In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.
Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Pacem, Oct 17, 2009.
Seriously, get out.
lol someone doesn't like Christianity.
dude when everyone vanishes that one guy looks around and is like, ****!!!!!!
Sorry, no sky wizards for me.
while ive adopted much of the beliefs. I too always enjoyed referring to god as the giant wizard in the sky who sent his lvl 99 white mage son to absolve man of their sins. sometimes i switch it up to lvl 99 cleric.
You need to get a goddamned life.
i dont get it.
Just ignore Aran. He just likes to troll and insult people. I don't think he really does much else around here.
Shouldn't you be playing ToonTown?
Interesting you should term it like that... my live WAS damned... but God didn't damn it.
I got a life now though Jesus, and it is anything but damned! WOOT!
Nobody was talking to you, Kool-Aid boy.
Mmmmmm, Kool-Aid... *drools*
Forgive them the lies they put forth in thy name, O Lord, especially badly made crappy youtube montage propaganda videos, for they are misled TV babies, not used to having to think for themselves.
I find the belief funny, that to think for yourself, it is required that you reject God entirely and go about things on your own.
Yeah we've certainly brought the world to a good condition by refusing God and demanding to think for ourselves.... yup who needs a pesky God to tell us how to live?
At any rate, if this video is right, you won't have to put up with people like me for much longer... and the ones left behind will TRUELY have to think for themselves.
Yep, you'll be an angel-gods flying around in heaven while we suckers are mindless shades in the netherworld. That's what Christians get as their reward, apparently... they turn into powerful angels.
But actually, what I meant is that the video itself is unbiblical, idolatrous and blasphemous. Most of what Jesus spoke of was fulfilled by the destruction of the Temple. This Second Coming ideology, where we all have to be sitting on edge waiting for the apocalypse even though its 2000 years later, derails the deeper truths that the Bible talks about. But I will read the Apocalypse and get back to you. I'm reading the Bible right now, and have finally gotten to Saint Paul. Wow. I understand now how Muslims can say they believe in Jesus but are not Christians. Christiainity as we know it was written and composed by Saint Paul. We ought to call Christians SaintPaulians instead. Because you are all Paulicians. Interesting, I never realized this before.
Mathew... he wrote an honest Gospel. The rest seem tainted to me. But the rest, that's the real core of Christianity. I always thought it was the Gospels. Nope. Its about the Prophet Paul.
I see where you are coming from, but Jesus himself also told about the end times, and told people directly that he was coming back again. These are his own words.
As for us as Christians becoming gods or angels, in fact neither is true. We will be LIKE the angels, but we won't actually turn into angels once we reach heaven. I myself thought the same as you do for many years. We won't be angels, but we will be where they are... and most importantly, where God is (even though He's everywhere), and we will get to see our loved ones again and see God face to face.
The only reason people will be left behind is because of their own choosing, and God cannot let sin into heaven. We must first come to Him, which He gives us every opportunity to do.
29"Immediately after the distress of those days
" 'the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'
30"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory.
The rapture is not a blasphemous ideology at all... it is supported in Luke 17, Matthew 24 and Mark 13:32-37.
Praise be to Allah, death to Infidels!
LOL you just confirmed what I said, Aran!
Hey, are you really a muslim? If so I got some info for ya.
I have also been reading Josephus. He's almost like an extra Bible book because he is so chock-full of historical information from that time. What he really details in excruciating clarity is the Roman campaign of Vespasian in A.D. 70 against the rebellious Judean nation, culminating in the siege of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple. As you know, the destruction of the Temple is a BIG THEME in the old Testament and of the prophets. The concept of Jerusalem destroyed would have been of the UTMOST IMPORTANCE to anyone living in that region, especially in Jesus' time. One should not discount how important the fulfillment of this prophecy had for the development of the Christian movement.
The Sermon on the Mount:
It reminds me when God kept telling that prophet (was it Jeramiah) to bury objects and wear odd clothing, not talk, etc, as a metaphor for the upcoming destruction of the city. People just thought he was crazy, but parable and hyperbole are the style of the Judean prophet.
So Jesus really speaks to the extreme, telling us the meek shall inherit the Earth and to turn the other cheek, etc.
But ever wonder the actual purpose of the speech, what the actual SUBJECT of the speech was?
It was Jewish foreign policy. Jesus, as a prophet, was saying, DONT FIGHT THE ROMANS THEY WILL SMASH US INTO LITTLE PIECES. Instead, let us be meek and sweet to them, but also impress them with our RELIGOUS PIETY. He wasn't announcing a new religion or a new morality, he was suggesting a pragmatic political approach. And likely it would have worked had they listened to him, would it have not? The Romans were once friends to the Jews, and the Jews themselves invited them in as arbiters. Jesus questioned the need for Jewish Independence saying they ought to just stick to their religion and let the Romans worry about the rest.
You are pretty much correct. Jesus wasn't there to insite rebellion or to institute a sort of jihad against the prevailing authority (the Romans), but rather impress upon them what you said, as well as declaring a kind of jihad against Satan and his forces. Also in that famous sermon are wonderful nuggets of wisdom about faith and how to act towards others, how to sow God's Word, etc.
Jesus, being God, most definately knew what he was doing.
Tis interesting the development of Satan. As I recollect, earlier in the book he was working for God as sort of a angelic prosecutor. I imagined him as one of the angels who disagreed with the existence of Man, who'd argue with God that Man should be erased, perhaps from an angelic theoretical intellectual perspective. In the Gospels, Mathew and Mark maintain the distinction between Satan and the devils, as Satan sends devils into someone, but he is not a devil himself. But the dualism does begin to appear. When does 'The Devil' as Satan first get mentioned? Is it John or is it Acts? Does it get explicitly mentioned? I forget where. But in the OT, there is no war with Satan, it is only man that creates his own problems unless God chooses to test him. Satan is but a very scary angel.
Satan is mentioned in pretty much all four Gospels, as well as the very beginning of the Bible in Genesis, who was the tempter of Adam and Eve.
Jesus cannot be an angelic procecutor, for Jesus himself is not in nature an angel, which is a created being. Jesus is quite literally God Himself, which is made evident in Philippians 2:5-11 and John 1:1-5, 14. And in other places Jesus declares himself equal with God, and even at some points declares himself quite literally to be God. No angel is equal to God, but only a servant. In this way we are equal to the angels in that we are both fellow-servants to the Almighty.
No, like I said, no sky wizards for me. (You know, since Muslims and Christians are controlled by the same sky wizard.)
Actually, no.... Muslims follow a different god than the true God of the Bible.
*snort* Sure, sure. One imaginary man or another, whatever makes you happy.
Imaginarey huh? Something from nothing? Hmm... *scratches head*
You do realize that Muslims just as strongly (and some stronger) believe in their beliefs as you do yours. How can you make such a judgment that you are right and they are not? Same with any other religion including ancient Greek and Roman Gods.
Actually, Satan is not mentioned in the beginning of the Bible in Genesis. You must be referring to the Serpent. Satan is introduced first in Job as sort of an employee of God, whom God lets cause harm to Job in order to test him. I didn't say anything about Jesus here. (This book itself, the book of Job, I wonder if its not older than all the rest of the Bible. The Old Babylonian Sumerian imagery is amazing. Leviathan? Is that not Tiamat? Behemoth, what is that... surely not a dinosaur?!!) Anyways, just note in the Gospel the careful phrasing, in the beginning at least, that makes sure not to equate Satan as the same as devils.
Judaism, Islam, Christianity, all the same one God. Just different traditions and ways of worshiping. In fact Islam and Catholicism are quite similar.
So who created "god"?
(Other than man)
To the people of Biblical times, Gods and other supernatural entities/intelligences were everywhere, manifestly evident. Questioning their origin was a matter of wonder, as we today might question the origin of the Sun and the Moon, but not of supreme necessity. What was important was keeping them happy so your city, home, and tribe didn't get exterminated by war, famine or plague.
Luke - Very obviously talking about the Temple destroyed. This prophecy fulfilled proved him a prophet. Interesting verse: "Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, 21nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."
Mathew - No, it refers to the Temple, for he says "34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. "
Mark 13:32-37 - Again, you must read the context. Mark 13:1-2 says " 1As he was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, "Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!"
2"Do you see all these great buildings?" replied Jesus. "Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down." "
If you read Josephus Book 7 Chapter 6, no more than a few decades after the death of Christ, this is what happens to Jerusalem:
Umm, Google Horus.
What about him?
Self-righteous, condescending, proselytising wannabe prophets like yourself have done more than anything else to turn me and others like me away from your religion. If, by some strike of good fortune, your delusions are right, I look forward to my stay in Hell; it is far preferable to spending eternity with your kind.
Quite simply because, while the people of other religions sincerely believe... even just as sincerely as Christians... that their way is right... you can be sincere about something and be sincerely wrong. Not intending to seem like overreacting, Hitler is a good example. I am not saying that these people are evil like Hitler, but Hitler sincerely believed that what he was doing was right, but obviously, he was sincerely wrong.
Take on top of that, that literally no other religious texts in all of human history can say the things that the Bible says, and then back them up with solid evidence and logic like the Bible can. The Christian Bible, which is God's Word, stands above all these other texts with the perfect track record of being 100% correct in everything that has been examined within its pages. All others fall short in this area.
So with a track record that surpasses all others, the Bible stands alone as the most believable text in existance today.
Muslims say the Old Testament is the literal word of God. Like the Jews, they disagree that the Prophet Paul was the literal word of God. I have to agree with what I have read so far. He offers SERMONS, with his own personal opinions. He is inspired, but not directly speaking GOD'S WORD as is in the Old Testament.
Yes, Paul does use his personal opinions, but he lets the reader know when it's just opinion. Most places he only repeats what was already said by Jesus and others before him.
Can you explain what you mean by 100% correct please? In what way is it correct? I am sorry to say that Adam and Eve never existed as in the story of Genesis. Nor was there a Noah's Ark nor did Moses move oceans. If you meant 100% correct in a different way or referring to the new testament then let me know.
Just because Jesus cooked a fish on a Sabbath didn't imply he wanted to abolish Judaism. I say Paul goes to extremes, being very liberal with the context of the OT verses he uses and taking minor incidents of the Gospels to found a Greek-style theological system. There was no metaphysics until the book of John. There were no Sermons until Paul. Something new is here, or a reinterpretation of the old.
Keep in mind the historical context. Paul was preaching to Greeks and Romans with the ultimate goal of the conversion of the empire to his religion. Greek and Romans had a moral ideal of self-control and abstinence far beyond what we have today, yet the reality of their society was far more lascivious then we can imagine. As Nietzsche said, their instincts turned against them. This is why Paul's message so resounded with them. They would see the Christians maintaining chastity and decorum, not over eating, not engaging in debauchery, and this brought them a lot of respect. Study the popularity and development of the Stoic movement, or wonder about the strict Augustinian moral laws imposed at the time.
In the Old Testament however, we really don't see much moralizing of this sort. During the wilderness where Desert Law is imposed, there is something on homosexuality and adultery, but the emphasis is on keeping harmony on the community and not integrating with the neighbor's customs. Having a few wives, seeing a harlot, cranking the old chicken... none of these activities are mentioned as forbidden as long as not done in the name of another God or in the Temple. Because they weren't Greeks and weren't so sick of living.
I mean, imagine living in a land where the supreme ruler was the Emperor Nero! Adopting ascetic ways made a political point and kept the movement disciplined. But Paul's opinions on chastity were Paul's opinions, and they were very sage advice for the burgeoning movement. Don't forget the constant accusations that Christians were a free sex movement... it was very important for them to appear respectable to be taken seriously.
Firstly, to say something never happened or never existed, you would need to have evidence to the contrary.
There has been much in the way of the study of the "genetic Adam and Eve" which holds some pretty incredible findings. I will get that info and come back to you on that. Sufficive to say that they found out at the most, the genetic history went back to around 100k years, traced to a single male/female.
For Noah's Ark, if you would like I can give you much in the way of evidence that the Biblical story of Noah's Ark and the Flood was an actual event (not localized). There are reports from many people about a large, long box-shaped vessel similar to a barge or cargo ship perched high up on the top of a mountain, in the area of land that connects Africa to the Middle East region. Eye-witness reports describe a ship with three decks with many compartments inside. This vessel has since then been broken in two as the result of a landslide.
As far as Moses parting the sea, studies have shown that a certain type of wind in that area can actually part the waters and make it dry, enabling people to move across safely. The Bible supports this idea, describing a wind such as this.
So, what I mean by 100% correct is that there is not even 1% error. Don't make me get into fractions! (I hate those )
A 100% literal reading of the Genesis wouldn't be claiming the Bible is giving a physical account of the universe. Adam and Eve does not refer to some 'historical fact' of a first man sitting in a garden six thousand years ago when miraculously a woman is made out of his rib. If you think this is a history lesson, you are missing the meaning. Read closer and more precisely.
Its the difference between correctness and truth.