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.

 

Jehovah is an Evil God!!!

page: 16
17
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by skyshow
I found this quite interesting. Jehovah, besides being angry and with murder on his mind, thus can not be the same as the New Testament deity or deities. During my earlier brainwashing days, they attempted to make me believe that they were all the same. Even Satan is one of their creations that wasn't around to war with Jehovah.


This is the way I see it. They are both the same God but the order of the age is different. In Old Testament times, the order of the age was the law. There was no room for nonsense and judgment was swift. In New Testament times (our age) we are in the age of grace. This is explained with the wheat and tares parable. The wicked (tares) will no longer be uprooted (judged) immediately but will be allowed to grow with the wheat (the righteous) until the end of this age. The law vs. grace.

The Old Testament God: It's easy to focus on his "judgment" side but just like Jesus' teachings, the Jews were to help the poor, take care of the orphans, tend to the widows, share with your neighbor, love each other, etc. If not, judgment (but warnings were always given). Much of the Old Testament also shows God's love for the people. But His order of the age was the law. And in the Torah, it shows the people specifically rallying for a law, judges, and king. They demanded it. It was never imposed. Then the promised Messiah would come and free them from this order.

The New Testament God: Now enters Jesus. He also reprimanded the people to help the poor, tend to the orphans and widows, love one another, etc. He also showed immense love for the people. But Jesus wasn't all about sugar coated love. He chastised the pharisees, overthrew the money changer's tables, cursed Israel to judgment for their apostasy, and called the Sadducees and Sanhedrin hypocrites and vipers. So we again have love but judgment and a disdain for wickedness.

I really don't see much difference other than grace and "suspended" judgment.

[edit on 1/21/2008 by AshleyD]




posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 02:27 AM
link   
my post was pointed towards everyone. Challenging beliefs is soooo 90s



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


so, sorta' the knee jerk default response for anyone who doesn't agree just as you do on religion..."atheist". I'm seeing this all over ATS, and I for one am beginning to grow sick and tired of it!

"Mind challenging sooo 90's"??? What is the 2000's by your logic, mindless and blind acceptance?



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 





This is the way I see it. They are both the same God but the order of the age is different. In Old Testament times, the order of the age was the law. There was no room for nonsense and judgment was swift. In New Testament times (our age) we are in the age of grace. This is explained with the wheat and tares parable. The wicked (tares) will no longer be uprooted (judged) immediately but will be allowed to grow with the wheat (the righteous) until the end of this age. The law vs. grace.


Interesting. Well since you provided your interpretation, here is mine: I think that humans as well as beings on planets all throughout the galaxy and universe, can incarnate, and re-incarnate. One reason humanity has not evolved yet after perhaps many cycles and attempts, is primarily due to the 10 to 20% or so of those who are the tares. They come back and turn into the Nepolean, Stalin, Hitler, and Bush's of the world. They quickly with their anti-social mental framework move up quickly in business and government to assume leadership roles having left all scruples behind. Now I think in other worlds where the beings are far more advanced than we are, and have moved beyond religious devisions and wars, and have learned how to take care of the people and basically have achieved optimal levels of efficiency, justice (fairness), and freedom. They did this when their world prince decided finally to not allow the tares to go back and grow in the fields with the wheat. This way they achieved peace and overcame their finite resources issues with population control and learned how to equally and most efficiently as possible utilize all resources while ensuring a level of freedom for the citizens to live and enjoy their lives and the planet. I believe these are many of the star travelers that have been reported in our planet's sky over thousands of years (but that's a whole other story). I believe that parable describes where we are in earth's evolution at this moment in our time. One day the tares will no longer re-incarnate (perhaps when our world prince changes once again--I believe Jehovah may have been one of them, and I definitely see that being as being one different from the more loving one of the NT--there is no way they are the same because why would god change horses in mid stream, or change his mind if he was perfect in the first place??? urgh, there are so many contradictions and unreliable data in the bible, it gets to where it's difficult to interpret or even assume to be valid), and then humanity can get on with progress and peace, and eventually become one of the star travelers as well...when that day comes, I believe much of today's religion will be obsolete and unnecessary. We will love one another, but we will do it naturally, we won't need some dogma to goad us towards that goal.

Meanwhile we are stuck in a huge rut, and we must figure a way out of it before it's too late. Remember there are more than 20,000 nuclear bombs ready to be fired off. If this happens all our progress up to now will all be erased, and it will be hundreds of thousands of years before the radiation levels come down low enough for life as we know it to resume it's evolution. Religion today is so political and globally it's very divisive and it's a spark near the powder keg as it were. Someone needs to speak out against the abuses and the tyranny, and help humanity not do itself in. If that means change in the church, then so much the more noble cause and reason to support change. Religion may not be the 100% sole reason that will behind a global, or even regional (and that due to radiation fall out becomes global so the point there is kinda' mute) nuclear war, but it most definitely has it's dirty hands in it! Hell, it's whole body is down in the mud just like a soaking rino and it's mud bath. If you don't see that, then your living under a rock.

What I am suggesting, is a start at an honest good clean effort at cleaning things up. Taking the beam out of our own eyes first, and then begin to help the other religious ideologies do the same. A significant move forward in that direction would be with an ethical review board set up to regulate religious activity and the churches.

[edit on 21-1-2008 by skyshow]



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 03:28 AM
link   


an ethical review board set up to regulate religious activity and the churches.


That's what they do in communist china. That wonderful haven for women. Where nary a female child wastes away in an orphanage with the rest of female children of china. where all is well, and female infants are never found lying in the gutter while people walk by as if she's just yesterday's trash. Cause afterall, this is a survival of the fittest scenario and women, let's face it, are low on the totem pole of the animal kingdom.

Yes, ethical. Ethical to what end is the question.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


How is India dealing with it's population explosion? As oil prices soar, and it begins to run low, how on earth are we to sustain the present global population? Why is our religions here in the west urging people to multiply? Will you enjoy watching your grandchildren fight a war over water, or go hungry?

Again, we might be comparing oranges to apples. I am not advocating a government regulatory agency. I said an IRB similar to ones at Universities that regulate research from creating an abusive and unethical scenario with a human or animal participant. This belongs on the thread I set up for that though, as this one is more about the Evil God Jehovah. I'm sure the person who set up this thread would prefer that we stick with topic, and so that is why I set up that other thread, as I find that subject to be of interest as well.

But thanks for your input and reply.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 03:37 AM
link   
These guys at university keep forgetting the female half of the population in all their theoretical survival scenarios which they proceed to spoon feed to their unwitting students, who then go forth into life thinking all we gotta do is this this and this, and all will be fine.

Yeah, if you don't mind making love to 100 year old pornos or robots.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by skyshow
 


Here's the Link:

www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 03:40 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 





These guys at university keep forgetting the female half of the population in all their theoretical survival scenarios which they proceed to spoon feed to their unwitting students, who then go forth into life thinking all we gotta do is this this and this, and all will be fine.


How so? Research generally is most interested in having fair and representative samples so that the results will generalize to the overall population as accurately as possible. This would mean roughly a 50/50 split among male and female participants...maybe you could explain a little more...

[edit on 21-1-2008 by skyshow]



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 04:28 AM
link   
All attempts to explain gods intentions or anger therewith are futile, Threrefore irrelevant. His actions as explained by historians who may be motivated or misinterpreted cannot be interpreted as fact one can only be convinced by physical proven data as asserted by "ash". Spiritual conclusions are derived from human feelings, and are the essence of the ten commandments, it feels wrong to kill someone because you wouldn't want it to happen to you and both of these portions of that sentence are parts of these laws apportioned by organized religion. further more the religions them selves are not the reason I abide by them as stated I don't feel like killing anyone!!!! With or without these laws when violations happen there seems to be a force which could be called karma, god or whatever but the universe is definately balnced I like to believe it's god that does this. Its important to remember most of today's religions seemased on the old testament so to not belive in it's recognized god is almost adebunking of most religions. GOD IS ALL OF UNIVERSAL THINGS AND NOT SOMEONES INTERPRETATION OF THEREFORE EVERYONE isRIGHT, mankind is created in his likeness therefore why are we violent and why is our opinion or interpretaions the one we kill for,we allbelieve we shouldn't BUT WE DO, GOD SHOULD BE EXPECTED TO BE NO DIFFERENT. Alien or human would have to live by certain universal truths or "laws" I just need to believe in something and the principle coincide ,for the most part, with the Christ version depicted in the bible. Any logical person can weed through the stuff put in by alternately motivated men. I have never been in aforum of any kind and this one motivated me to do so to the OP thank you and welcome me damn it!!



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 04:36 AM
link   
I should discuss the assumption that the gods ancients were refering to were alien. This has real possibities however it can't explain the spiritual aspects I touched on. I'm sleepy I don't see how ya'll do this all the time, I gonna learn to place quotes in my post then Crash. I will pick up tommorow


Wass up PoPS I know your out there



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by skyshow


How so? Research generally is most interested in having fair and representative samples so that the results will generalize to the overall population as accurately as possible. This would mean roughly a 50/50 split among male and female participants...maybe you could explain a little more...



All people are repeatedly brainwashed. You are just as much a victim as anyone else. A select number of concepts are tossed out for public consumption (this is how the population of the planet is controlled), with powerful institutiions to back them up. You make a selection and this selection colors the rest of your journey. Believe it or not, you are a victim of the mainstream. It's on the radio, the tv, the movies, in the bookstores, at college, and on the internet. It's your destiny to help the institution, you selected, to fulfill their agenda. You may not know the name of it, but it doesn't matter because the platform is very easy for you to recognize.

While in college they tell you that to solve world hunger, we need to control the population explosion. In the 70's, china tried that idea on for size. Now, they are worried because they've lost so many female childiren to sex-selective abortion and female infanticide, that whole generation of men is growing to maturity and will never have the opportunity to meet, date or marry a female.

This, my friend, is the end game of survival of the fittest scenarios: forced iuds, forced abortion and removal of most of the earth's female population. It's a shell game. What have i got in my hand over here?? ? meanwhile, the other hand is using up the resources we could use to make it possible not to kill off our youngest and most fragile members. Why aren't we making it possible to populate other places in the solar system so when we outgrow planet we can expand to the stars? Because it's a shell game for the elite. And you bought it.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo

Originally posted by skyshow


How so? Research generally is most interested in having fair and representative samples so that the results will generalize to the overall population as accurately as possible. This would mean roughly a 50/50 split among male and female participants...maybe you could explain a little more...



"All people are repeatedly brainwashed. You are just as much a victim as anyone else. A select number of concepts are tossed out for public consumption (this is how the population of the planet is controlled), with powerful institutiions to back them up. You make a selection and this selection colors the rest of your journey. Believe it or not, you are a victim of the mainstream. It's on the radio, the tv, the movies, in the bookstores, at college, and on the internet. It's your destiny to help the institution, you selected, to fulfill their agenda. You may not know the name of it, but it doesn't matter because the platform is very easy for you to recognize. "

*****I agree with you on this for the most part. I try and find concepts that can be backed up with some credible and discernible research to support the central assumption in the concept. I also (having worked many years in the media, and having attained multiple degrees) try to not just limit myself to main stream media and as such seek out alternative and relatively credible sources for information. I think much of our "brainwashing" is at an unconscious level...and I think America will go down in history and perhaps not in a good way, as the Marketing culture that enslaves us all and is inefficient at resource allocation and usage (that's a whole other story), so yes growing up in the west I may also be a victim, but I am aware, and that is a start, and so there is hope that we can all be aware, and choose no longer to be passive victims and then change. ******

"While in college they tell you that to solve world hunger, we need to control the population explosion. In the 70's, china tried that idea on for size. Now, they are worried because they've lost so many female childiren to sex-selective abortion and female infanticide, that whole generation of men is growing to maturity and will never have the opportunity to meet, date or marry a female. "

*****It isn't like they line you up against the wall and say "you will believe this". College material is based on imperical evidence. We have a population problem, how can we find and implement the most effective solution? These are the questions that are asked, the data is then collected...I'm glad your into humanism and finding solutions for these horrible problems now in China. Just don't throw the baby out with the bath water and blame college on the struggles in China.*****

"This, my friend, is the end game of survival of the fittest scenarios: forced iuds, forced abortion and removal of most of the earth's female population. It's a shell game. What have i got in my hand over here?? ? meanwhile, the other hand is using up the resources we could use to make it possible not to kill off our youngest and most fragile members. Why aren't we making it possible to populate other places in the solar system so when we outgrow planet we can expand to the stars? Because it's a shell game for the elite. And you bought it.
"

****I agree once again, and I also think we should find ways to more efficiently allocate goods and resources here on Earth. The marketing culture encourages mass consumption of goods and services that people don't always need...it creates needs out of wants and wants out of thin air, and the waste is horrible...One expert in economics (I think if I pulled a book off my shelf behind me, and dug around I could find his name, but it's getting late, and I'm tired) once said something like "if someone wanted to put into place the single most destructive and in-efficient way at allocation of resources no single better way could be constructed than the so called free market. People buy things they don't need, then when they realize they no longer want it they throw it away and move on to the next item and the cycle repeats itself. Now with India & China's emerging economies to match the west we are going to see a hyper process in consumption that will make the gluttony of the west look like a bag of peanuts you get on a delta flight. I didn't necessarily or voluntarily "buy" it as you said. I agree also with you and support the "elite" theory. But they are not completely in power. We still can overcome and change things, and I believe we can through education and the flourishing of unbridled communications such as this forum and others.****

Thank you for making me think.
(also pardon the quote system I used...I haven't fully figured out yet how it fully works)

[edit on 21-1-2008 by skyshow]



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 

The solar system doesn't have a pay off as the research conducted by most universitiys. Find a way to profit and the media may educate it's seduced people if it isn't railroaded for fear of competionw/ todays most dominate corp.s. Give up on the Univesities though they are the scariest pawns of our corp. society and government.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 05:52 AM
link   
reply to post by azblack
 


and just what do you propose to put in their [universities] place?



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 06:01 AM
link   
well i don't buy for five seconds that the governments of the world have to arm themselves to protect them from each other. they test drive stuff they might need later but war is usually for some reason they've already agreed upon behind the scenes. it's all a big dramatization in which the population at large plays out the roles. the guys at the tippy top are all buddies. saddam is probably somewhere right now, sipping a martini.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 
boy talk about getting it wrong, constatine had nothing to do with what later developed as christianity, or catholicism, or what happened in his time, in fact if you research the record, you will see that he banished paganism threw out the empire,and closed its temples, also as far as what these church councils came up with, he had no say so in that matter, all he did was convene said council, the council of nicea, to work out the many different brands of christianity that were tearing at each others throughts over doctrine, and he ordered said council to finishh its works promptly so that he could make 50 copies of said agreament, work out by the church fathers to send to one end of the empire to the other, so that there would be a general agreement on matters of faith, it was not constatine who came up with these church doctrines established at the council of nicea, but the church bisops from one end of the empire to the other who attended, in fact of the 300+ bishops who attended only 27 roughly were from rome and italy, the rest were from all other areas in the empire, from britain to alexandria egypt, and in betwween, constatine has always been blamed simply because he was not the hero of the catholic church, but rather its greatest detractor of it, which is why he moved the whole seat of goverement from rome to constinople, which was a part of greece at that time, the truth is was he was raised a british christian by his mother, helen, who along with his father are buried at in the town of york england, attesting to the fact that he was indeed not only half british, but raised as a british chritian, which was more closely aligned to the greeks than the romans who by that time started to corrupt there own teachings, and it has been the catholic church, if you bother to check out where all these so called sources get there info on constatine from, it goes back to the church of rome, who never forgave constatine for not only moveing the seat of goverement to his new city, but also church power as well, everything deragotory about constatine can be traced back to the roman church and its followers if you follow it back far enough, for the detractors of constatine and blameing him for all these church evils, these detractors are doing nothing more then plagerizeing from some earlier historian who is copying from some earlier historian, and when you check out these so called earlier historians and there degarortory statments, you will see the catholic hand in play. like i said they never forgave him, and his religious views were of british origin, not roman, again showing his preference of british christianity vs. roman catholicism which became more and more corrupt as the centuries went by. as i stated british christianity at that time was closer in doctrine to the greeks then it was the romans. and british celtic christianity lasted up until william the congeror in 1050 a.d. who just happened to be aligned with the pope of rome, but later the catholics were thrown out by henry the 8th, but the damage to the early british celtic church had been done, as 4 church councils decreed, britain was the first amongst the nations to make christianity the national religion, which happened in 150 a.d. way before constatine and his british troops freed the romans from the christian pursecution headed up by emperor domitian, and maxilmian, in rome, so to blame constatine for these church doctrines that the bisops came up with later is wrong, second there is nothing basically wrong with the statment of faith expressed in the niceian council, only its implamentation later on is what went wrong, but again that was the so called church fathers who came up with it, not constatine, but like most people who refuse to do there homework and research, its easier to pass along propaganda, then to actually research it, which most dont.



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by enoch1
 


Er... I never said Christianity became pagan or absorbed the pagan gods under the rule of Constantine. He did indeed have pagan temples destroyed or converted to Christian churches. He also declared Christianity the empire's religion and had it replace paganism after his conversion. I'm referring more to the common knowledge merger of traditions like Easter with the Resurrection, the winter solstice celebrations with Christmas, etc.

Again, I don't think Constantine was necessarily being evil but was trying to smooth the transition for His empire. As for the thought he completely rewrote Christianity, I don't believe that either. His influence was more on traditions and the endorsement of a state church (something I have never agreed with).



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Jehovah God, the Lord of all, is NOT evil. The fact is this: HE is JUST, and must punish sin and sinners, and reward those that He chooses.

Allow me to explain:

The fact is that you and me, we, are ALL sinners -- born sinners in fact, due to the original sin of Adam, since we are his progeny. Outside of His grace alone, we are doomed. And, He is just for sending us to hell, since He created it all and has made the rules. (Yet, there is hope as I will explain later)

Our Creator, Jehovah God, set forth the price of our sin from day one, and YES, like it or not, it is damnation in a place called hell.

Nominal visible "Christianity" today would tell you that "God loves you." The Bible however makes it clear that HE, in HIS infinite wisdom, does NOT love everyone, for all time. Truth is, He may not love you. The fact is, He may hate you. Fact is, we all deserve hell, as we are sinners and God hates sin AND sinners.

Is this just? Perhaps not in your eyes. But, do not place too much value upon your own wisdom and thoughts... After all, who are we to squabble with the Creator of all things. Its HIS deal.

And here's that deal: THE GOSPEL that you will likely not hear in any visible church house today:

God Almighty, for his own good pleasure, chose to redeem a finite number of men from among otherwise hopeless humankind. Almighty God purposed this "oh so great a salvation" in Himself, and it pleased Him to accomplish it thusly:

First, in the Old Testament we see where God established the Levitical law, which set down His law for what would be acceptable sacrifices for sin. In other words, with the establishing of the law, God made a way by which men could be saved. This was a great thing, except that it quickly became evident that with men at the helm, the law could never bring any PERMANENT and lasting salvation -- at least not as long as the IMPERFECT blood of bulls and goats were all that could be offered, and not as long as imperfect men, who were the progeny of Adam, were necessarily offering these imperfect sacrifices as the High Priests in the Temple.

Nevertheless, the law provided THE VEHICLE whereby God promised to accept provisional sacrifices in the stead of sinful men. In other words, IF the law be fulfilled perfectly, then salvation was permanently possible, at least for that specific group of people that the sacrifice was intended.

Therefore, with the stage set, in the fullness of time, Almighty God sent His perfect and blameless Son, the Lord Jesus Christ to this earth to accomplish an otherwise impossible mission. That is, to save a remnant for Himself!

And, it was the Lord Jesus Christ, fully sinless man, and fully Holy God, Who acted in the stead of the Elect by becoming both the perfect unblemished sacrifice AND the perfect High Priest. Ultimately, The Lord Jesus offered up Himself for His Bride (the Elect), was slaughtered, then conquered death itself, going into the REAL Holy of Holies and performing the covenants of the law FOR HIS CHOSEN ONES (from all races, by the way.)

Once He was done, Christ Jesus did what no man and animal combination could ever do -- that is to PERFECTLY fulfill the requirements of THE LAW, on a PERMANENT basis, on behalf of the SPECIFIC people given Him by His Father, Almighty Jehovah God!

So, does God love everyone as modern religion likes to teach? No. Is this something evil or wicked? Certainly not. This is clear from only a cursory look at Scripture. We all deserve hell, but the good news of THE GOSPEL is that if YOU be part of the Elect, then He does love you!

So, we'd best hit our knees and humble ourselves and earnestly pray that we are counted in the Elect because only IN, and by the Lord Jesus Christ, is salvation possible for the fallen race of man.

Humbly submitted,
EagleEye
HisFaith.org



posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by skyshow
reply to post by Gorman91
 


"Mind challenging sooo 90's"??? What is the 2000's by your logic, mindless and blind acceptance?



Yes.
It's funny cause I, the conservative, am more liberal then the liberal. LOL.

[edit on 21-1-2008 by Gorman91]



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join