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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

You have been lied to : Christians , Muslims , Jews - all worship the same God

page: 24
35
<< 21  22  23    25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Invicid

This doesn't matter, the book is written with the Jewish God as the father of Jesus. It doesn't matter who you think the author used as a character model. It doesn't matter if you believe what it says.

It is written to be read as being the same God as the Jews.




posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

True, and Mohammad worshiped the God of Abraham, thank you for agreeing



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: SaintlyMic

You realize that Muslims believe Jesus will return to earth and will destroy the antichrist, right????

They just don't think he was God in the flesh..... They believe that God sent him to be a prophet... You obviously haven't read the Muslim holy text

edit on 21-10-2016 by fatkid because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

But both groups say they follow the same God (Jews and Muslims), you are one saying they don't.....
edit on 21-10-2016 by fatkid because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-10-2016 by fatkid because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: JChrisD

Yes and you just stated your belief



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: JChrisD

Why can anyone who disagrees with you "not fathom" but in the same post you attempt to explain God's reasoning



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: JChrisD

Mathew 10:34
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword - Jesus



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: JChrisD






In Christianity you have the right to defend yourself but to kill is against God's commandments and therefore a sin. Just like lying or coveting. Just sayin


Unless "said god" orders you to kill....then it's all cool and stuff. Just saying.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: JChrisD






Nice job of copying and pasting...sorry it took me so long to reply, I was lost in reading. Just kidding I am not about to read through an entire re posting of someone else's re posting...etc etc.


Why? Afraid you might read something you have no quick "Christian retort", too? I though Wakeupbeer did an outstanding job....I was leaving for work, so borrowed his diligent research. Not that I didn't already know it was there, just short on time. But, whatever.




As most you are just repeating what you have heard and have not actually put your eyes on the texts themselves. Just as an example and because it stood out since a false belief states they are a "religion of peace" but do kill unbelievers.


(where's the eye roll emogi?). Ok, man. Whatever...again.




"Kill nonbelievers. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)" If you picked up a bible and actually read through it instead of copying and pasting someone else's copying and past job, you would have seen this is where 2 MEN make a covenant between themselves and were not ordered by God to do it. Your entire argument is full of such holes. And now your putting physical attributes to the Holy Spirit which is neither or male or female but is in spirit form. And no Jesus did not break any of the commandments.


You must have skipped over WHAT I WROTE too....you know, the part where I told you I was a Christian for over two decades, read the Bible constantly....and if you think my argument is "full of holes", well then...I guess you got me, lol.

Ummmmm....the BIBLE ITSELF put GENDER attributes on the Holy Spirit (by calling it a HIM constantly). The Holy Spirit is the "Ruach Qodesh" in Hebrew. It's a feminine noun...go look it up.

Oh, and there are way more things in the Torah of God smiting people (that would include women, elderly people and infants...and animals).




Mathew 5:17 "Don't assume that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill." - Jesus


Yea...and Jesus also summed up all the "law and prophets" in two commandments...Love God and love others.
What if that Law was NOT YHWH'S? Like I said....Jesus didn't keep YHWH'S laws.

Annnnd onto that topic. Did Jesus reject those whom YHWH would have considered "unclean", "sinner's", "outcasts", "adulterers", etc? Nope.
Did Jesus touch and heal lepers? (you know...the one's that were considered "unclean").
Did Jesus raise people from the dead?
Did Jesus keep the Sabbath?
Soooo......in your opinion, exactly WHAT laws of YHWH did Jesus fulfill? He would have had to have KEPT THEM to have fulfilled them.
Just wondering.





I expected more from ATS then people that just accept what is presented to them, I seem to have been mistaken.
This is where I brush your sand from my boots and move on.
Reply if you like I will not see it. And whether you accept it or not, our Lord in Heaven is merciful and does not change. He just isn't a wuss.


Oh, I know the god of the Torah isn't a wuss...insecure and all, but not a wuss. He killed enough folks and critters to show that.

quote]
This is where I brush your sand from my boots and move on.


You mean...."take your ball and go home?"



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: fatkid

Peace and love ! Not a literal sword but a sword ( word ) of truth that wounds the satans unconsciousness ! Peace and love fom the mystical metal hippie



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: mysticalmetalhippie
a reply to: fatkid

Peace and love ! Not a literal sword but a sword ( word ) of truth that wounds the satans unconsciousness ! Peace and love fom the mystical metal hippie


Peace and love to you, too, man. And a hug, lol.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 11:00 PM
link   
a reply to: mysticalmetalhippie

Obviously, that is the point- quoting one line of scripture as the basis of an arguement is basically an insult to the entire work, but followers are quick to do it just to attempt to prove a point trying to force there view of an entire doctrine into 10 words and then grandstanding on the statement



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: fatkid
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

But both groups say they follow the same God (Jews and Muslims), you are one saying they don't.....


You're ignoring the history because it would blow up your dogmatic beliefs. And maybe your entire moral fiber.

The New Testament was written by Flavius Josephus - see the Flavian Piso Conspirarcy - it's been thoroughly validated. Additionally the Old Testament was partially rewritten after the fall of the second temple and the scattering of the jewish population. This is ACTUAL history. Having said that - this is why there are even obvious hypocrisys or clear connections. I.e. Moses and Abraham being two separate individuals, they were one person. This was made to change quite literally the timeline of our history - once the Julian Calendar was introduced. So you can continue to spew non-sense about "God" writing a man-made book. Or you can try to learn some real spirituality. Right now, Your a dog on a leash chasing it's tail. But please educate me more on the bible. You're pathetic, not because you're stupid, but because you insist on believing only what validates your shallow validation of your being. Take responsibility for yourself, your thoughts, and your actions, LIKE A MAN.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: fatkid
a reply to: Invicid

Been gone for awhile sorry for late reply.

It doesn't matter if they are fictional or not, they are based on the same subject matter and God, even if that God isn't real, it is irrelevant to the topic of the books, it is like saying the Star Wars saga or the lord of the rings saga aren't about the same groups of characters because they are fiction



Um Jesus Christ - is the real historical Julius Caesar. Again, see the Flavian Piso Conspiracy. Jesus Christ, and all the other characters of the New Testament - NEVER existed. Flavius Josephus's Senatorial family were the governors of Syria and Palestine for HUNDREDS of years before, during, and after the timeline of the new testament. As a scholar of Alexandria, Flavius Josephus had a seperate, SCHOLAR title that allowed him to make HISTORICAL FACT out of any of his writings under that title and name. The scholar who validated the characters of the New Testament, is Flavius Josephus himself, the only one ever to do so. Additionally - what's painfully forgotten here is the fact that the Jews, were just as organized as the Romans. And documented EVERY SINGLE man, women or child, ever born under their kingdom. Not Jesus, NOR ANY of the other characters of the bible are documented in their strict, annual censuses. Which were at the same level of population documentation as the Romans. Lastly - did you know Julius Caesar's body was crucified? And he was given the ONLY living god-king title, in all roman history? What if you knew that Julius Caesar was regarded by the Jews as their only king and savior? HMM, the walls start to fall down quickly. But stupid is easier.



posted on Oct, 24 2016 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Invicid

originally posted by: fatkid
a reply to: Invicid

Been gone for awhile sorry for late reply.

It doesn't matter if they are fictional or not, they are based on the same subject matter and God, even if that God isn't real, it is irrelevant to the topic of the books, it is like saying the Star Wars saga or the lord of the rings saga aren't about the same groups of characters because they are fiction



And lastly, did you know that everything just mentioned was validated in the purge trials run by Emperor Nero? This is how we know Flavius Josephus full list of names and titles that he worked under. THEY WERE EXPOSED BY THE EMPIRE THEMSELVES! FULLY DOCUMENTED. In fact, Josephus's father (a senator) lost his life in this trial, and Josephus himself was sent into exile subsequently.



posted on Oct, 25 2016 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: fatkid
a reply to: mysticalmetalhippie

Obviously, that is the point- quoting one line of scripture as the basis of an arguement is basically an insult to the entire work, but followers are quick to do it just to attempt to prove a point trying to force there view of an entire doctrine into 10 words and then grandstanding on the statement


Cat got your tongue? Would u like to discuss the actual history behind the new testament to begin? Or was the Flavian Piso Conspiracy too much verified history for your liking? Who benefits from your dogmatic, single focused POV? Surely not u, or anyone you try and convince/manipulate.



posted on Oct, 26 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Invicid

I have a job, I travel to places where the internet doesn't work, so no a cat doesn't have my tongue.

The topic of discussion you wish to have is very interesting; however, it has nothing to do with the religions based around the texts. You aren't accounting for the multitudes of people who follow the said religions or the subject of the text.

Your entire arguement is what is called a straw man

"A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent."
edit on 26-10-2016 by fatkid because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 09:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: fatkid
a reply to: Invicid

I have a job, I travel to places where the internet doesn't work, so no a cat doesn't have my tongue.

The topic of discussion you wish to have is very interesting; however, it has nothing to do with the religions based around the texts. You aren't accounting for the multitudes of people who follow the said religions or the subject of the text.

Your entire arguement is what is called a straw man

"A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent."


That was a cute attempt. Having said that, despite the fictional history of the religious texts you are discussing, you are still talking about them as "gospel". Thank you for showing everyone on these boards what it means to be a self righteous, selective mind. The books you speak about are brilliant pieces of fiction written by a Roman historian / senatorial heir. I bet you would discuss jack and the giant bean stalk as if it was gospel as well, despite a litany of historical, undeniable evidence.

I suggest you take your head out of your ass so you maybe have a shot at some self awareness.



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Invicid

I never claimed once, in any of my posts on this thread that they were non-fiction. And your arguement about their history doesn't dispute their subject matter. You have no idea what I believe.

The subjects of the books are based around the same God, your just looking for an arguement and straw manning my original post

edit on 27-10-2016 by fatkid because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Hijacking someone else's deity and trying to force It into your own mold by claiming your deity and their deity are the same one is not the same thing as "worshiping the same God". It's just worshiping two distinct deities and trying to muddy the waters until your enemy gets confused and capitulates.


I can claim my god is the same as the other guy's god, except it's a new and improved version that has nothing in common with the other guy's god because he just didn't understand his god whereas I do, but that does not make the claim so... it just makes it an unfounded claim.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 21  22  23    25  26 >>

log in

join