Depends what you consider as ugly. There are ugly looking and or ugly personalities.

I'm really turned off by a beautiful gal who throws my complement back at me or doesn't acknowledge anyone else but her.

Ghost

Ontario use to be a regular pain in the ass here. A rather troll. probably a 16 tr old kid who was board with being a pimple face dweeb and decided to make a name for himself on here. Starting by insulting me personally so I know for a fact he still trolling these forum by virtue of the fact he has multiple personas on this site to create chaos amongst us.

Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer.

Quote fron Quote Details: Sun-tzu.

Ghost

"if you don't believe in God, then why are you involved in a discussion of prayer?"

So this has become a mutually exclusive forum I guess.

My non belief in a diety is not worrented.

Poo Pooo!

Oh well.
I guess i'm such a negative wort on humanity. Blah Blah blah!

But you feel the need to put your half a cent worth in my post.
Oh I get Spider is the incarnation of Onterial Or as I refer to him as Ontroll.

"Get right with God and then He can use you"

Oh I like that part. Use and abuse us too.

So how do we actually get so called right with God then. By acknowledging a supernatural being that man created in the first place.

Hey may be some enjoy being used but I.

"What ways are there to pray?"

Meditate. Do your every day thing. Or just take a walk in the woods to be closer with nature. Think out load.
That ussually is a sign your in tune at least with your mind.

Ghost

Personnal I like to surf porn sites. LOL

Well a lot of ppl would find God in giving to some televangalits as part of their salvation due to their lack of understanding of the true meaning od giving. So I can think that a simple act of kindness would surfice to be truely in tune with what ever creater you are afilliated with. If not then there is truely a problem with this thing called religion.
I understand this thing of God helps those who help themselves. But at some point you need someone to carry you to get back on your feet too.

Ghost

I don't mean to be a Party pooper. But when one pray's over their food, let's say. And the food is of very low quality as far as health goes. Isn't that counter productive? I mean to give thanks for the food you are about to ingest is good but if it's eventually going to kill you by being highly cholesterol hardening then wouldn't that be thanking God for this posion

Ghost

how about giving to the poor. Or just doing randome acts of kindness.
I think that always works

of coures you don't have to be religious to do that too, just a bit on the wild side.

Ghost

Here's one for ya all.

IS "JESUS" A PAGAN NAME?
by Yahkov Hartley


In a recent Messianic magazine there appeared an article that purported to address the question,"Is the name "Jesus" pagan?" The article was clearly a defense of the use of the name "Jesus", in spite of that author's admission that this is not the "original" name (birth name) given to the Messiah (by his Jewish mother, Miryam). The article leaves the reader with the notion that "Jesus" is just as valid, if not more valid, than "Y'shua" (, a contraction of ) when referring to the Mashiach (Messiah). And it arrives at this "deduction" by the most obtuse etymology and stunted logic, ignoring the weightier matters of the issue. The "issue" raised in this article is a prize-winning canard designed to decoy the unwary from the real issue of the word "Jesus".

Early in the article, the author demonstrated the difficulty of transliterating from Hebrew to Greek and the ease of transliterating from Hebrew to English. A detailed letter-by-letter (from the Hebrew aleph-bet to the Greek alphabet) "transliteration" of the name, Y'shua to the Greek name, Iesous was brought forth as evidence. Because there are no equivalent sounds of many of the letters, this so called "transliteration" becomes in reality a translation. There is so little assonance between "Y'shua" and "Eeaysooce" that calling this a transliteration is an offense to even the most debased scholarship. There is no way to transliterate this name between these two languages! The best that can be done is to translate, which is what was done in the Septuagint by its Hebrew translators.

The name, Septuagint, is late-Latin (the ecclesiastical tongue of the Roman Corporate Church) from septem + ginta which hints at the 70 (approximately) translators who produced the Greek version of the Tanakh (the "Old" Testament). A study of the etymology of the word "Jesus", in even as mundane a source as the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, reveals that this name does not come directly from the Greek "Iesous", but derives from the early-Latin "Iesu", the "I" pronounced initially as a "Y" producing Yay-soo. The "I" in the middle-ages was differentiated into the "I' and the "J" in our Latin alphabet used for the English language. Thus, in late-Latin, the Iesou (Yaysoo) became Jesu (Jaysoo) which became Jesus in the English tongue. This relationship in the etymology is omitted by the author in his "apologetics".

Regardless, the word Jesus has no direct ancestry from the Greek Iesous, as is implied by the author, but at best, it derives from the late-Latin Jesu , a fact completely missing in the cited article. However, all of this etymology, even with the missing link provided above, is a decoy to distract our attention from the real problem with this word "Jesus."

We have never used the argument that Jesus is somehow a compound of Gee-Zeus (Zeus being the chief "god" of the Greek Pantheon) although there is certainly an extreme degree of assonance (which is the core of the art of transliteration) with the "Jesus" word. We have never pursued that possibility to any extent, since it is totally irrelevant. The only relevant issue is: What was/is the Messiah's name given him by his mother, Miryam, in accordance with the angelic messenger's revelation to her?

Since the author of the subject article didn't have any problems with the name Y'shua being the Messiah's "original" name (as opposed to some subsequent name Y'shua changed to?), why not look firstly, what is NOT at issue here. The issue is NOT, " whether the word Jesus is pagan!" The issue is NOT how to "transliterate" Y'shua into Greek! The issue is NOT how to "transliterate" Greek Iesous into Latin! The issue is NOT even how to "transliterate" the Latin Jesu into English! The issue IS how to transliterate the real name, Y'shua, from the Hebrew, into English. We certainly don't need to go through Greek into Latin and then from Latin into English. Why would anyone want to take such a circuitous route, unless he's trying to "prove" the validity of the erroneousness, "Jesus?"

To transliterate from the Hebrew Y'shua to English, we merely go to Y'shua. Thus his name is pronounced Y'shua both in Hebrew and in English - perfect transliteration. What could be simpler? Whether Jesus is a pagan name isn't what matters! What matters is the fact that Jesus was never the name of the Messiah of the "New" Testament! Names aren't translated from one language to another, if it is possible to transliterate. If that is impossible (as in Hebrew to Greek) then there is no alternative but to translate. However, translation from one language to another frequently results in a change in the context and, almost always, the nuances of the original text! The change of the Messiah's name from Y'shua to Jesus certainly serves the purpose of obscuring his Jewish identity and his Jewish ministry dedicated to finding the "lost sheep of the House of Yisrael." History, both religious and secular, is clear that the "Church" has expended a vast effort to distance itself from the true nature, origins, and purpose of this Jewish messiah!

The "scholarship" of the subject article is a paradigm (an example) of eisegesis pawned off as exegesis. If this represents the "best" understanding that these people have about such issues, then they are woefully inadequate to be the tool to accomplish the reunion of the Two Houses and restoration of the united kingdom of Yisrael. The "churches" and their teachings have not, do not, and will not ever cause the Tribes of Judah to become jealous!! Nor will they be able to bring the genuine Messiah to his people (see Romans chapter 11).

It is no surprise that the number of "religious" people who want to bring "Jesus" to the Jews, clearly do not have a grasp of many of the Ephraim/Judah issues that plague the unity of those two Houses. Churchianity has been in the sun way too long, and it is going to be a tough process for them to discard the pagan and/or error filled baggage they bring with them. Judah (the Jew) has considerable Talmudic baggage to discard as well. I am reminded of the declaration of the prophet Hosea 4:6, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge..."

We are not interested in bringing "Jesus" errors to Judah; there are already enough groups doing that. We do support bringing Y'shuah Ha Mashiach (Yahushua the Messiah) to both Ephraim and Judah: and there is an immense historical difference between Jesus and Y'shua. People's eternal life depends on acceptance of the genuine and rejection of the false.

Our king is totally opposed to perpetuating the centuries of misinformation and disinformation promulgated by the church leaders who have used their pulpits to disseminate their apostasy. The prophet to Israel, Jeremiah 16:19, prophecies: "O YHWH, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, 'Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit.'"

We need to examine the Scriptures from a Hebraic perspective (not always a Jewish perspective) in order to glean all the truth and nuances of the Hebrew writers of those books and arrive at the intended (by YHWH) understanding of the Hebrew words of YHWH to the people to whom He entrusted the oracles. Those people were NOT the "churches."

We take seriously the imperative in Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 58:1, "Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins." We know that we are citizens of the Kingdom of YHWH and have no allegiance to any denomination on earth nor any man. Our Kohen HaGadol (High Priest) is Y'shua Ha Mashiach (Yahushua the Messiah) and he ministers in the Great Temple of YHWH our Father on our behalf.

Wow!

What an artical.

You can find it here.
http://yahushua.net/pagan_name.htm

"So, Ghost do you think God was gay?"

Only if he had a lot of girls around as friends when he was young.
I heard that that is a tell tale sign that a young boy may turnout to be gay. I dunno?

Your all wrong!

Jesus was *the* original Hippy ......... long hair, wearing sandals, no regular job, going around saying "Peace, Brother". The founder of a popular cult.
Didn't some anthropologist recently find his stash box? Was empty except for a few seeds and a couple of roaches.:)

No but seriously.

Jesus could have been considered a Pagan since that term refers to a culture and not a race or religion. From Latin paganus, meaning a country dweller, rustic.

Hi ya CCP.

To answer your question (I think you already know my answer anyways. But.) We created God in our own image. Period. So I guess you knew that anyways. (Sorry I couldn't give an example that a child could understand.) But basically we created a deity to give us hope or some sort of meaning to this who chaos of life. Read quotes by Timothy Larry's "Think for yourself".
You can googol that and find a whole host of his quotes like that.

Sorry I came into this a bit late. I haven't been here in a while due to computer issues.:(

Anyways hi and good to see your still active here and in the religion forums.

Take care.

Ghost

Try the Not so funny side of Scientology website for some
really good answers.

http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/read/forbidden_side/murray_luther_08.html

The Evil Cult of Scientology (documentaries from the 80's, 90's ...
[New Window]
Because they won't actually present the other side of the argument -
just ... It's really not so bad out here. Come on, you can do it, you
don't need the ...
http://reddit.com/info/1r56z/comments

Dogma= indoctrination.
Pure and simple.

Be yourself. Don't try soo hard. let it happen.
If nothing at all happens. Use that as another step into bachelorhood.

Theres nothing wrong in being a bachelor.

Talk to devorced guys.


ghost

You sound like you have an ego that's too big for your trousers. Why not
ask them the reason for there self doubt.
Who knows. Maybe you you might find about them and yourself too.

But I guess that would require one to be votable too. So forget it I
guess.

Ghost

"even worse
than being dismembered by that cougar"

Dear LexFonteyne

Was that "Sudduced by a Couger?"

They have a nice website.
take it from me. LOL

Ghost

"Thank you for accessing our Power of Prophecy website. We are an
end-times ministry called by God "

OH!!!!!! Jessse!!!!!

How do you expect me to even attempt to read this crap? You speak and
reason better than this garbage.

End-timers are of a dieing breed.
(Thank God for that)

I still see the stupid poster's of the Seventh Day Adventist who
supposidly Raptured to heaven way back in the early 80's.

I hope thier all gone now.
But some how I tend to think they arew still around. Even in this forum.

Inocent untile proven guilty is a fales hood.

You have to prove your inocent first.

Shot first. Aske queastions later.

Ghost