"Prove Christ exists" orders judge

Originally posted by queenannie38

Originally posted by LCKob
(I guess my joke fell flat?

Not at all! I got it!

... I was referring to Jesus "giving ski-lifts" ... and that humans invented both .... errrrrrrr ... I should stick to my day job ....

I knew that!

Maybe it was my reciprocal funny that wasn't funny....

Ah ... its the one thing I find disorienting about the internet ... it lacks the added dimension of additional communications cues ... I find that sometimes I am blindsided or left wondering at a particular message, when IRL it would be obvious from the tone, or body language ... or non textual indicator.

... no in retrospect queenannie38... your post was quite good ... I merely lost the context of it.

Sam

[edit on 4-1-2006 by LCKob]

Non-believers will always be sign-seekers.

Only the Holy Spirit can give a person the knowledge to know that Jesus Christ is the only Son of God and He lives and waits on His Fathers go ahead to return.

I feel very sorry for those who reject His great gift and persecute His followers.:shk:

Intelearthling:

Non-believers will always be sign-seekers.

LCKob:

Well from my perspective being Agnostic, I think I would differ with you in that I would say Non-believers tend to be truth seekers.

Intelearthling:

Only the Holy Spirit can give a person the knowledge to know that Jesus Christ is the only Son of God and He lives and waits on His Fathers go ahead to return.

LCKob:

"Only the Holy Spirit can give a person the knowledge..."

"I feel very sorry for those who reject His great gift ..."

My grandmother was a Buddhist and she was a very good person, honest, loyal, extremely hardworking and she loved her children dearly ... she gave her all and sacrificed much for her children ... yet, it is common assumption by many christians (per doctrine and dogma) that she, by not being christian is in hell or pergatory ... if for no other reason, I would not endorse an entity or a religion/denomination that would condemn my grandmother to such a fate, despite the fact that she was in many ways a much better person than many christians I personally know.




[edit on 5-1-2006 by LCKob]

The Holy Spirit cares nothing for religious persuasion.

To seek truth is to seek the Spirit--it is truly the Spirit of Truth.

Buddhist grandmas know and many others know, too. Semantics are details.

Originally posted by queenannie38
This isn't about religion, people

yes it is, the priest was sued for publicly opposing the book calling jesus not real, so again whats the point? this is a case of religious persecution, not a justified legal case.

this abuse of popular disposition to easily believe things law is total oppression bs that has no place in a free society, especially if questioning another persons doubt can lead to this nonsense.

it certainly would be thrown out of court here.

[edit on 5-1-2006 by namehere]

Originally posted by namehere

Originally posted by queenannie38
This isn't about religion, people

yes it is, the priest was sued for publicly opposing the book calling jesus not real, so again whats the point? this is a case of religious persecution, not a justified legal case.

The priest is being sued for voicing his opinion as if it were fact--based on a difference of opinion. It's not religious persecution, it is the persecution of the rational thinking man (in general).

Example? Keep reading:

this abuse of popular disposition to easily believe things law is total oppression bs that has no place in a free society, especially if questioning another persons doubt can lead to this nonsense.

'Denouncing' is not the same as 'questioning.'

it certainly would be thrown out of court here.

I doubt it seriously. It is defamation of character.

Originally posted by OneGodJesus
www.timesonline.co.uk...

This is going to be good. If the vatican cannot prove using catholic documents from thier libraries to lend credibility to what we as Christians believe and know to be true from an experiential stand point then where does that leave us? If they do prove it, will a militant atheist believe anyway. It is like a sick joke you already know the punchline to but cannot stop listening to just because it is that morbid. NO FOAM AT THE MOUTH ATHEIST is going to believe no matter what you say. See what I am saying here? It is really funny.

All the Father in the article has to do is read the book "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel and the case is laid out for him right there! (And a convincing one at that!)

Originally posted by LCKob

LCKob: If belief is the criteria then, yes I think you are right.

You think? Wow - miraculous.

The world has an over-active imagination, it's beautiful when you really think about it though. Contrast is so much better than comparison, comparison demands a loser. Contrast never loses, contrast simply exists without question.

LCKob: Actually I like both concepts ... they have different functions for me ... as in Contrast the difference vs. Compare features ...

vs.? Interesting concept - care to explain it to me?

I don't know about you, but I believe in Jesus. I can feel him in me, I can see him in others.

LCKob: Then I am happy that you are happy in such a way that does not impose on others.

Why would happiness impose itself on others? Doesn't happiness want to share itself?

Rock, paper, scissors used to be one of my favourite games as a child. But how does paper beat rock? It simply covers it up. The rock is unscathed, unless you start adding fire to the mix - then you get a lake of fire.

LCKob: I always liked that game ... and have come to think of it as multipurpose learning game ... one that primes the child for more complex scenarios that require quick thinking, problem solving and a degree of analysis ... in fact, in general I think of games as such tools ... merely entertaining .

Still, it's entertaining to note that you can't beat a rock without covering it up.

I never really liked the idea of volcanoes. I much prefer mountains.

LCKob: I like volcanoes ... but then I am biased ... I live in Hawaii hahahah... but seriously, while I would not want to live near an active one, I do appreciate the implications of a "dynamic and growing" process" in this regard I like Volcanoes like Scientific Methodology ... both grow and change.

Jesus climbed every mountain for me, he gave me ski-lifts, in the end I reached out to him and he helped me up.

LCKob: ... hahaha ... and all this time, I thought mankind gave you ski lifts ... and skis for that matter.

I wonder where mankind would have gotten metal without it having existed prior to mankind. I wonder how mankind would have developed fingers had life not existed in the first place. I wonder where mankind would have developed the idea of 'skis' were it not for the existence of mountains. I wonder...

[edit on 5-1-2006 by Simon_the_byron]

LCKob: If belief is the criteria then, yes I think you are right.

You think? Wow - miraculous.

LCKob: Yes, I think, and you believe ... no miracle, well actually for you yes miracles.

The world has an over-active imagination, it's beautiful when you really think about it though. Contrast is so much better than comparison, comparison demands a loser. Contrast never loses, contrast simply exists without question.

LCKob: Actually I like both concepts ... they have different functions for me ... as in Contrast the difference vs. Compare features ...

vs.? Interesting concept - care to explain it to me?

LCKob: The two terms can have similar meanings based upon usage the "vs" was put in to show two examples usages that is all.

I don't know about you, but I believe in Jesus. I can feel him in me, I can see him in others.

LCKob: Then I am happy that you are happy in such a way that does not impose on others.

Why would happiness impose itself on others? Doesn't happiness want to share itself?

LCKob: Happiness in itself does no imposition, it is mankind that can impose ... and as for "happiness sharing itself" semantics aside, happiness is often defined differently for different individuals, and thus not always intrinsically "transferrable"

Rock, paper, scissors used to be one of my favourite games as a child. But how does paper beat rock? It simply covers it up. The rock is unscathed, unless you start adding fire to the mix - then you get a lake of fire.

LCKob: I always liked that game ... and have come to think of it as multipurpose learning game ... one that primes the child for more complex scenarios that require quick thinking, problem solving and a degree of analysis ... in fact, in general I think of games as such tools ... merely entertaining .

Still, it's entertaining to note that you can't beat a rock without covering it up.

LCKob: I suppose it is entertaining, but keep in mind that the "rock" rule ... could have just as easily been "hammer" smashes rock or a symbolic gesture to denote erosion "wearing" the rock away ... in other words, just an arbitrary and convenient if inefficient metaphor, very easily replacable within the scope and practice of the game.

I never really liked the idea of volcanoes. I much prefer mountains.

LCKob: I like volcanoes ... but then I am biased ... I live in Hawaii hahahah... but seriously, while I would not want to live near an active one, I do appreciate the implications of a "dynamic and growing" process" in this regard I like Volcanoes like Scientific Methodology ... both grow and change.



Jesus climbed every mountain for me, he gave me ski-lifts, in the end I reached out to him and he helped me up.

LCKob: ... hahaha ... and all this time, I thought mankind gave you ski lifts ... and skis for that matter.

I wonder where mankind would have gotten metal without it having existed prior to mankind. I wonder how mankind would have developed fingers had life not existed in the first place. I wonder where mankind would have developed the idea of 'skis' were it not for the existence of mountains. I wonder...

LCKob: Simply put, mankind can and will utilize what is supplied by nature, given the capacity of his or her mind ... be it metal or some other substance.
As you imply perhaps your god supplied this metal? It could be, I am not adverse the the notion of a creator ... but personally I find little difference in "I don't know" and "god did it" ... well, little difference besides intent I suppose, for you obviously have faith in your answer, and I have and support a methodology that searches for answers ... its not complete, nor does it claim to be ... it merely claims to seek the truth and that is after all the ideal behind Scientific Methodology.

So, as I have stated above, I by no means begrudge you your happiness, and in this I am happy for you, so long as your happiness is not derived from some sort of imposition on others.









[edit on 5-1-2006 by LCKob]

Originally posted by queenannie38

Methinks you are impersonating a boat motor...

OK, THAT was the best and funniest comment I've seen here in a long time! And, perfectly descriptive.

QueenAnnie!

Originally posted by Intelearthling
Non-believers will always be sign-seekers.

Only the Holy Spirit can give a person the knowledge to know that Jesus Christ is the only Son of God and He lives and waits on His Fathers go ahead to return.

I feel very sorry for those who reject His great gift and persecute His followers.:shk:

what if god told me personally that im exempt?
what if god told me that were all his children?
what if god told me the answer is inside each and everyone of us?
what if god told me all we need is pure unconditional love, the same love he has for us?


oh yea i always thought jesus was waiting for the 3rd building of the temple to return, but i could be wrong.

Originally posted by plague
what if god told me personally that im exempt?
what if god told me that were all his children?
what if god told me the answer is inside each and everyone of us?
what if god told me all we need is pure unconditional love, the same love he has for us?

I would say 'oh, yeah?'
You'd say 'Yeah.'
I'd then say 'Yeah, well, He told me exactly the same thing! Far out!'

'Exempt' is for everyone, did He mention that? (unless I'm misunderstanding exempt?)

oh yea i always thought jesus was waiting for the 3rd building of the temple to return, but i could be wrong.

It's been under construction for the last 2000 years!

Originally posted by Al Davison

Originally posted by queenannie38

Methinks you are impersonating a boat motor...

OK, THAT was the best and funniest comment I've seen here in a long time! And, perfectly descriptive.

QueenAnnie!

Is this supposed to be insulting? First off, I did address some of the substance of what you said "queen" by the dictionary and secondly you said early on in your first comments I chose to ignore because they weren't substantive:

"First of all, Nazareth's non-existence, according to the approximate accepted time frame of Christ's birth, disqualifies the entire first point of evidence.

Secondly, the cited passage from Antiquities of the Jews is one that has been almost, but not officially, declared by the scholastic experts to be a certain forgery--and so the second point of evidence is also rendered null and void."

This seems to me (and correct me if I'm wrong in my assessment of your statement) this is conjecture and non-substantive on your part. If you want to call me out for something I said in regards to what I ignored as opinionated and "not officially declared" then that is grossly unfair to say I'm "doing something with a motor boat" or whatever. You may think yourself clever in regards to insults but I do not appreciate it in the least. AND do not appreciate those who would jump on the "let's kick the guy because its fun" bandwagon (AL) .

yes we are all exempt. the truth is though, there is nothing to be exempt from. its not the path you take thats important but how you conducted yourself on that path. was your heart pure? were your intentions pure?
to become a christian would do me no good. its not in my heart, and god would see right through this. my love is for god and he has given me a path to walk. its upsetting though to hear people say that christ is the only way end all be all, and your going to be thrown in the pit if you dont believe. this is just not true. and most of the people you get this from god probably has not spoken to. the info that spews out there mouths is very degrading towards god and his works and they often dont see the error in there own religion and ways . and when you do point this out they often have a loophole to use. now im not saying all christians are bad or that christianity is bad. the teachings of jesus are worth alot if you learn from them. the whole bible it self has alot of good stories that you can learn from. but most christians are looking for salvation not gods love. they look for a promise land or a new body or a ticket to heaven. i however am satisfied with gods love. he is my parent and i treat him as such. we may not always see eye to eye and yes sometimes i get angry with god, but i still love him unconditionally. just as he has always loved me.

[edit on 5-1-2006 by plague]

the poster a few post back really struck a chord with me. According to some doctrine, it's true that his Buddhist grandmother would be burning in hell even though she devoted her life to making the world around her better. It seems odd that an all-knowing all-powerful deity would require regular worship in order for us lowly beings to ascend into paradise after we shuffle off this mortal coil. We love our children without expecting them to worship us daily, only hoping the best for them. Wouldn't we be ecstatic if our children just lived every day being the best that they can be, and making the world a better place? Wouldn't that be better than worship? Wouldn't that be like the highest form of worship?

The worst part is, I feel like just posting this is blasphemous, and I'm heading for the 5th circle of hell just for thinking about this. And I'm not even a devout Christian!

Why doesn't Father Righi just ask them "what time is it? "

The clocks around the world are all in uniSON, based on the life and death of Jesus Christ.

If they claim that the time on their watch and the date on their calendar is correct, then doesn't that PROVE the existence of Christ ?

I know it sounds simple, but whoever choses to denounce the existence of Jesus Christ must also denounce the time of day.

How can such a case be heard ? and when, if their measurement of time is nonexistant and/or incorrect and unsynchronized with the rest of the world?

Originally posted by OneGodJesus
Is this supposed to be insulting?

It was an observation regarding your demeanor on this thread.

First off, I did address some of the substance of what you said "queen" by the dictionary

I can read the dictionary myself. I do it all the time. I post it as reference a lot.
I thought it was pretty funny that you did that.

and secondly you said early on in your first comments I chose to ignore because they weren't substantive:

Originally posted by queenannie38 "First of all, Nazareth's non-existence, according to the approximate accepted time frame of Christ's birth, disqualifies the entire first point of evidence.

Secondly, the cited passage from Antiquities of the Jews is one that has been almost, but not officially, declared by the scholastic experts to be a certain forgery--and so the second point of evidence is also rendered null and void."

This seems to me (and correct me if I'm wrong in my assessment of your statement) this is conjecture and non-substantive on your part.

Then please consider yourself corrected. I do not make statements by conjecture nor do I prattle on about things that might be considered 'non-substantive.' I am not beyond making a mistake, certainly--and when I do it is because I made a mistake, BUT not because I employ my vocal chords without employing my brain.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.belowtopsecret.com...

then that is grossly unfair to say I'm "doing something with a motor boat" or whatever.

You postings give the impression that you are trolling.

It is not unfair to say that if it is something you choose to ignore as far as courtesy to the rest of the forum. It is unfair to others to allow it to go unsaid.

You may think yourself clever in regards to insults but I do not appreciate it in the least.

I am sorry you did not 'appreciate it.' I was not trying to insult you or 'think myself clever.' I am clever and there is no need to showcase it by insulting you, or anyone else.

what QueenAnnie said...she's right, you know.

it's not nice - it's even against "the rules" - to pick on somebody but, when you come out swinging and making wild and generally false statements about the beliefs of others, that makes you the attacker/aggressor. You can say anything you want about your own beliefs and you can question and challenge the beliefs of others if you do it in a sincere and respectful way. When you jump out and say things like "atheism is about hate" then you just set yourself up for a good ol' smack-down. I'm sure some atheist somewhere in the world probably does actually hate religion but the ones that I've met and talked with really just don't spend any time thinking about religion unless they are provoked. It's kinda hard to hate something that you rarely think about it - hate is an active thing. Ignoring, which is what I think most atheists do in regard to religion, is just a passive thing.

So, the question here is: are you actively pursuing atheists? if so, why? if not, why make statements that seem to be attacks? That's the "trolling" thing. Are you trying to provoke? why would you do that? That, too, is not very nice or very constructive.

If a man honors the time of day that the rest of the world functions by, then he honors the life and death of Christ, right ?? ??

Originally posted by Submersible
If a man honors the time of day that the rest of the world functions by, then he honors the life and death of Christ, right ?? ??

no i honor that time because this is the time i was given since birth. i can not go into work 3 hours late because i choose to follow my own time.
sorry man this was a very rediculous thing to post.