"If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid." (John 5:31)
"Jesus answered: Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid." (John 8:14)

Bible quotes are great

Bible quotes are great but you have to read before & after to get the meaning of the quote. Anything can be taken out of context to be used to whatever your desire is. You're living proof.

Thats funny I was just thinking you were living proof of that.

Shifting middle is when you equate rebuke with forsake, and demonstrate that as proving your point. That is "shifting" the idea of what you are trying to prove. Also, you are refering to Satan rebuking Satan - which also does equal equating God the Father with God the Son - which you have done by saying Jeusu is forsaking himself. This - as many have told you - shows a lack of unserstanding of the trinity. And since you are trying to demonstrate a biblical point, i.e. Jesus being forsaken by God (which you see as himself) than you should familiarize yourself with biblical concepts so that your premise holds up.

As to responding to "all men are sinners" - it does not say that "all men are born with sin". Which I sermized as your point - since you've stated it repeatedly.

Then why does it say "in sin" and not "with sin"? And this wold be taking a passage to prove your point, rather than examing all of the passages concerning sin and drawing a concluison. The passage "it is the soul who sins who will die" is in direct conflict with your conclusion.

Rabbit - Christians do NOT call babies sinners. Catholics, perhaps - but not all Christians are Catholics, and not all Catholics are Christains. So if you want to feel sorry for Catholics - so be it, but get your facts straight.

This is my quote eljay. It does not say all "men" it says all. I f you want to say the bible is not to be taken literally that would be fine.

But I don't see how you are equating this with babies being sinners? Within the realm of "majoring in minors" has always been the long debated topic of "age of intent". At what age does a child knowingly do that which they know to be wrong.
When this "awareness comes" - then the action is sin. Or however you would like to define "sin". It is at this point that Romans 3:23 takes on it's meaning. Consider the audience of Romans. Do you think it was meant for a group of 2 and 3 year olds? Of course you don't. The audience of this passage was the believers of the church in Rome. The argument brought forth that led to this conclusion was whether Jews were moe justified in the eyes of God than Gentiles. It is demonstrated by Paul that non were rightious - that the Jew, as well as Gentile fell short of the glory of God, and through the sacrifice of Jesus, both were now redeemed. Hardly worthy of support for an argument to claim that babies are sinners. That is faulty exegesis - and Cultic logic. It is the very argument which Abra screams against - so I'll echo Abra's many posts about this type of interpretation and ask yoiu to please stop it, for Abra's and my sake.

just sending some love and blessings

may we all have a happy, bright peaceful,
very clear and very enlightened new year

Eljay I still think All means All not just men of age. But I will move on to this quote. Do the infants below get killed because they are sinful or does god kill innocent infants?



1 Samuel 15:2-3 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)


2 This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. 3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy [a] everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.' "

In response to your question - let's assume thry're "innocents", as you've surmised. Have you determined that this is a "negative" act because God does not meet your standard of ethics? What makes you think that you know what awaited these innocents? We all die. What we don't know is why it takes some longer than others to "leave here" - what awaits us on the "other side", and what the determinant judgement will be. To you - the act of the children being killed is a negative act because that is all you can percieve.
But how do you not know that they have been saved from a life of misery and torment to spend their eternity with God, without having to be put through what might have been hell on earth? The fact is - you don't. So through this ignorance - you accuse God, of... what exactly? His not meeting your uninformed standards? His not telling you what his purpose was?
Help me understand what your problem is Rabbit - because I'm just not seeing it.

Hi Rabbit,

1. What were you using as proof that Jesus is not God?

His statement "My God, My God, Why have you forsaken me?"

or:

God cannot forsake God. (which of course you followed up with you cannot (and will not) forsake yourself)
Most people realize that yes in some sense a person can and it is done willingly and in love.

as for your quote....
So I might agree with you if you agreed that Jesus in that case would be saying that he is upset about his situation. "

All I can say to that is "My name is not Eve".

this is deep! Oh my GOD!

i agree with eljay ...

we do not fully see what the bigger picture is...

I think your answer makes my point better then I do. This is how easily Christians will dispatch Children into the afterlife because the life the have ahead doesn't meet some proper standard.


Job 14:1 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)

1 "Man born of woman
is of few days and full of trouble.

I think I would seriously kick the **** outa this guy if I ever saw him in the street, & I'm a gentle man.

I can always rely on you Brian to bring uplifting perspective to the dialog.

Seneca the Younger 4 b.c.- 65 a.d.


Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.


I'd say in todays USA VERY useful ;)

Blaise Pascal:
Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions


But I find this one the best:

Doug McLeod:
I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence

Rabbit,

I haven't been on this site since before Christmas and I log on now to find you arguing the same, tiring logic you were then. Just like now, you had a few well-intentioned people trying to help you understand why Jesus said what he did on the cross, including me. As I continued to read your arguments, it became clear to me that what Jesus said on the cross was not really your concern. You have just decided, for whatever reason that you do not believe in Christ as Lord and Savior. Guess what? That's fine. Why do you keep bringing it up? Would anyone actually be able to convince you to consider another option? I think not.

To those trying to explain to Rabbit your faith, remember that when Christ talked to his disciples about preaching the gospel, he told them that some would not accept his message. He did not tell them to keep at them until they do. He told them to wipe the dust of that town off their feet and move on. Rabbit will probably take exception to us wiping off his dust, but aren't we just allowing him to maintain his free will? That's what Jesus would do.