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.

 

Mary did have sex with Joseph Mt. 1:24

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 07:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix




I would call a shrink.
and what happens if you end up with a crazy one ? I hear they have a higher rate of suicide demographically. just saying



You hear? I don't place trust in things heard unless I know a person.

Are you a Scientologist?

Regardless, such an outrageous hypothetical does not come close to making me rethink what I said, truthfully, a psychiatrist who isn't a little crazy like everyone else is not going to be as effective as one who is.

Also, it was a joke and like a great portion of people I actually have a psychiatrist who is not suicidal.

If a psychiatrist was suicidal her or his first instinct would be to talk to a peer and get help, they would be given paid leave until they got better, within reason, or they would have to go on whatever version of government security benefits the nation they live in has to offer.

Now that that's out of the way, why would I let a rarely occuring hypothetical prevent me from visiting a shrink? I could always get a different one anytime.

If I was hallucinating angels telling me some lady I never had sex with was pregnant with "God's" baby I would be the insane one, doubly if I didn't get help.

What Joseph did is in the realm of esoteric mythology, not history, nobody has ever seen an angel and had proof of it.

edit on 14-1-2017 by TerriblePhoenix because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix




If I was hallucinating angels telling me some lady I never had sex with was pregnant with "God's" baby I would be the insane one, doubly if I didn't get help. What Joseph did is in the realm of esoteric mythology, not history, nobody has ever seen an angel and had proof of it.
I had went to see a shrink who was referred to me by my GP at my request because of a issue I was having related to ptsd . The shrink lied to me and while I was at his office lied to someone else on the phone .

If you were hallucinating then I would understand your response but if you were not and you knew it you might consider it differently .The unseen realm is not something that is going to prove but is something that can be believed . Seeing that faith plays a big roll in Gods plan (by faith you are saved through grace ) it becomes a search using scripture as your main data point . It also allows the person to search out other literature ,concepts and studies to develop a world view .

Joseph is a Biblical historic figure living in a historic place at a time with other historic figures .The Bible is a historic document itself that can be corroborated with other historic documents . How much or little trust you put into those documents is up to anyone reading them or studying them. Lets face it, if its someone studying a document then they could notice details missed by someone who only read the thing once or has been told by someone else .

I think the OP picked up on something that a lot of people would agree on ,that runs contrary to what the RCC says .



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 09:50 AM
link   
I side with Terrible on this.I do believe the Bible has additions and modifications on some key points crucial to their beliefs. The virgin birth is one of the more glaring ones. It was probably added because they needed to bolster the supremacy, ruling both politically and spiritually in brutal form. They made Jesus God and demanded worship on penalty of death, extracting slavery to impossible ideals. They said salvation was done but treated it like He just co-signed. But in order to pull this off, they had to change the truth. Because the truth was perceived as a threat. Jesus's teachings were not political but they were revolutionary. He had a following. And if they were listening, He said his followers would be able to do what He did. So they had to make Him out to be much more to demand obedience.
If they knew what the Spirit was like, they would have known that the virgin birth was completely unnecessary to begin with. It is like the wind, just as He said. The 'Born of the spirit/flesh' thing are separate altogether. God didn't impregnate Mary and that whole belief is ridiculous. Besides, look at the hoops they have to jump through explaining the Davidic line and why all of the sudden when it makes all the difference in the world to the Jewish faith, God decided to mix it up and bring the line through the mother for once..
But can you see why they had to hide the truth? If he was fully man, then man has the potential, as Jesus said, to also follow in His path and do the very same things. I do believe He was also uniquely the Son, but He's more 'one of us' than we give Him credit for. IMO



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 03:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix




If I was hallucinating angels telling me some lady I never had sex with was pregnant with "God's" baby I would be the insane one, doubly if I didn't get help. What Joseph did is in the realm of esoteric mythology, not history, nobody has ever seen an angel and had proof of it.
I had went to see a shrink who was referred to me by my GP at my request because of a issue I was having related to ptsd . The shrink lied to me and while I was at his office lied to someone else on the phone .


I would suggest a different shrink then. Although are you sure the doc was lying, my mind plays tricks on me sometimes and I think someone is lying only to come to my senses later and grateful for having kept it to myself.



If you were hallucinating then I would understand your response but if you were not and you knew it you might consider it differently .The unseen realm is not something that is going to prove but is something that can be believed . Seeing that faith plays a big roll in Gods plan (by faith you are saved through grace )


There is one religion, and within the scripture of this religion one man only who says this is true and that faith alone, i. e. without works is salvation, Paul.

Jesus did not teach this, James and Peter reputiated it and Paul was neither apostle, prophet or someone who knew Jesus.

I would not count on that being true, faith without works is dead, not true faith and will not be what saves you, whatever you think saved is. In fact salvation was not ever said by Jesus to be dependent upon faith alone, by your fruits you will know them, anyone can make a statement of faith, it is bunk theology.

But carry on.



it becomes a search using scripture as your main data point . It also allows the person to search out other literature ,concepts and studies to develop a world view .

Joseph is a Biblical historic figure living in a historic place at a time with other historic figures .


It's possible, not historically provable though which is why it's called religion and not history.



The Bible is a historic document itself that can be corroborated with other historic documents


Now you are being presumptuous, the only historically verifiable things in the Bible are things involving other cultures like Persia and Babylon, barely anything is historical in that book, Jews do not believe in it historically for the most part, only Christian literalists would call it history and some ultra fundamentalist Jews, but they are a minority and most consider the literal interpretation as foolish.



. How much or little trust you put into those documents is up to anyone reading them or studying them. Lets face it, if its someone studying a document then they could notice details missed by someone who only read the thing once or has been told by someone else .

I think the OP picked up on something that a lot of people would agree on ,that runs contrary to what the RCC says .


The funny thing is that Christians think using a protestant Bible that removed several books makes them better Christians than the relatively hated RCC.

Yet when the Bible was Canonized it was by a more corrupt Roman Church than today's so by denying the validity of Catholicism they unwittingly deny the validity of the NT, and the Old by removing books, which is blasphemy.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix


The funny thing is that Christians think using a protestant Bible that removed several books makes them better Christians than the relatively hated RCC.
haters will hate . And the books that are not in the standard bible can be read and studied .In fact I encourage that if you want to know the context for the NT writers then you have to look at them because there are quotes from them and you can get a better understanding of the mindset of the NT writers .
Jewish religious books vary and I dont think all of them could or should be included into the cannon . The Bible is just a collection of writings and different bibles have different books .




Now you are being presumptuous, the only historically verifiable things in the Bible are things involving other cultures like Persia and Babylon, barely anything is historical in that book, Jews do not believe in it historically for the most part, only Christian literalists would call it history and some ultra fundamentalist Jews, but they are a minority and most consider the literal interpretation as foolish
That is why literal translations are not all that great imo . I don't think you can put the Bible into a box like that because there are all kinds of genera involved in its creation . Just as it took many writers over many years to bring about its present form ,its not a one mans or one groups creation . Its not just the Babylonians or the Persians that have data points in it .Have you heard of Rome ? How about Egypt . Check out the table of nations in Genesis . Just like its not a science book ,its not a history book but it does give a context as to what the writers thought at that time in history .




It's possible, not historically provable though which is why it's called religion and not history.
Someone writing today on the history of medicine reads all ancient documents to get a feel for what was thought of and practiced in history . Its not like science had a peer review journal back then . Oh and even ancient historians didn't get it completely correct back in their day .




There is one religion, and within the scripture of this religion one man only who says this is true and that faith alone, i. e. without works is salvation, Paul. Jesus did not teach this, James and Peter reputiated it and Paul was neither apostle, prophet or someone who knew Jesus. I would not count on that being true, faith without works is dead, not true faith and will not be what saves you
Its only the blood of Jesus Christ that saves us and it sure doesn't come from any works we might like to put on God that He some how owes us salvation because we did this or that .True faith is the operative word and because it requires us to be true with God it can produce the fruit spoken of in scripture that even Paul mentions . He uses the metaphor called Love .




I would suggest a different shrink then. Although are you sure the doc was lying
I am absolute sure he was lying and I never said I was crazy . My problem was not eating at the time that my GP was concerned about . I went 2 weeks without food . No big deal as I started eating and am fine now . It was a culmination of a bunch of things happening in my life at the time . very stressful stuff .



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 05:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix


The funny thing is that Christians think using a protestant Bible that removed several books makes them better Christians than the relatively hated RCC.
haters will hate . And the books that are not in the standard bible can be read and studied .In fact I encourage that if you want to know the context for the NT writers then you have to look at them because there are quotes from them and you can get a better understanding of the mindset of the NT writers .
Jewish religious books vary and I dont think all of them could or should be included into the cannon . The Bible is just a collection of writings and different bibles have different books .




Now you are being presumptuous, the only historically verifiable things in the Bible are things involving other cultures like Persia and Babylon, barely anything is historical in that book, Jews do not believe in it historically for the most part, only Christian literalists would call it history and some ultra fundamentalist Jews, but they are a minority and most consider the literal interpretation as foolish
That is why literal translations are not all that great imo . I don't think you can put the Bible into a box like that because there are all kinds of genera involved in its creation . Just as it took many writers over many years to bring about its present form ,its not a one mans or one groups creation . Its not just the Babylonians or the Persians that have data points in it .Have you heard of Rome ? How about Egypt . Check out the table of nations in Genesis . Just like its not a science book ,its not a history book but it does give a context as to what the writers thought at that time in history .


What is Rome? Egypt? No, never heard of it.

Seriously I wasn't aware I was supposed to list every foreign culture to make my point, which is that the historical aspects of the Bible are either not about Israelites but foreign nations LIKE Babylon and Persia.

Egyptian history has no part in the Bible, they don't even mention the pyramids which would be a first for anyone who was there in the ancient world, or the identity of the Pharoah and probably they never were even enslaved in Egypt in the first place, that is fiction written in Babylon and probably why slavery is introduced into the story, to say "It happened before, Yahweh will save us again if you worship him."






It's possible, not historically provable though which is why it's called religion and not history.
Someone writing today on the history of medicine reads all ancient documents to get a feel for what was thought of and practiced in history . Its not like science had a peer review journal back then . Oh and even ancient historians didn't get it completely correct back in their day .




There is one religion, and within the scripture of this religion one man only who says this is true and that faith alone, i. e. without works is salvation, Paul. Jesus did not teach this, James and Peter reputiated it and Paul was neither apostle, prophet or someone who knew Jesus. I would not count on that being true, faith without works is dead, not true faith and will not be what saves you
Its only the blood of Jesus Christ that saves us


How so? Because you think so?

Jesus didn't say anything of the sort, neither did the apostles, just crazy ass hypocrite and liar Saul, whose epistles are nonsense and lead many astray now and then. 2 Peter even says as much. In fact that whole epistle is meant to be a polemic against Paul, who is revealed at the end of much criticism to be the subject of the letter, albeit subtly, and with the lone expression of brother Paul has not a kind word to say about him.

James also repudiates this nonsense theology saying vein man, do you need to be told, faith without works is dead.

The blood of Christ is not going to save anyone, it doesn't even make sense.



and it sure doesn't come from any works we might like to put on God that He some how owes us salvation because we did this or that .True faith is the operative word and because it requires us to be true with God it can produce the fruit spoken of in scripture that even Paul mentions . He uses the metaphor called Love .




I would suggest a different shrink then. Although are you sure the doc was lying
I am absolute sure he was lying and I never said I was crazy . My problem was not eating at the time that my GP was concerned about . I went 2 weeks without food . No big deal as I started eating and am fine now . It was a culmination of a bunch of things happening in my life at the time . very stressful stuff



Yeah I have trouble eating too, no appetite. I take vitamins just to keep some nutrients in my body and eat a pretty ascetic diet, but sometimes I will be so hungry and unable to eat. I don't get it at all.

I am perfectly healthy though, according to every blood test and exam I've had, but I think I am going to have to start eating meat. I think I can't eat because I want meat but don't want to eat it, it's hard not eating meat. Eggs and v8 juice are a big part of my diet but I am missing something, amino acids maybe?

Anyway, blood of Christ, that is what you believe, I am cool with that if it works for you, I am just staunchly against Pauline theology personally, I believe that our life and good or evil deeds determine your destination after life.

I don't see a difference between benefitting from human sacrifice and vicarious atonement, someone else paying for my sins who didn't say it was his purpose just doesn't make sense. Hitler gets to go to heaven if he dies believing not Jesus but Paul?

Yeah right. Maybe if Jesus said "I came to be killed to ransom you from hell" I'd consider it.



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix


""Egyptian history has no part in the Bible, they don't even mention the pyramids which would be a first for anyone who was there in the ancient world""

A study of the Pyramids in ancient documents would make for a interesting thread .A simple google search does not seem to give much by other cultures . I guess they have theirs and Babylon has its Tower . The Bible does not claim to be a exhaustive work of most of the material within it But if you wanted to know about the Hebrews and the Israelite history and religion its your best source .It is also a good source for early Christianity .

"" Anyway, blood of Christ, that is what you believe, I am cool with that if it works for you, I am just staunchly against Pauline theology personally, I believe that our life and good or evil deeds determine your destination after life.""

My problem with your theory is that how do we know how much . Some use prayer beads and the like but what if they missed it by one bead .Oh and I think that Faith without works is dead . Its like believing but never acting on that belief .Claiming to be truthful while telling lies .Turning the other cheek while secretly seeking revenge .

""I don't see a difference between benefitting from human sacrifice and vicarious atonement, someone else paying for my sins who didn't say it was his purpose just doesn't make sense""

Jesus mentioned that He came to seek and save that which was lost .John 3:16 is a well known verse that has a promise of eternal life .The Bible is quite clear , keep the law and live . break any of the laws and you die . Its such a precarious situation that man is in .If you had a lot of money you could do a lot of good works with it .How fair would it be for a poor person that has no money .Seeing giving is a mater of the heart then the poor mans one deed can be worth all of the rich mans money .

""Yeah right. Maybe if Jesus said "I came to be killed to ransom you from hell" I'd consider it.""

Maybe you should try and figure out why God raised Him from the dead . Sometime taking a backward approach to figuring things out can actually be enlightening .

Oh I don't think I could live without my meat . A nice chunk of moose meat is very good for the body .I like stews best of all .



posted on Jan, 14 2017 @ 10:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix


""Egyptian history has no part in the Bible, they don't even mention the pyramids which would be a first for anyone who was there in the ancient world""

A study of the Pyramids in ancient documents would make for a interesting thread .A simple google search does not seem to give much by other cultures . I guess they have theirs and Babylon has its Tower . The Bible does not claim to be a exhaustive work of most of the material within it But if you wanted to know about the Hebrews and the Israelite history and religion its your best source .It is also a good source for early Christianity .

"" Anyway, blood of Christ, that is what you believe, I am cool with that if it works for you, I am just staunchly against Pauline theology personally, I believe that our life and good or evil deeds determine your destination after life.""

My problem with your theory is that how do we know how much . Some use prayer beads and the like but what if they missed it by one bead .Oh and I think that Faith without works is dead . Its like believing but never acting on that belief .Claiming to be truthful while telling lies .Turning the other cheek while secretly seeking revenge .

""I don't see a difference between benefitting from human sacrifice and vicarious atonement, someone else paying for my sins who didn't say it was his purpose just doesn't make sense""

Jesus mentioned that He came to seek and save that which was lost .John 3:16 is a well known verse that has a promise of eternal life .The Bible is quite clear , keep the law and live . break any of the laws and you die .


The Bible is far from clear on this issue.

Paul says faith alone is salvation, the law is dead, allow yourself to be circumcised and Christ will be of no benefit, the law is a curse.

He is the only one to say that Jesus died for your sins. His death has literally nothing to do with getting people to heaven because he didn't even die. He was seen three days later.

Also, I challenge you to find Jesus preaching about salvation, he uses the word a few times but not in the salvation equals going to heaven sense of the false apostle.

No. Jesus was a teacher. To say his death, not his words or deeds of charity to show us how to live righteously are void because his death covers the sins of believers is to spit on his cause. You really think that someones death is more beneficial than their teachings, that this honors Christ?

He died because everyone dies. He was a man, his blood has nothing to do with going to heaven at all. He was a Prophet of Israel who taught people righteousness, that salvation is even a goal is selfish self preservation.

It shows a lack of faith if anything. A lack in faith of God's mercy is all it is, you want to escape hell but guess what? Jews don't believe in hell, it's a Greek concept inserted into the New Testament called hades.

It's only purpose... to make you think you need to listen to a religion founded on spiritual extortion in order to avoid hell. A scare tactic.

Meanwhile, benefiting from the sacrifice of a human is human sacrifice, the foundation of Pauline theology.

As Peter said, it leads men astray, Paul's letters do, so don't think that is not a warning to stay the hell away from Paul because it is, that it is in the Bible that Paul leads people astray, but no other author in the NT, should tell you something. Early Catholic Priests and Christians came from the illiterate and uneducated classes, so don't think they knew what they were doing, they were under pressure to create a New Testament and did a half assed job using the epistle rather than stories about the apostles is pure Jewish bias, Paul was openly hateful towards Jews and was therefore given priority.

Jewish Nazarenes and Ebionites were the first Christian disciples and rejected as apostate Saul/Paul. I am not making this up it's in Church history except they expect you to believe that the RCC was God's true Church and the Jews who founded it were heretics.

Yeah right.



Its such a precarious situation that man is in .If you had a lot of money you could do a lot of good works with it .How fair would it be for a poor person that has no money .Seeing giving is a mater of the heart then the poor mans one deed can be worth all of the rich mans money .

""Yeah right. Maybe if Jesus said "I came to be killed to ransom you from hell" I'd consider it.""

Maybe you should try and figure out why God raised Him from the dead . Sometime taking a backward approach to figuring things out can actually be enlightening .

Oh I don't think I could live without my meat . A nice chunk of moose meat is very good for the body .I like stews best of all .



Let me just state emphatically.

I do not believe in virgin birth or godmen being ressurected from the dead, that would make God a plagiarist.

I accept the Gospels as spiritual truths told in the fashion of allegorical myths.

Virgin Birth, a euphemism for being filled with the spirit and born again.

Resurrection for death to the material world only to be born again as a spiritual person.

Ascension is similar to Nirvana, the highest concept in spirituality, experiencing heaven in a moment of meditative transcendence.

We are the ones supposed to be born again/virgin born, meaning not from sex, through the Spirit.

We die, to sin, ressurect to righteousness, and ascend to heaven.

If you can figure out how to do this, you have figured out what the Gospels are trying to teach.

Or you can read the rambling nonsense Paul wrote and exist in a state of confusion, thinking the point of the Gospels is explained in them, even though Paul didn't know anything in them and never met Jesus.

Sounds like you are in the middle tbh. You don't accept Paul's faith without works theology but don't quite get the spiritual concepts of ressurection and ascension.

Not at all your fault because Christianity doesn't teach the actually beneficial philosophy of the Gospels and insists on treating it as literal history.

Give it some thought, what makes more sense, that we should emulate Christ, or benefit from his death?

One actually cancels the other so you kind of have to choose between Paul and Jesus, there is no room for compromise as the two theologies are opposed, in every way possible.



posted on Jan, 15 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix

Johns gospel chapter 3 is a important chapter to try and understand how this salvation actually works .Jesus is speaking directly to a teacher who is confused about this new birth that happens on excepting Him as savior . Joh 3:9 Nicodemus asked him, "How can that be?"
Joh 3:10 Jesus answered him, "You're a teacher of Israel, and you can't understand this?
Joh 3:11 Truly, I tell you with certainty, we know what we're talking about, and we testify about what we've seen. Yet you people do not accept our testimony.
Joh 3:12 If I have told you people about earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things?
Joh 3:13 "No one has gone up to heaven except the one who came down from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven.
Joh 3:14 Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
Joh 3:15 so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.
For God So Loved the World
Joh 3:16 "For this is how God loved the world: He gave his unique Son so that everyone who believes in him might not be lost but have eternal life.

Earlier in John , John the baptist is brought into the gospel . The Testimony of John the Baptist
Joh 1:19 This was John's testimony when the Jews sent priests and descendants of Levi to him from Jerusalem to ask him, "Who are you?"
Joh 1:24 Now those men had been sent from the Pharisees.
Joh 1:25 They asked him, "Why, then, are you baptizing if you are not the Messiah, or Elijah, or the Prophet?"
Joh 1:26 John answered them, "I am baptizing with water, but among you stands a man whom you do not know,
Joh 1:27 the one who is coming after me, whose sandal straps I am not worthy to untie."

Joh 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!
Joh 1:30 This is the one about whom I said, 'After me comes a man who ranks above me, because he existed before me.'
Joh 1:31 I didn't recognize him, but I came baptizing with water so that he might be revealed to Israel."
Joh 1:32 John also testified, "I saw the Spirit coming down from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him.
Joh 1:33 I didn't recognize him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, 'The person on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.'
Joh 1:34 I have seen this and have testified that this is the Son of God."

""Paul says faith alone is salvation, the law is dead, allow yourself to be circumcised and Christ will be of no benefit, the law is a curse. ""

That is because no one can keep the law perfectly . Under the law we are condemned . But under Grace there is no condemnation .Salvation is a free gift offered to all . If it wasn't a free gift then we would have to work to gain our salvation from the penalty of the law .

"" he didn't even die. He was seen three days later. "" because God raised him from the dead . That is the resurrection that is the foundation of the Christian faith to be believed .Rom 10:9 If you declare with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

That is also pictured in Christian Baptism with the death burial and resurrection into a new life of the believer .

A early concept of salvation is put into practice and celebrated is the Passover .Its when the angel of death passed over anyone who took the blood of the Passover lamb and applied it over the door of their house . John the Baptist calls Jesus the lamb of God .This connection needs to be studied and factored in to who Jesus was .

"".Meanwhile, benefiting from the sacrifice of a human is human sacrifice, the foundation of Pauline theology."" Israelite religion did not have human sacrifice but other religions around them did .Abraham in acting out the sacrifice of his unique son and God stopping him is a important part to the story overall . Same deal with the serpent in the wilderness . There are a ton of pictures that make up a large Mosaic of Gods plan . The more pieces you put to the picture the more resolution you get to the overall picture .

"" Paul leads people astray, but no other author in the NT, should tell you something. Early Catholic Priests and Christians came from the illiterate and uneducated classes"" Not sure how you get that they didn't read teach and listen to one another . Even in Qumran they were writing and studying and thinking about this kind of stuff .Then you have the many synagogue's specifically for biblical studies .

""you to believe that the RCC was God's true Church and the Jews who founded it were heretics. "" No that is not what I believe . I believe that no church can call themselves "the true Church" The true church is made up of independent believers .A cuhrch is a possiblity as it only needs two or more to come together in the name of Jesus to constitute a Church .

I gather from your statements that you may be a Gnostic and I am fine with that , its your free will to do so .I on the other hand look at it from a different perspective Main stream Christianity has its issues as well as the RCC .No one is going to get away with anything and we will all have to give a account .



posted on Jan, 15 2017 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

I am just going to be blunt.

Jesus is not a human sacrifice whose death was for your sins. He never said it so it is not debatable. You want to draw me into a conversation with you about the benefits of vicarious atonement which I already told you I don't believe in so at least you could stop trying to convince me of something I consider foolishness.

Further, every religion is gnostic. There never existed a religion called Gnosticism and I consider myself Gnostic but not by your definition. Whatever you think it means I guarantee that you and I define it differently.
.

All religions being equally valid with the exception of Pauline theology and not true Nazarenes of the Way, and an unbiased knowledge based approach to life AND honesty about religious hypocrites like Paul, not blind faith, is my definition.

If you want to believe a man who never said so himself came to earth to die for everyone who says they believe PAUL, go ahead.

Don't waste your time trying to sell me on something I once believed and through study found out was false and a lie, it insults my intelligence.

You care about saving your soul from hell, otherwise you would not need vicarious atonement and would have faith that God isn't a jerk who sends good people to hell for not being Christians.

Save it. It's human selfish self preservation to think that salvation is dependent upon some man dying. Take responsibility for your sins and stop pretending Jesus and Paul taught the same thing, it only means you need to read the book again because they didn't.



posted on Jan, 15 2017 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix




If you want to believe a man who never said so himself came to earth to die for everyone who says they believe PAUL, go ahead.
The majority of scripture I quoted above was not by Paul .I could have grabbed other authors to corroborate what I believe but at the end of the day , Paul is consistently exploring and saying the same thing .Pauls letters are part of the cannon . Pick and choose what you want .Martin Luther at one point it is said that he tore the book of James out of his bible .He struggled like a lot of people do in trying to work out the seemingly conflict between Grace and works .



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 06:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: Krazysh0t




Either Joseph is the biggest beta male I've ever seen or the Bible is full of #.
Or maybe just maybe a real angel of the Lord appeared to him and explained it out. Tell me . what would you do or say if a real angel of God appeared to you and said something ?

Well that's a good question. First I'd check to make sure I wasn't hallucinating. Then after confirming my reality, I'd want to run some tests to make sure this angel is what it really says it is. Then I'd probably question its motives. Then I'd ask for some direct evidence of it being an angel. If all of that checks out then I'd think about listening to its message. Though I'm not too keen on bowing down to something just because it is more powerful than me.



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t




First I'd check to make sure I wasn't hallucinating. Then after confirming my reality, I'd want to run some tests to make sure this angel is what it really says it is. Then I'd probably question its motives. Then I'd ask for some direct evidence of it being an angel. If all of that checks out then I'd think about listening to its message. Though I'm not too keen on bowing down to something just because it is more powerful than me.
Now this is where it gets tricky .Do you appeal to the scientific community about the unseen realm ,or paranormal issues ? Do your answers lay within metaphysics ?


Though I'm not too keen on bowing down to something just because it is more powerful than me.
A quick reading of scripture would show you that you do not bow down to these entities and I would not be comfortable as well ,although for probably different reasons .



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
Now this is where it gets tricky .Do you appeal to the scientific community about the unseen realm ,or paranormal issues ? Do your answers lay within metaphysics ?

If the being can exist to the point that I can detect it with my physical senses then I can use the physical sciences to define and categorize it.

A quick reading of scripture would show you that you do not bow down to these entities and I would not be comfortable as well ,although for probably different reasons .

Worship, bow down. I just don't want to give away my freedoms because something appears more powerful than me. Wouldn't want to start a cargo cult or anything.



posted on Jan, 16 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

In the case of Joseph he seen it and heard it and understood it but held it inside him . I am sure that Mary and him did talk about it and even Elizabeth who was pregnant had a similar story to share with the couple .According to the Bible narrative .




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join