I
isaacekusuma
Guest
The word of God is the inspired word from God to all mankind. It’s good and a raoyal way to Heaven.
Isaac
Isaac
- Status
C
CalmDownWisWins
Guest
That is true, and is the basis of the idea of “invincible ignorance”, and why that is a large factor in the culpability of what it actually IS that one has the choice to choose that one may choose at one’s end.
You HAVE had experiences from God of that kind!
When you first saw the amazing majesty of how mathematics works, or the beauty of physics!
As long as you are wary of “tricks” and not searching for actual truth via prayer (humble giving of ALL that you hold dear in expectation of receiving wisdom) (( Google “Thomas Dubay”, and “Authenticity” under the author’s name )), you’ll be thwarted by your present god, who will interpose “materialistic needs” and various other things between you and God in hopes you’ll get tired and give up and take these “interposers” as “God”, as you are doing now.
C
Charlie_Zeaiter
Guest
Wonderful. You found a Web site to make the Virgin birth a myth.
Can you show me if you have any links that show the prophecies between Passover and the Crucifixion are a myth too?
C
Charlie_Zeaiter
Guest
And I suppose the celestial events that occured during the time of the crucifixion is just a co-incidence.
C
CalmDownWisWins
Guest
Tig, your gullibility is showing!
“ha’almah” meaning virgin in usage to mean “a young girl for marriage” as “polite” poetics.
But the literalistic dictionary obsessed materialist with a pissy-on for bashing “the evil christ thing” can pick and choose from endless sources of trash to fling at his enemies.
What would anyone expect from the undereducated and angry juvenile contingent?
C
Charlie_Zeaiter
Guest
Keep researching is my only advice.
And we’re not too concern that the whole would is not believing. That was predicted a long time ago.
Luke 16:31 - But Abraham said, ‘If they will not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone were to rise from death.’
Oh, how very true that is…
I
isaacekusuma
Guest
The Bible says, It is A Sabbath day: [Satur day]
Mat 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Luk 6:5 And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Rev 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
Then who said that The Lord’s day is Sunday?
Reply me
Bro. Isaac E. Kusuma
Mat 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
Mar 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Luk 6:5 And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Rev 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
Then who said that The Lord’s day is Sunday?
Reply me
Bro. Isaac E. Kusuma
F
fmagill
Guest
AMEN, Paladin!!!
C
CalmDownWisWins
Guest
Yes, people choose hell.
AND God, who exists in “God’s eternity”, where all time is “now” to Him, knows what your decision in “man’s time” is, and aquiesces to your will.
It is God’s will that our will either choose Him or not. Therefore, it is God’s will that what actually does happen happens, and those “chosen for hell by God”, as it is God’s will that they get what they choose, find themselves where they have freely chosen to spend eternity.
Hell is not a punishment. It is a result. An endless “punishment” qua punishment (yes I do like that expression!
) would not be justifiable because no short term act borne of probable ignorance of it’s consequence would balance ETERNAL “punishment”!But, once one knows that a particular decision has **eternal **consequence, and the decision is essentially one of choosing to hang onto “sins” or not (ie being humble and accepting superior [ultimate] authority), the “pain” of making an eternal boo-boo is simply the description OF one’s actions.
Just as leaping off a tall building will most likely **result **in some serious injury, which is not in any way “punishment” qua punishment.
T
tigers08
Guest
If you do research, and find evidence that points towards X being false, and no evidence that says X is right, then you shouldn’t believe X. I’m not sure if you’ll agree with that, but that’s how my “materialistic” mind works.
Well I don’t think I said there was no evidence that God existed, because I’ve always defined God as whatever created the universe. I don’t really wanna look through all the posts but I would think I said something like there’s no evidence that Christianity is right or something. You’re right, I should have said there is no universal evidence that everyone could see and check for themselves that proves Christianity is right.
Well with the exception of what I was arguing (again I don’t think I argued against the existence of proof for God) I agree, my bad. You’re right that I can’t say your evidence is invalid. To you it may be. But it’s not ME determining “appropriate evidence”. It’s the scientific method. I’m pretty sure no scientist would ever say a feeling or personal experience was valid evidence.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
A read of this may go some way to help in answering your question
- hds.harvard.edu/news/bulletin_mag/articles/35-1_stendahl.html
It’s long, but very worthwhile.
C
CalmDownWisWins
Guest
I do agree with that! That is true science.
But when one refuses to do “actual research”, by APPROPRIATE experiment, and instead substitutes “research” consisting of searching for the logically impossible (such as searching ONLY for external evidence for revelation when only internal evidence CAN be valid [due to the nature of the subject] due to defining “valid evidence” as only being of the external type) then one is violating true science at it’s root, and has utterly invalidated one’s results as being scientific at all.
The materialist CAN’T admit that the scientific method is applicable to religion, but true religious research is a testing of proposed dogma (which is merely hypothesis not proven wrong which we believers take on faith will never BE proved wrong) by internal experiment afterword integrated into a coherent structure which is constantly tested as a whole (it’s internal and external interrelationships) and in detail (the aforementioned dogmatic testing).
Your “not believing in X until it is proven or highly probable (however that is computed)” is incorrect ONLY in that just as one “believes” one’s teachers about the believability of things which they haven’t taught one yet, you are asked to believe the Church (the Magisterium which means “the teaching authority”, ie “the teachers”) until they’ve explained how you are to do your own (internal) experiments to prove that their proposed dogma is correct.
C
CalmDownWisWins
Guest
I figured you do have evidence (internal) of God as “universal creator” as you’re very obviously a very intelligent person, and there is ALWAYS a huge measure of “religiosity” in intelligence, as intelligence is a function OF religiosity (ie the ability to find and form dogma and methodically search [via the scientific method] for truth). The “problem” with “the intelligent person” is always allowing ego expansion due to the power of intelligence to bend one toward seeking power (utility) instead of truth (meaning).
I agree entirely if by “universal evidence that everyone could see” you **exclude **internal evidence, which everyone CAN see but can’t SHOW to others. So, if so, amen to that bro!
There is only the hint which we are drowningly immersed in. If we’re not taken from the sea of comfort we fish have little care for the ocean which had surrounded us.
C
CalmDownWisWins
Guest
The scientific method only says that we formulate a description of a phenomena such that “how it works” is as flimsily described as possible so that we know (as precisely as possible) where to look when it is broken by further observation.
The researcher DOES determine the appropriate evidence, but it is suggested by the **results **of the ongoing experiment. The “measuring instrument” is **purposefully **constructed so as to be “weakest” (most sensitive to purturbation) in the area of the “theory/hypothesis” that is of most interest to the researcher.
But, yes, you’re quite right, in that what we see when we do our individual research is determined by what we personally are looking at and with what we are looking.
The “personal experience” of reading a dial on a scale COULD be considered “valid evidence”, wouldn’t you think?
If you mean that no “internal vidence”, such as a “feeling”, is valid evidence, then we’re right back to invalidating evidence appropriate to a particular area of study by the simple prejudice of invalidating the entire subject area.
You have a too limited view of “science” and “scientists”.
T
tigers08
Guest
But none of these “experiences” would point toward Christianity being right. In fact, something you may see as an “experience” but I would call coincidence happened when I stopped believing the Church to begin with. When I began having doubts I prayed for months for the truth, and I still ended up leaving the Church. That’s the closest thing I’ve had to an internal revelation and if it is divine intervention it points to the church being wrong.
T
tigers08
Guest
I won’t bother but I’m sure there are thousands. Besides that’s not even a prophecy. Even if you think that Jesus dying around passover is significant, a prophecy has to be a prediction about the future. I’m pretty sure there is no mention of Jesus dying on the same day as God killing thousands of innocent children anywhere in Exodus. Besides, why would God need the lambs blood? Shouldn’t he know who his people are?
T
tigers08
Guest
considering you BASED your guess of the date of the crucifixion on these celestial events…yes.And I suppose the celestial events that occured during the time of the crucifixion is just a co-incidence.
C
Charlie_Zeaiter
Guest
The lambs blood is part of the prophecy. The people in the exodus were protected from the blood of the lamb. This is a sign from God that we are saved from sin by the blood of Jesus. That’s why the bible refers to Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.
But, I suppose all this is nonsense if you wish to continue to deny the prophecy.
C
CalmDownWisWins
Guest
That you require very intellectual “reasons” for doing things, as do I by the way, creates a very sharp “razor” with which to make decisions. When a very sharp razor is wielded by someone uncertain about the value of a thing due to not being well enough aquainted with it, the thing in question could get rather mutilated and rendered useless.
Your very sharp intellect had made a few “cuts”, ie decisions, based on incorrect information and rather spoiled, by mutilation, your conception of the Church. You can’t, of course, “cut” the actual Church, other than in cutting yourself off from Her.
Those “beautiful” experiences that for you didn’t point toward the Church (as the best representative of “Christianity”), which I dare say probably pointed AWAY from the Church, did so because of your previous decisions that beauty doesn’t point toward that which is not beautiful for you, such as the Church.
You left the Church long before you think you left the Church, and “praying” for truth while fleeing truth makes finding truth finding what you don’t want and won’t accept when it is presented to you.
- Status