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 Conspiracy of the 'other' Gospel

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38Would that be a concept similar to the tartarus/abyss ideology which is also found in early gnostic writings?
Re- yours on my dispute with you on the doctrinal concept of hell…

I prefer not to compound the path by the creation of dead-ends. Gnostic writings do not pre-date the DSS, which is the crux of my statement. If you wish to use those which rely heavily on the Nag Hammadi findings to prove your Christian faith, then you would find yourself open to a plethora of contradictions that you would not wish to be met with.

On the issue of no doubt since you are confused as to what I ask, I provide your original statement:

No doubt. We must be tried by fire--something which I didn't realize until it happened to me.
My question then should seem explanatory for you in that if there is “no doubt” what constitutes same in your mind since “no” in this case, would mean that there is zero, zilch, nada, nein, non, doubt. In other words, your choice of language dares to speak for everyone, when in fact it is only your position that is represented, and as such, it cannot speak for the majority much less the whole.


Certainly not--my belief is grounded and backed by evidence that can only be undeniable to me, personally—
And then you have to weigh this against those who believe in something other than your belief and who can also state as did you, that theirs is also backed and grounded by evidence. The point of this exercise here is to show that statements such as these

We are all born forsaking Jesus--none of us are born free of 'sin'--we are born to a world in which God is not apparent to our limited perception.
cannot be justified on the whole and are intended to claim that which is not proprietary, as is evident in your acknowledgement that your statement is not back by undeniable evidence. Therefore, you should not be masking a personal claim as one of universal thinking.



Christian teachings are often a muddle in the midst of those seeking to overcome something which all forms of that religion inherently deny--which is duality. And duality is directly related the concept which has been deformed into legalism--centered around man's idea of what 'sin' is.
And this has what exactly to do with supporting your initial claim of?

We are all born forsaking Jesus--none of us are born free of 'sin'--we are born to a world in which God is not apparent to our limited perception.




posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
I prefer not to compound the path by the creation of dead-ends.
No, it would seem your preference lies in attempting to 'compound the path' by engaging in circular arguments and assumptions. Something which I prefer not to do.


Gnostic writings do not pre-date the DSS, which is the crux of my statement. If you wish to use those which rely heavily on the Nag Hammadi findings to prove your Christian faith,
Who said I was wishing to use the Nag Hammadi to prove something which I don't even subscribe to, in the first place? All I did was ask if that's what you were referring to.
And as far as 'proving my christian faith' as you put it--
#1 I am not required to prove anything to you, in the area of things such as faith and beliefs--nor would I expect anyone else to prove something that is unprovable in the sense of what mankind considers 'proof.'
#2 My faith is not something that fits neatly into the cloistered suppression which most call the 'christian faith.' Obviously you have not taken note of my statements elsewhere on this board that I am not a 'christian.' To assume anyone who believes in Messiah is a christian is only testament to a pre-formed opinion on your part, also called a 'prejudice.'


then you would find yourself open to a plethora of contradictions that you would not wish to be met with.
I have no problem with opening myself up to anything you might throw at me--as long as you're not accusing me of having ideologies which I do not actually subscribe to. I can meet any perceived contradictions with logical exposition based solely in the canonized scriptures--which would clearly demonstrate there is no contradiction in what I hold to be true in regard to what the bible says. Not just support of my own chosen opinions, but support of my understandings of what the bible teaches, which can be easily seen when the veils of personal beliefs are set aside.

The only thing is, I hope you brought your lunch.




In other words, your choice of language dares to speak for everyone, when in fact it is only your position that is represented, and as such, it cannot speak for the majority much less the whole.
No it doesn't. To 'speak for everyone' is to profess that my opinion is everyone's opinion. I didn't say it was my opinion that we are all going to be tried by fire--I understand that, indeed, is the case. Opinions do not change inevitabilities.


Therefore, you should not be masking a personal claim as one of universal thinking.
I am not masking a 'personal claim' as one that is 'universal thinking.' I am saying that what I understand to be true, as evidenced by what has happened to me, myself--things which only I can test the veracity of--is a principle that does, in fact, apply to every soul--whether or not they think, believe, doubt, or scorn my understanding or my experience.

By the same token, what's the difference between you saying that, because the majority of people may not have come to this understanding that I have, that it is therefore not valid--according to your own thinking?

Does the absence of a certain knowledge or experience that one person has, but that another does not, preclude the possibility of it being an inevitability?

Just because I haven't died yet, although others certainly have--but no one living can say for sure what happens past the point of what is reported by those who have had NDE's--does that mean that the event that we call 'death' is not going to happen to me, eventually, no matter what?

I'm pretty sure that you are not yet able to understand what I mean when I say that my perspective on things is not typical of most of the population at this present time--I see the world from a slightly broader angle than most people do--yet there are others who see (or have seen) with a much broader view than I am currently capable of. But there is one thing that applies to all of our perspectives--they can all become wider, just as they could also become narrower (although that's not often the case). And what some see now will eventually be seen by all, and eventually all will be seen and understood.

How do I know? I just do. Proof only comes with the sight. That's just the way it is.



posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween


Christian teachings are often a muddle in the midst of those seeking to overcome something which all forms of that religion inherently deny--which is duality. And duality is directly related the concept which has been deformed into legalism--centered around man's idea of what 'sin' is.
And this has what exactly to do with supporting your initial claim of?

We are all born forsaking Jesus--none of us are born free of 'sin'--we are born to a world in which God is not apparent to our limited perception.



Figure it out--I can't do it for you.

If you really want to understand what I mean, you can. If you just want to debate for the sake of promoting differing points of view simply because they differ, I'm not interested. I don't need to debate my point in order to substantiate it or disprove it, in my own understanding. I've done that, at great length, long before this thread in regard to this subject. I started this thread for that purpose, for sure--but not for myself.


df1

posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 02:19 PM
link   
It seems to me that you are saying that God leads you to what you need to read and hear with some of things in the appropriate scripture and while other things are not in scripture at all. This seems to escape those that are trying to nitpick and parse your words or perhaps they want to impose a particular belief system others. I haven't posted much as I have no desire to debate or convince anyone to believe any particular religous doctrine, but I feel that I have understood what you are saying from your first post.
.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38No, it would seem your preference lies in attempting to 'compound the path' by engaging in circular arguments and assumptions.
What exactly is circular about it, save for your assertion that it is? I repeat more precisely: your statement that hell is one based on Christian theology (re: your post no 1696113), does not pre-date that of the texts from Nag Hammadi. My statement therefore can only be misconstrued to be circular or anything but a direct refutation of your claim by someone intent on obfuscation. So---I await your true attention to this fact and dismiss your claim as being off on the beaten path.


Who said I was wishing to use the Nag Hammadi to prove something which I don't even subscribe to, in the first place?
Indeed not I. But if you are suggesting here that you will deliberately deny that which is now in evidence so as not to harm your case, then that tells me and all readers that you are disingenuous and will advance only that which you wish to believe. Now! Considering that your statement as to Christian belief in hell has been reduced to rubble by the mere mention of Nag Hammadi, I am going to complicate life for you even further and take you back thousands of years prior to the nag Hammadi text and tell you that the Egyptians spoke of a fiery underworld.

Therefore, I await an arguable response from you now on both the DSS and the Egyptian belief.


All I did was ask if that's what you were referring to.
You asked no such thing.


#1 I am not required to prove anything to you, in the area of things such as faith and beliefs--nor would I expect anyone else to prove something that is unprovable in the sense of what mankind considers 'proof’
I see, you just expect that whatever you wish to say is to be taken as fact, such as: Do you see what I'm saying, now? He died for a world that had not even one believer in what He was about to do. It is not correct to say He only died for believers, when there was no such thing at the time. The world did not know, did not believe, but yet He gave Himself for the world, anyway. There is no proof that he died for anyone, yet you offer this non-provable tidbit based on what you hold to be true, and not what mankind holds to be true.


#2 My faith is not something that fits neatly into the cloistered suppression which most call the 'christian faith.' Obviously you have not taken note of my statements elsewhere on this board that I am not a 'christian.' To assume anyone who believes in Messiah is a christian is only testament to a pre-formed opinion on your part, also called a 'prejudice.'
No, I have not followed all of your posts, just as I have followed no one else’s, and if I have accused you of being or assumed you to be a Christian, I apologize to you, and if I have not, then you must apologize to me for leaping to conclusions.



then you would find yourself open to a plethora of contradictions that you would not wish to be met with.

I have no problem with opening myself up to anything you might throw at me--as long as you're not accusing me of having ideologies which I do not actually subscribe to. I can meet any perceived contradictions with logical exposition based solely in the canonized scriptures--which would clearly demonstrate there is no contradiction in what I hold to be true in regard to what the bible says. Not just support of my own chosen opinions, but support of my understandings of what the bible teaches, which can be easily seen when the veils of personal beliefs are set aside.
Then please do answer to those contradictions, I have laid them out twice now. I welcome any scripture; apocrypha; heretical text you wish to offer, I know them all.


I am not masking a 'personal claim' as one that is 'universal thinking.' I am saying that what I understand to be true,
You have not asked anything of the sort, refer the above and any and all posts as made by yourself which is delivered as an argument for your case.


By the same token, what's the difference between you saying that, because the majority of people may not have come to this understanding that I have, that it is therefore not valid--according to your own thinking?
I can back my claims, and I have broadly offered to you the opportunity to show just what you know, but instead you mince words. So I refer you back to my original claim to you about DSS, and if and when you decide you wish to challenge me on that, I will show you that your statement was…wrong!


Does the absence of a certain knowledge or experience that one person has, but that another does not, preclude the possibility of it being an inevitability?
Yes! You cannot argue that which you have no knowledge of. And as for your death sequence, it means nothing in the grand scheme of the living, doesn’t it?


I'm pretty sure that you are not yet able to understand what I mean when I say that my perspective on things is not typical of most of the population at this present time--I see the world from a slightly broader angle than most people do
Don’t be too sure of anything, I might very well be Samuel resurrect.


How do I know? I just do. Proof only comes with the sight. That's just the way it is.
True enough! Yet my 20.20 proof is obviously different to yours.



[edit on 9/21/05 by SomewhereinBetween]



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween


Christian teachings are often a muddle in the midst of those seeking to overcome something which all forms of that religion inherently deny--which is duality. And duality is directly related the concept which has been deformed into legalism--centered around man's idea of what 'sin' is.
And this has what exactly to do with supporting your initial claim of?

We are all born forsaking Jesus--none of us are born free of 'sin'--we are born to a world in which God is not apparent to our limited perception.
No ma'am, you wrote those puzzling statements, you explain 'em.




Figure it out--I can't do it for you.

If you really want to understand what I mean, you can. If you just want to debate for the sake of promoting differing points of view simply because they differ, I'm not interested. I don't need to debate my point in order to substantiate it or disprove it, in my own understanding. I've done that, at great length, long before this thread in regard to this subject. I started this thread for that purpose, for sure--but not for myself.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 11:54 PM
link   
You are onto something, but err in believing hell does not exist. Jesus said it does!

Moreover, plenty of bad stuff happens here. One thing we know about reality is that bad stuff happens, and therefore God allows it to happen. The idea hell is not there because God is so good is just theologically inconsistent with reality and the Bible.

But here's where you are right.

God has a bigger plan, one that swallows up hell and fulfills the grand promises and assurances of "working all things according to the good pleasure of His will" which is "that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth."

This is part of Paul's gospel and most preachers and Christians do not grasp it.

But the error is to think hell cannot be real and that purpose be fully accomplished at the same time. I could explain it, but part of understanding the plan is realizing that time is not something that restricts God. He is present at all points in time, and is able to affect changes at all points in time, even in the past.



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by randman
You are onto something, but err in believing hell does not exist. Jesus said it does!
I have no idea who this 'brother" of yours is. If it is me, then understand that in order to believe in Jesus, one must believe that he was as it is said that he was. I do not believe what is said. Which means that whatever is attributed to having been said by him is inconsequential.

There is also no hell, save for that which is fabricated in the mind of man. Just as there is no God who created all humans and decided that he would favour only one lineage of same. My God as creator cannot be such a hatemonger of his own children.


Moreover, plenty of bad stuff happens here. One thing we know about reality is that bad stuff happens, and therefore God allows it to happen. The idea hell is not there because God is so good is just theologically inconsistent with reality and the Bible.
Yes plenty of bad stuff happens, and man is narcissistic enough to believe that when he does right, he does so because he follows the path of god, but when he does wrong, it is the devils fault. In short, man does nothing of his own accord.


This is part of Paul's gospel and most preachers and Christians do not grasp it.
Paul? You mean the Roman killer who had a dream? We all have dreams.


But the error is to think hell cannot be real and that purpose be fully accomplished at the same time. I could explain it,...
I doubt that you can.



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 12:36 AM
link   
To say that hell doesn't exist and that all will be saved would be to disregard the essence of free will.



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by randman
You are onto something, but err in believing hell does not exist. Jesus said it does!
Indeed it does--but not as an eternal place of fiery torture--only as the state of death--temporary for all, in the long run.


The idea hell is not there because God is so good is just theologically inconsistent with reality and the Bible.
It's not that God is 'so good'--it is more precisely, that only He is good, and even the evil He does to man is, in the end, for man's own good. That would be, primarily, physical death. We view it as something to dread, but without death, there could be no life. Death is the doorway to life.



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Forgiven
To say that hell doesn't exist and that all will be saved would be to disregard the essence of free will.


Assuming there were such a things as free will, disregarding hell would not diminish it in the least.

From a biblical perspective, there's good reason to view hell as a metaphor for permanent death. In other words, those who are not saved will not be resurrected. When they die, that's it. The judgement is about deciding who to leave dead and who to resurrect.

From a non-Biblical perspective, there are any number of reasons that free will is not inconsistent with the absence of hell.



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   

At the time of the crucifixion, how many believers were there? None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.


Wrong!

Lazarus was a believer. So was his family as they watched him walk from the tomb.
All the Apostles were believers (Matthew 14)
Blessed Mother Mary was a believer.
The Centurian was a believer (Matthew 8)
Joseph of Arimathea was a believer.
The crowds of people who were healed, and even the evil spirits were believers (Mark 3.11)

Sorry...I don't buy your diatribe



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by BostonBill99

At the time of the crucifixion, how many believers were there? None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.


Wrong!

Lazarus was a believer. So was his family as they watched him walk from the tomb.
All the Apostles were believers (Matthew 14)
Blessed Mother Mary was a believer.
The Centurian was a believer (Matthew 8)
Joseph of Arimathea was a believer.
The crowds of people who were healed, and even the evil spirits were believers (Mark 3.11)

Sorry...I don't buy your diatribe



Do you at least realize that we only have the words of anonymous authors who wrote in the late 1st/early 2nd century that any of these individuals were witnesses?



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

Originally posted by queenannie38No, it would seem your preference lies in attempting to 'compound the path' by engaging in circular arguments and assumptions.
What exactly is circular about it, save for your assertion that it is?
Because it's going nowhere and there is no obvious objective related to the intended topic of this thread--other than what seems very much like your desire to take an off-shoot comment between me and another poster and run with it--into an oblivion of babble which already hurts my head. And since I'm not a dingbat--thinking doesn't hurt my head, but pointless illogical debates do.

As to the rest of your post, I'm going to decline particpating in the muddle--call it what you like--I know what it is.



posted on Sep, 22 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   
Well, Here I Go back into left again....

No, Hell's doors are not open Yet (So No Hell)

Remember The great white throne judgement ???????

Remember that Hell was first made for 1 person (Right/ Wrong)

The Doors of Hell will not be Open till God Judges Everyone at the Great white throne get together OK...
Everyone that died in Sin will be Judge after Satan is judge and there body's and soul's will be put back together and they will get on their last one way flight to Hell. (With doors wide open)



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfdarby
No, Hell's doors are not open Yet (So No Hell)

'Hell' as defined 'grave' already exists:

For the grave (sheol) cannot praise thee, death can not celebrate thee: they that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth.
--Isaiah 38:18 KJV

For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell (sheol), and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.
--Deuteronomy 32:22 KJV

*Please note: in the first verse, the word 'sheol' is translated as 'grave', and in the second verse, the word 'sheol' is translated as 'hell.'*

Sheol: 'hades or the world of the dead (as if a subterranian retreat), including its accessories and inmates.'

'Hell' as in the abyss already exists:

And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit (abussos) and a great chain in his hand.
--Revelation 20:1 KJV

And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, Legion: because many devils were entered into him. And they besought him that he would not command them to go out into the deep (abussos).
--Luke 8:30-31 KJV

Abussos: depthless, that is, (specifically), (infernal) “abyss”: - deep, (bottomless) pit.

'Hell' as in gehenna (or the Valley of Himmon) already exists:

And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell (Geenna).
--Matthew 5:29 KJV

Geenna: Of Hebrew origin ; valley of (the son of) Hinnom; gehenna (or Ge-Hinnom), a valley of Jerusalem, used (figuratively--see below) as a name for the place (or state) of everlasting punishment.


Reference:Dictionary.com
Figuratively:

    1. Based on or making use of figures of speech; metaphorical: figurative language.
    2. Containing many figures of speech; ornate.

  1. Represented by a figure or resemblance; symbolic or emblematic.
  2. Of or relating to artistic representation by means of animal or human figures.



Remember that Hell was first made for 1 person (Right/ Wrong)
Wrong.

For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell (Tartaros), and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
--2 Peter 2:4 KJV

Tartaros: (the deepest abyss of Hades); to incarcerate in eternal torment: - cast down to hell.


Everyone that died in Sin will be Judge after Satan is judge and there body's and soul's will be put back together and they will get on their last one way flight to Hell. (With doors wide open)
Not quite.

#1 Satan has already been judged:

Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
--John 12:31 KJV
Now is the time for the judgment of this world to begin. Now will the ruler of this world be thrown out.
--John 12:31 ISV

Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
--John 16:11 KJV
and of judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.
--John 16:11 ISV

#2 Works will be judged--bodies will be tried by fire--souls will be saved:

Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
--1 Corinthians 3:13-15 KJV
the workmanship of each person will become evident, for the day will show what it is, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person's work. If what a person has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If his work is burned up, he will suffer loss. However, he himself will be saved, but it will be like going through fire.
--1 Corinthians 3:13-15 ISV

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
--Revelation 20:12-13 KJV
I saw the dead, both unimportant and important, standing in front of the throne, and books were open. Another book was opened-the Book of Life. The dead were judged according to their works, as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and all were judged according to their works.
--Revelation 20:12-13 ISV

#3 No one will be going to hell (hades) because the grave (hades) will be destroyed last of all, after they have delivered up the souls:

And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
--Revelation 20:13-14 KJV
The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and all were judged according to their works. Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. (This is the second death-the lake of fire.)
--Revelation 20:13-14 ISV

The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
--1 Corinthians 15:26 KJV
The last enemy to be done away with is death,
--1 Corinthians 15:26 ISV



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 06:47 AM
link   
What my opinion is that there is no hell and this is all created to control and tame man, in the early days it was a 'hell' of a lot easier to get people to listen to you when you said that God told you. It is the greatest manipulation tool ever created. Jesus did exist and he done great things and did he not say this to his fellow man 'So you shall do this and more' The message that god was trying to send us through Jesus is that he sent his only son down and sacrificed him proving that death is only the beginning and all shall meet the glory of god.
The lord is the alpha and the omega, the up and the down, the hot and the cold, so how can he condemn something that He is.
You are never apart from god because you are a - part of God.
and I shall also convey to you that when Eve ate the apple and got ejected from paradise that was a blessing becuase how would you know you are in paradise when that is all there is. You cannot know how hot without cold, love would not be love if there was no hate. there would be no goodness of evil did not exist.
Which is why ALL souls go to heaven.
God loves mankind the way a mother loves her child. Would a mother condemn her child to an eternity of punishment.

Just like Jesus came to earth to spread his message that all are equal and loved in the eyes of God.

God also sent us messengers on the other side of the spectrum. for example Adolf Hitler to teach us how wrong we can be and how much we ALLOWED to happen before it was deemed as too much.

The only hell is not knowing that God has unconditional love for everyone. We cannot imagine a God like this, So man invented a Satan for God to battle with, thinking that the lord solves problems the way we do.

This is all my opinion, because I do believe we do not have to fear God to become good, helpful people, we should be good cos we want to.
Thankyou



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Right on, jagzz!!!

Your words are so true and sweet, I could just kiss you!



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Thankyou, much appreciated, although I have read ATS for a while I have only just joined and am looking forward to share my thoughts more frequently.



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 11:48 AM
link   
And I certainly look forward to reading them!




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join