It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How exactly was Jesus' crucifixion a sacrifice?

page: 14
32
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 10:16 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

The vital principle in humans that animates between body and soul. ENCORPOREAL What is your best guess troubleshooter?

Not to derail but it's spelled 'incorporeal'.

I just feel like if you're going to yell it you should probably spell it correctly.




posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: vethumanbeing

The vital principle in humans that animates between body and soul. ENCORPOREAL What is your best guess troubleshooter?

Not to derail but it's spelled 'incorporeal'.

I just feel like if you're going to yell it you should probably spell it correctly.

Nice derail by using an Obvious misspell "ALERT" to do so. What is your point (rap my fingers)? You failed to respond to the post content, just spelling?
edit on 25-10-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Yes. It was obviously misspelled. At least, it was obvious to me.

...now as you said we don't have free-will, it's actually god working through us, and to think otherwise is arrogant.

So it was actually god that misspelled it.

You're off the hook.



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 10:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Yes. It was obviously misspelled. At least, it was obvious to me.

...now as you said we don't have free-will, it's actually god working through us, and to think otherwise is arrogant.

So it was actually god that misspelled it.
You're off the hook.

Enlightenment. I was NEVER ON THE HOOK.



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing
You just blew me away with the profundity of your illumination.

I'm in awe. *eye roll*

Please note: this is indeed god typing right now. I have no free-will. God works through me. As you said.



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 10:40 PM
link   
originally posted by: vethumanbeing]originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: vethumanbeing


Lucid Lunacy: Yes. It was obviously misspelled. At least, it was obvious to me.
...now as you said we don't have free-will, it's actually god working through us, and to think otherwise is arrogant.
So it was actually god that misspelled it.You're off the hook.

Self Enlightenment. I was NEVER ON THE HOOK. Beware those that nit pick at your exterior/interior motives as are Bully Boys (Dickinsonian editors of your words).
edit on 25-10-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing
I have no idea what that meant.

I'm merely trying to illustrate how ridiculous the implication that my actions ultimately come from god, and not my own volition, really is.



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 10:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: vethumanbeing
You just blew me away with the profundity of your illumination.
I'm in awe. *eye roll*
Please note: this is indeed god typing right now. I have no free-will. God works through me. As you said.

You have no free will; someone is lying to you; put on your sunglasses.



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 10:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: vethumanbeing
I have no idea what that meant.
I'm merely trying to illustrate how ridiculous the implication that my actions ultimately come from god, and not my own volition, really is.

You are God as its best description aspect of/as created YET and just do not realize it (no wonder you are confused). Do you have any clue as to why you exist?
edit on 25-10-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 11:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Leahn

originally posted by: Ghost147
Yes. Here is an exact, peer reviewed, Scientific article on this very topic.


The article does not say anywhere that mankind cannot survive with a population under 10k.


The issue isn't that mankind can survive or not, it's that genetic diversity wouldn't be what it is today without about that number of people.

It's quite interesting actually. I suggest going to this Link for further reading. It's on the topic of colonizing another star system, and what the minimum number of people we should send could be without eventually ruining the diverse bloodlines.


originally posted by: Leahn
Considering how low was life expectancy even mere two centuries ago, how is that relevant?


Firstly, If you believe Adam and Eve existed, don't you also believe that people in those days lived for hundreds and hundreds of years?

It is relevant because when I refer to 'life-threatening conditions' I mean that they might as well be still-births because there is no way they could possibly survive even a few weeks without the aid of modern medicines. It sounds like you're thinking about long-term conditions, like asthma or Allergies. However, I'm talking about severe birth defects, often ending in an early death (as in weeks or less). And that's with today's medicines.

Incest born children and their health issues is incredibly relevant to the Adam and Eve story (not to mention the great flood when basically the same thing occurs)


originally posted by: Leahn
No, no, we can't.


Yeah, because you know, no civilization ever left anything behind that would identify they were there at any given time. No bones, no tools, no structures, no literature, so on and so forth. Are you honestly saying that you believe we have no evidence, what so ever, that shows that the migration of pre-colonial populations?



If you really need evidence for it, I can back up my claims. feel free to ask. But to save time, here's a map.


originally posted by: Leahn
I shall remind you that you were the one who posed the original question. Considering that the question that baffles you is one that I can easily answer, do you really think that you are able to lecture me about theology?


Not sure why you need to remind me, I am well aware I asked it. But when you state something that doesn't make sense, or isn't justified, and you don't present anything to back up your claims, I am more than free to correct your errors.



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 11:06 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

no wonder you are confused

Who are you even addressing right now?? It can't be me...

You are claiming that my actions come from god. It's not my will, it's god's will that you read these sentences from this Illusory persona 'Lucid Lunacy'. This accusation of confusion therefore is towards god. Now since you are also without free-will, and simply a conduit for the divine, this is really just an argument god is having with itself.
edit on 25-10-2015 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 11:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: vethumanbeing
Who are you even addressing right now?? It can't be me...

You are claiming that my actions come from god. It's not my will, it's god's will that you read these sentences from this illusionary persona 'Lucid Lunacy'. This accusation of confusion therefore is towards god. Now since you are also a without free-will, and simply a conduit for the divine, this is really just some an argument god is having with itself.

Nice subterfuge. I claim nothing, I just recognize a similar being that is my sibling is all; looking for OUR creator. I have no free will and am a conduit for the divine; Gods argument is this: IT WILL NOT RECOGNISE ITSELF by telling the human; it is God; as the human does not realize it is Gods Expression (it tries with its Dogmatic Religion). God has a conundrum; its major expression (the human) has no idea it is actually God in the flesh.
edit on 25-10-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 11:36 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

I claim nothing


Gods argument is this

How do you not see this discrepancy??



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 11:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: vethumanbeing

I claim nothing


Gods argument is this

How do you not see this discrepancy??

YOUR "Claim nothing"; Gods argument is this: "SEE this discrepancy" leaves nothing emotive enough to respond to.
edit on 25-10-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 11:47 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Maybe it's just me, but that was not cogent. Paraphrase or elaborate?

My point:

You said you're not claiming anything, and then you proceed to claim you know god's argument.
edit on 25-10-2015 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 11:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: vethumanbeing
Maybe it's just me, but that was not cogent. Paraphrase or elaborate?

My point:
You said you're not claiming anything, and then you proceed to claim you know god's argument.

Why would I NOT KNOW Gods argument regarding Itself and its creation (the latchkey human) unenlightened. You haven't hired me so am not your representative.
edit on 26-10-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2015 @ 11:59 PM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing
Translation of your posts:

I am claiming to know god's argument, so yes, I was wrong when I said I was not claiming anything, I am just too stubborn to admit it.
edit on 26-10-2015 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2015 @ 12:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: vethumanbeing
Translation:

I am claiming to know god's argument, so yes, I was wrong when I said I was not claiming anything, I am just too stubborn to admit it.

Your good opinion is? I will give you mine.
edit on 26-10-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2015 @ 12:02 AM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

You mean god's opinion?



posted on Oct, 26 2015 @ 12:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: vethumanbeing

You mean god's opinion?

Is there another? I have to say this, one other thread speaking about the Constitution of the USA; poster said 'God' was not within the writing of. Those men were of a God constituent. I said this; if God were not in the writing of this missive then the Devil was in the details (God had to be as created the Devil to exist).
edit on 26-10-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join