe by giving this scientific understanding, life, and righteous meaning...and because it all happened millions of light-years ago we know that Almighty God is well versed in the 'word' that Jesus Christ made flesh, and this is why we should pay heed when they talk of serious, impending dangers...which they announced to us well over 2000 years ago.
All of which no doubt makes perfect sense in your head, but only to you. What you were asked for therefore was some working out to validate these extraordinary claims that the entire worlds of physics, cosmology, logic etc seem to have missed.
You know, just to help you make the case that you aren’t delusional after all.
-
NM takes a few things from the Jehovah's Witnesses, but this appears to be one area where he definitely departs from one of their core teachings. Namely, the JWs don't believe hell to be a place of eternal torment (merely non-existence), whereas NM seems to get rather gleeful over the idea of people being roasted.
I don't read him as gleeful - if that is what he believes - more that he is trying to warn people, to save them. I'd still like him to answer my question.
(Floo, Corrie deals with everyday stuff like:- abortion, varieties of sexual orientation, transgender issues, religion & religious people including a gay vicar, a lesbian Christian, child neglect, PTSD, adultery, disability both physical and learning difficulties, drug abuse, agoraphobia, cancer, kidnapping, violence, murder, robbery, fraud, alcoholism, grooming of vulnerable youngsters for sexual exploitation, police corruption - ooh it gets boring, I can understand why you don't bother.)
-
Sparky,
All of which no doubt makes perfect sense in your head, but only to you. What you were asked for therefore was some working out to validate these extraordinary claims that the entire worlds of physics, cosmology, logic etc seem to have missed.
You know, just to help you make the case that you aren’t delusional after all.
Sorry if you can't see the wonderful logic that makes righteousness, Jesus Christ and Almighty God the most powerful influence in the whole, wide, universe, but I can trace many of the things that are piling up behind your sciences door, which make perfect sense when this knowledge is compared against my own experiences, and what is written in the Holy Bible...especially resurrection, which is so vitally important to us all...but there we go...if you are incapable of seeing how an indestructible energy can be brought into our daily lives via the wonderful teaching of Jesus Christ, then you are certainly not going to make it in the wonderful new heavens and the new Earth, and I'm certainly not going to beg you...simple logic, along with the Gospels should suffice, bluehillside...and you certainly wont kid yourself in at that vital moment.
-
I don't read him as gleeful - if that is what he believes - more that he is trying to warn people, to save them. I'd still like him to answer my question.
(Floo, Corrie deals with everyday stuff like:- abortion, varieties of sexual orientation, transgender issues, religion & religious people including a gay vicar, a lesbian Christian, child neglect, PTSD, adultery, disability both physical and learning difficulties, drug abuse, agoraphobia, cancer, kidnapping, violence, murder, robbery, fraud, alcoholism, grooming of vulnerable youngsters for sexual exploitation, police corruption - ooh it gets boring, I can understand why you don't bother.)
Try reply #52 Robinson...I think that covered all points. Coronation Street was a front for all energy consuming programs that tell huge porkies to arouse and compel the viewer to waste the vital energy that turns them into couch potatoes and dulls their thinking processes...and this is the starting point of many stress related illnesses...as you almost pointed out.
-
I need another paracetamol.
I also need those links I asked you for in post #31, NM.
Try reply #47 Anchorman.
-
Sparky,
Sorry if you can't see the wonderful logic that makes righteousness, Jesus Christ and Almighty God the most powerful influence in the whole, wide, universe, but I can trace many of the things that are piling up behind your sciences door, which make perfect sense when this knowledge is compared against my own experiences, and what is written in the Holy Bible...especially resurrection, which is so vitally important to us all...but there we go...if you are incapable of seeing how an indestructible energy can be brought into our daily lives via the wonderful teaching of Jesus Christ, then you are certainly not going to make it in the wonderful new heavens and the new Earth, and I'm certainly not going to beg you...simple logic, along with the Gospels should suffice, bluehillside...and you certainly wont kid yourself in at that vital moment.
Ah but I’m not incapable of that at all old son. All I’m asking you for is even a jot of a scintilla of a smidgin of a reason to think that you’re right – you know, some logic, some evidence, some working out, some anything other than your personal assertions on the matter.
Is that so unreasonable?
-
Try reply #47 Anchorman.
Did that.
Still not seeing any links with evidence to verify your position.
-
Try reply #52 Robinson...I think that covered all points. Coronation Street was a front for all energy consuming programs that tell huge porkies to arouse and compel the viewer to waste the vital energy that turns them into couch potatoes and dulls their thinking processes...
...looks to me like you have been binge watching Corrie, very recently!
-
Try reply #52 Robinson...I think that covered all points. Coronation Street was a front for all energy consuming programs that tell huge porkies to arouse and compel the viewer to waste the vital energy that turns them into couch potatoes and dulls their thinking processes...and this is the starting point of many stress related illnesses...as you almost pointed out.
Whatever you say Babe.
-
I thought I had answered these points in various different ways Anchorman...but here goes again...
The solar system is a minute detail in a much greater universe and Almighty God created the lot...but what did he use?? Well, there is a willing candidate...a superabundant, indestructible, highly malleable, dynamic energy, or, God's mighty and powerful force, as identified in Isaiah 40:26 when God said 'look into the heavens who made these?' You see, we want to satisfy science as well as doubting Thomas' and this is how God, describes this raw material...which Jesus, being the 'word' of God made flesh, teaches us about, and how we can interact with it under the heading of God's fountain of living waters.
Now, what I do remember touching upon was that it isn't my teaching that millions have latched on to, it is Jesus Christ's teaching, and I am just another one of those with a slightly more modern take on the subject.
the words 'force' and 'energy ' are not interchangeable , they do not mean the same thing. Thought you would've known that, what with all that scientific knowledge you've got from the bible.
-
The Bible is not a book of scientific documents, however much NM would like to believe it is.
-
Yep, floo - and 99% of Christians would agree with your last statement.
-
Yep, floo - and 99% of Christians would agree with your last statement.
In the beginning, God Created the heavens and the Earth...now the Earth and the heavens proved to be full of science...so...who used science to create it with??
Hmmm...we had better go back to the Holy Bible because, it seems, if we read the Biblical evidence, laid out in Isaiah, he used his mighty power and an awful lot of dynamic energy to do it so that science is contained in his 'word' and Jesus is that 'word' made flesh and we will all require to be obedient to that word because the science of salvation won't work without it.
Don't take my word for it...follow Jesus' righteous teaching, accurately, and prove it for yourselves, because I don't want anyone weeping and gnashing their teeth on my shift.
-
In the beginning, God Created the heavens and the Earth...now the Earth and the heavens proved to be full of science...so...who used science to create it with??
Hmmm...we had better go back to the Holy Bible because, it seems, if we read the Biblical evidence, laid out in Isaiah, he used his mighty power and an awful lot of dynamic energy to do it so that science is contained in his 'word' and Jesus is that 'word' made flesh and we will all require to be obedient to that word because the science of salvation won't work without it.
Don't take my word for it...follow Jesus' righteous teaching, accurately, and prove it for yourselves, because I don't want anyone weeping and gnashing their teeth on my shift.
I think ill be okay mate but thanks for caring. ;)
-
I think ill be okay mate but thanks for caring. ;)
It would be ok Walter, if some of those who don't want saving didn't think they had a right to ensure others, who might be quite eligible for salvation, are fed a deluge of anti-Christian material to sway them into the fiery lake of sulphur which the disobedient actually embrace.
Its an old war crime, isn't it, where the evil ensconce themselves in the mass of the innocent and dare the invaders to attack them,. I remember Saddam Hussein using it.
Still, I'm sure the science of righteousness will cream off those who are prepared to listen to the scientific evidence gleaned from the Holy Bible.
-
In the beginning, God Created the heavens and the Earth...now the Earth and the heavens proved to be full of science...so...who used science to create it with??
Hmmm...we had better go back to the Holy Bible because, it seems, if we read the Biblical evidence, laid out in Isaiah, he used his mighty power and an awful lot of dynamic energy to do it so that science is contained in his 'word' and Jesus is that 'word' made flesh and we will all require to be obedient to that word because the science of salvation won't work without it.
Don't take my word for it...follow Jesus' righteous teaching, accurately, and prove it for yourselves, because I don't want anyone weeping and gnashing their teeth on my shift.
NM you don't seem to have a clue about 'science'. Jesus wouldn't have had any knowledge of it either.
-
NM you don't seem to have a clue about 'science'. Jesus wouldn't have had any knowledge of it either.
Ahh...but Jesus wasn't from this world...so to get here he knew a little more about science than you give him credit for Floo. This is what I'm trying to tell you...that written into God's 'word'...brought to us in the flesh by Jesus Christ, is a science of enormous proportions, and it all starts with the superabundance of a wonderful, dynamic energy, of which, those saved into the new heavens and the new Earth, will embrace with all their hearts, via righteous worship to our benefactors, just as the angels in Heaven do already.
-
Ahh...but Jesus wasn't from this world...so to get here he knew a little more about science than you give him credit for Floo. This is what I'm trying to tell you...that written into God's 'word'...brought to us in the flesh by Jesus Christ, is a science of enormous proportions, and it all starts with the superabundance of a wonderful, dynamic energy, of which, those saved into the new heavens and the new Earth, will embrace with all their hearts, via righteous worship to our benefactors, just as the angels in Heaven do already.
Jesus was a flawed human just like you and me, it was the gospel writers who tried to recreate him into a god.
-
Jesus was a flawed human just like you and me, it was the gospel writers who tried to recreate him into a god.
Ohhh...Floo...you've got it all wrong...no wonder you don't believe in him or what others have influenced his word to mean which is something else entirely.
First of all Jesus was made perfect...that is perfect in body and spirit...this is the only interpretation of being born without sin. So he is a good act to follow if we want to cure ourselves of our own genetic impediments, which lie behind all the influences in our life, including our medical needs, which we must continue with, whilst also following a path that will give us the emotional strength to see things clearer, and in so doing, a huge weight lifts off our emotions and if you remember what Robinson told you, much of our emotional weight comes from false stimulus like media sources and dangerous propaganda. Then you have made a start in becoming less damaged internally and more able to become righteous and this excites a science which Jesus Christ taught us all about....because...well...He isn't from this world...but he does represents the owner of it...Almighty God.
-
In the beginning, God Created the heavens and the Earth...now the Earth and the heavens proved to be full of science...so...who used science to create it with??
Hmmm...we had better go back to the Holy Bible because, it seems, if we read the Biblical evidence, laid out in Isaiah, he used his mighty power and an awful lot of dynamic energy to do it so that science is contained in his 'word' and Jesus is that 'word' made flesh and we will all require to be obedient to that word because the science of salvation won't work without it.
Don't take my word for it...follow Jesus' righteous teaching, accurately, and prove it for yourselves, because I don't want anyone weeping and gnashing their teeth on my shift.
NM:
I've asked you for links to those who support your views - which are NOT either Christian or bear any relationshi to any reliable translation of Scripture.
You have provided none.
I've asked you for links to this 'planrt' or 'solar system' which you claim is going to collide with us.
Again, no links.
Your witterings are nice as fantasy, I suppose, but there is no - repeat no- basis either in science or, for that matter, in Scripture.
Please supply the aforementioned links - and don't just refer me to a bible verse, please: I have eight translations sitting in front of me now....none of which is the NWT, which has the benefit of being excellebt cat litter.
Thanks.
-
NM:
I've asked you for links to those who support your views - which are NOT either Christian or bear any relationshi to any reliable translation of Scripture.
You have provided none.
I've asked you for links to this 'planrt' or 'solar system' which you claim is going to collide with us.
Again, no links.
Your witterings are nice as fantasy, I suppose, but there is no - repeat no- basis either in science or, for that matter, in Scripture.
Please supply the aforementioned links - and don't just refer me to a bible verse, please: I have eight translations sitting in front of me now....none of which is the NWT, which has the benefit of being excellebt cat litter.
Thanks.
And so Anchorman, you totally disregard Jesus' teaching of love they neighbour...or even, love thy enemy...we aren't doing very well are we??
The whole universe gives praise to Almighty God's handiwork...filled with science...but you prefer to divorce God from that science...but only because your scientists tell you to...so, who are you listening to, The combined work of God and Jesus Christ or man...who has a vested interest in you not listening to our deity, too strongly.
If you listen to the 'word' of Jesus accurately you will hear all sorts of wonders about this planet and the universe and you will know you are in safe hands when you truly worship the word that Jesus lived and died for...but you need your confirmation from others and not from Jesus who has promised to save you if you accept his word. Now you could do that alone...you don't need me or iniquity...just the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ which will grow and grow until you have full righteous truth...isn't that what Jesus told you as well.
-
And so Anchorman, you totally disregard Jesus' teaching of love they neighbour...or even, love thy enemy...we aren't doing very well are we??
The whole universe gives praise to Almighty God's handiwork...filled with science...but you prefer to divorce God from that science...but only because your scientists tell you to...so, who are you listening to, The combined work of God and Jesus Christ or man...who has a vested interest in you not listening to our deity, too strongly.
If you listen to the 'word' of Jesus accurately you will here all sorts of wonders about this planet and the universe and you will know you are in safe hands when you truly worship the word that Jesus lived and died for...but you need your confirmation from others and not from Jesus who has promised to save you if you accept his word. Now you could do that alone...you don't need me or iniquity...just the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ which will grow and grow until you have full righteous truth...isn't that what Jesus told you as well.
I asked for links outside Scripture to provide evidence for your assertion, NM; not more wittering.
Having failed to provide such links, we are therefore able to dismiss your claims of pseudoscience, planetary collision, 'dynamic energy', etc, as unsubstantiated.
Thanks.
-
Ohhh...Floo...you've got it all wrong...no wonder you don't believe in him or what others have influenced his word to mean which is something else entirely.
First of all Jesus was made perfect...that is perfect in body and spirit...this is the only interpretation of being born without sin. So he is a good act to follow if we want to cure ourselves of our own genetic impediments, which lie behind all the influences in our life, including our medical needs, which we must continue with, whilst also following a path that will give us the emotional strength to see things clearer, and in so doing, a huge weight lifts off our emotions and if you remember what Robinson told you, much of our emotional weight comes from false stimulus like media sources and dangerous propaganda. Then you have made a start in becoming less damaged internally and more able to become righteous and this excites a science which Jesus Christ taught us all about....because...well...He isn't from this world...but he does represents the owner of it...Almighty God.
A perfect person doesn't cause their parents worry by not telling them when he was a kid he was off to the Temple. A perfect person doesn't trash a Temple. A perfect person doesn't frighten a herd of pigs over a cliff when playing silly exorcism hocus pocus. A perfect person doesn't tell people to leave their responsibilities and become his followers. Jesus was far from perfect, but then he was a human, no sort of god. But compared to the evil god featured in the Bible, all humans wear halos, even the worst of us!
-
I asked for links outside Scripture to provide evidence for your assertion, NM; not more wittering.
Having failed to provide such links, we are therefore able to dismiss your claims of pseudoscience, planetary collision, 'dynamic energy', etc, as unsubstantiated.
Thanks.
You are free to do precisely that Anchorman...I have simply presented a deep and meaningful account of how the universe came into existence in such a way as to satisfy science and satisfy the Holy Bible and especially the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ. Now science says all things must unify and that everything is energy...I'm just pointing them in the right direction...with or without your support...but reconcile this for me...Almighty God says he has always been and always will be. Science says there was absolutely nothing and that nothing lived on a pin-prick sized nothing, and it erupted into everything.
-
Sparky,
I have simply presented a deep and meaningful account of how the universe came into existence in such a way as to satisfy science and satisfy the Holy Bible and especially the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ.
No you haven’t. What you’ve actually done is asserted the argument- and evidence-free musings of a confused and narcissistic mind - no more, no less.
-
You are free to do precisely that Anchorman...I have simply presented a deep and meaningful account of how the universe came into existence in such a way as to satisfy science and satisfy the Holy Bible and especially the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ. Now science says all things must unify and that everything is energy...I'm just pointing them in the right direction...with or without your support...but reconcile this for me...Almighty God says he has always been and always will be. Science says there was absolutely nothing and that nothing lived on a pin-prick sized nothing, and it erupted into everything.
please learn some REAL science , you are currently a laughing stock. If you have any self respect , give up .
dammit , you've got me , you are a very clever comedian . ;D ;D ;D
-
A perfect person doesn't cause their parents worry by not telling them when he was a kid he was off to the Temple. A perfect person doesn't trash a Temple. A perfect person doesn't frighten a herd of pigs over a cliff when playing silly exorcism hocus pocus. A perfect person doesn't tell people to leave their responsibilities and become his followers. Jesus was far from perfect, but then he was a human, no sort of god. But compared to the evil god featured in the Bible, all humans wear halos, even the worst of us!
Scraping the barrel there Floo...There are times when righteousness can display anger especially to prove a righteous point...and there are times when righteousness must be about 'his father's business' even if his carnal mother is offended...it's called letting go, and she already knew, even before he was born, that she would have to let go one day. As for the pigs...I bet not one rasher of bacon was wasted...and it was probably a kinder death than the one planned for them....Again, Jesus just wanted to prove a righteous point.
As far as righteousness losing its temper...what do you think the wrath of Almighty God will be like on Judgment Day because he doesn't paint a pretty picture.
-
Sparky,
No you haven’t. What you’ve actually done is asserted the argument- and evidence-free musings of a confused and narcissistic mind - no more, no less.
Always free with the compliments still I see bluehillside. If you were God-fearing I might be a little more concerned. As it is all the evidence is piling up...and Wormwood is fast approaching but now its not just me saying it many observers are saying it as well. Times will get very tough for us all but even tougher for those who are divorced from Jesus Christ...because Wormwood has a sting in its tail especially for those listed in Revelation 21:8...So, be prepared, as any boy scout will tell you, and watch out for the righteous signs not the deceitful signs.
-
please learn some REAL science , you are currently a laughing stock. If you have any self respect , give up .
dammit , you've got me , you are a very clever comedian . ;D ;D ;D
Have a good laugh then Walter...I only say what I am inspired to say. It is an old Biblical technique...but of course, reading the Holy Bible is laughable to you as well isn't it, except for the millions who have put it to the test and found great comfort from its teaching. Even your horriblest tyrants wanted a piece of the action and via practicing their deceit over their people have kept Jesus' name fully operational even till these 'last days'.
-
And so Anchorman, you totally disregard Jesus' teaching of love they neighbour...or even, love thy enemy...we aren't doing very well are we??
The whole universe gives praise to Almighty God's handiwork...filled with science...but you prefer to divorce God from that science...but only because your scientists tell you to...so, who are you listening to, The combined work of God and Jesus Christ or man...who has a vested interest in you not listening to our deity, too strongly.
If you listen to the 'word' of Jesus accurately you will hear all sorts of wonders about this planet and the universe and you will know you are in safe hands when you truly worship the word that Jesus lived and died for...but you need your confirmation from others and not from Jesus who has promised to save you if you accept his word. Now you could do that alone...you don't need me or iniquity...just the accurate teaching of Jesus Christ which will grow and grow until you have full righteous truth...isn't that what Jesus told you as well.
So; that'll be an
"I can't provide links, so I'll waffle on in the hopes that he won't notice I'm evading, then", will it?
-
So; that'll be an
"I can't provide links, so I'll waffle on in the hopes that he won't notice I'm evading, then", will it?
You missed reply #98 then Anchorman...but it doesn't matter...you would probably just repeat what you say here. The accurate teaching of Jesus Christ should bring us all into one common understanding about Almighty God, Jesus Christ and righteousness...but that is impossible if everyone wants to follow iniquity instead of what Jesus says...and that is my stance from the very outset...but I guarantee one thing...everyone who is saved will have the same understanding about righteousness because from that twinkling of an eye they will put on incorruptibility and I can't see how that can be achieved if the many doctrines of the many churches aren't unified and quickly and that can only come about if the individual is prepared to listen to Jesus accurately.
.
-
Have a good laugh then Walter...I only say what I am inspired to say. It is an old Biblical technique...but of course, reading the Holy Bible is laughable to you as well isn't it, except for the millions who have put it to the test and found great comfort from its teaching.
Millions of people have put the Quran to the test and found great comfort from its teaching.
Have you studied it respectfully and calmly?
-
Millions of people have put the Quran to the test and found great comfort from its teaching.
Have you studied it respectfully and calmly?
That's true Seb...what it tells us is that, just like Christianity, people can be led by Almighty God and by tyrants at the same time. Breaking away from those tyrants though requires righteousness...the pure and accurate 'word' of Jesus Christ...because it is science based and teaches us how to get that deluge of sludge off the brain and other sensitive organs, allowing a much purer blood to flow through our veins. An absolute imperative if we want everlasting life.
-
Do you want some of my paracetamol, Seb?
-
Do you want some of my paracetamol, Seb?
Solpadeine Max is required I'm thinking!
-
That's true Seb...what it tells us is that, just like Christianity, people can be led by Almighty God and by tyrants at the same time. Breaking away from those tyrants though requires righteousness...the pure and accurate 'word' of Jesus Christ...because it is science based and teaches us how to get that deluge of sludge off the brain and other sensitive organs, allowing a much purer blood to flow through our veins. An absolute imperative if we want everlasting life.
My question though was
Have you studied it respectfully and calmly?
-
My question though was
Have you studied it respectfully and calmly?
I did look at it briefly, years ago...and decided that it was the religous branch of Esau...but I realised, to my own satisfaction that it was misleading because the teaching of the son of man being our saviour had been transposed to their savior being born from a man and this didn't gel with me. But I was calm and collected at the time.
-
Scraping the barrel there Floo...There are times when righteousness can display anger especially to prove a righteous point...and there are times when righteousness must be about 'his father's business' even if his carnal mother is offended...it's called letting go, and she already knew, even before he was born, that she would have to let go one day. As for the pigs...I bet not one rasher of bacon was wasted...and it was probably a kinder death than the one planned for them....Again, Jesus just wanted to prove a righteous point.
As far as righteousness losing its temper...what do you think the wrath of Almighty God will be like on Judgment Day because he doesn't paint a pretty picture.
Jesus acted like a hooligan in the Temple, there is no excuse for vandalism. As for those pigs, what a stupid excuse you have made for that act of animal cruelty. >:( There is nothing to suggest Jesus compensated the poor farmer!
NM the more you post the less and less credible your POV becomes, and you are making a laughing stock of yourself. I doubt Jesus would recognise the spin you have put on his life.
-
Jesus acted like a hooligan in the Temple, there is no excuse for vandalism. As for those pigs, what a stupid excuse you have made for that act of animal cruelty. >:( There is nothing to suggest Jesus compensated the poor farmer!
NM the more you post the less and less credible your POV becomes, and you are making a laughing stock of yourself. I doubt Jesus would recognise the spin you have put on his life.
Regarding the rough handling of the money lenders in the temple
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SO5Y1OuQIxo
-
Regarding the rough handling of the money lenders in the temple
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SO5Y1OuQIxo
::)
-
I did look at it briefly, years ago...and decided that it was the religous branch of Esau...but I realised, to my own satisfaction that it was misleading because the teaching of the son of man being our saviour had been transposed to their savior being born from a man and this didn't gel with me. But I was calm and collected at the time.
So you have not studied it then Nick.
A brief look is not studying is it?
Yet here you are telling everyone to go study the Bible when you haven't done the same thing properly with the Quran.
I mean, you won't know for sure that you are barking up the wrong tree until you do that will you not?
Maybe the Quran has the correct scientific secrets to life the universe and everything.
-
If you can't face the q'ran, and can't handle other interpretation of Scripture, caN i suugest the book of Amduat?
It's shorter, very hard to fathom, and its got a lot of pictures in it...I can forward you a translation I made when I was at Uni, if you like.
Nice pictures.
-
So you have not studied it then Nick.
A brief look is not studying is it?
Yet here you are telling everyone to go study the Bible when you haven't done the same thing properly with the Quran.
I mean, you won't know for sure that you are barking up the wrong tree until you do that will you not?
Maybe the Quran has the correct scientific secrets to life the universe and everything.
You've done it again Seb...created your own argument and woven it so that I have no answer...but, you see, I am well up to these vicious circle tactics.
I gave Islam the right to be in the Holy Bible but not the right to be terrorists...but you just want to crush the hope of millions though in reality you are crushing your own ability to find righteousness. You see, that's where the science comes in. Did I ever mention the two separate dimensions that run side by side in our universe. I know I have but you have given me the ideal platform to bring it to the attention of you, Anchorman, all Christians, all Jews and all of Islam.
You see...Jesus talks about this second dimension often. It is where Almighty God resides...It is where Jesus himself comes from, it is where we are invited to direct our prayers, it is what gives our dimension all its gravity...all its higgs fields, and all the mysteries like poltergeist...Bermuda Triangle...Missing 411, as researched by David Paulides, and the amazing experience of Bruce Gernon as portrayed in his own youtube video. It also opens the door to how ufos get about...so that we can safely say that Jesus Christ's kingdom could be anywhere in this universe because he has access to it in its entirety...because, well, in the static-pre-big-bang universe time stands still...or rather...a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years are like a day.
-
Stuff the paracetamol.
Gotta be Laphroaig.
-
You've done it again Seb...created your own argument and woven it so that I have no answer...but, you see, I am well up to these vicious circle tactics.
I gave Islam the right to be in the Holy Bible but not the right to be terrorists...but you just want to crush the hope of millions though in reality you are crushing your own ability to find righteousness. You see, that's where the science comes in. Did I ever mention the two separate dimensions that run side by side in our universe. I know I have but you have given me the ideal platform to bring it to the attention of you, Anchorman, all Christians, all Jews and all of Islam.
You see...Jesus talks about this second dimension often. It is where Almighty God resides...It is where Jesus himself comes from, it is where we are invited to direct our prayers, it is what gives our dimension all its gravity...all its higgs fields, and all the mysteries like poltergeist...Bermuda Triangle...Missing 411, as researched by David Paulides, and the amazing experience of Bruce Gernon as portrayed in his own youtube video. It also opens the door to how ufos get about...so that we can safely say that Jesus Christ's kingdom could be anywhere in this universe because he has access to it in its entirety...because, well, in the static-pre-big-bang universe time stands still...or rather...a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years are like a day.
So, no then!
Not unexpected.
-
Stuff the paracetamol.
Gotta be Laphroaig.
That is going to be expensive, the amount which one would need! ;D
-
Stuff the paracetamol.
Gotta be Laphroaig.
I've never heard of that stuff before Anchorman but I'm sure it's quite nasty. But what I have too say isn't to pleasent either. Which is...if we don't follow Jesus Christ accurately, as he himself taught us, we wont escape the tail end of Wormwood, which will be even nastier for those mentioned in Revelation 21:8...Now that is Biblical and requires serious study of righteousness by those who are able so that we can warn others in time.
Who said that being a Christian wasn't dangerous??
-
I've never heard of that stuff before Anchorman but I'm sure it's quite nasty. But what I have too say isn't to pleasent either. Which is...if we don't follow Jesus Christ accurately, as he himself taught us, we wont escape the tail end of Wormwood, which will be even nastier for those mentioned in Revelation 21:8...Now that is Biblical and requires serious study of righteousness by those who are able so that we can warn others in time.
Who said that being a Christian wasn't dangerous??
I hope you don't spout this bollocks down the pub, you'd get lynched . Now that's dangerous!
-
I've never heard of that stuff before Anchorman but I'm sure it's quite nasty. But what I have too say isn't to pleasent either. Which is...if we don't follow Jesus Christ accurately, as he himself taught us, we wont escape the tail end of Wormwood, which will be even nastier for those mentioned in Revelation 21:8...Now that is Biblical and requires serious study of righteousness by those who are able so that we can warn others in time.
Who said that being a Christian wasn't dangerous??
Then you are not a follower of Jesus who seemed to like his booze very much indeed. Laphroaig is a Scottish whisky.
-
I've never heard of that stuff before Anchorman but I'm sure it's quite nasty. But what I have too say isn't to pleasent either. Which is...if we don't follow Jesus Christ accurately, as he himself taught us, we wont escape the tail end of Wormwood, which will be even nastier for those mentioned in Revelation 21:8...Now that is Biblical and requires serious study of righteousness by those who are able so that we can warn others in time.
Who said that being a Christian wasn't dangerous??
Nasty?
Nasty?
How very dare you?
Do you have evidence to support your assumption?
You claim you've never heard of Laphroaig, but on what evidence - yes - evidence, NM - do you assume that it's nasty?
See what I mean?
You provider assertion without evidence.
If you cannot even back up your assertion on this albeit minor topic with links, how are we supposed to accept the rest of your witterings as true, without evidence of others who claim your beliefs, or even Scripture to back them up?
Throwing tripe like "Science", "dynamic energy", "Planetary collision" etc into the discussion without a shered of verifiable, extra *(or even intra) Scriptural links tp back them up is not good apologetics and a poor witness, to boot.
-
I think that we are up against the limits of Jesus' accurate scientific powers here. The best he could do was change water into wine.
You need a lot more righteousness than Jesus had to be able to change water into Laphroaig ...
-
Then you are not a follower of Jesus who seemed to like his booze very much indeed. Laphroaig is a Scottish whisky.
Thanks for that Floo...I don't drink a lot...just the occasional pint.and perhaps like Jesus, at the occasional wedding.
-
Thanks for that Floo...I don't drink a lot...just the occasional pint.and perhaps like Jesus, at the occasional wedding.
I think the guy drank on a very regular basis if the gospels are correct, he even insisted wine was part of the sacrament.
-
That's true Seb...what it tells us is that, just like Christianity, people can be led by Almighty God and by tyrants at the same time. Breaking away from those tyrants though requires righteousness...the pure and accurate 'word' of Jesus Christ...because it is science based and teaches us how to get that deluge of sludge off the brain and other sensitive organs, allowing a much purer blood to flow through our veins. An absolute imperative if we want everlasting life.
Nick
why are so certain abut your beliefs , do you ever think you might have got it wrong?
-
I think that we are up against the limits of Jesus' accurate scientific powers here. The best he could do was change water into wine.
You need a lot more righteousness than Jesus had to be able to change water into Laphroaig ...
One of the many things I love about the LORD is that He wasn't averse to parties!
-
Thanks for that Floo...I don't drink a lot...just the occasional pint.and perhaps like Jesus, at the occasional wedding.
You think the only time the LORD drank was at a wedding?
So, you haven't actually read the Bible, then?
-
You think the only time the LORD drank was at a wedding?
So, you haven't actually read the Bible, then?
When NM reads the Bible he wears a special pair of specs so that nothing diverts him from his interpretation of it.
-
When NM reads the Bible he wears a special pair of specs so that nothing diverts him from his interpretation of it.
My interpretation of the Holy Bible, Floo, states that the whole universe sprung into existence at Almighty God's behest from a superabundant, dynamic energy, which, when travelling at the speed of the expanding universe crashes with multiple forces that whipped it all into galaxy sized clouds, with galaxy sized hurricanes, that created many solar sized tornadoes, each feeding off the core of each galaxial cloud, and whipped up solar balls of denser energy up their columns, and distributed them around the galaxy until it ran out of steam, whilst simultaneously doing the same or similar things within tiny electric clusters inside these many star formations and which manifested themselves as atoms...many atoms, controlled by their higgs-fields, which erupted from the clashing forces within, and the gravitational forces, that clash with each other when these two universal dimensions come together. More than that...I just suggest that many hidden scientific principles can be identified here...but following Jesus, accurately, enters us into the best science that can be extracted from the universe.
-
My interpretation of the Holy Bible, Floo, states that the whole universe sprung into existence at Almighty God's behest from a superabundant, dynamic energy, which, when travelling at the speed of the expanding universe crashes with multiple forces that whipped it all into galaxy sized clouds, with galaxy sized hurricanes, that created many solar sized tornadoes, each feeding off the core of each galaxial cloud, and whipped up solar balls of denser energy up their columns, and distributed them around the galaxy until it ran out of steam, whilst simultaneously doing the same or similar things within tiny electric clusters inside these many star formations and which manifested themselves as atoms...many atoms, controlled by their higgs-fields, which erupted from the clashing forces within, and the gravitational forces, that clash with each other when these two universal dimensions come together. More than that...I just suggest that many hidden scientific principles can be identified here...but following Jesus, accurately, enters us into the best science that can be extracted from the universe.
well fuck me, I wasted my time at university then.
-
My interpretation of the Holy Bible, Floo, states that the whole universe sprung into existence at Almighty God's behest from a superabundant, dynamic energy, which, when travelling at the speed of the expanding universe crashes with multiple forces that whipped it all into galaxy sized clouds, with galaxy sized hurricanes, that created many solar sized tornadoes, each feeding off the core of each galaxial cloud, and whipped up solar balls of denser energy up their columns, and distributed them around the galaxy until it ran out of steam, whilst simultaneously doing the same or similar things within tiny electric clusters inside these many star formations and which manifested themselves as atoms...many atoms, controlled by their higgs-fields, which erupted from the clashing forces within, and the gravitational forces, that clash with each other when these two universal dimensions come together. More than that...I just suggest that many hidden scientific principles can be identified here...but following Jesus, accurately, enters us into the best science that can be extracted from the universe.
NM I rest my case! ::)
-
Floo and Walter
Not for the first time, when reading this topic, I have wondered whether Nicholas Marks isn't just a highly inventive wind-up merchant who has devised a little comic world by dreaming up ridiculous scenarios based around "righteous", "science" and "accurate". By keeping an apparent straight face while using his random word generator he is able to manipulate our responses to the incredible universe he has created.
Of course, he'll never tell us - and a good thing too ...
-
My interpretation of the Holy Bible, Floo, states that the whole universe sprung into existence at Almighty God's behest from a superabundant, dynamic energy, which, when travelling at the speed of the expanding universe crashes with multiple forces that whipped it all into galaxy sized clouds, with galaxy sized hurricanes, that created many solar sized tornadoes, each feeding off the core of each galaxial cloud, and whipped up solar balls of denser energy up their columns, and distributed them around the galaxy until it ran out of steam, whilst simultaneously doing the same or similar things within tiny electric clusters inside these many star formations and which manifested themselves as atoms...many atoms, controlled by their higgs-fields, which erupted from the clashing forces within, and the gravitational forces, that clash with each other when these two universal dimensions come together. More than that...I just suggest that many hidden scientific principles can be identified here...but following Jesus, accurately, enters us into the best science that can be extracted from the universe.
Hi there Nick I know that you mean well but all of this religious stuff you keep coming out with, I can remember from when you last did a few posts on the forum you never did supply anything that would of evidentially supported your belief in this he she or it figure you like to refer to as god.
Where you were asked in the past for evidence on this god subject you in effect indicated that god is the proof of god, you actually used various quotes from the bible as though you were saying the bible proves the bible, I realise nobody is quite as nutty as that and you must have made a mistake saying the bible proves the bible, now I just wondered if between now and the last lot of postings you were making if you had found anything that would stand up to scrutiny that would also prove for good and all this god of yours really does exist?
I look forward to reading your answer, only there are so many religionists like your good self that don't answer this sort of question and I'm sure your not one of the silent ones that refuse to answer awkward questions of this nature.
All the best to you Nick ippy
-
Floo and Walter
Not for the first time, when reading this topic, I have wondered whether Nicholas Marks isn't just a highly inventive wind-up merchant who has devised a little comic world by dreaming up ridiculous scenarios based around "righteous", "science" and "accurate". By keeping an apparent straight face while using his random word generator he is able to manipulate our responses to the incredible universe he has created.
Of course, he'll never tell us - and a good thing too ...
Yep, I think you're right HH . Its all far too ridiculous not to be a wind up ..
well done Nick :) :) :)
-
Floo and Walter
Not for the first time, when reading this topic, I have wondered whether Nicholas Marks isn't just a highly inventive wind-up merchant who has devised a little comic world by dreaming up ridiculous scenarios based around "righteous", "science" and "accurate". By keeping an apparent straight face while using his random word generator he is able to manipulate our responses to the incredible universe he has created.
Of course, he'll never tell us - and a good thing too ...
I have considered the possibility of NM being a WUM, but I think as sad as it is he genuinely believes he is in possession of the 'truth', however crazy the rest of us believe his POV to be. I probably shouldn't respond to his posts, but it is very hard to resist doing so.
-
Nichlas Marks
I have read about a dozen of your words here and there, mainly because I am listening to others' responses, but I thought I might just point out, very politely of course, that the phrase 'the universe sprumng', should have been 'the universe sprang'. I wouldn't want you to, you know, get something slightly wrong!!
-
For crying out loud, Susan, don't tellhim he isn't being "accurate".....!
-
For crying out loud, Susan, don't tellhim he isn't being "accurate".....!
:D Actually, just catching up this morning, I hear that I misspelt his name!!!
-
Nichlas Marks
I have read about a dozen of your words here and there, mainly because I am listening to others' responses, but I thought I might just point out, very politely of course, that the phrase 'the universe sprumng', should have been 'the universe sprang'. I wouldn't want you to, you know, get something slightly wrong!!
;D An orgasmic explosion no less! The earth certainly moved.
-
Nichlas Marks
I have read about a dozen of your words here and there, mainly because I am listening to others' responses, but I thought I might just point out, very politely of course, that the phrase 'the universe sprumng', should have been 'the universe sprang'. I wouldn't want you to, you know, get something slightly wrong!!
You are of course correct Susan. I use a number of different computers and my least favourite is a tablet that can jump to a new place on the page whilst writing. I check for these errors but obviously don't always spot them...but, at least, you got the gist.
-
So no answer for post 136 then, the one on on this thread?
If you do decide to answer don't forget it'd be daft to try and back up the bible from the bible.
I haven't known of a religionist anywhere any time that has been able to answer a question like the one on post 136 on this thread yet, let's see if you con be the first Nick?
ippy
-
Hi there Nick I know that you mean well but all of this religious stuff you keep coming out with, I can remember from when you last did a few posts on the forum you never did supply anything that would of evidentially supported your belief in this he she or it figure you like to refer to as god.
Where you were asked in the past for evidence on this god subject you in effect indicated that god is the proof of god, you actually used various quotes from the bible as though you were saying the bible proves the bible, I realise nobody is quite as nutty as that and you must have made a mistake saying the bible proves the bible, now I just wondered if between now and the last lot of postings you were making if you had found anything that would stand up to scrutiny that would also prove for good and all this god of yours really does exist?
I look forward to reading your answer, only there are so many religionists like your good self that don't answer this sort of question and I'm sure your not one of the silent ones that refuse to answer awkward questions of this nature.
All the best to you Nick ippy
What I am saying ippy is that I have discovered that the universe...or at least all its mass and all its invisible energy is in fact a wonderful, invisible, superabundant dynamic energy, and that Albert Einstein, Jesus Christ and Almighty God had grasped this point and tried to distribute this knowledge in their own ways...that is why you need to try as well...but I can help you if you righteously get stuck and ask in a righteous way...but I'm not too hopeful.
-
What I am saying ippy is that I have discovered that the universe...or at least all its mass and all its invisible energy is in fact a wonderful, invisible, superabundant dynamic energy, and that Albert Einstein, Jesus Christ and Almighty God had grasped this point and tried to distribute this knowledge in their own ways...that is why you need to try as well...but I can help you if you righteously get stuck and ask in a righteous way...but I'm not too hopeful.
And where did you make that discovery? Science and dynamic energy are not mentioned in the Bible.
-
Moderator: please note posts diagnosing members as mentally ill will be removed and may lead to suspension
-
Albert Einstien, Jesus Christ and Almighty God?
Well, it's a trinity, I suppose......
-
What I am saying ippy is that I have discovered that the universe...or at least all its mass and all its invisible energy is in fact a wonderful, invisible, superabundant dynamic energy, and that Albert Einstein, Jesus Christ and Almighty God had grasped this point and tried to distribute this knowledge in their own ways...that is why you need to try as well...but I can help you if you righteously get stuck and ask in a righteous way...but I'm not too hopeful.
fantastic Nick , you're on form today hahaha
-
And where did you make that discovery? Science and dynamic energy are not mentioned in the Bible.
But you are wrong Floo...it is all there by implication...and by carefully peeling away what is said to reveal what is behind the surface of the written word...For example...The Light of the World, is a reference to a wonderful science that explains everything...Many scientists have drooled with hope and expectation to find this key to understanding the universe when it was already there, staring them in the face, they just had to apply scientific investigation to the key-words and I can assure you that dynamic energy, besides being an obvious, scientific term to describe all the atomic energy in the universe is recorded as being in the Holy Bible and at the root of all those atoms.
-
But you are wrong Floo...it is all there by implication...and by carefully peeling away what is said to reveal what is behind the surface of the written word...For example...The Light of the World, is a reference to a wonderful science that explains everything...Many scientists have drooled with hope and expectation to find this key to understanding the universe when it was already there, staring them in the face, they just had to apply scientific investigation to the key-words and I can assure you that dynamic energy, besides being an obvious, scientific term to describe all the atomic energy in the universe is recorded as being in the Holy Bible and at the root of all those atoms.
It is all there in your imagination NM.
-
It is all there in your imagination NM.
You mean that the Holy Bible is all in my imagination then Floo...but I could counter this by saying that your lack of interest in Holy Bible is all in your imagination because, it is so wonderfully worded that only an intellect far superior to ours could have crafted it with such expertise...especially because it comes alive in every generation and has forced tyrants to reconsider their stance over the masses...which is how I see it panning out through the forthcoming, great tribulations...I would hate to be found on the unrighteous side of all that.
-
But you are wrong Floo...it is all there by implication...and by carefully peeling away what is said to reveal what is behind the surface of the written word...For example...The Light of the World, is a reference to a wonderful science that explains everything...Many scientists have drooled with hope and expectation to find this key to understanding the universe when it was already there, staring them in the face, they just had to apply scientific investigation to the key-words and I can assure you that dynamic energy, besides being an obvious, scientific term to describe all the atomic energy in the universe is recorded as being in the Holy Bible and at the root of all those atoms.
Floo's right, though.
(I never thought I'd say that) :D
You can imply whatever you want till the cosmic blancmange collides with earth, but the word "science" does not appear in Scriptre; nor, except for the rightly discredited New World mistranslationn, do the words "dynamic energy".
-
You mean that the Holy Bible is all in my imagination then Floo...but I could counter this by saying that your lack of interest in Holy Bible is all in your imagination because, it is so wonderfully worded that only an intellect far superior to ours could have crafted it with such expertise...especially because it comes alive in every generation and has forced tyrants to reconsider their stance over the masses...which is how I see it panning out through the forthcoming, great tribulations...I would hate to be found on the unrighteous side of all that.
I mean your interpretation of the Bible is UNIQUE.
-
Anchorman
Floo's right, though.
(I never thought I'd say that) :D
You can imply whatever you want till the cosmic blancmange collides with earth, but the word "science" does not appear in Scriptre; nor, except for the rightly discredited New World mistranslationn, do the words "dynamic energy".
Anchorman...
Had you read the post open mindedly Anchorman you would know that dynamic energy is a term that any scientist might use to describe the energy within the atom which must be magnified billions of times to cover all atoms in the universe...but...even so...thank you for confirming that this expression is indeed in the Holy Bible...which doubles as God's mighty power and great strength in yours. Now, knowing that God is telling 'you' this, and science is telling you the other, don't you realise that both statements are telling you the same thing.
-
What I am saying ippy is that I have discovered that the universe...or at least all its mass and all its invisible energy is in fact a wonderful, invisible, superabundant dynamic energy, and that Albert Einstein, Jesus Christ and Almighty God had grasped this point and tried to distribute this knowledge in their own ways...that is why you need to try as well...but I can help you if you righteously get stuck and ask in a righteous way...but I'm not too hopeful.
It would be interesting to know where you have gained this knowledge of the universe from and let us know all about any of the evidence that would support this knowledge you claim to have.
I think you'll find that there are several theories about the mass of the universe, Einstine's theory has stood for some time now with only minor ongoing challenges that I don't fully understand, nor I doubt do many others, the mass of the universe ie dark matter forming a part of the whole is, as I understand a major part of the work being undetaken by Cerne, even there they haven't got all of the answers yet.
The work at Cerne tests whatever the current theory might be and as allways in science it's a hard ongoing load of work often without reward or it can be failure due to faulty input in the first place but anyway with all of the resources they have, they don't, it seems to me, seem to be able to come up to anywhere near to the amount of knowledge you claim to have, at least the knowledge they do have has some reasonable evidence that backs it up, you've never shown any evidence that would back up the religious god stuff you're always on about.
I note that last post of yours to me still didn't have any evidence that could be used as full and final evidence for the existance of this he she or it figure you refer to as god and as such wasnt really an answer to the question I asked of you.
Nick you haven't got any verifiable evidence that proves this god of yours exists have you?
Wish you well Nick ippy
-
It would be interesting to know where you have gained this knowledge of the universe from and let us know all about any of the evidence that would support this knowledge you claim to have.
I think you'll find that there are several theories about the mass of the universe, Einstine's theory has stood for some time now with only minor ongoing challenges that I don't fully understand, nor I doubt do many others, the mass of the universe ie dark matter forming a part of the whole is, as I understand a major part of the work being undetaken by Cerne, even there they haven't got all of the answers yet.
The work at Cerne tests whatever the current theory might be and as allways in science it's a hard ongoing load of work often without reward or it can be failure due to faulty input in the first place but anyway with all of the resources they have, they don't, it seems to me, seem to be able to come up to anywhere near to the amount of knowledge you claim to have, at least the knowledge they do have has some reasonable evidence that backs it up, you've never shown any evidence that would back up the religious god stuff you're always on about.
I note that last post of yours to me still didn't have any evidence that could be used as full and final evidence for the existance of this he she or it figure you refer to as god and as such wasnt really an answer to the question I asked of you.
Nick you haven't got any verifiable evidence that proves this god of yours exists have you?
Wish you well Nick ippy
I refer you to the above Anchorman reply, ippy. Science exposes this dynamic energy that resides inside all atoms. No matter how science arrived at that conclusion, it is secondary to me, because it's already in the Holy Bible and using the clues offered by that source it's inside us as well...unless you have no atoms residing within you. Now...Jesus Christ tells us how that energy can be harnessed in a respectful and responsible way. Many churches agree. Many people who have hit on bad times, will agree...many sub sciences that deal with difficult circumstances know that it is the stress that causes all the problems, which responsible people avoid, and which Jesus Christ tells us to avoid. So we come back to the logic that says...get this knowledge right and we give our own health a tremendous boost...thanks to the good-will of Jesus Christ and his wonderful father...Almighty God...me, I'm just a messenger who believes that our Judgment is fast approaching...the rest is up to you.
-
Anchorman...
Had you read the post open mindedly Anchorman you would know that dynamic energy is a term that any scientist might use to describe the energy within the atom which must be magnified billions of times to cover all atoms in the universe...but...even so...thank you for confirming that this expression is indeed in the Holy Bible...which doubles as God's mighty power and great strength in yours. Now, knowing that God is telling 'you' this, and science is telling you the other, don't you realise that both statements are telling you the same thing.
NM;
To class your interpretation, transliteration and application of Scripture as 'unique' would be an exercise in understating the obvious.
-
NM;
To class your interpretation, transliteration and application of Scripture as 'unique' would be an exercise in understating the obvious.
From another planet, or universe, even! ;D
-
I refer you to the above Anchorman reply, ippy. Science exposes this dynamic energy that resides inside all atoms. No matter how science arrived at that conclusion, it is secondary to me, because it's already in the Holy Bible and using the clues offered by that source it's inside us as well...unless you have no atoms residing within you. Now...Jesus Christ tells us how that energy can be harnessed in a respectful and responsible way. Many churches agree. Many people who have hit on bad times, will agree...many sub sciences that deal with difficult circumstances know that it is the stress that causes all the problems, which responsible people avoid, and which Jesus Christ tells us to avoid. So we come back to the logic that says...get this knowledge right and we give our own health a tremendous boost...thanks to the good-will of Jesus Christ and his wonderful father...Almighty God...me, I'm just a messenger who believes that our Judgment is fast approaching...the rest is up to you.
I see you're back to the assertions again Nick, always good to fall back on when you haven't got an answer.
By the way Nick you stil haven't answered my question about where is this verifiabl evidence that, if there were any, would support this he she or it idea you refer to as god, as though it's something that realy exists and remember the bible boesn't support the bible as evidenc for its veracity, only you seem to keep forgetting this not so insignifigant point?
ippy
-
I see you're back to the assertions again Nick, always good to fall back on when you haven't got an answer.
By the way Nick you stil haven't answered my question about where is this verifiabl evidence that, if there were any, would support this he she or it idea you refer to as god, as though it's something that realy exists and remember the bible boesn't support the bible as evidenc for its veracity, only you seem to keep forgetting this not so insignifigant point?
ippy
Oh...dear...I wonder what they smash together at the Hadron Collider then ippy and which only leaves an electric trace before decaying back to its original, invisible, undetectable, indestructible form, because, remember, energy must change to a different form of energy of the same value. That is why you must listen to the only teaching outside the Holy Bible that is telling you to repent else, otherwise become a fizzle of energy inside a terrible mass of energy which will retain your spirit and any vestment of your spirit for ever more...and it wont be pleasant. That's not my fault or Jesus Christ's fault it is a natural disaster that Jesus forewarned us about and what we must do if we want to be spared.
Here is where obeying electrical laws in the face of an electrically, distressed, planetary body, will be our best option.
-
Oh...dear...I wonder what they smash together at the Hadron Collider then ippy and which only leaves an electric trace before decaying back to its original, invisible, undetectable, indestructible form, because, remember, energy must change to a different form of energy of the same value. That is why you must listen to the only teaching outside the Holy Bible that is telling you to repent else, otherwise become a fizzle of energy inside a terrible mass of energy which will retain your spirit and any vestment of your spirit for ever more...and it wont be pleasant. That's not my fault or Jesus Christ's fault it is a natural disaster that Jesus forewarned us about and what we must do if we want to be spared.
Here is where obeying electrical laws in the face of an electrically, distressed, planetary body, will be our best option.
UNIQUE and then some! ;D ;D ;D I reckon the long dead Jesus would have been bemused as the rest of us by your interpretation of what he is supposed to have taught!
-
Oh...dear...I wonder what they smash together at the Hadron Collider then ippy and which only leaves an electric trace before decaying back to its original, invisible, undetectable, indestructible form, because, remember, energy must change to a different form of energy of the same value. That is why you must listen to the only teaching outside the Holy Bible that is telling you to repent else, otherwise become a fizzle of energy inside a terrible mass of energy which will retain your spirit and any vestment of your spirit for ever more...and it wont be pleasant. That's not my fault or Jesus Christ's fault it is a natural disaster that Jesus forewarned us about and what we must do if we want to be spared.
Here is where obeying electrical laws in the face of an electrically, distressed, planetary body, will be our best option.
So you're still not answering my question Nick, about where's your evidence that would support your god idea, that is if you have any evidence of this gods existence that could be substantiated, of course?
Here is where obeying electrical laws in the face of an electrically, distressed, planetary body, will be our best option.
This kind of stuff, underlined above, has nothing to do wit the question I've put to you, why don't you answer the question asked Nick?
ippy
-
So you're still not answering my question Nick, about where's your evidence that would support your god idea, that is if you have any evidence of this gods existence that could be substantiated, of course?
Here is where obeying electrical laws in the face of an electrically, distressed, planetary body, will be our best option.
This kind of stuff, underlined above, has nothing to do wit the question I've put to you, why don't you answer the question asked Nick?
ippy
Perhaps this will explain some of my reasoning ippy...but I bet you don't bother watching it, cus, well, why bother??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39a7nbf8ro4
-
Perhaps this will explain some of my reasoning ippy...but I bet you don't bother watching it, cus, well, why bother??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39a7nbf8ro4
Any one can give out links, I was asking you for your evidence that proves there is a god, evidence that can be verified?
You're so keen on your god idea Nick, it should be an easy one for you to answer instead of keep on avoiding answering.
-
Any one can give out links, I was asking you for your evidence that proves there is a god, evidence that can be verified?
You're so keen on your god idea Nick, it should be an easy one for you to answer instead of keep on avoiding answering.
I've answered that many times ippy. My job isn't to save you...that is Jesus Christ's job...I'm simply showing everyone who will listen that the Holy Bible is the fifth, fundamental force, which is essential in unifying the other four...if we want what is Biblically on offer.
-
I've answered that many times ippy. My job isn't to save you...that is Jesus Christ's job...I'm simply showing everyone who will listen that the Holy Bible is the fifth, fundamental force, which is essential in unifying the other four...if we want what is Biblically on offer.
It looks like you can't prove your case and you haven't got any evidence, is that why you wont answer the question I have asked you?
Don't forget Nick assertions really don't count for anything, unless they're backed up with supportable evidence, I haven't seen any evidence worth much coming from your direction to date.
I'm not looking to be saved but I would like to have an answer to my original question to you, not your usual sermon.
It was a straight question Nick how about a straight answer to the question I asked you in the first place?
Kind regards ippy
-
It looks like you can't prove your case and you haven't got any evidence, is that why you wont answer the question I have asked you?
Don't forget Nick assertions really don't count for anything, unless they're backed up with supportable evidence, I haven't seen any evidence worth much coming from your direction to date.
I'm not looking to be saved but I would like to have an answer to my original question to you, not your usual sermon.
It was a straight question Nick how about a straight answer to the question I asked you in the first place?
Kind regards ippy
If I said the universe existed, ippy, and in special circumstance life could live on certain planets...you would say to me, whilst standing in your wooly vest and socks...No it doesn't...prove it to me, you will not answer a straight question...etc...etc. Well the universe does exist and it seems people from other worlds travel around it with little difficulty, visiting this planet quite frequently. But, unless you analyse this phenomenon openly and judge all the facts, you will remain blissfully ignorant. That is what I've done with Biblical teaching and found that we are about to enter into a terrible set of tribulations foretold in that book and much of it is happening whilst we speak. There is only one possible salvation and that is to respect the teaching of Jesus Christ and respect that word that many people should be telling you about. But we are each only one person and no one will miss me if I'm hauled into the fiery lake and I'm sure that any who might follow me will not be missed for long either, it's just that we have an option...respond to the science that says an indestructible energy, owned by Almighty God, saved Jesus Christ, and can save us as well, else don't bother...nuff said.
-
If I said the universe existed, ippy, and in special circumstance life could live on certain planets...you would say to me, whilst standing in your wooly vest and socks...No it doesn't...prove it to me, you will not answer a straight question...etc...etc. Well the universe does exist and it seems people from other worlds travel around it with little difficulty, visiting this planet quite frequently. But, unless you analyse this phenomenon openly and judge all the facts, you will remain blissfully ignorant. That is what I've done with Biblical teaching and found that we are about to enter into a terrible set of tribulations foretold in that book and much of it is happening whilst we speak. There is only one possible salvation and that is to respect the teaching of Jesus Christ and respect that word that many people should be telling you about. But we are each only one person and no one will miss me if I'm hauled into the fiery lake and I'm sure that any who might follow me will not be missed for long either, it's just that we have an option...respond to the science that says an indestructible energy, owned by Almighty God, saved Jesus Christ, and can save us as well, else don't bother...nuff said.
So in other words you can't answer then Nick?
ippy
-
So in other words you can't answer then Nick?
ippy
I refer you back to #166 ippy.
-
I've answered that many times ippy. My job isn't to save you...that is Jesus Christ's job...I'm simply showing everyone who will listen that the Holy Bible is the fifth, fundamental force, which is essential in unifying the other four...if we want what is Biblically on offer.
If as you say you've given me an answer to the question I first asked of you via post 166, I don't remember asking you to save me, ever, and have never seen anything that could be construed as an answer to any question I've asked of you, I haven't asked you anything about Jesus Christ, anything specifically about the bible or anything about the fifth, fundamental force, which is essential in unifying the other four..
So where's the answer to letting me have verifiable evidence that would prove this he, she or it thing you refer to as god really does exist, nobody has proved this yet perhaps you could be the first, if you do supply supportable evidence that this god of yours does exist I will join you and be just as devout as you are; don't forget only if your proof is given accompanied by the necessary verifiable evidence, something you haven't managed to do yet.
Now how about that answer, in science if something isn't known, those scientists involved usually admit they don't know, you're into science so you keep telling us, do you say you don't know when you don't know like the real scientists do?
Kind regards ippy
-
Perhaps this will explain some of my reasoning ippy...but I bet you don't bother watching it, cus, well, why bother??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39a7nbf8ro4
Nick, why are you continuing to refer people to videos which contain references to astrological signs?
Astrology Nick?
Really?
Need I remind you about the accurate teaching in the Bible?
The very thing which you claim to be an expert in!
Isaiah 47:13-15 NIV. "All the counsel you have received has only worn you out. Let your astrologers come forward, those stargazers who make predictions month by month, let them save you from what is coming upon you. Surely they are like stubble; the fire will burn them up. They cannot even save themselves from the flame… Each of them goes on in his error; there is not one that can save you."
Is it because you are in cohorts with Satan, trying to lead souls astray?
-
John 18:36
If Jesus wasn't from this world then he was from another...Heaven. Now our space age knowledge suggests he was from somewhere else way out in space. This puts a new aspect on things because this man of absolute truth was telling us a deep and intimate knowledge about Almighty God and there must have been a terrific amount of advanced science wrapped up in his reaching which included repair, resurrection and everlasting life...and he died to prove it to us. So shouldn't we be prepared to listen to what he has to say??
Jesus Christ WAS NOT A SPACE MAN.
-
Jesus Christ WAS NOT A SPACE MAN.
I agree, Jesus was a human nothing more, nothing less.
-
I agree, Jesus was a human nothing more, nothing less.
Fully Human but a Holy Thing and called the Son of God.
-
Fully Human but a Holy Thing and called the Son of God.
A less than credible belief, not a fact.
-
Fully Human but a Holy Thing and called the Son of God.
NB. This doctrine is not that shared by any mainstream church.
-
A less than credible belief, not a fact.
According to Christ and the witnesses it is a fact. A well documented one by all accounts.
Your belief is less of a fact because it has only one witness.. yourself.
Guess your replies has a belief and witness of one yourself. Christ had many and spread across the world.
Tell me floo, will anything you ever did be known around the world regarding words and personal actions in 2,000 years?
Even common sense of what can be seen and reasoned on the subject simply evades you.
-
NB. This doctrine is not that shared by any mainstream church.
Luke 1:35(KJV)
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Is Luke a liar did the Angel not say because he was born by the power of the Holy Ghost and the power of Almighty God himself that Christ was a HOLY THING and was to be called the Son of God?
King James Bible
Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
Did Jesus Christ or God come in flesh?
7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
God told mankind that Christ was a Holy Thing and was to be called THE SON OF GOD.
Who do you think the deceivers claim came in the flesh?
God alone knows all things. As God and Christ did not lie. Then when Christ said:King James Bible
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
To be God in person in flesh then he would be lying if he said he did not know the day or hour of his return.
Clearly Christ says ONLY his Father, who is God knows that time.
Whilst Christ revealed God to us and his true nature. At no time does he claim to be God. Even Peter makes this clear.
38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the holy Ghost, and with power, who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil: for God was with him.
God was with him, not God was him.
You see how over the years man has changed the teachings. As a Child I knew Jesus was Gods son.
I know being my Fathers daughter does not make me my Father. As Only Jesus Father knew the day of his return Jesus came
in the flesh and God was with him and gave him power and anointed him with the Spirit.
King James Bible
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
Lovers of truth are true worshippers of God. 24 God is a Spirit, and they that worship him, must worship him in spirit, and in trueth.
Why do you believe the bible speaks about these matters clearly. Was Moses not made like a God unto Pharaoh? But he like Christ was sent by God to mankind. They both revealed the will of God for his people. Christ was a Holy thing from the start a second Adam born by the power of Gods word made flesh.
You either follow the teachings of God or be lost in the teachings of man. Peter believed Jesus to be a man.
God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the holy Ghost, and with power, who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil: for God was with him.
In that one sentence, we see that Peter is telling you that Jesus was anointed by God and was given his power by God and the Holy Spirit. That he did all he did by Gods power and God himself was WITH HIM.
Now you have been told. Either the scales will fall from your eyes or you will continue in the illusion. For God made it very clear...
King James Bible
I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
My belief is both biblical and supported by the Apostles and especially Peter and Lukes account.
Even Paul gave warning in letters. Jesus Christ is the Messiah and he is the Son of God the Prophet he promised through Moses.
-
Luke 1:35(KJV)
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Is Luke a liar did the Angel not say because he was born by the power of the Holy Ghost and the power of Almighty God himself that Christ was a HOLY THING and was to be called the Son of God?
Did Jesus Christ or God come in flesh?
7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
God told mankind that Christ was a Holy Thing and was to be called THE SON OF GOD.
Who do you think the deceivers claim came in the flesh?
God alone knows all things. As God and Christ did not lie. Then when Christ said:King James Bible
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
To be God in person in flesh then he would be lying if he said he did not know the day or hour of his return.
Clearly Christ says ONLY his Father, who is God knows that time.
Whilst Christ revealed God to us and his true nature. At no time does he claim to be God. Even Peter makes this clear.
38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the holy Ghost, and with power, who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil: for God was with him.
God was with him, not God was him.
You see how over the years man has changed the teachings. As a Child I knew Jesus was Gods son.
I know being my Fathers daughter does not make me my Father. As Only Jesus Father knew the day of his return Jesus came
in the flesh and God was with him and gave him power and anointed him with the Spirit.
King James Bible
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
Lovers of truth are true worshippers of God. 24 God is a Spirit, and they that worship him, must worship him in spirit, and in trueth.
Why do you believe the bible speaks about these matters clearly. Was Moses not made like a God unto Pharaoh? But he like Christ was sent by God to mankind. They both revealed the will of God for his people. Christ was a Holy thing from the start a second Adam born by the power of Gods word made flesh.
You either follow the teachings of God or be lost in the teachings of man. Peter believed Jesus to be a man.
God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the holy Ghost, and with power, who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil: for God was with him.
In that one sentence, we see that Peter is telling you that Jesus was anointed by God and was given his power by God and the Holy Spirit. That he did all he did by Gods power and God himself was WITH HIM.
Now you have been told. Either the scales will fall from your eyes or you will continue in the illusion. For God made it very clear...
King James Bible
I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
My belief is both biblical and supported by the Apostles and especially Peter and Lukes account.
Even Paul gave warning in letters. Jesus Christ is the Messiah and he is the Son of God the Prophet he promised through Moses.
You belief is your own creation, other Christians don't see it your way.
-
You belief is your own creation, other Christians don't see it your way.
Apart from the ad populum here, you are incorrect, Sassy's views are far from unique and have a long history.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarianism
(as an aside if someone writes a long post and you are the next person replying , is it worth repeating the entire post just to add on a sentence? I would have thought those using screen readers might find it abit annoying)
-
Apart from the ad populum here, you are incorrect, Sassy's views are far from unique and have a long history.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarianism
(as an aside if someone writes a long post and you are the next person replying , is it worth repeating the entire post just to add on a sentence? I would have thought those using screen readers might find it abit annoying)
Not just those who use screen readers.
-
Apart from the ad populum here, you are incorrect, Sassy's views are far from unique and have a long history.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarianism
You're right, didn't this come up a few weeks ago on another thread? I've no doubt some members of the mainstream denoms (if they think about it) believe it's possible. It's not important though, surely, or at least there are more important things.
-
According to Christ and the witnesses it is a fact. A well documented one by all accounts.
Your belief is less of a fact because it has only one witness.. yourself.
Guess your replies has a belief and witness of one yourself. Christ had many and spread across the world.
Tell me floo, will anything you ever did be known around the world regarding words and personal actions in 2,000 years?
Even common sense of what can be seen and reasoned on the subject simply evades you.
How do you know for certain anything is 'According to Christ and the witnesses it is a fact', I haven't seen any evidence that would support this idea of yours Sass, could you let us see the evidence that proves this asserted fact is indeed a fact?
regards ippy
-
Did Jesus Christ or God come in flesh?
Did the Holy Ghost or God come upon Mary?
-
According to Christ and the witnesses it is a fact. A well documented one by all accounts.
According to the repeatedly edited second and/or third-hand accounts of alleged witnesses (you are aware of the well-documented unreliability of eye-witness testimony and long-term recall, right)...
O.
-
Did the Holy Ghost or God come upon Mary?
Oh I say.
-
When a long post is quoted with only a one-liner added, I scroll down past until I perceive a straight line, then read the one line!
-
According to the repeatedly edited second and/or third-hand accounts of alleged witnesses (you are aware of the well-documented unreliability of eye-witness testimony and long-term recall, right)...
O.
You will of course be able to reference these repeated accounts of course and tell us why your other objections specially apply to Christians producing histories and er, any body else without resorting to the genetic fallacy.
-
You will of course be able to reference these repeated accounts of course and tell us why your other objections specially apply to Christians producing histories and er, any body else without resorting to the genetic fallacy.
As has been noted before, any anecdotal accounts from any source whatsoever with the level of provenance of the NT, which is very little indeed, are of no real historical value since the contents for the most part are indistinguishable from fiction, so no genetic fallacy involved.
-
As has been noted before, any anecdotal accounts from any source whatsoever with the level of provenance of the NT, which is very little indeed, are of no real historical value since the contents for the most part are indistinguishable from fiction, so no genetic fallacy involved.
Fiction is a possibility and of course a positive assertion so I shall revive my as yet unsatisfied expectation of your proof.
I think most historians would go though with a sincere belief in the Christian community that They had witnessed a ressurection.
A dogmatic claim of fiction being antitheist polemic and not history.
-
Fiction is a possibility and of course a positive assertion so I shall revive my as yet unsatisfied expectation of your proof.
I haven't offered a 'proof': I've just noted the lack of provenance in the NT.
I think most historians would go though with a sincere belief in the Christian community that They had witnessed a ressurection.
A 'sincere belief' is one thing: that what is sincerely believed is historical fact in another thing entirely.
A dogmatic claim of fiction being antitheist polemic and not history.
I've often noted that fiction is a risk: how have you assessed this risk?
-
I haven't offered a 'proof': I've just noted the lack of provenance in the NT.
A 'sincere belief' is one thing: that what is sincerely believed is historical fact in another thing entirely.
I've often noted that fiction is a risk: how have you assessed this risk?
You haven't offered proof but an assertion that this is fiction needs justification. Do you care to give justification beyond it being that it's something you cannot personally believe in?
The fiction defence seems a bit iffy since there is non supernatural fiction that can be passed off as fact.
That leaves your real non historical reasons. That this is a supernatural thing and they don't happen although a case could be made that this in fact was a rare event exploited by religion. After all what a naturalist or physicalist can believe is a movable feast, even up to the point where we have today's spectacle that a intelligent creator which creates a universe it isn't part of and of which it isn't part of is touted as a reasonable idea.
History is whatever happens or as they say ''One thing after another''.
You are basing the one after the other on the nature of things.
In terms of risk assessment that sounds just like managerese bullshit with you metaphorically lapelling me and saying a la Charles Endell '' you owe me a risk assessment son''.
All that is needed is for me to say why I think this is all sound and you've had that report in triplicate.
-
You will of course be able to reference these repeated accounts of course and tell us why your other objections specially apply to Christians producing histories and er, any body else without resorting to the genetic fallacy.
The history of the bible is well documented, if you want to see the examples of it being translated through multiple languages, the scholarly accounts of how far after the alleged events the documentation occurred and the like, there's a wealth of information out there.
Likewise the scientific papers on how unreliable eye-witness accounts are, and how poor people's long-term memory is for specific details and the tendency of any story to 'drift' with time.
Is it any different in that regard to other accounts of the era? Perhaps, yes - the degree of overt editing and selection seems to be more significant than with most other texts from the era, and the extreme nature of the claims within is certainly far in excess of the relatively mundane politics, economics, warfare and everyday life that are documented in other places from similar eras.
O.
-
The history of the bible is well documented, if you want to see the examples of it being translated through multiple languages, the scholarly accounts of how far after the alleged events the documentation occurred and the like, there's a wealth of information out there.
Likewise the scientific papers on how unreliable eye-witness accounts are, and how poor people's long-term memory is for specific details and the tendency of any story to 'drift' with time.
Is it any different in that regard to other accounts of the era? Perhaps, yes - the degree of overt editing and selection seems to be more significant than with most other texts from the era, and the extreme nature of the claims within is certainly far in excess of the relatively mundane politics, economics, warfare and everyday life that are documented in other places from similar eras.
O.
Unfortunately, for me, it is impossible at the end of the day for me to hide the fact that the claims are shaking hands with what you have described as 'extreme.'
There are two silver linings on the horizon here though
1: That would support those of us who think why stick to putting in something that embarrassing unless of course they sincerely believe that it happened?
2: That you acknowledge it was extreme even for those times, thus disproving those who think that this sort of thing was commonplace in a gullible age.
Since you are using the big swinging dick of the scientific paper it's a timely er, time to remind folks of the scientific paperage concerning conspiracy theory.
-
Unfortunately, for me, it is impossible at the end of the day for me to hide the fact that the claims are shaking hands with what you have described as 'extreme.'
Which bit is 'extreme'?
The well documented history of New Testament works showing the time-frame for the authoring of the documents starting at least decades after the purported events, or the associated scientific investigations demonstrating the unreliability of human memory over such timeframes?
The demonstrable historical investigations suggesting that at least some, if not most of the New Testament works were not written by the claimed authors? The fact that even if they are second hand accounts, and notwithstanding the unreliability of long-term memory (see above) that there is more than enough scientific investigation to show that eye-witness testimony is unreliable at the best of times.
The pretty much uncontested history which shows the selection and adjustment of texts to form the canon, and the rejection of other equally valid texts in order to establish an orthodoxy to suit the establishment of the era.
The established textual analysis showing the widespread additions, excisions and selective editing of the individual works to accommodate orthodoxy at various periods, as well as the demonstrable history of the translation from Aramaic and Greek into Latin, and the further into 'Vulgar' tongues, each step attempting to convert cultural concepts into relevant approximations where the new culture has no direct correlate for the original understanding.
There are two silver linings on the horizon here though
1: That would support those of us who think why stick to putting in something that embarrassing unless of course they sincerely believe that it happened?
2: That you acknowledge it was extreme even for those times, thus disproving those who think that this sort of thing was commonplace in a gullible age.
That it's seen, in some enlightened circles, as an extreme claim now, doesn't mean that it's an extreme claim now. Indeed, I suspect the majority of the world's populace now wouldn't see it as an inherently extreme claim. As to embarrassing, the nature of the closed circle of religion is that in many instances cleaving to something that's palpably nonsense in the face of reality is seen as a virtue, not an embarrassment.
Since you are using the big swinging dick of the scientific paper it's a timely er, time to remind folks of the scientific paperage concerning conspiracy theory.
The one that puts conspiracy theory down to a combination of inherent cognitive and confirmation biases acting upon a superficial veneer of apparent evidence? That's why academic systems implement peer-review, to eliminate so far as is possible those biases. It's probably not perfect, but it's the most effective and reliable system we've implemented as yet.
O.
-
Which bit is 'extreme'?
The well documented history of New Testament works showing the time-frame for the authoring of the documents starting at least decades after the purported events, or the associated scientific investigations demonstrating the unreliability of human memory over such timeframes?
The demonstrable historical investigations suggesting that at least some, if not most of the New Testament works were not written by the claimed authors? The fact that even if they are second hand accounts, and notwithstanding the unreliability of long-term memory (see above) that there is more than enough scientific investigation to show that eye-witness testimony is unreliable at the best of times.
The pretty much uncontested history which shows the selection and adjustment of texts to form the canon, and the rejection of other equally valid texts in order to establish an orthodoxy to suit the establishment of the era.
The established textual analysis showing the widespread additions, excisions and selective editing of the individual works to accommodate orthodoxy at various periods, as well as the demonstrable history of the translation from Aramaic and Greek into Latin, and the further into 'Vulgar' tongues, each step attempting to convert cultural concepts into relevant approximations where the new culture has no direct correlate for the original understanding.
That it's seen, in some enlightened circles, as an extreme claim now, doesn't mean that it's an extreme claim now. Indeed, I suspect the majority of the world's populace now wouldn't see it as an inherently extreme claim. As to embarrassing, the nature of the closed circle of religion is that in many instances cleaving to something that's palpably nonsense in the face of reality is seen as a virtue, not an embarrassment.
The one that puts conspiracy theory down to a combination of inherent cognitive and confirmation biases acting upon a superficial veneer of apparent evidence? That's why academic systems implement peer-review, to eliminate so far as is possible those biases. It's probably not perfect, but it's the most effective and reliable system we've implemented as yet.
O.
That is now, maybe, But these ideas were embarrassing then, in a world where you say claims of a resurrection were in a sense extreme, then.
And the fact that I as a Christian can admit to them being extreme belies your picture of a world which accepts this as not extreme.
Look let me prove you wrong at a stroke.
Extreme in this sense means an event that doesn't naturally happen. Most Christians believe that the resurrection is a rare miracle. That it doesn't happen naturally is therefore a given
Having usefully declared that the world of the first century was not as gullible as some of your co stealth religionists would say.
You announced that religionists see the resurrection as not something that doesn't happen naturally or being unusual. That they view resurrection as a miracle and an almost unique event proves you wrong.
In the question of the term of long term memory. We have to apply the implications that to all history for you not to be specially pleading again.
There are papers with equations regarding the length of survival for conspiracies.
-
That it's seen, in some enlightened circles, as an extreme claim now,
Well thank you for including me in the enlightened circle which raises the question then ''how would YOU know?''.
-
You haven't offered proof but an assertion that this is fiction needs justification.
Certainly: mistakes and lies are always a risk with anecdotal accounts, and especially where the provenance is uncertain and where the details may could involve those with a personal interest in what is being portrayed. The police accounts of the Hillsborough disaster in 1989 is a more recent example of risks associated with human artifice.
Do you care to give justification beyond it being that it's something you cannot personally believe in?
Just did: anecdotal/witness accounts come with risks, which is why perjury can get you locked up.
The fiction defence seems a bit iffy since there is non supernatural fiction that can be passed off as fact.
That doesn't preclude fiction though: for example if I said that while in Asda earlier I bought some butter it would be unremarkable and involves no supernatural agency. but it would still be a lie. The key point is though that my buying butter claim is trivial whether I'm telling the truth or not but if my claim involved something highly unusual that, if true, would go against how we expect things to work (for instance that I saw an adult walk on water without flotation aids) then the evidence bar needs to be raised a lot higher and the risks of mistakes or lies become much more important since a claim such as this is definitely non-trivial (unlike whether or not I bought butter this morning).
That leaves your real non historical reasons. That this is a supernatural thing and they don't happen although a case could be made that this in fact was a rare event exploited by religion.
Before you get to the exploited but you first have to determine that there was such an event, and that involves excluding the risks of mistakes or lies. People can exploit fictitious claims too you know, as we saw recently when 'Niburu' failed to show.
After all what a naturalist or physicalist can believe is a movable feast, even up to the point where we have today's spectacle that a intelligent creator which creates a universe it isn't part of and of which it isn't part of is touted as a reasonable idea.
No idea what you're trying to say here.
History is whatever happens or as they say ''One thing after another''.
Indeed: if you know it actually happened that is: since if not you have another type of historical event involving the perpetuation of unsupported claims.
You are basing the one after the other on the nature of things.
Which is fine when a) these things are natural, and b) they can be shown to have occurred. Of course people making mistakes and telling lies is natural too.
In terms of risk assessment that sounds just like managerese bullshit with you metaphorically lapelling me and saying a la Charles Endell '' you owe me a risk assessment son''.
Correct: so where is it?
All that is needed is for me to say why I think this is all sound and you've had that report in triplicate.
Must be windy where you are, Vlad, since you seem to be flying several kites at the same time.
-
Certainly: mistakes and lies are always a risk with anecdotal accounts, and especially where the provenance is uncertain and where the details may could involve those with a personal interest in what is being portrayed. The police accounts of the Hillsborough disaster in 1989 is a more recent example of risks associated with human artifice.
Just did: anecdotal/witness accounts come with risks, which is why perjury can get you locked up.
That doesn't preclude fiction though: for example if I said that while in Asda earlier I bought some butter it would be unremarkable and involves no supernatural agency. but it would still be a lie. The key point is though that my buying butter claim is trivial whether I'm telling the truth or not but if my claim involved something highly unusual that, if true, would go against how we expect things to work (for instance that I saw an adult walk on water without flotation aids) then the evidence bar needs to be raised a lot higher and the risks of mistakes or lies become much more important since a claim such as this is definitely non-trivial (unlike whether or not I bought butter this morning).
Before you get to the exploited but you first have to determine that there was such an event, and that involves excluding the risks of mistakes or lies. People can exploit fictitious claims too you know, as we saw recently when 'Niburu' failed to show.
No idea what you're trying to say here.
Indeed: if you know it actually happened that is: since if not you have another type of historical event involving the perpetuation of unsupported claims.
Which is fine when a) these things are natural, and b) they can be shown to have occurred. Of course people making mistakes and telling lies is natural too.
Correct: so where is it?
Must be windy where you are, Vlad, since you seem to be flying several kites at the same time.
Unusual claims unusual evidence.
You mean that your testimony is not enough, we need two, or maybe three.......or maybe 500.
-
Unusual claims unusual evidence.
You mean that your testimony is not enough, we need two, or maybe three.......or maybe 500.
The '500', or any number of claimed witnesses at all, could still be a post-hoc lie though - how could you check this independently of the claim itself?
-
Unusual claims unusual evidence.
You mean that your testimony is not enough, we need two, or maybe three.......or maybe 500.
...or maybe more than that even?
The miracle of the sun in 1917 for example. Do you believe that event actually happened as described by the witnesses?
A simple yes or no will do for a start.
-
The '500', or any number of claimed witnesses at all, could still be a post-hoc lie though - how could you check this independently of the claim itself?
Yes it COULD be as you say although the probability decreases with each.
I believe that the people on the ground did a bit of checking up.
Of the 500 we don't know who were disciples and who, at the end of everything did not convert but who could not lie about their experience.
There has to be more behind it though and that is the encounter with the risen and ascended Christ which would confirm to disciples the truth of their experience and for those of us without participation in the historical resurrection we find we cannot finally dismiss this as just sincere belief so we can join with the easter proclamation 'He is Risen, He is risen indeed'.
-
Did the Holy Ghost or God come upon Mary?
It wouldn't be a bad idea to rephrase this post of yours Spud.
ippy
-
Yes it COULD be as you say although the probability decreases with each.
Don't be silly - all it takes is one person to say 'there were 500 witnesses'.
I believe that the people on the ground did a bit of checking up.
Super- what methods did they use?
Of the 500 we don't know who were disciples and who, at the end of everything did not convert but who could not lie about their experience.
You don't know there were 500: you are simply accepting this claim at face value.
There has to be more behind it though and that is the encounter with the risen and ascended Christ which would confirm to disciples the truth of their experience and for those of us without participation in the historical resurrection we find we cannot finally dismiss this as just sincere belief so we can join with the easter proclamation 'He is Risen, He is risen indeed'.
There might be mistakes and lies behind it though: and these are risks you're clearly ignoring, and in doing so it seems you are indulging is special pleading that the risks of mistakes or lies in relation to anecdotal accounts of uncertain provenance don't apply when it comes the the NT (which contains anecdotal accounts of uncertain provenance).
-
1:Don't be silly - all it takes is one person to say 'there were 500 witnesses'.
Super- what methods did they use?
You don't know there were 500: you are simply accepting this claim at face value.
There might be mistakes and lies behind it though: and these are risks you're clearly ignoring, and in doing so it seems you are indulging is special pleading that the risks of mistakes or lies in relation to anecdotal accounts of uncertain provenance don't apply when it comes the the NT (which contains anecdotal accounts of uncertain provenance).
1: Yes people lie but this would be a lie at a time when it could be demonstrated to be a lie in that it is dated to within living memory. Why would someone invite scrutiny of a lie?
The statement is a response to expressed doubts within the community it was written too after all.
I have said it could be fiction Gordon but what are you suggesting is the fiction, the resurrection? The 500, The community to whom it was written?
I cannot be specially pleading lies unless you have evidence that they are. Lies happen yes.
Let's however turn to your methodology. People lied at Hillsborough. Are we now to tar everybody with lying. I don't really get the link further than lies happen.
The motivation for lying at Hillsborough was not getting caught for a criminal offence. What would Paul's motivation be since this is a take it or leave it thing?
-
Don't be silly - all it takes is one person to say 'there were 500 witnesses'.
If there weren't loads of witnesses who could verify the story, the church would have fizzled out, surely. There must have been an effort made to verify it, as there was with the cause of the Hillsborough disaster. The Jews at the time were so intent on eradicating Christianity that it was 300 years before it was formally accepted as the truth.
-
it was 300 years before it was formally accepted as the truth.
....what do you mean by "the truth"?
-
If there weren't loads of witnesses who could verify the story, the church would have fizzled out, surely.
Nope - all you need is some charismatic people and a bunch of credulous ones and your off: Scientology, Mormons etc are more recent examples.
There must have been an effort made to verify it, as there was with the cause of the Hillsborough disaster.
How? In relation to Hillsborough there was evidence other than testimony, which is why the accounts of some police officers didn't stand eventual scrutiny, whereas the claims about Jesus in the NT are solely anecdotal, post-hoc by decades and of uncertain provenance.
The Jews at the time were so intent on eradicating Christianity that it was 300 years before it was formally accepted as the truth.
Since when was Christianity 'formally accepted as the truth', and on whose authority?
-
Nope - all you need is some charismatic people and a bunch of credulous ones and your off: Scientology, Mormons etc are more recent examples.
These are relatively short term localised religions. But if we are talking recent religions, what about stealth religions like New Atheism?
-
These are relatively short term localised religions. But if we are talking recent religions, what about stealth religions like New Atheism?
Much is made of these 'church fathers' in, say, the 1st/2nd centuries when the NT was produced - so the comparison with Mormonism seems reasonable to me.
-
Much is made of these 'church fathers' in, say, the 1st/2nd centuries when the NT was produced - so the comparison with Mormonism seems reasonable to me.
I don't understand.
-
I don't understand.
Mormonism was started by Joseph Smith in the 1820's - so it has been around for the same length of time Christianity had been around when it got up and running in the 1st/2nd centuries, and Mormonism is still going. Therefore, that Christianity managed to gain a foothold over a couple of hundred years really isn't that remarkable.
-
That is now, maybe, But these ideas were embarrassing then, in a world where you say claims of a resurrection were in a sense extreme, then.
The specific instance might have been embarrassing back then, but the nature of the claim - supernatural resurrection, healing by divine whim - those were part of the fabric of their understanding of reality.
And the fact that I as a Christian can admit to them being extreme belies your picture of a world which accepts this as not extreme.
The fact that you can see them as extreme now is testament to a couple of centuries of hard work by empiricists, natural philosophers and scientists.
Look let me prove you wrong at a stroke.
Should I get some popcorn?
Extreme in this sense means an event that doesn't naturally happen. Most Christians believe that the resurrection is a rare miracle. That it doesn't happen naturally is therefore a given
Hold the popcorn, then, you didn't even get past the first sentence. No, extreme does not mean 'unnatural', extreme means outside of our understanding of the possible. Skyscrapers don't naturally happen, aircraft carriers don't emerge spontaneously from the undergrowth, you cannot come across wild 700 seater airliners. Resurrection into a different corporeal body, elevation to a spiritual realm, these are things that defy our understanding of reality, not things that result from our understanding of reality.
Having usefully declared that the world of the first century was not as gullible as some of your co stealth religionists would say.[/quote
I said no such thing, I've testified here and elsewhere about the fundamental (and entirely explicable) ignorance of the historical eras. I don't blame them for believing, I blame people today for still believing the same nonsense.
You announced that religionists see the resurrection as not something that doesn't happen naturally or being unusual. That they view resurrection as a miracle and an almost unique event proves you wrong.
No, I said that religionists see the resurrection as something that did happen, despite the complete absence of any sort of evidence sufficient to support such an outrageous claim. That they view this as a 'miracle' is just an excuse not to address the fact that it defies our understanding of how the universe works.
In the question of the term of long term memory. We have to apply the implications that to all history for you not to be specially pleading again.
I'm perfectly happy to apply it to all of history; all of history does not make claims so fundamentally unbelievable as this; all of history does not have the documentary evidence of the various councils where minutes were taken of which elements of the story were going to be kept and which ditched as they didn't match up to the desired orthodoxy of the time; all of history does not have the examples from various eras showing the tracked changes...
There are papers with equations regarding the length of survival for conspiracies.
And they show that these things exist on a spectrum; some fizzle and die immediately, others endure despite their lack of any depth to the supporting evidence. That Hinduism and Shintoism and Buddhism and Paganism and Islam and Judaism have lasted as long as they have is, presumably, no indication that they are fundamentally true, so why should Christianity's endurance put it in a different bracket? People still think we didn't go to the moon, people still think multiple bullets hit Kennedy's entourage, people think the Twin Towers was an inside job... some people believe what they want to believe rather than looking deeply at the evidence.
O.
-
The specific instance might have been embarrassing back then, but the nature of the claim - supernatural resurrection, healing by divine whim - those were part of the fabric of their understanding of reality.
The fact that you can see them as extreme now is testament to a couple of centuries of hard work by empiricists, natural philosophers and scientists.
Should I get some popcorn?
Hold the popcorn, then, you didn't even get past the first sentence. No, extreme does not mean 'unnatural', extreme means outside of our understanding of the possible. Skyscrapers don't naturally happen, aircraft carriers don't emerge spontaneously from the undergrowth, you cannot come across wild 700 seater airliners. Resurrection into a different corporeal body, elevation to a spiritual realm, these are things that defy our understanding of reality, not things that result from our understanding of reality.
No, I said that religionists see the resurrection as something that did happen, despite the complete absence of any sort of evidence sufficient to support such an outrageous claim. That they view this as a 'miracle' is just an excuse not to address the fact that it defies our understanding of how the universe works.
I'm perfectly happy to apply it to all of history; all of history does not make claims so fundamentally unbelievable as this;
Well you've confirmed my view that this is, for you, not down to history but what you can believe. However if you are suggesting that there is a long term memory problem that must be true of all history.
For some reason you've started guffing on about what can be believed. That's Shuffling of Sammy Davis JR proportions.
In what way does a miracle not address the way the world works when it is recognition of how the world works?
These things defy our understanding of reality?......That's why they are called miracles. Reality? You've already stated that that's whatever you can believe. Bong!
-
Gordon, #209
Christianity was formally adopted as the world religion by a guy called Peter Pan, or was it Constan Teen, I can't remember. In terms of evidence other than testimony, what about people who were once known to be paralyzed, crippled or blind, who were now cured? As regards things like Mormonism; these are counterfeits of something that is true, ie the four gospels. The latter are clearly distinct from the counterfeit gnostic gospels, having been written under the supervision of the apostles.
-
Gordon, #209
Christianity was formally adopted as the world religion by a guy called Peter Pan, or was it Constan Teen, I can't remember. In terms of evidence other than testimony, what about people who were once known to be paralyzed, crippled or blind, who were now cured?
Also known as "unevidenced claims."
-
Gordon, #209
Christianity was formally adopted as the world religion by a guy called Peter Pan, or was it Constan Teen, I can't remember. In terms of evidence other than testimony, what about people who were once known to be paralyzed, crippled or blind, who were now cured? As regards things like Mormonism; these are counterfeits of something that is true, ie the four gospels. The latter are clearly distinct from the counterfeit gnostic gospels, having been written under the supervision of the apostles.
OK, you are a Poe and I claim my five pounds
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe's_Law
-
Also known as "unevidenced claims."
In the context of #207, the point is that had there been no evidence the church would have fizzled out.
-
In the context of #207, the point is that had there been no evidence the church would have fizzled out.
No. Gordon dispatched this in #209 (amplified in #213).
-
Gordon, #209
Christianity was formally adopted as the world religion by a guy called Peter Pan, or was it Constan Teen, I can't remember.
Possibly the name you are looking for is Prof B. Ollocks.
In terms of evidence other than testimony, what about people who were once known to be paralyzed, crippled or blind, who were now cured?
Indeed: problem is, Spud, these are all unevidenced claims else this would be a fact issue and not a faith one. Any success with amputees regrowing limbs yet?
As regards things like Mormonism; these are counterfeits of something that is true, ie the four gospels. The latter are clearly distinct from the counterfeit gnostic gospels, having been written under the supervision of the apostles.
This sounds like a touch of No True Scotsman (said the Scotsman).
-
Well you've confirmed my view that this is, for you, not down to history but what you can believe.
You think that claims of divine incarnation are the stuff of normal historical enquiry? You don't think there's a higher burden of proof required to support the idea of the reincarnation of Jesus than, say, that it was Caesar who crossed the Rubicon rather than Augustus? Do I accept the historical records of Christianity, yes, as evidence of Christianity, but not as evidence of Christ as a divine being.
However if you are suggesting that there is a long term memory problem that must be true of all history.
Yes. Any historical account - any modern account, for that matter - written after an extended period (memoirs, for instance) has to be considered suspect. Even when it's based upon notes made at the time, inferences and opinions and understandings of the matter change; we only remember the last time we remembered the event, we don't necessarily remember the event itself.
For some reason you've started guffing on about what can be believed. That's Shuffling of Sammy Davis JR proportions.
Who would have thought credibility and possibility might come into a discussion about people believing incredible things in the absence of evidence!!!
In what way does a miracle not address the way the world works when it is recognition of how the world works?[/quote
No, it's a claim of something that is outside of the way the world appears to work; the conclusion are either that the claim is somehow false, or there is something about the way the universe works that we don't understand.
These things defy our understanding of reality?......That's why they are called miracles.
They're called 'miracles' because calling them 'probably apocryphal' makes it harder to get the tithes in.
Reality? You've already stated that that's whatever you can believe. Bong!
No, I've explained that's the things that actually happen; we consider things to probably be part of reality when they're in accord with things that can be repeatedly demonstrated.
O.
-
In the context of #207, the point is that had there been no evidence the church would have fizzled out.
I see your 'Millions of people can't be wrong' and raise you a 'the global homeopathy market in 2016 was estimated to be over $2 billion'.
As a health and safety professional I can attest to the rule 'Always count on human stupidity'.
O.
-
The motivation for lying at Hillsborough was not getting caught for a criminal offence. What would Paul's motivation be since this is a take it or leave it thing?
What would be the motivation for lying for those who witnessed the miracle of the sun in 1917?
Do you believe that event actually happened as described by the witnesses in the crowd of 30,000?
-
What would be the motivation for lying for those who witnessed the miracle of the sun in 1917?
Do you believe that event actually happened as described by the witnesses in the crowd of 30,000?
And if it did, why nobody elsewhere (including the world's astronomers etc.) notice it?
-
And if it did, why nobody elsewhere (including the world's astronomers etc.) notice it?
Presumably magic. It was a special sun performance for those there with a god moving it for them but no one else and nullifying the whole gravity thing, because it could.
-
And if it did, why nobody elsewhere (including the world's astronomers etc.) notice it?
Very strange indeed. ::)
-
Yes it COULD be as you say although the probability decreases with each.
I believe that the people on the ground did a bit of checking up.
What evidence do you have for substantiating that belief?
Of the 500 we don't know who were disciples and who, at the end of everything did not convert but who could not lie about their experience.
The 500 was a number that St Paul very likely pulled out of his arse.
There has to be more behind it though and that is the encounter with the risen and ascended Christ which would confirm to disciples the truth of their experience and for those of us without participation in the historical resurrection we find we cannot finally dismiss this as just sincere belief so we can join with the easter proclamation 'He is Risen, He is risen indeed'.
The big problem is that dead people don't come alive again. You need more than stories and unsubstantiated assertions that people in the stories wouldn't lie.
-
What evidence do you have for substantiating that belief?The 500 was a number that St Paul very likely pulled out of his arse.
The big problem is that dead people don't come alive again.
Really, then it's a blooming miracle. You either believe it or you don't I suppose.
I believe it because it is consistent with my experience and because the idea of telling God what he can and can do has become, for me, slightly amusing.
-
You either believe it or you don't I suppose.
It took ten pages to get to that?
I believe it because it is consistent with my experience
What is your experience of/with reanimated corpses?
-
I see your 'Millions of people can't be wrong' and raise you a 'the global homeopathy market in 2016 was estimated to be over $2 billion'.
As a health and safety professional I can attest to the rule 'Always count on human stupidity'.
O.
I'll stick on my 'thousands (fify- I'm talking about the people who witnessed Jesus's miracles) of people can't be wrong' and I think that might beat homeopathy market stats, although you never know.
-
What would be the motivation for lying for those who witnessed the miracle of the sun in 1917?
Do you believe that event actually happened as described by the witnesses in the crowd of 30,000?
What was the motivation for moving the sun anyway? What would be the point?
-
It took ten pages to get to that?What is your experience of/with reanimated corpses?
Several years of critiquing antitheist Zombie arguments.
-
What was the motivation for moving the sun anyway? What would be the point?
I dunno. Do you?
-
I'll stick on my 'thousands (fify- I'm talking about the people who witnessed Jesus's miracles) of people can't be wrong'
That may be what the stories say, Spud, but how have you excluded the risk that these are nothing more than tales made-up by Jesus fans way back then in order to promote his reputation (as someone divine) for consumption by the highly credulous.
In short: there is a risk that many claims about Jesus, and especially the outlandish ones, are propaganda - but it seems you guys don't want to even consider that possibility.
-
What was the motivation for moving the sun anyway? What would be the point?
To induce mass hysteria among the credulous faithful?
Oh wait - the Sun doesn't have to actually move for a hysterical crowd of the credulous faithful gathered at the site of a claimed miraculous appearance of 'Mary' in the expectation of another miracle would happen, as predicted by the children who claimed to have seen 'Mary, to convince themselves the Sun 'danced'.
-
I'll stick on my 'thousands (fify- I'm talking about the people who witnessed Jesus's miracles) of people can't be wrong' and I think that might beat homeopathy market stats, although you never know.
Of course people can be wrong, people can be extremely gullible. Some people claim the so called 'healings' performed by that shyster Benny Hinn are genuine. I believe even an amputated leg was supposed to have grown back, like as if! ::)
-
I'll stick on my 'thousands (fify- I'm talking about the people who witnessed Jesus's miracles) of people can't be wrong' and I think that might beat homeopathy market stats, although you never know.
Except that:
a) we know that eye-witness accounts not only can be wrong, but very often are;
b) very few, if any, of the accounts we have are directly from eye-witnesses, they are at least second hand, if not further removed;
c) those accounts were all written a considerable period after the alleged events, when time has also had a deleterious effect on the accuracy of memory; and
d) those accounts have subsequently been deliberately edited and selectively interpreted through multiple languages into cultural realms without the underlying concepts of the original.
So we have no way to know if those thousands of people are right or wrong, or even existed.
O.
-
Except that:
a) we know that eye-witness accounts not only can be wrong, but very often are;
So we assume they were wrong then? Just to recap, we are talking about people who had known a blind beggar for years before his sight was restored, and other similar eyewitnesses of miracles.
b) very few, if any, of the accounts we have are directly from eye-witnesses, they are at least second hand, if not further removed;
Again, should we assume they were wrong because some of them (eg. Luke) hadn't met Jesus?
c) those accounts were all written a considerable period after the alleged events, when time has also had a deleterious effect on the accuracy of memory; and
Is that not an assumption based on the AD 70 prophecy?
d) those accounts have subsequently been deliberately edited and selectively interpreted through multiple languages into cultural realms without the underlying concepts of the original.
Which underlying concepts? The gospels were written for different cultures: some contain translations to assist the reader, for example; why would that be a problem?
So we have no way to know if those thousands of people are right or wrong, or even existed.
O.
You can put them to the test, and ask God to reveal himself.
-
So we assume they were wrong then?
We recognise it as a distinct possibility, based on abundant evidence of the kind that Outsider and if memory serves Gordon have outlined.
Just to recap, we are talking about people who had known a blind beggar for years before his sight was restored, and other similar eyewitnesses of miracles.
Just to say that this is a splendid example of the begging the question fallacy - assuming the prior truth of something yet to be demonstrated. A logical no-no.
-
So we assume they were wrong then?
No, but we have to address the risk that they could be wrong (or they could be lying) - have you done this?
Just to recap, we are talking about people who had known a blind beggar for years before his sight was restored, and other similar eyewitnesses of miracles.
How do you know this isn't just propaganda for Jesus (especially the miracle elements)?
Again, should we assume they were wrong because some of them (eg. Luke) hadn't met Jesus? Is that not an assumption based on the AD 70 prophecy?
We don't assume they were wrong: at least I don't, but without some basis to assess the risks of mistakes and lies it would be foolish to assume these anecdotal accounts are correct.
The gospels were written for different cultures: some contain translations to assist the reader, for example; why would that be a problem?
Because human artifice is always a factor when it comes to people.
You can put them to the test, and ask God to reveal himself.
Just did - zilch was the result.
-
So we assume they were wrong then? Just to recap, we are talking about people who had known a blind beggar for years before his sight was restored, and other similar eyewitnesses of miracles.Again, should we assume they were wrong because some of them (eg. Luke) hadn't met Jesus? Is that not an assumption based on the AD 70 prophecy?Which underlying concepts? The gospels were written for different cultures: some contain translations to assist the reader, for example; why would that be a problem?You can put them to the test, and ask God to reveal himself.
I did as a child when I needed it, but it didn't bother to give me any sign it exists, that says it all.
-
So we assume they were wrong then?
If we are talking about a dead man coming alive again, of course we do. If somebody came up to you and said he had lunch with Elvis Presley, you would certainly assume they were wrong. Why are you giving a free pass to people who say the saw Jesus resurrected?
Just to recap, we are talking about people who had known a blind beggar for years before his sight was restored, and other similar eyewitnesses of miracles.
No, we are talking about stories of people who had known a blind beggar for years before his sight was restored, and other similar eyewitnesses of miracles.
You can put them to the test, and ask God to reveal himself.
Did that. God was a no show. Conclusion, he doesn't exist.
-
If we are talking about a dead man coming alive again, of course we do.
Okay, so we assume they were wrong. But can we leave it there? The claim has been made - how have you addressed the possibility that they might have been right?
-
Okay, so we assume they were wrong. But can we leave it there? The claim has been made - how have you addressed the possibility that they might have been right?
By observing that dead people do not come alive again and therefore the evidence needs to be very strong.
By analysing the stories that we have and finding that they were written anonymously (except Paul), decades after the alleged fact.
By observing that, of the sources, the stories in Mark were added centuries later, the stories in Matthew, Luke and John are are all different and therefore cannot be used to support each other, and the story in Paul consists of nothing more than assertion that unnamed people saw Jesus, except Paul himself who seems to have had a hallucination.
The evidence is nowhere near good enough to seriously consider the possibility that Jesus really was resurrected.
-
You can put them to the test, and ask God to reveal himself.
Done that. No show. Now what?
(WFCRAE)
-
Done that. No show. Now what?
(WFCRAE)
We obviously didn't get god's e-mail address right. ;D
-
Okay, so we assume they were wrong. But can we leave it there? The claim has been made - how have you addressed the possibility that they might have been right?
Don't need to: the burden is theirs.
In the absence of any good reasons to think they may be correct, taking into account the nature of the claim and also considering that they seem to have done no due dligence in respect of the risks of mistakes or lies, then we can dismiss the resurrection of Jesus claim as being unfounded - since there are no good reasons to think it a serious proposition.
-
What was the motivation for moving the sun anyway? What would be the point?
Okay, so we assume they were wrong. But can we leave it there? The claim has been made - how have you addressed the possibility that they might have been right?
-
Not too long ago - a few weeks at most, I think - there was a thread (can't remember which one) where this very point cropped up yet again. What I distinctly remember was the point-blank refusal of certain religionists even to consider the possibility that Gospel accounts (rather: those who wrote them) could be wrong, either through deliberate mendacity (i.e. lying), perfectly sincere error, misapprehension, poor memory etc. etc. All of these things - perfectly well known to any and every copper since the year dot - were waved aside and denied out of court despite the preponderance of evidence that eyewitness testimony is notoriously sketchy (the death of many a criminal case), that people propagandise and so forth.
If someone can recall which thread it was, it would be useful to identify it and see the same points put forward and blithely ignored. Might save us all some time.
-
Yes Shaker I think this has come up recently. A past Bishop of Durham (Jenkins) caused great controversy about twenty five years ago when he wrote that Christianity is more than a conjuring trick with bones. I agree, also that it is more than about whether or not Jesus Christ is God.
Theologians from the early Christian councils spent goodness knows how long debating these, and other, facts. It seems we haven't moved on much since then.
-
Yes Shaker I think this has come up recently. A past Bishop of Durham (Jenkins) caused great controversy about twenty five years ago when he wrote that Christianity is more than a conjuring trick with bones.
Almost to this day still misquoted as his saying: "The Resurrection was a conjuring trick with bones" ::)
-
I read the book.
Can't say I liked his prose style but I got the points he was making.
-
Not too long ago - a few weeks at most, I think - there was a thread (can't remember which one) where this very point cropped up yet again. What I distinctly remember was the point-blank refusal of certain religionists even to consider the possibility that Gospel accounts (rather: those who wrote them) could be wrong, either through deliberate mendacity (i.e. lying), perfectly sincere error, misapprehension, poor memory etc. etc.
The gospels themselves provide plenty of evidence that some or all of those things happened.
eyewitness testimony is notoriously sketchy
The question of whether eye witness testimony is reliable (it definitely isn't) should not concern us when critiquing the gospels. There is no eye witness testimony in them.
-
The question of whether eye witness testimony is reliable (it definitely isn't) should not concern us when critiquing the gospels. There is no eye witness testimony in them.
No, but the claim (from people like Spud) is that there is.
-
Don't need to: the burden is theirs.
In the absence of any good reasons to think they may be correct, taking into account the nature of the claim and also considering that they seem to have done no due dligence in respect of the risks of mistakes or lies, then we can dismiss the resurrection of Jesus claim as being unfounded - since there are no good reasons to think it a serious proposition.
Antitheists idea of the burden of proof.
1: Get the combination of the secure nuclear proof bunker antitheist is sitting in.
2: Open the twenty ton reinforced door
3: Traverse the passage way ducking the lasers and circular saws
4: Incapacitate the ninja guards
5: Gaffer tape to stop the la la la ing
6: Force fingers out of ears
7: Make point
8:Traverse the passageway ducking etc.
9: Step out of ninja suit revealing black bowtie and tuxedo, step into car driven by soviet agent Voluptanya Voluptiouova
10 Disappear down road. Camera pans back to antitheist base and the sound of an echoey La La La.
-
Antitheists idea of the burden of proof.
1: Get the combination of the secure nuclear proof bunker antitheist is sitting in.
2: Open the twenty ton reinforced door
3: Traverse the passage way ducking the lasers and circular saws
4: Incapacitate the ninja guards
5: Gaffer tape to stop the la la la ing
6: Force fingers out of ears
7: Make point
8:Traverse the passageway ducking etc.
9: Step out of ninja suit revealing black bowtie and tuxedo, step into car driven by soviet agent Voluptanya Voluptiouova
10 Disappear down road. Camera pans back to antitheist base and the sound of an echoey La La La.
I take it you're bored, Vlad?
Perhaps, since you've clearly got time on your hands, you can explain how you've assessed the risks of mistakes or lies in the NT: or are you going to continue avoiding this inconvenient problem?
After all the burden of proof here is with those supporting Christian claims about Jesus.
-
I take it you're bored, Vlad?
Perhaps, since you've clearly got time on your hands, you can explain how you've assessed the risks of mistakes or lies in the NT: or are you going to continue avoiding this inconvenient problem?
We've been through this. For My thoughts on your attitude on my reply to your risk assessment, the allegory I've posted should suffice.
-
We've been through this. For My thoughts on your attitude on my reply to your risk assessment, the allegory I've posted should suffice.
It certainly suffices in one sense: as a glaring example of evasion.
-
It certainly suffices in one sense: as a glaring example of evasion.
The Christian case is out there Gordon. It is what it is you can adopt a 'we can't tell that no lying has occurred therefore we must assume it has'' policy reinforced with cherry picked examples of lying. If you want to.
The evidence from the epistles is that there was a community which believed in claims later collated in the Gospels and acts. Anything else is fringe.
Now I grant you that a resurrection is hard to swallow but so God avoidy are some that we now have claims of denial that Jesus ever had anything like the three year ministry the NT states, that he was like Brian in the life of Brian and had a religion projected onto him and that's fine as a theory but it comes with a burden of intellectual justification.
Have a nice day.
-
Antitheists idea of the burden of proof.
1: Get the combination of the secure nuclear proof bunker antitheist is sitting in.
2: Open the twenty ton reinforced door
3: Traverse the passage way ducking the lasers and circular saws
4: Incapacitate the ninja guards
5: Gaffer tape to stop the la la la ing
6: Force fingers out of ears
7: Make point
8:Traverse the passageway ducking etc.
9: Step out of ninja suit revealing black bowtie and tuxedo, step into car driven by soviet agent Voluptanya Voluptiouova
10 Disappear down road. Camera pans back to antitheist base and the sound of an echoey La La La.
You have had a liquid breakfast by the looks of it! ::)
-
The Christian case is out there Gordon. It is what it is you can adopt a 'we can't tell that no lying has occurred therefore we must assume it has'' policy reinforced with cherry picked examples of lying. If you want to.
I'm not assuming lying, Vlad, just asking how you've excluded the risk: seems you haven't.
The evidence from the epistles is that there was a community which believed in claims later collated in the Gospels and acts.
No doubt: doesn't mean they were correct though.
Now I grant you that a resurrection is hard to swallow but so God avoidy are some that we now have claims of denial that Jesus ever had anything like the three year ministry the NT states, that he was like Brian in the life of Brian and had a religion projected onto him and that's fine as a theory but it comes with a burden of intellectual justification.
Nope, I'm not theorising at all: I'm just asking how you guys have excluded the risks of mistakes or lies in the NT.
Have a nice day.
It's going well so far.
-
I'm not assuming lying, Vlad, just asking how you've excluded the risk: seems you haven't.
And won't.
-
I dunno. Do you?
The original question was what was Paul's motivation for lying. The people at Fatima didn't really have any way to explain the so-called miracle (except maybe that it was something to do with world war I) which was probably an illusion, or else it would have surely been seen at other locations. Paul however had scriptures to explain Jesus' death and resurrection.
-
Paul however had scriptures to explain Jesus' death and resurrection.
So what - that you apply the epithet 'scripture' doesn't somehow automatically remove any risks from these sources.
-
The original question was what was Paul's motivation for lying. The people at Fatima didn't really have any way to explain the so-called miracle (except maybe that it was something to do with world war I) which was probably an illusion, or else it would have surely been seen at other locations. Paul however had scriptures to explain Jesus' death and resurrection.
Which doesn't explain anything. ::)
-
The original question was what was Paul's motivation for lying.
Propagandising for his belief system springs to mind.
The people at Fatima didn't really have any way to explain the so-called miracle (except maybe that it was something to do with world war I) which was probably an illusion, or else it would have surely been seen at other locations. Paul however had scriptures to explain Jesus' death and resurrection.
There we go with the question-begging yet again ::)
-
So what - that you apply the epithet 'scripture' doesn't somehow automatically remove any risks from these sources.
I think it does. If an event is predicted to happen for a logical reason (in this case the triumph of good over evil) then to lie about it happening would itself be evil; it would quickly be refuted because people will not accept lies. I believe there could be no church if it had not indeed happened.
-
I think it does. If an event is predicted to happen for a logical reason (in this case the triumph of good over evil) then to lie about it happening would itself be evil; it would quickly be refuted because people will not accept lies. I believe there could be no church if it had not indeed happened.
Since when is 'the triumph of good over evil' a logical statement? Moreover people will indeed accept lies if the lies are couched in terms that appeal to their credulity: are there no 'con men'?
The risk you are running by seeing the 'church' - presumably you mean the version you support and not, say, the Mormon version - as vindication is that it may well have been established on the basis of mistakes or lies in antiquity and yet it seems you guys are reluctant to consider this possibility.
-
people will not accept lies.
So a billion Muslims can't be wrong then.
Of course people will accept lies. You know this, but you choose to ignore it when talking about Christianity.
-
Since when is 'the triumph of good over evil' a logical statement? Moreover people will indeed accept lies if the lies are couched in terms that appeal to their credulity: are there no 'con men'?
The risk you are running by seeing the 'church' - presumably you mean the version you support and not, say, the Mormon version - as vindication is that it may well have been established on the basis of mistakes or lies in antiquity and yet it seems you guys are reluctant to consider this possibility.
I witness many selfish acts every day, including my own. People pushing in front of each other is the most frequent type, and it convinces me that there is such a thing as objective morality, where the only way to overcome evil is by humility and self sacrifice. Do people trying desperately to get ahead of each other look as if they are in fellowship with each other? Can we call that good? Such evil can only be prevented if there is submission on an individual basis to a higher authority, one whom we must believe in if we are to live in peace.
One thing the Gospel achieves is it proves this authority is a reality. It's not just the hope of life after death, but a way to achieve peace on earth and goodwill.
I used the word 'could' because Jesus' body was being guarded by Roman soldiers, and there is no way they would have let it be removed from the tomb. The church could not have survived if it was rooted in a lie.
-
So a billion Muslims can't be wrong then.
Of course people will accept lies. You know this, but you choose to ignore it when talking about Christianity.
Islam in its original form is unacceptable to the rest of the world because it glorifies violence. So no, ultimately the world will not accept a lie.
-
Islam in its original form is unacceptable to the rest of the world because it glorifies violence. So no, ultimately the world will not accept a lie.
What are you blathering on about? We are talking about your magical assertion the Christians will not accept a lie.
-
Islam in its original form is unacceptable to the rest of the world because it glorifies violence. So no, ultimately the world will not accept a lie.
That is a 'larf' the Christian god is a very violent so and so if the deeds attributed to it were true.
-
I witness many selfish acts every day, including my own. People pushing in front of each other is the most frequent type, and it convinces me that there is such a thing as objective morality, where the only way to overcome evil is by humility and self sacrifice.
So, are you saying that your opinion on what constitutes inconsiderate behaviour is objective morality in action?
Do people trying desperately to get ahead of each other look as if they are in fellowship with each other? Can we call that good?
I wouldn't since I'm not sure what 'good' means: I'd limit myself to disapproval perhaps, but that would just be my personal opinion.
Such evil can only be prevented if there is submission on an individual basis to a higher authority, one whom we must believe in if we are to live in peace.
Again I'm not sure what 'evil' means but I'm sure there are worse things that people doing some shoving: you seem to be over-egging the pudding, Spud.
One thing the Gospel achieves is it proves this authority is a reality. It's not just the hope of life after death, but a way to achieve peace on earth and goodwill.
No it doesn't: I'm not bound by this Gospel of yours and it does seem, over the centuries, that its adherents don't always dispense peace and goodwill.
I used the word 'could' because Jesus' body was being guarded by Roman soldiers, and there is no way they would have let it be removed from the tomb.
That may be how the story goes but that isn't a guarantee the story is correct.
The church could not have survived if it was rooted in a lie.
Of course it could - all it needs is for people to believe the stories about Jesus.
-
One thing the Gospel achieves is it proves this authority is a reality.
You have a different definition of the word prove to the rest of us, apparently.
The church could not have survived if it was rooted in a lie.
Pure unsubstantiated assertion, of course.
-
Islam in its original form is unacceptable to the rest of the world because it glorifies violence.
You must be reading the Islamic scripture incorrectly and not with an open mind and heart otherwise you would not say that!
-
That is a 'larf' the Christian god is a very violent so and so if the deeds attributed to it were true.
Under the Noahic covenant the Christian God sanctions the restraint of violence using force, whereas the god of islam wants the whole world converted to itself either by persuasion or by force
-
Under the Noahic covenant the Christian God sanctions the restraint of violence using force, whereas the god of islam wants the whole world converted to itself either by persuasion or by force
My god is loving and only sanctions killing children in special circumstances.
Your god is evil
Their god is a murdering thing and we must kill its supporters and their babies because the loving god says so.
-
My god is loving and only sanctions killing children in special circumstances.
Your god is evil
Their god is a murdering thing and we must kill its supporters and their babies because the loving god says so.
My, Your, Their, not quite clear who is who here
-
My, Your, Their, not quite clear who is who here
They aren't specific, that's the point.
-
If I understand NS aright, he's using the same trope as: "I enjoy a drink in moderation; you are a heavy drinker; he is an alcoholic."
-
Under the Noahic covenant the Christian God sanctions the restraint of violence using force, whereas the god of islam wants the whole world converted to itself either by persuasion or by force
Nah. You are just reading the scriptures incorrectly.
Now go back and start again but this time do it properly.
-
You belief is your own creation, other Christians don't see it your way.
You're so blind you don't see - to know any way -which may be the right way.
THE BIBLE SEES IT MY WAY, GOD SEES IT MY WAY... WHO'S WAY MATTERS OUTSIDE THAT?
You make stupidity an art form.
-
You're so blind you don't see - to know any way -which may be the right way.
THE BIBLE SEES IT MY WAY, GOD SEES IT MY WAY... WHO'S WAY MATTERS OUTSIDE THAT?
You make stupidity an art form.
No Sass it is you whose nonsense is an art form. ;D ;D ;D
-
You're so blind you don't see - to know any way -which may be the right way.
THE BIBLE SEES IT MY WAY, GOD SEES IT MY WAY... WHO'S WAY MATTERS OUTSIDE THAT?
You make stupidity an art form.
The Bible and God see it your way? That's somewhat arrogant of you, especially when the bible precedes you by almost 2,000 years.
-
You're so blind you don't see - to know any way -which may be the right way.
THE BIBLE SEES IT MY WAY, GOD SEES IT MY WAY... WHO'S WAY MATTERS OUTSIDE THAT?
You make stupidity an art form.
Sass, I've yet to see any of these statements/assertions you keep making backed up in the slightest way with anything that could possibly considered evidentially viable, is there any chance you could do something about this fact?
Kind regards ippy.
-
Sass, I've yet to see any of these statements/assertions you keep making backed up in the slightest way with anything that could possibly considered evidentially viable, is there any chance you could do something about this fact?
Kind regards ippy.
God better be in tune with Sass, or else it will be on the naughty step! ;D ;D ;D
-
No Sass it is you whose nonsense is an art form. ;D ;D ;D
As I said, you make stupidity an art form.
Your responses show an absolute lack of any religious knowledge (for someone who says they had it rammed down their throat.)
Jesus Christ was the Son of God and the whole of the so called heads of the Jewish religion could not understand what God was telling them about their own God and religion. Sometimes we need to see the bigger picture and understand why those who are taught by God, like Jesus Christ, the Prophets and Apostles differ to many of the big religions today.
Knowing God is an personal experience and had you experienced this or know the faith you said you once professed you would not be on forums disrespecting God.
One thing has become clear in your posts that you have no respect for authority figures in your life and have rebelled.
Maybe the answer to all your problems was your own views and your own rebellion. Other people and especially religion cannot be blamed for that.
You see truth is a commodity most people cannot afford. One day God will reveal everything hidden.
I believe that sometimes a black sheep never sees it as the rest of the flock do.
-
The Bible and God see it your way? That's somewhat arrogant of you, especially when the bible precedes you by almost 2,000 years.
God is timeless, the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
Nothing arrogant at all that is you attacking that which you do not understand in the only way you know how, the flesh.
The bible is more than 2,000 years old, only Christ and the NT precedes me by 2,000 years.
But God and the Holy Spirit and the Promise of Christ goes way back before he came.
You think somehow insults masks the ignorance and even the inncorrect belief that the bible is 2,000 years old.
The Torah the OT goes all the way back to Moses. As does the Promise of Christ the Messiah go back further than 2,000 years.
Faith and what we belief can hold no personal 'arrogance' for God made us and not the other way around.
Unless you can prove the opposite of what I have said then you cannot accuse me of arrogance.
Why not study the bible and actually try and answer the post content instead of throwing insults because you have no real answers to prove differently if what I say is truth. Telling the truth isn't arrogance but calling someone arrogant when you have
no ability to know if telling the truth, that is arrogance. You relying on an uninformed personal opinion about what someone has said about their belief, unable to prove or disprove it. Comments such as that are arrogant and totally unfounded when ignorant of the things said.
-
Sass, I've yet to see any of these statements/assertions you keep making backed up in the slightest way with anything that could possibly considered evidentially viable, is there any chance you could do something about this fact?
Kind regards ippy.
I have always backed what I believe with the Bible hence they have been backed up the way of Gods Word.
Why make such unfounded statements. This was not about your disbelief or atheism. It was not about your personal atheism.
Therefore why bring red herrings into this matter? There is no fact because you are again addressing your atheism and not my true faith.
-
God better be in tune with Sass, or else it will be on the naughty step! ;D ;D ;D
I see how you managed to turn your own rebellion onto those who were not really at fault.
But not with me... because your lack of ability to accept anyones beliefs outside your own is clearly outside your own selfish
ability to do so. One day you will realise only you believe as you do and think arrogantly that makes you right and them in
the wrong. Truth is you make your own wrong and then accuse everyone else of making it that way. You thought no one would
see and no one would tell. From here on in I believe and pray that God will make the truth blatantly obvious to all when you speak and disrespect God and others.
-
But not with me... because your lack of ability to accept anyones beliefs outside your own is clearly outside your own selfish
ability to do so.
Do you accept anyone's beliefs outside your own?
Those of pagans, for one example?
-
I see how you managed to turn your own rebellion onto those who were not really at fault.
But not with me... because your lack of ability to accept anyones beliefs outside your own is clearly outside your own selfish
ability to do so. One day you will realise only you believe as you do and think arrogantly that makes you right and them in
the wrong. Truth is you make your own wrong and then accuse everyone else of making it that way. You thought no one would
see and no one would tell. From here on in I believe and pray that God will make the truth blatantly obvious to all when you speak and disrespect God and others.
Oh Sass you are HILARIOUS, you accuse me of not accepting other people's beliefs when it is clear you don't accept my non belief. As I have said times without number, I was religious as a child, embarrassingly devout for a little while :-[ until I seriously started to question my faith and that was when I lost it.
I agree I disrespect the god of the Bible if the deeds claimed for it had any veracity, it is much worse than Hitler and should be exterminated if that were possible. I have no problem with people who have a faith, but don't try to force it on others with threats. I disrespect the more extreme theists who try to convert others to their POV by issuing threats if they don't convert. Religion is a matter of belief not fact. No theist has managed to provide verifiable evidence to prove god exists as a genuine entity, and not just a figment of the human mind. You certainly haven't Sass, verses from the Bible, which you endlessly quote, are no sort of evidence.
-
I have always ba
cked what I believe with the Bible hence they have been backed up the way of Gods Word.
Why make such unfounded statements. This was not about your disbelief or atheism. It was not about your personal atheism.
Therefore why bring red herrings into this matter? There is no fact because you are again addressing your atheism and not my true faith.
Sass it's a fact that, not just you, nobody has managed to come up with any incontrovertible evidence that would confirm for once and for all that this god figure/idea of yours does actually exist, this is the fact I was referring to.
I'm not a disbeliever, how do I disbelieve in something that isn't there for me to disbelieve in, in the first place?
For me Sass, there is no such thing as a he, she or it thing that you often refer to as god and I don't particularly mind being referred to as an atheist even though it's not a strictly accurate description of my non-belief in any religion, I prefer to be referred to as a 'non-religious' person.
I couldn't help noticing where you said, "I have always backed what I believe with the Bible hence they have been backed up the way of Gods Word", that's all very well Sass, but where is your evidence that does in fact back the bible as a collection of actual happenings, I've yet to see any of the supporting kind.
It would be daft to say the bible proves the bible, you must be able to see this Sass?
Regards ippy
-
Sass it's a fact that, not just you, nobody has managed to come up with any incontrovertible evidence that would confirm for once and for all that this god figure/idea of yours does actually exist, this is the fact I was referring to.
I'm not a disbeliever, how do I disbelieve in something that isn't there for me to disbelieve in, in the first place?
For me Sass, there is no such thing as a he, she or it thing that you often refer to as god and I don't particularly mind being referred to as an atheist even though it's not a strictly accurate description of my non-belief in any religion, I prefer to be referred to as a 'non-religious' person.
I couldn't help noticing where you said, "I have always backed what I believe with the Bible hence they have been backed up the way of Gods Word", that's all very well Sass, but where is your evidence that does in fact back the bible as a collection of actual happenings, I've yet to see any of the supporting kind.
It would be daft to say the bible proves the bible, you must be able to see this Sass?
Regards ippy
Good post ippy.
-
Good post ippy.
Thanks Floo, I do think it's a shame people like Sass so really believe in this stuff that to me is such a load of absolute nonsense but she has every right to believe anything she wants to believe as has anyone else.
The main rub for me with these religios is the grabbing hold of very young children, as they all do, and then stuffing their vulnerable young heads full of these stories that amount to little more than old wives tales.
Regards ippy
-
Thanks Floo, I do think it's a shame people like Sass so really believe in this stuff that to me is such a load of absolute nonsense but she has every right to believe anything she wants to believe as has anyone else.
The main rub for me with these religios is the grabbing hold of very young children, as they all do, and then stuffing their vulnerable young heads full of these stories that amount to little more than old wives tales.
Regards ippy
I agree people have a right to their faith, always providing it isn't used in an abusive manner in order to coerce others into conversion.
-
If I understand NS aright, he's using the same trope as: "I enjoy a drink in moderation; you are a heavy drinker; he is an alcoholic."
Why has it taken me four days to get this? :'(
-
You think somehow insults masks the ignorance and even the inncorrect belief that the bible is 2,000 years old.
The Torah the OT goes all the way back to Moses. As does the Promise of Christ the Messiah go back further than 2,000 years.
Yawn. The New Testament - which, for Christians, is usually considered to be the most important bit, was all written less than 2,000 years ago.
Also, Jesus is not mentioned at all in the Jewish Bible (what Christians, with breath taking arrogance, call the Old Testament).
-
Why has it taken me four days to get this? :'(
Lay off the gin. You'll get there quicker next time!
;)
-
Yawn. The New Testament - which, for Christians, is usually considered to be the most important bit, was all written less than 2,000 years ago.
Also, Jesus is not mentioned at all in the Jewish Bible (what Christians, with breath taking arrogance, call the Old Testament).
You sometimes have to be a Jew to understand what the Jews believe.
The house without the foundations has not stability,. So Jesus Christ and the NT has no stability without the foundations of the OT.
You have no idea of either and so make statements which are absent in knowledge, foundations and nothing for any foundation to support.
Furthermore with respect, you are absolutely clueless to the fact it is obvious to everyone who actually understands the OT and the NT.
God is the central theme of both. His truth and the power of himself and the power he shared with mankind through his Holy Spirit.
-
You sometimes have to be a Jew to understand what the Jews believe.
The house without the foundations has not stability,. So Jesus Christ and the NT has no stability without the foundations of the OT.
You have no idea of either and so make statements which are absent in knowledge, foundations and nothing for any foundation to support.
Furthermore with respect, you are absolutely clueless to the fact it is obvious to everyone who actually understands the OT and the NT.
God is the central theme of both. His truth and the power of himself and the power he shared with mankind through his Holy Spirit.
And how do you become a Jew? ::)
-
And how do you become a Jew? ::)
Floo, it is possible to convert to Judaism, but the only thing is, being a part of the male population of this country is the thought of converting to Judaism, it's making my eyes water.
No ta :'( :'( :'(, very much.
Kind regards ippy
-
There are so many Jewish groups though ippy. I'd think if you wanted to be a reform Jew or a reconstructed Jew (yes there are some, the actor who played Harry Selfridge in Mr Selfridge is one), they wouldn't expect an adult to be snipped.
The more traditional orthodox and the highly spiritual ones expect you to live with a Jewish family whilst learning the scriptures because there's so much more to being a Jew than religion.
-
There are so many Jewish groups though ippy. I'd think if you wanted to be a reform Jew or a reconstructed Jew (yes there are some, the actor who played Harry Selfridge in Mr Selfridge is one), they wouldn't expect an adult to be snipped.
The more traditional orthodox and the highly spiritual ones expect you to live with a Jewish family whilst learning the scriptures because there's so much more to being a Jew than religion.
I've experienced the milk and meat seperation in the kitchen, the eating under the stars, I think that's on a Friday, always enjoyed the company of any jewish people I've had the good fortune to mix with, they're all comfortable in the compamy of us atheists, just like the rest of us they're mostly good people.
Im not into the mystical, magic or superstition based anything, although I might convert to Star Treckism, that is me being a realist and all of that.
Regards ippy.
-
I should have said, "Reconstructionist" and not "Restructured". :-[
-
I should have said, "Reconstructionist" and not "Restructured". :-[
Yer mean logical like wot i is?
ippy
-
Can the Jews almost be regraded as a race ???? Even though a NON-born Jew can convert INTO the faith ???
Nick
-
Not "Reconstructed" either. :-[ :-[ I get there in the end.
Fascinating stuff -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconstructionist_Judaism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/judaism/subdivisions/reconstructionist_1.shtml
Jews are from many races.
http://www.aish.com/atr/Race_or_Religion.html
-
Can the Jews almost be regraded as a race ???? Even though a NON-born Jew can convert INTO the faith ???
Nick
Does it matter?
ippy
-
Should have said regarded not regraded.
Of course it matters but obviously not to YOU. ;)
Thanks !!!
-
I don't believe we can regard Jews as a race, they don't see themselves that way. They say they're a 'nation' or a 'people'.
-
Yawn. The New Testament - which, for Christians, is usually considered to be the most important bit, was all written less than 2,000 years ago.
Also, Jesus is not mentioned at all in the Jewish Bible (what Christians, with breath taking arrogance, call the Old Testament).
It's the Hebrew Bible not the Jewish Bible ;D
-
Jews are nothing special, they are just like the rest of us. It is crazy some believe in putting them on a pedestal because that guy, Jesus, was a Jew.
-
It's the Hebrew Bible not the Jewish Bible ;D
So what?
ippy
-
Jeremy likes pendanticism :D
-
Can the Jews almost be regraded as a race ???? Even though a NON-born Jew can convert INTO the faith ???
Nick
The race is the Israelites.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel
People born of the 12 tribes of Israel the Country being called Israel too.
The faith is Judaism and the true Israelites are Jews.
-
So we assume they were wrong then?
No we don't 'assume' anything, we review the evidence, and the reliability of the sources of that evidence, and we come to a conclusion.
Just to recap, we are talking about people who had known a blind beggar for years before his sight was restored, and other similar eyewitnesses of miracles.
No, we aren't, that's part of the analysis of the sources. We are dealing with CLAIMS of having known a blind beggar for years, with CLAIMS of eyewitness accounts, but assessment of the texts, and their changes through time, and the likely generation of the written documents makes it extremely unlikely these were written by the people to whom they are attributed.
Again, should we assume they were wrong because some of them (eg. Luke) hadn't met Jesus?
No, we should determine if we think that a single account purporting to be eye-witness testimony, written long after the fact, with a vested interest, is a reliable enough account to justify accepting that physics is optional for some people.
Is that not an assumption based on the AD 70 prophecy?
As I understand it, that's one piece of the evidence, but it's not all of it.
Which underlying concepts?
I don't know, I'm not a bronze-age Arab Jew.
The gospels were written for different cultures: some contain translations to assist the reader, for example; why would that be a problem?
Intrinsically, no, but it does give insight into the intended purpose of the document - this was a text by an expansive organisation with an aim to getting a memorable story into the minds of a disparate range of people. That, in itself, means that at best accurate history was only part of the remit.
You can put them to the test, and ask God to reveal himself.
Did that; he apparently put me on hold. Now I'm left with using my own intellect (and that of the collective of human academia) to make a rational judgment on the veracity of these claims: they are in defiance of everything we understand about how reality works; they are qualitatively similar to other, defunct, mythological claims (Greek pantheon, Roman pantheon, Sumerian, Aztec etc) and other, extant, spiritual and religious claims (Shintoism, Hinduism, paganism etc.) which they explicitly decry; they are almost certainly not written by the people they are attributed to; the people they were written by were almost certainly not eye-witnesses to the events, and it is unlikely they had access to eyewitness accounts at the time of writing.
On that understanding, I dismiss the Christian canon as unreliable on the same basis I dismiss the Hindu texts, and stories of the Walkabout - they're just not sufficiently reliable to justify the extreme nature of the claims.
O.
-
What is a 'true' Israelite? ::)
Google Desmond Dekker.
-
What a ghastly noise he makes! ::)
.but you dont like music anyway. Is that correct?