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.

 

The Absolute Power of Christianity!

page: 57
7
<< 54  55  56    58  59  60 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by passengername
I believe the 144,000 is talking about the reps of the 12 tribes of isreal that go in the rapture.


Thank you, passengername. I may have over-explained.


Originally posted by passengername
as far as the all men who didn't know women, this is purely a thing brought on by paul who was "undesirable" to say the least.


Hm? Paul didn't write Revelation.


Originally posted by passengername
He attempted to become a pharisee to try to get a jewish woman to marry him.


Where's that at?


Originally posted by passengername
well, I guess I'll tackle it. no one says you can't!


Right now I'm in a city. If I were to go outside and start talking to people about God, how long would it take until I get told to "move along" for loitering or disturbing the peace when all I'm doing is talking to people? (not shouting or thumping)


Originally posted by passengername
the whole idea is to keep church and state seperate.


Who's idea? The 'church' is the people, not a building or clergy organizing a service. The 'state' too is the people, not a governor's mansion nor senators. Do people who work for the state have to be separate from the people who go to church or could they be one in the same?


Originally posted by passengername
no one says that you as a private citizen can't rant and rave all you want to about all us sinners going to hell.


Er, that's counterproductive I think. How do I spread the good news about how God loves people, wants people to talk to Him, and how to get the gift of eternal life without 'violating' law or causing a 'disturbance'?


Originally posted by passengername
we just don't want OUR funds(your's included i'm afraid) to pay for it.


Fair enough I think. I don't need money to talk.




posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham
Your case is somewhat unique in that you believe you received direct communication from god. Most of us have not, nor do we have any reason to believe your experience was what you think it was.


I don't know if it's that unique really. Probably here at ATS, yes. This place isn't exactly a magnet for people who are trying to serve God. With all the skepticism, paranoia, conspiracy, and talk about how screwed up Christianity is, I'm sure there are people who don't see this as a beneficial use of time. I disagree though, I think it is a great use of time. Much is challenged and much is learned (at least in my case) and though there are those who will argue otherwise, I get to sit among my fellow skeptics.


Originally posted by spamandham
For the rest of us, how do we choose which printed warnings to consider? We have the Bible, the Qu'ran, the Indian Vedas, the Book of Mormon, Egyptian writings, etc.


I've read 3 of the 5 (and parts of the other 2 I suspect), but know this is a trip we all have to take. Again, the statement above assumes is there's no God to check with. If a person can ask God, one can get answers.


Originally posted by spamandham
You've rejected the straightforward natural explanations for your experience out of hand. You have motivation to accept it, but not a reason.


I've tested the 'straightforward natural explanations' and found them to be neither straightforward nor natural. I had tried to talk myself out of God to get what I wanted. This was a dumb thing for me to do for 2 reasons: 1.) The things that I "wanted" were the very things that were dragging me down physically, emotionally and spiritually and 2.) Who fights with God? It's a given that it's a lost battle. It wasn't until I could say "put my wants aside, lead me to what I should be" that I got my 'nudge' that I was out of line. Likewise, when I was on the right track, I'd been accelerated, given the resources I needed to grow.


Originally posted by spamandham

Originally posted by saint4God
God is still here, it can be checked.


Uh huh.


I'm confident you're not going to believe me when I say "I understand where you're coming from", but will say it anyway because it is how I feel. I cannot reach through the screen and show you my life on a projector, as much as I'd like to.


Originally posted by spamandham
You didn't explain why even though god wants everyone saved (1 Tim. 2:3-6),


God does want everyone to be saved. He loves us all. The sin is what cannot stay in His sight. Therefore if we are attached to our sin, when that sin gets thrown, so do we. Like the ball in a ball-and-chain being thrown.


Originally posted by spamandham
and everyone has been given to Jesus to save as he sees fit (John 3:35),


Also true, Jesus can save whom He sees fit. He is the high priest that pleads our case to the judge (Hebrews 4:14)


Originally posted by spamandham
and he gave himself as a ransom for all men (1 Tim, again), that these do not equate to universal salvation.


The difference is what God wants and what He did. What He wants is everyone to be saved. What He did, was set up a mechanism by which we can choose to come to Him to gain eternal life. This is why Christ bothered speaking. If all he had to do was die and everyone would be saved, the 4 gospels would be a 1/2 page each. It was necessary for Him to explain how the process works and why. Inclusive in that is the popular John 3:16 as well as many, many other verses. Parables, miracles, teachings, they're all instances of where mankind can choose Him. For example, when the rich man approached Jesus and said he did great works, Jesus tells him to sell everything and follow him if he wanted eternal life. The rich man turned away. God gives us that choice, else there's no reason for us to have the ability to choose, think and reason. We'd be mindless drones or puppets performing a program. Some of us probably feel that way, but you and I are spiritually aware that there's much more going on here than just work, eat, sleep, death and taxes.


Originally posted by spamandham
All you did was play dictionary games and say that just because he wants it doesn't make it his will, and to further insert into the text your interpretation that 'ransom for all' really mean 'ransom for some'. The straightforward read of these passages supports universalism.


What benefit to me is it for me to say that Jesus didn't save everybody? How easy it would be just to go around saying "Thank God, everybody is saved!" I wouldn't have to do anything and I could go on with my life without a single care. There is still that difference though between what I want and what actually happened but it'll take more than one verse to discern that. It'll take the reading of at least 1 gospel book from start to finish. John seems to press this point best, but I like Matthew myself. Timothy was written after the gospel to reiterate the gospel and explain in more detail that which has already been written. If Jesus saved all men, why would Paul have to say anything? Why would he have to write this letter (the book of Timothy) to Timothy instructing him to not only do the same, but to set up a church of ministry?


Originally posted by spamandham
Of course, your perspective is supported by other passages. Hence the numerous Christian sects.


We're not as divided as perceived. I actually hadn't realized that myself until a few years ago. Churches I've attended: Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, Protestant, Catholic, and I'm sure a few others I can't recall at the moment. I tended to follow the teacher. When the teacher left, so did I if I didn't think the new one was 'as good'. Consequently, that left me without going to church most of the time then going to another when I found a good teacher. Fortunately I'm going to one with a strong leadership as a whole, and if it seems lacking, I'm going to be responsible enough to step up and provide whatever assistance is needed.


Originally posted by spamandham
It can be it isn't intended to literally be 144,000, but rather represents a large perfection of perfections (12=perfect number). This is where a literal reading causes problems, but a symbolic reading doesn't.


There's more to it than that i think, but to toss everything in the air and say "it's all symbolic" means there is no truth, which is not what it says. So, my advice is to either accept what it says or do not. To put it on the shelf next to Humpty Dumpty provides no value.


Originally posted by spamandham
In Rev. 7 it states those in the white robes are the ones who came out of great tribulation (not "the" great tribulation BTW). Rev.6 speaks of those with the white robes as the ones who had been slain for the word of god, and Rev 14. refers to the 144,000 as those who were the 'firstfruits' - a reference back to sacrifice of the Old Testament, which gives context that they are those that were martyred, and are the same group thus spoken of in Rev. 6 and 7.


I don't know how it can be seen these two separate groups as being mashed into one. I also feel sorry for anyone who believes only male virgins will have eternal life. Jesus did not preach to just male virgins. One was a prostitute, another a tax-collector (not considered 'pure' by any stretch), some possessed by demons, a woman with multiple husbands, etc.


[edit on 21-9-2005 by saint4God]



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
This place isn't exactly a magnet for people who are trying to serve God.


I don't know about that. ATS seems to have a much higher fraction of fundamentalist types than most secular internet forums. But, this is just an ad hoc observation.


Originally posted by saint4God
I've read 3 of the 5 (and parts of the other 2 I suspect), but know this is a trip we all have to take. Again, the statement above assumes is there's no God to check with. If a person can ask God, one can get answers.


The ranks of Muslims, Buhddists, alienists, etc. are filled with people who have had experiences like yours. How are the vast majority of the rest of us who have not had such an experience to judge? Realize that the greater fraction of the world has asked god for guidance, myself included in my more credulous days.


Originally posted by saint4God
I've tested the 'straightforward natural explanations' and found them to be neither straightforward nor natural. I had tried to talk myself out of God to get what I wanted.


If you had night terrors or temporal lobe epilepsy, you would not be able to talk yourself out of it. Those experiences seems as real as day to those who have them. If you are the skeptic you claim to be, you would realize that these two possibilities can not be eliminated. Based on things you've said in the past, I suspect night terrors as opposed to temporal lobe epilepsy. Were you awakened from sleep for these experiences?


Originally posted by saint4God
I cannot reach through the screen and show you my life on a projector, as much as I'd like to.


Even if you could, I wouldn't be convinced. See above.


Originally posted by saint4God
Therefore if we are attached to our sin, when that sin gets thrown, so do we. Like the ball in a ball-and-chain being thrown.


Since those who are saved still sin, they are just as "attached to sin" as the rest of us. Prisons have a higher percentage of faithful than the general population, so you might even argue the faithful are more attached to sin than the rest of us.


Originally posted by saint4God
The difference is what God wants and what He did. What He wants is everyone to be saved.


An omnipotent being that sets things up different from what he wants? Sorry, there's no way to make sense of that. Your just repeating the party line at this point.


Originally posted by saint4God
What He did, was set up a mechanism by which we can choose to come to Him to gain eternal life. This is why Christ bothered speaking.


Surely you understand that when the basic facts can not even be established, no meaningful choice can be made. Belief is not a matter of choice, and if you don't believe, all other "choices" are meaningless.

I can not force myself to believe in your blatantly obvious mythology any more than I can force myself to believe in ghosts and aliens, Zeus or Valhalla. Until you can demonstrate that beliefs are the result of decisions rather than observations, your argument holds no water.


Originally posted by saint4God
If all he had to do was die and everyone would be saved, the 4 gospels would be a 1/2 page each.


I could say the same thing about your perspective. If faith in Jesus is all that matters, then the gospels could be a single paragraph.

Although the gospels do talk about salvation, they concentrate heavily on messages about how to live a moral life as well.


Originally posted by saint4God
What benefit to me is it for me to say that Jesus didn't save everybody?


It resolves the concept of justice in your mind. People have a hard time accepting that life isn't fair. It's much easier to accept that it is all fair in some grander scheme. Would you be happy to learn that Hitler is in heaven in fellowship with those he brutally murdered?

But even if you personally would be happy that everyone were saved, the church wouldn't be, and the church is the one spreading the delusion.


Originally posted by saint4God
There's more to it than that i think, but to toss everything in the air and say "it's all symbolic" means there is no truth, which is not what it says.


Not necessarily. It means that you need to understand the symbolism to unlock the message. If you are taking 144,000 literally, you are in trouble not just because the number is so small, but also because Revelations listing of the 12 tribes conflicts with Genesis. The tribe of Dan has been replaced by the tribe of Manasses. No explanation for this is given anywhere in the Bible. But from a symbolic perspective, the tribes of Revelation refer to the 12 apostles and not the 12 actual tribes, where Judas (Dan) was replaced by Matthias (Manasses).


Originally posted by saint4God
To put it on the shelf next to Humpty Dumpty provides no value.


I disagree. The mythological perspective of the Bible opens a whole new world in understanding ancient culture. It's invaluable from that perspective.


Originally posted by saint4God
I don't know how it can be seen these two separate groups as being mashed into one.


I thought I just showed how.


Originally posted by saint4God
I also feel sorry for anyone who believes only male virgins will have eternal life.


Few probably believe that, but that is what you must conclude from a nonsymbolic perspective on Revelation.

[edit on 21-9-2005 by spamandham]



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham
I don't know about that. ATS seems to have a much higher fraction of fundamentalist types than most secular internet forums. But, this is just an ad hoc observation.


Perhaps. I haven't been to a lot of internet forums, but know a good number of Christians who weren't interested in visiting the site because of the reasons I'd listed.


Originally posted by spamandham
The ranks of Muslims, Buhddists, alienists, etc. are filled with people who have had experiences like yours.


I'd not heard them. I have read a few alienists if I understand the meaning correctly. I don't see a Biblical conflict with that though, and in fact can cite a passage or two that would suggest the presence of extra-terrestrial life. Again, not related to God or eternity so I don't see any point of discussing that here.


Originally posted by spamandham
How are the vast majority of the rest of us who have not had such an experience to judge?


By going and getting it.


Originally posted by spamandham
Realize that the greater fraction of the world has asked god for guidance, myself included in my more credulous days.


Did you get it for the time that you needed it? Are you still getting it?


Originally posted by spamandham
If you had night terrors or temporal lobe epilepsy,


Hehe, oh boy. Maybe meeting people who have had these conditions would change your mind when trying to compare. Wow that group called the Christians are really powerful to suck up all those night terror/temporal lobe epilepsy people by the millions
. Anyhow, I wasn't part of a Christian organization at the time, so there goes that theory too.


Originally posted by spamandham
you would not be able to talk yourself out of it. Those experiences seems as real as day to those who have them. If you are the skeptic you claim to be, you would realize that these two possibilities can not be eliminated. Based on things you've said in the past, I suspect night terrors as opposed to temporal lobe epilepsy. Were you awakened from sleep for these experiences?


Depends on the experience.


Originally posted by spamandham
Even if you could, I wouldn't be convinced. See above.


Fair enough. Then regrettably, I think I'm wasting my time talking about anything.


Originally posted by spamandham
Since those who are saved still sin, they are just as "attached to sin" as the rest of us. Prisons have a higher percentage of faithful than the general population, so you might even argue the faithful are more attached to sin than the rest of us.


Jesus, gave way of repenting. Of course none of this info is new, it seems you've read a good bit of scripture and therefore my answers are predictable unless tied to my experience, which you would also refuse even if they were seen.


Originally posted by spamandham
An omnipotent being that sets things up different from what he wants? Sorry, there's no way to make sense of that. Your just repeating the party line at this point.


We've always been able to choose. God did not take that gift back.


Originally posted by spamandham
Surely you understand that when the basic facts can not even be established, no meaningful choice can be made.


That's a personal inhibition.


Originally posted by spamandham
Belief is not a matter of choice, and if you don't believe, all other "choices" are meaningless.


Sorry you feel that way. Sounds depressing.


Originally posted by spamandham
I can not force myself to believe in your blatantly obvious mythology any more than I can force myself to believe in ghosts and aliens, Zeus or Valhalla. Until you can demonstrate that beliefs are the result of decisions rather than observations, your argument holds no water.


As you've said above, it would not matter anyway. A great example was the psychosis theory you'd presented. When not believing it to be psychosis, success was acheived. When believing experience was psychosis, nothing was advanced and there are consequences to being wrong.


Originally posted by spamandham
I could say the same thing about your perspective. If faith in Jesus is all that matters, then the gospels could be a single paragraph.


Yeah, if the people 'got it' the first time I'd agree. But they didn't get it. Jesus has to explain, and explain, and re-explain. Not only that but had to demonstrate (through miracles) and counter cynics. It's not hard to die, it's hard to change someone's way of thinking.


Originally posted by spamandham
Although the gospels do talk about salvation, they concentrate heavily on messages about how to live a moral life as well.


Why would that matter if we're all saved, hm?


Originally posted by spamandham
It resolves the concept of justice in your mind. People have a hard time accepting that life isn't fair. It's much easier to accept that it is all fair in some grander scheme. Would you be happy to learn that Hitler is in heaven in fellowship with those he brutally murdered?


I don't know Hitler's heart and cannot say what judgement God has given him, nor does it matter to you and me. A vengeful heart would be angry about him being there. A forgiving heart would delight in his turning from evil.


Originally posted by spamandham
But even if you personally would be happy that everyone were saved, the church wouldn't be, and the church is the one spreading the delusion.


Actually I get my information from the Book.


Originally posted by spamandham
Not necessarily. It means that you need to understand the symbolism to unlock the message. If you are taking 144,000 literally, you are in trouble not just because the number is so small, but also because Revelations listing of the 12 tribes conflicts with Genesis. The tribe of Dan has been replaced by the tribe of Manasses. No explanation for this is given anywhere in the Bible. But from a symbolic perspective, the tribes of Revelation refer to the 12 apostles and not the 12 actual tribes, where Judas (Dan) was replaced by Matthias (Manasses).


We're going in circles again.


Originally posted by spamandham
I disagree. The mythological perspective of the Bible opens a whole new world in understanding ancient culture. It's invaluable from that perspective.


Well, when you're ready to engage in a serious discussion, let me know.


Originally posted by spamandham
I thought I just showed how.


I sit corrected. If someone stuffs earplugs in their ears and keeps talking, then I could see how. It takes two to have a dialogue, else it's called a monologue.


Originally posted by spamandham
Few probably believe that, but that is what you must conclude from a nonsymbolic perspective on Revelation.


This is a witnessing account as explained in the beginning of the book. Here's a fun exercise. Go through Revelation and underline the words "look" and "saw". Now count that number. Quite a lot for symbolism, don't you think?

[edit on 21-9-2005 by saint4God]



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   

I don't see a Biblical conflict with that though, and in fact can cite a passage or two that would suggest the presence of extra-terrestrial life. Again, not related to God or eternity so I don't see any point of discussing that here.


Extra-terrestrial life not related to GOD? I need a little clarification of that statement.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by madmanacrosswater

I don't see a Biblical conflict with that though, and in fact can cite a passage or two that would suggest the presence of extra-terrestrial life. Again, not related to God or eternity so I don't see any point of discussing that here.


Extra-terrestrial life not related to GOD? I need a little clarification of that statement.


Sure thing. The likelyhood of us discoving and interviewing extra-terrestrial life within our lifetime looks very slim. Therefore to question their view on the Creator isn't really relevant to our discussion here. Whether or not these interviewed extra-terrestrials believe in a Creator or not doesn't really have much bearing on the facts either unless there are individuals here who would 'take their word' for it if they confirm a Creator.

The Bible suggests from the way I understand it that there could be extra-terrestrials, and if that's true, that some will be present in heaven. However this is how I interpret one of Jesus' parables, so certainly he could have meant people from other nations. I don't know, we'll find out when we get there.

Pray, train, study,
God bless.

[edit on 21-9-2005 by saint4God]



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 01:41 PM
link   
If I could just tack on to Saint's comment, any theorizing we could make on extraterrestrial life's beliefs on a creator would be severely human in nature. We cannot even speculate as to how an alien would think or what because we have no example. We don't know the psychology, the beliefs, etc.

So by discussing an alien's interpretation would be just another way of expressing our own opinion through a means which could never be confirmed or corroborated, and thereby is irrelevant to the discussion.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 02:33 PM
link   
yeah, bring it brother(or sister?). IF there are aliens, did God make them too? if he didn't, is there a creator that made other species? who is greater?



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by passengername
yeah, bring it brother(or sister?). IF there are aliens, did God make them too? if he didn't, is there a creator that made other species? who is greater?


If there are aliens, God would have made them, too. After all, He created everything. So who is greater? Well, how could He be greater than Himself?



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 04:25 PM
link   
so do some aliens believe in Jesus? my whole argument isn't against God but the caveaut that you must believe in Jesus to be saved. if there are aliens, how could they know about Jesus if they are upmteen lightyears away?



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Salvation for man comes from the Son of Man. I know angelic beings are held to a different standard than humans are. As to aliens, guess what? I stand by my previous statement. I have no idea, never been there, never met one, never talked theology with one, never asked them about their salvation. I cannot add any decent information to that conversation, because of those reasons I just stated.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by spamandham
The ranks of Muslims, Buhddists, alienists, etc. are filled with people who have had experiences like yours.


I'd not heard them.


Ok then, to maintain your claim of being a skeptic, you need to research to see whether or not people of other beliefs have similar experiences that confirm those beliefs.


Originally posted by saint4God
By going and getting it.


That's not very helpful. Most of go to our graves without such confirmation.


Originally posted by saint4God
Did you get it for the time that you needed it?


No.


Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by spamandham
If you had night terrors or temporal lobe epilepsy,


Anyhow, I wasn't part of a Christian organization at the time, so there goes that theory too.


People of all faiths/nonfaiths get these conditions. It is not unique to Christians. Sometimes you see angels, sometimes demons, sometimes aliens, sometimes mothmen, etc. The fact that a non-Christian would have such an experience of god telling them to go get answers from the Bible in no way diminishes the possibility of night terror or temporal lobe epilepsy as the cause. I don't get the impression you have done due diligence in investigating natural explanations for your experience or you would already know the things I'm telling you.


Originally posted by saint4God
it seems you've read a good bit of scripture and therefore my answers are predictable unless tied to my experience, which you would also refuse even if they were seen.


Of course I would refuse them even if I could see them, as I would have no reason to rule out the natural explanations. Look, we know people have such experiences, and we know they seem very real. How do we know? Because they have been induced under controlled settings, and thoroughly investigated from a scientific perspective. We even have clues as to why they happen from a neurological perspective.

So given an explanation that we know to be plausible, vs. one that we don't know to be plausible (an actual visitation from god), what is the proper conclusion?


Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by spamandham
Surely you understand that when the basic facts can not even be established, no meaningful choice can be made.


That's a personal inhibition.


Yes it is, but not one we have control over. Ask anyone why they believe, and they will ramble off a list of reasons, yourself included. The reasons may or may not seem good to a second party, but they seem good to the individual. Belief is not a choice, but an involuntary mental position driven by what your subconscious deems most plausible.

Actions are within conscious control, but not beliefs, although admittedly you can consciously control what you allow yourself to be exposed to, to some degree.


Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by spamandham
Belief is not a matter of choice, and if you don't believe, all other "choices" are meaningless.


Sorry you feel that way. Sounds depressing.


It isn't a feeling, it's a fact. Nor is it the least bit depressing.


Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by spamandham
Although the gospels do talk about salvation, they concentrate heavily on messages about how to live a moral life as well.


Why would that matter if we're all saved, hm?[/quopte]

Could it be because salvation is not what the original message was all about, but rather something tacked on later?


Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by spamandham
But even if you personally would be happy that everyone were saved, the church wouldn't be, and the church is the one spreading the delusion.


Actually I get my information from the Book.


Where did the Book come from?


The tribe of Dan has been replaced by the tribe of Manasses. No explanation for this is given anywhere in the Bible. But from a symbolic perspective, the tribes of Revelation refer to the 12 apostles and not the 12 actual tribes, where Judas (Dan) was replaced by Matthias (Manasses).



Originally posted by saint4God
We're going in circles again.


Fine then, but perhaps you could simply answer this question. Why is Manasses listed in Revelation in place of Dan?


Originally posted by spamandham
I disagree. The mythological perspective of the Bible opens a whole new world in understanding ancient culture. It's invaluable from that perspective.



Originally posted by saint4God
Well, when you're ready to engage in a serious discussion, let me know.


Uhg. You've been pleasant in the past. I didn't expect this from you.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
My bad, thought we went into a general discussion from there. I'll refer back to the "where there is life there is hope" statement, though I agree it's hard to see anyone suffer and would do all I could the help and alleviate.

Oh I didnt mind discussing it, but maybe there was a miscommunication that I supported people who kill themselves.


Originally posted by saint4God
The word doesn't bother me, he could say "you female dog!" means the same thing and am typically not alone watching tv.....After some questioning on it, I realized this so try to respect their mental space and try to kick the habit all together.


I can understand those two reasons, and I know if I watch a show with alot of swearing, over time I swear more. I think of it as a kind of way to relieve stress. Its better to let it out, than to let it build up inside. I could say "COOKIES" everytime I get mad, but it means the same to me.

About your comment on the slim chance of finding alien life, I disagree. Alien life could be as simple as bacteria, its still life.

In regards to alien life not being significant, I still don't see how you can feel that way. If you think all life was created by God, then of course so were they. Maybe they have more insight, or knowledge to share with us on that topic, among many.

And thats ignoring the possibility they might be "God".


Peace, love, empathy. Kurt Cobain

[edit on 21-9-2005 by Charlie Murphy]



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham
Ok then, to maintain your claim of being a skeptic, you need to research to see whether or not people of other beliefs have similar experiences that confirm those beliefs.


I've known (face-to-face, not boards) Wiccans, Buddhists, Hindi, Athiests, Satanists, Druidic, Agnostics (I used to be one), and I'm sure some others that I can't recall at the moment. Only representatives from one group listed above have claimed to me that they have had direct communication back and forth with their master. I believe them, having been invited to meet him myself. Sure enough, he exists. If anyone has an experience to share, I'm always interested in hearing from people from all backgrounds per above.


Originally posted by spamandham
That's not very helpful. Most of go to our graves without such confirmation.


...which is why I think it's important to get that information before going to the grave. How?



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Charlie Murphy
Oh I didnt mind discussing it, but maybe there was a miscommunication that I supported people who kill themselves.


No problem. I think we're on the same page now. Having been ex-suicidal myself, it's a topic that hits home. In alleviating suffering, I think there's a big difference between alleviating the suffering and killing a person off. When people say "I want to die", they're trying to say "I want the suffering to end". How we get the two confused I'm not certain but have my suspicions.


Originally posted by saint4God
I can understand those two reasons, and I know if I watch a show with alot of swearing, over time I swear more.


I guess I do too, but for me it's usually my friends. Even slang and catch-phrases I tend to pick up. Anger brings out the worst in me and try to avoid it at all costs.


Originally posted by saint4God
I think of it as a kind of way to relieve stress. Its better to let it out, than to let it build up inside.


I agree that build up is lethal. My recommendation would be to wait until the heart rate/blood pressure normalizes again (about 10 seconds of breathing) and say the 'meat' of what you were going to say. That might mean an argument will take a half-hour, but better that than saying regrettable things that aren't true feelings, rather rage. As I say this though, I hear it myself and must work on it.


Originally posted by saint4God
I could say "COOKIES" everytime I get mad, but it means the same to me.


For me it sounds a lot different. I could be in a minority, but I actually picture what people say. So, saying "COOKIES!" creates a pretty good image. In fact, you'd probably get a chuckle out of me (which may make the angry person even more mad) whereas when someone says "SH*T" I picture "SH*T". I have been known to cuss using the literal word. That makes my spouse especially mad. Using it in context really solidifies the image I guess. I took "Swearing in Daily Conversation" as a secondary course curriculum in my hood growing up and some of it comes back now and then. I do my best to think before speaking though and usually am successful avoiding it.


Originally posted by saint4God
About your comment on the slim chance of finding alien life, I disagree. Alien life could be as simple as bacteria, its still life.


True dat. I did a research paper on salt-consuming bacteria on Mars. Lots of fun when completed.


Originally posted by saint4God
In regards to alien life not being significant, I still don't see how you can feel that way. If you think all life was created by God, then of course so were they. Maybe they have more insight, or knowledge to share with us on that topic, among many.


I'm not saying they don't matter. Life is significant. As far as whether or not they exist though, I don't see where that has a bearing on whether or not God exists unless someone will believe when they provide proof positive.


Originally posted by saint4God
And thats ignoring the possibility they might be "God".


God is pretty clear who He is. God himself describes his thinking as "alien" to our own. However there's other things to consider, such as us being created "in his image" and all the active role he plays in our daily lives. I'd love to talk about what extra-terrestrials would think or say about God. For example, would aliens have their own resurrection account in their history or did the manage to not piss off God so much? Or, how "alien" is God to us? These discussions though I thing would warrant threads of their own since they are speculation. One of those "what if" things that a fun to talk about and daydream, but don't impact our daily lives at present.


Originally posted by saint4God
Peace, love, empathy.


And to you as well.


Originally posted by saint4God
Kurt Cobain


Speaking of suicide...


[edit on 22-9-2005 by saint4God]



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
I've known (face-to-face, not boards) Wiccans, Buddhists, Hindi, Athiests, Satanists, Druidic, Agnostics (I used to be one), and I'm sure some others that I can't recall at the moment. Only representatives from one group listed above have claimed to me that they have had direct communication back and forth with their master.


I have known all kinds as well, and have never met anyone in person who claims to have had the type of experience you've had. Shall I conclude they don't exist? If such experiences are uniformly distributed, I would expect mostly Christians to have them in the west since the west is predominantly Christian. The question then is, do people of other faiths, and do people in other parts of the world have such experiences that lead them to Budhhism, or to Islam, etc? That's the question a skeptic would try to answer, and not just from the people you've met, but with research that's readily available.


Originally posted by saint4God
I've had an EEG, CAT scan, EKG, bloodwork and various other tests. What test needs to be done to be considered sufficient?


It isn't a matter of testing, it's a matter of research. Testing is only conclusive when it shows a positive. The lack of a positive is not sufficient to eliminate these possibilities, particularly for night terrors. But even for milder cases of temporal lobe epilepsy (which are sufficient for hallucination), testing may show nothing unless you are hooked up when it happens.


Originally posted by saint4God
Surely it was my good health that caused these experiences, huh?


No, it was probably the high stress you were experienceing at the time. Stress is known to trigger night terrors.


Originally posted by saint4God
Actually, it is one we have control over. I know people who have so much faith that they don't have to see to believe.


Actions follow belief. If you are not acting as if you believe, it's because you don't believe. Very few individuals actually believe based on this. What you find are lots of people who claim to believe, and want to believe, and who are trying to make themselves believe - they believe they believe. I believe in gravity. My conscious actions demonstrate that belief without exception. How many of those who claim to have faith act consistent with that faith? "Sin" results from doubt, not from defiance. Doubt is natures way of telling you that you don't really know what you think you know. If you ever "sin" with intent, it's because you don't have the faith you claim you have. Once you realize this, you can free yourself from the Christian meme. However, the meme will forbid you from admitting it.


Originally posted by saint4God
You've mentioned that you were once faithful and are now faithless. That's a decision you've made that changed your beliefs.


That's right. One day I woke up and decided not to believe anymore.


Loss of faith (the belief that you believe really) is painful. No-one chooses to quit believing anymore than they choose to believe. Loss of belief stems from exposure to contrary evidence, just as belief stems from affirming evidence. If you want to continue to have faith, you either have to shelter yourself from other positions, or build a wall based on speculation to rationalize away all the obvious conflicts.


Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by spamandham
Where did the Book come from?


Many, many authors who have had the God experience. What's most impressive is how well they all mesh together, despite the distances of years and locations.


The book did not come from random authors, but from the leaders of the church, or confirming works of anonymous authors selected by those leaders. It should not be surprising that it meshes together (to the degree it does) for that reason. Even Paul, whose experience reads like a textbook night terror episode, did not write his letters until after he had become a church leader.

[edit on 22-9-2005 by spamandham]



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake

Stop forcing your beliefs on us



So I guess I agree, by Christians sharing the Gospel, they are, in fact, forcing their beliefs and God's will on you.



hmmm... sahring is not forcing... if i share a cake with someoen Im not focing the person to have it, Im simply saying ..." i have a cake, and I want to share it with you, do you want some?" ...

forcing would be " I have a cake, nbow open you damn mouth so i can shuv the cake in"

People get so cranky when someone talks about Christianity...what for ? whats the point? Noone seems to care if someone comes along and shares the "goddess" and the "rainbow" and the " moon rays"..or whatever else, but whne it comes to Christianity its "forcing"... heh ...go figure



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by BaastetNoir
People get so cranky when someone talks about Christianity...what for ? whats the point? Noone seems to care if someone comes along and shares the "goddess" and the "rainbow" and the " moon rays"..or whatever else, but whne it comes to Christianity its "forcing"... heh ...go figure


The goddess and rainbows and moon ray folks don't control the legislatures.

Christians are the only ones in the west attempting to use the law to force children to pray every morning in school, to force the usage of public property/money to support blatently religious displays, to comingle church and state with "faith based" government programs, to dumb society down with silly creation myths taught as "theories" etc. In other words, Christians tend to be legally obnoxious and not just socially obnoxious.

We all laugh at the Wiccans behind their backs of course, but the Wiccans don't pose a theocratic threat.



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham

Originally posted by BaastetNoir
People get so cranky when someone talks about Christianity...what for ? whats the point? Noone seems to care if someone comes along and shares the "goddess" and the "rainbow" and the " moon rays"..or whatever else, but whne it comes to Christianity its "forcing"... heh ...go figure


Christians are the only ones in the west attempting to use the law to force children to pray every morning in school, to force the usage of public property/money to support blatently religious displays, to comingle church and state with "faith based" government programs, to dumb society down with silly creation myths taught as "theories" etc. In other words, Christians tend to be legally obnoxious and not just socially obnoxious.


My husband is a Christian and hethinks all the above is crap, should not be. I know more Christiasn that do not think tha way.. ever thought that maybe, just maybe some of the people pushing for those lwas are PROTESTANTS...liek Pat Robertson and Billy Graham... and there is a big difference between a protestan and a christian, tho they are clumped together in the same bag.


We all laugh at the Wiccans behind their backs of course, but the Wiccans don't pose a theocratic threat.
I dont laugh at Wiccans, I laugh at the hypocricy of some of their members as to how Peacefull and no-judgemental they are, but than they turn around and gang up on Christians and call them dumb for believing in Christ when they themselves believe in agoddess...

But than again some of the Christians do the same, so this is a never ending circle..

Anyway, I dont see how there is a threat coming to the laws, after all the Supreme court just ruled you have to remove "under God" from the Pledge of Aliegence, yet when you go to court you have "swear to tell the truth the all thruth and nothing but the truth so help you ..." who ??? ...GOD !


and taking that swearing ( not as in cursing) is agaisnt the TRUE Christian Religion that should not even exhist in Court.



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   
For asking my question about extra-terrestrials. I just did want to confirm that the existence of such would be made by the almighty creator of this universe.




top topics



 
7
<< 54  55  56    58  59  60 >>

log in

join