100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: When the Bible is discredited... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
if people are saying to you that you must believe the 'stories' or go to Hell , you can tell them that this 'christian' said baloney It's in the scriptures themselves MsHarmony. John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. So I'm not going by what people are saying to me. I'm rejecting the stories themselves. By the way, do you realize that you just called the gospel of John "baloney"? 
nope, you do realize that the verse quoted says nothing about believing on 'stories',, Do you realize that this verse IS a part of the story? 
of course I do,, the whole book has stories, accounts given by others but where does it say that you must believe the 'stories' or go to hell? this is NOT what is stated, although many may interpret it that way,,, It IS the story! The story is claiming that Jesus is the only begotten son, and if you don't believe in the claims that are being made by this story, then you will be condemned for not believing in the name of the only begotten son of God. It IS the story MsHarmony. sorry ab, but the book does not say that it does not say 1) if you dont believe Jesus as the only begotten son, you are condemned nor does it say 2) If you dont believe the claims you will be condemned it does say 3)if you dont believe 'in the name of' ,,which has more than one possible interpretation,,, The truth of the bible is there, but it is easy to misinterpret into things that ARENT true it lies in the person who reads the book, not in the book itself,,, Jesus saves, not the bible, not believing he is Gods son, not worshipping Jesus, but Jesus HIMSELF,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know this will be judged and I dont really care. ITs a difference in 'culture' and 'cultural values' perhaps, but I learned early on that 'fear' is not always some terrible thing. I had a respectful fear of my parents as a child. I was happy, I knew I was loved. I had a great childhood. I respected the hard work and sacrifice they put in for us.I appreciated the things and times they invested in our 'happiness' when they didnt have to. I respected their authority. I also had a certain fear (cautionary conscious) of the consequences they could, would , and should impose for certain INTENTIONAL infractions. This is not something everyone will agree with and thats fine too. But 'fear' does not invoke the same 'thats unfair' reaction from everyone. Some of us see its usefulness and its necessity, and its ability to coexist quite well with love and respect. Fear is the "easy" and fastest way to get semi respect. Those who use their brain and logic have to work a bit harder but their respect given and received is more real. Of course, a child who learns that the only way to get and give respect is through fear and pain will do the same to their children if they do not out think their upbringing. I agree, which is why I Never stated I believe it to be the 'only' way to respect as I said, I appreciated my parents( a form of respect), I respected their hard work(no fear there), I respected their sacrifice(no fear there), I respected their authority(sometimes calling for a fear, or COGNIZANCE OF UNDESIRABLE CONSEQUENCES) many types of respect, fear is sometimes involved , which is why the mere emotion of fear does not always constitute a negative in my opinon,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know this will be judged and I dont really care. ITs a difference in 'culture' and 'cultural values' perhaps, but I learned early on that 'fear' is not always some terrible thing. I had a respectful fear of my parents as a child. I was happy, I knew I was loved. I had a great childhood. I respected the hard work and sacrifice they put in for us.I appreciated the things and times they invested in our 'happiness' when they didnt have to. I respected their authority. I also had a certain fear (cautionary conscious) of the consequences they could, would , and should impose for certain INTENTIONAL infractions. This is not something everyone will agree with and thats fine too. But 'fear' does not invoke the same 'thats unfair' reaction from everyone. Some of us see its usefulness and its necessity, and its ability to coexist quite well with love and respect. Fear is the "easy" and fastest way to get semi respect. Those who use their brain and logic have to work a bit harder but their respect given and received is more real. Of course, a child who learns that the only way to get and give respect is through fear and pain will do the same to their children if they do not out think their upbringing. I agree, which is why I Never stated I believe it to be the 'only' way to respect as I said, I appreciated my parents( a form of respect), I respected their hard work(no fear there), I respected their sacrifice(no fear there), I respected their authority(sometimes calling for a fear, or COGNIZANCE OF UNDESIRABLE CONSEQUENCES) many types of respect, fear is sometimes involved , which is why the mere emotion of fear does not always constitute a negative in my opinon,,, Fear is a learning mechanism but it shouldn't be used in conjunction with love and respect it is not needed. If we are burned by fire we should fear it the next time we experience it to know not to touch it. That is the reason we have fear and it is effective. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if people are saying to you that you must believe the 'stories' or go to Hell , you can tell them that this 'christian' said baloney It's in the scriptures themselves MsHarmony. John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. So I'm not going by what people are saying to me. I'm rejecting the stories themselves. By the way, do you realize that you just called the gospel of John "baloney"?
nope, you do realize that the verse quoted says nothing about believing on 'stories',, Do you realize that this verse IS a part of the story?
of course I do,, the whole book has stories, accounts given by others but where does it say that you must believe the 'stories' or go to hell? this is NOT what is stated, although many may interpret it that way,,, It IS the story! The story is claiming that Jesus is the only begotten son, and if you don't believe in the claims that are being made by this story, then you will be condemned for not believing in the name of the only begotten son of God. It IS the story MsHarmony. sorry ab, but the book does not say that it does not say 1) if you dont believe Jesus as the only begotten son, you are condemned nor does it say 2) If you dont believe the claims you will be condemned it does say 3)if you dont believe 'in the name of' ,,which has more than one possible interpretation,,, The truth of the bible is there, but it is easy to misinterpret into things that ARENT true it lies in the person who reads the book, not in the book itself,,, Jesus saves, not the bible, not believing he is Gods son, not worshipping Jesus, but Jesus HIMSELF,,, Oh please. It's a religion that is trying to claim that their God hero is the only way to get to God and if you fail to worship their God hero you will be condemned. This is what all the religions of that the Mediterranean region tried to do. They tried to make their religion trump all others. The Greeks had Zeus as the "God of Gods". (He's the FINAL WORD) The Jews had Yahweh who is depicted as a jealous God who gives as his first commandment "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me!" He's the FINAL WORD! The Christians came along and stole the authority of God from the Jews by claiming that Jesus is THE ONLY WAY! He's the FINAL WORD! The Muslims chimed in and said, BULL CRAP! Mohammad is the LAST PROPHET sent by God and therefore he is the FINAL WORD! Everyone is trying to trump each other with the religion that has the FINAL WORD of God.
~~~~ Besides, you say that Jesus SAVES. But according to the religion Jesus is totally helpless to 'save' anyone. It's entirely up to THEM to save themselves by believing on Jesus' name. ~~~~~ I personally don't believe in any of these egotistically competitive religions that are all trying to claim ownership of FINAL WORD of God. I don't believe that any seriously all-wise God would participate in such petty nonsense. The God who plays guessing games with religions? Oh please! Even if the Christian version of God were true it would be pathetic. The God of that religion could not righteously condemn anyone for not believing in Jesus' name. That's simply not even rational, IMHO. The whole shebang is so utterly confusing and convoluted that even the myriad of Christians followers can't agree on what this God supposed wants from people. And you expect us to look at such a confused and convoluted religious doctrine as an "instruction manual" from our creator. If our creator is that inept, then we are in truly sad shape to be sure! Like I always say, I would have such feelings of pity for this God's ineptitude that I couldn't possible consider worshiping it. If it can't even communicate to meager mortal beings with crystal clear clarity then it can't be a very wise all-powerful being. That's the bottom line for me. For a supposedly all-powerful all-wise creator to have created a religion that supposed contains his "Instructions to Humanity" and to allow that religion to become so fragmented and confused as the Abrhamics religions are today, is imply inexcusable. There is no excuse for such a sloppy communication from a supposedly all-wise all-powerful God. It necessarily has to be the superstitious fables of men. The blood sacrifices is a dead give-away! This is nothing more than an offshoot from Zeus and company. It's the same mythology just evolved by a different culture is all. Jesus wasn't the blood sacrificial lamb of any God. At best he might have been a Mahayana Buddhist who tried to teach better morals to the Hebrews that had gotten their horrible morals from the Torah. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
considering many cultures and languages have passed since the days of Jesus,, I dont think its unreasonable for the doctrines to be more confusing to us two thousand years later
the bottom line is, I believe Jesus to be the only begotten Son of God,, I dont believe that that BELIEF is what will save me I believe, as Gods son, Jesus is the way to God,,,, I dont believe that means more than that we will pass Jesus before we see God people who have never learned of 'Jesus' specifically but who are living his message just the same,, I believe are doing just as well as those who learn about him and live his message but in the end, it will be his 'endorsement' that will eternally save or condemn us,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
considering many cultures and languages have passed since the days of Jesus,, I dont think its unreasonable for the doctrines to be more confusing to us two thousand years later Historically it was obviously just as confusing at the time it supposedly occurred as it is today. The Jews never bought into the rumors that Jesus was the messiah, the son of God, the king of the Jews or anything like that. The entire New Testament is very sparsely written by less than a handful of men. It obvious that this supposed "message" from God was not ever "clear" to anyone at any point in history. the bottom line is, I believe Jesus to be the only begotten Son of God,, I dont believe that that BELIEF is what will save me I believe, as Gods son, Jesus is the way to God,,,, I dont believe that means more than that we will pass Jesus before we see God I'm really not interested in what you personally believe. I speak to what's actually written in the stories. I'm not renouncing your beliefs. I'm voicing my rejection of what I see as ancient superstitious myths. people who have never learned of 'Jesus' specifically but who are living his message just the same,, I believe are doing just as well as those who learn about him and live his message. Well, that's nice. I feel the same way in that regard. As far as I'm concerned Jesus taught basically the same moral values as Buddha and many others. You can't really "follow" one without "following" the other. Although in terms of moral values, when I read all of these fellows I just shake my head in agreement with what they say. So how can I "follow" any of them if they are basically preaching the moral values that I already hold myself? Besides, if that were true then there would be no need for any God to have anyone write in his "instruction book" that those who do not believe on the name of Jesus will be condemned already. Why even put that in there if it's not even part of God's "instructions"? What parts would be "instructions" and which parts can we safely ignore? but in the end, it will be his 'endorsement' that will eternally save or condemn us,,, I thought God was omniscient and knows what's in the hearts of all men. Why would God need to have Jesus 'endorse' anyone? 
Isn't that rather silly right there when you stop and think about it? That whole thing grew out of the Christians attempting to TRUMP the jealous God of the Jews. They had to find some way to make Christianity the "Only Way" thus giving them reason to place it above Judaism. So they put Jesus BEFORE the God of Abraham by claiming that now we need Jesus' "endorsement". And they claim that this isn't really putting another God before the God of Abraham because Jesus' is actually "God's only begotten Son" blah, blah, blah. Can you not see the cultural competition here? This was so typical of the Mediterranean religions. Everyone was trying to have the single religion that TRUMPS all others. That's what that's all about. No truly omniscient creator would need the "endorsement" of some demigod to know what's in the hearts of men. Either the men are sincere or they aren't. And the TOP GOD should know. The whole 'endorsement' thing is clearly a ploy just to try to place one religion above all others. Either a person is sincere or they aren't. They shouldn't need to be "endorsed" by anyone. They are what they are. They are their own "endorsement" simply by what's in their own heart. Period. Anything less than that would be unrighteous and favoritism. How could Jesus' justifiably refuse to endorse a sincere person? And why would he endorse an insincere person? There shouldn't be any need for any trial if God already KNOWS what's in the hearts of men. They are either sincere or they aren't. If God needs to have Jesus try to figure out who's worthy and who isn't then when did God lose his omniscient abilities? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My favorite Einstein quote:
"There are only 2 things that are infinite, the universe and mans > stupidity <, and i'm not sure about the universe." There is only one god - Mr. "V" And i'm digging his good vibrations :) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My favorite Einstein quote: "There are only 2 things that are infinite, the universe and mans > stupidity <, and i'm not sure about the universe." There is only one god - Mr. "V" And i'm digging his good vibrations :) my favorite: "Once you can accept the universe as being something expanding into an infinite nothing which is something, wearing stripes with plaid is easy." - Albert Einstein |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God doesnt NEED Jesus to judge, anymore than my boss NEEDS me to run his copies
its a responsibility delegated, not a necessity ,, in any case , this 'How could Jesus' justifiably refuse to endorse a sincere person? And why would he endorse an insincere person? ' ....was actually my point,, Jesus will see what God sees and vice versa we will first go through Jesus to get to God,, so if we have been refused by Jesus, we wont be able to go with God as far as endorsing a sincere person, it is my hope and belief that he will,, but mind you, those who SINCERELY dont approve of the God of the Bible, or the Jesus of the Bible,,,,,,would be refused on the bases of not being FORCED to live eternally with them and their (stupid, archaic, egotistic) values/rules ,,,that is, IF the Jesus and God of the Bible are exactly as it is written they are,,,, if they are first refused by me, why would they insist on forcing me to live eternally with them? ,,,,,that is my believe anyhow, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God doesnt NEED Jesus to judge, anymore than my boss NEEDS me to run his copies
its a responsibility delegated, not a necessity ,, in any case , this 'How could Jesus' justifiably refuse to endorse a sincere person? And why would he endorse an insincere person? ' ....was actually my point,, Jesus will see what God sees and vice versa we will first go through Jesus to get to God,, so if we have been refused by Jesus, we wont be able to go with God as far as endorsing a sincere person, it is my hope and belief that he will,, but mind you, those who SINCERELY dont approve of the God of the Bible, or the Jesus of the Bible,,,,,,would be refused on the bases of not being FORCED to live eternally with them and their (stupid, archaic, egotistic) values/rules ,,,that is, IF the Jesus and God of the Bible are exactly as it is written they are,,,, if they are first refused by me, why would they insist on forcing me to live eternally with them? ,,,,,that is my believe anyhow, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God doesnt NEED Jesus to judge, anymore than my boss NEEDS me to run his copies its a responsibility delegated, not a necessity ,, in any case , this 'How could Jesus' justifiably refuse to endorse a sincere person? And why would he endorse an insincere person? ' ....was actually my point,, Jesus will see what God sees and vice versa we will first go through Jesus to get to God,, so if we have been refused by Jesus, we wont be able to go with God as far as endorsing a sincere person, it is my hope and belief that he will,, but mind you, those who SINCERELY dont approve of the God of the Bible, or the Jesus of the Bible,,,,,,would be refused on the bases of not being FORCED to live eternally with them and their (stupid, archaic, egotistic) values/rules ,,,that is, IF the Jesus and God of the Bible are exactly as it is written they are,,,, if they are first refused by me, why would they insist on forcing me to live eternally with them? ,,,,,that is my believe anyhow, Off-topic: What up with the multiple commas? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bad eyesight and one key away...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yes he does. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Tue 07/26/11 08:59 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electricity! http://new.music.yahoo.com/country-gentlemen/albums/going-back-to-the-blue-ri--159859114
Dude are you serious? Your into Blue Grass? My cousin is Doc Watson. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God doesnt NEED Jesus to judge, anymore than my boss NEEDS me to run his copies its a responsibility delegated, not a necessity ,, in any case , this 'How could Jesus' justifiably refuse to endorse a sincere person? And why would he endorse an insincere person? ' ....was actually my point,, Jesus will see what God sees and vice versa we will first go through Jesus to get to God,, so if we have been refused by Jesus, we wont be able to go with God as far as endorsing a sincere person, it is my hope and belief that he will,, but mind you, those who SINCERELY dont approve of the God of the Bible, or the Jesus of the Bible,,,,,,would be refused on the bases of not being FORCED to live eternally with them and their (stupid, archaic, egotistic) values/rules ,,,that is, IF the Jesus and God of the Bible are exactly as it is written they are,,,, if they are first refused by me, why would they insist on forcing me to live eternally with them? ,,,,,that is my believe anyhow, Off-topic: What up with the multiple commas? I don't like to read words all crammed together with run on thoughts and indiscernable subject-verb agreement. My writing style in the forum reflects the way I prefer to READ things in this type of setting, with the use of EXTRA spacing to clearly seperate points. As for the commas, its my form of an ellipsis but the commas seem easier to make out than the dots. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God doesnt NEED Jesus to judge, anymore than my boss NEEDS me to run his copies its a responsibility delegated, not a necessity ,, in any case , this 'How could Jesus' justifiably refuse to endorse a sincere person? And why would he endorse an insincere person? ' ....was actually my point,, Jesus will see what God sees and vice versa we will first go through Jesus to get to God,, so if we have been refused by Jesus, we wont be able to go with God as far as endorsing a sincere person, it is my hope and belief that he will,, but mind you, those who SINCERELY dont approve of the God of the Bible, or the Jesus of the Bible,,,,,,would be refused on the bases of not being FORCED to live eternally with them and their (stupid, archaic, egotistic) values/rules ,,,that is, IF the Jesus and God of the Bible are exactly as it is written they are,,,, if they are first refused by me, why would they insist on forcing me to live eternally with them? ,,,,,that is my believe anyhow, Off-topic: What up with the multiple commas? I don't like to read words all crammed together with run on thoughts and indiscernable subject-verb agreement. My writing style in the forum reflects the way I prefer to READ things in this type of setting, with the use of EXTRA spacing to clearly seperate points. As for the commas, its my form of an ellipsis but the commas seem easier to make out than the dots. Uh, OK. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reading this S hi t gives me a headache....
but i got an idea....................... i'm working to get an IQ of 2. isn't it.....the lower the number, the better? i mean, if i can hone it down, and streamline the thing..... i might be able to think really really hard on just one thing. i can't multi-task anyway! so i figure i'd get rid of all the excess thoughts, yanno? god!, can you imagine if i could get it to...... 1......how clear i could think! wwwoooouuww!!! hey^ can you use an ap-p-postraphy here? i mean...comma? i wasn't sure. well, thankyou for your tieme. just wanted to share.....and bragg a little bit....or, well maybe alot......thanks again.......thanks!.......ou.....ummmm cool.. yeah hey thanks.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electricity! http://new.music.yahoo.com/country-gentlemen/albums/going-back-to-the-blue-ri--159859114
Dude are you serious? Your into Blue Grass? My cousin is Doc Watson. Great song eh? That's some heritage there my man! 
|
|
|
|
|
