an epistle to the revelationists, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 6-7-2008 @ 10:03 PM by MegaTherion
reply to post by Myrtales Instinct



wow.

you ACCIDENTALLY got my point.

you and Jane Doe are Christians.

is it clear now?


reply posted on 7-7-2008 @ 12:00 PM by miriam0566
Originally posted by MegaTherion
if I say the only way is through me, and have 12 guys write twelve stories of how wicked cool I am, and get myself arrested and fake my death, wait a thousand years.... there will be millions of people like you who will beleive the whole thing.

this is what is happening with L Ron Hubbard right now. he was a drug addict, all the way to his death.
he was a criminal and a litigous curmudgeon.


i see, so now this jesus fellow is rolling in money! the bastard. living it up at the vatican with a girl under each arm. and all he had to do was wait a thousand years.... hey wait, would jesus be dead? of what benefit would the scam be to jesus now.


why? he was in it for the money. when he wasn't getting as much in as he thought he should, he squeezed the members and pushed for recruitment, and raised the price of his 'techs'


except noone in the first century was living the vida loca in the first century, they were persecuted and killed for being christians. so where's the benefit.

when enough people got to the 'final level', he just 'discovered' another one and wrote up a new tech while blazing on speed.

why do people fall for it?

Hard sell techniques, and of course, a grain of usefulness. in fact, even William Seward Burroughs thought that the original Dianetics was very useful.

see, it's after they hook you that they charge you more and more for increasingly useless stuff.

in OT3 you essentially ouija board YOURSELF to exorcise your demons... woops! I mean body thetans.


i still fail to see what the similarity with christians is.

but back to xtianity.

you are following to the letter a text that has been translated hundreds of years ago for the third time by a group of people whose livelihood depends on fleecing you, and to fleece you, they must own you.


except that the bible conflicts with the church's beliefs, if you actually read it instead of reading what other people say about it, then you would see that.

to own you they convince you that there is an invisible man, who lives in the sky and watches everything you do, every day of your life, and makes lists of things he will punish you to eternal damnation for if you do them... but he loves you.


not exactly what the bible says does it?


how exactly do you know that demons have no bodies?

because the bible says so.


actually the bible says they are spirit creatures hence they have spirit bodies, also in the days of noah they made bodies (human)


why is adultery wrong?

because the bible says so


adultery cause a considerable amount of pain for people, you dont need a bible to tell you that

Neophobia begotten by control.

if you are a man of intelligence, why would you suppose a supreme being would be so concerned with what you think of him?


why wouldnt he be if he created us?

if a supreme being is so merciful, why is there a way to mess up, unless he WANTS you to mess up?


mercy doesnt equal stupidity. god wont give mercy to those who dont want it.

oh, but he LOVES you, so we have to reconcile that by picking a prominent angel called Satan, who seems to be pretty tight with the Big Guy (see Job)
and we'll make him Angra Mainyu, that is, the Evil God, god's twin, so that way we can blame all the bad stuff on him.


see revelation were satan is cast out.


What is wrong?
What is right?


you seem to know.

there are only relatives to an intelligent man, there are things that aid survival and things that aid death.

safe/danger. survival/non-survival.

so what is not safe is Evil.

what is safe is Good.

an intelligent man is a practical man. if something is found to be helpful to him, he will adopt it, label it good. if he finds something to be harmful, that he labels bad.


except the bible goes beyond the simplistic animal instinct of survival and says that love for others is good.

high morality or animal instinct?


final point:

why do you assume an angel is a physical being? an angel or even god is beyond you, so they would not be confined to a body, as you are.


angels are physical? news to me.

maybe a discorporate being would be like a man, not evil or good, just trying to survive.. well, maybe they eat our emotions, our beliefs.


keyword: maybe. but what proof is there?

do you call the wolf evil for eating the rabbit?
perhaps the carrot can forgive the rabbit for eating it.

this is intelligence.

everything has to eat.


so that means that obviously demons and spirits are eating us? what?!?!

look if your going to go around bible bashing, at least know what your talking about. in any debate you have to have at least a basic knowledge of you opponents beliefs



reply posted on 7-7-2008 @ 01:38 PM by jmdewey60
reply to post by MegaTherion



angels are ______ because the bible says _______.

What if I said I have seen and/or heard several angels and have met and/or seen several demons?
Would it be OK to also believe in the Bible version of these beings, then?
Well, I have and I do.
So, what?
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



I Am Christ-The Almighty!
  Posted 10 days ago with 12 member flags
The Pope\'s Advice for ATS (and others)
  Posted 16 days ago with 10 member flags
God\'s Judgment on homosexuality.
  Posted 13 days ago with 10 member flags
The Bringer of Light
  Posted 9 days ago with 10 member flags
Christ! My Hero!
  Posted 5 days ago with 9 member flags
WTF just happend to me?
  Posted 2 days ago with 9 member flags
End of the world, You should start paying attention! WW3
  Posted 8 days ago with 8 member flags
Van Gogh\'s "Starry Night"
  Posted 18 days ago with 7 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Santorum wants more fracking!!!
  US Political Madness, Posted 12 hours ago, 53 replies
Pass Me My Rifle
  World War Three, Posted 8 hours ago, 52 replies