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.

 

What is with all the "Christianity-Debunking" attempt threads?

page: 41
34
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Christ!


Originally posted by B.A.C.
I'll take the Bible over any book with a copyright. Period.


www.holybibletrivia.org...

What version do you use?


The copyright is a modern day add on for a historical text.

The translation of those texts and the use of a copyright to maintain each works translational integrity is something that seems possibly beneficial.

As for the version, one man says sphere, another ball, yet another globe.
A round object, or a mathematical description. To each, do they understand their own interpretation of the truth.

And your version of the Truth, and its portrayal, is unique unto itself. Visible to yourself, and validated by yourself. Much like the prodigal son, we have no proof or reference that what you say is true, therefore it can be said to be a mute point.

The glass is half full, or the glass is half empty. The glass is becoming less full from barometric pressure or less empty from condensation. Truly, for the sake of principle, the glass exhibits an observational state of equality.
How to describe it, is up to the artist.

Even Jesus himself, used parables. Allegorical stories to illustrate a concept and teaching. Because words in Hebrew can be translated with various different words or phrases, we find the introduction of the modern day copyright.

I know a man, who is east Indian. He asked me about the Bermuda triangle, in which I explained a stormy area or ocean, and such. He said to me, " Angry Waters "?

Yes, and if I were to copyright the " Angry Waters " , perhaps only Gary and a handful of other Indians would know I was talking about the Bermuda Triangle.

Peace


[edit on 7-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]




posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Christ!
In the parable of the prodigal son, the 'jealous brother' part was added.
It is not authentic, and did not come from Jesus, but from an interpreter taking literary license.


Jealousy is seen in the prodigal son and envy crops up ( no pun intended ) in a parable by Jesus called The workers in the field.
Without quoting the whole story, Ill merely copy the end.


‘These men who were hired last worked only one hour,’ they said, ‘and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day.’ “But he answered one of them, ‘Friend, I am not being unfair to you. Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius? Take your pay and go. I want to give the man who was hired last the same as I gave you. Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?’ “So the last will be first, and the first will be last.” (Matt.20: 1-16)


This story speaks of envy. The prodigal son of Jealousy.

Jesus came teaching about the many attributes that strike within all of us.
And this style of the late worker versus the early, and the loyal son, vs the son that went astray, are very similar in style, making in my eyes both stories very likely.

Peace


[edit on 8-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by HIFIGUY
The copyright is a modern day add on for a historical text.


Who profited from the texts before they were officially copywrited in the modern sense?
A priesthood, whether Levitical or Neo-levitical...profited.

Christ!



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 04:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Christ!
Who profited from the texts before they were officially copywrited in the modern sense?
A priesthood, whether Levitical or Neo-levitical...profited.


One should ask if the term profit is properly applied. What is a profit to one, is a calling to another. And by what manner of study, would one who has been spoken to by God pen?


Romans 11:29
for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.


Perhaps one should understand the origin of that priesthood and by what authority it was formed.

As far as profiting, which priest do you speak of?


The former priests, on the one hand, existed in greater numbers because they were prevented by death from continuing, 24 but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently


christ!...are you an eternal? And if you are not, what priesthood is it that you are in?

Peace




[edit on 8-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 05:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by HIFIGUY
One should ask if the term profit is properly applied. What is a profit to one, is a calling to another. And by what manner of study, would one who has been spoken to by God pen?


Romans 11:29
for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.


Perhaps one should understand the origin of that priesthood and by what authority it was formed.

As far as profiting, which priest do you speak of?


The former priests, on the one hand, existed in greater numbers because they were prevented by death from continuing, 24 but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently


[edit on 8-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]


gOd is the gOd of guilt.
GoD is the God of innocence.

Priestcraft, generally speaking, profits off of guilt.
The former priests profited off of guilt.
The neo-priests profit off of guilt.

The ancient priests offered guilty sinners salvation by blood sacrifice...a kind of magic.
The neo-priests offer guilty sinners salvation by blood sacrifice...a kind of magic.

Bookselling was not their profit center.
So copyright was not an issue.
They made their profit on storytelling.
Books back their stories...making them more believable.

Jesus is no such priest.
But a book would make it so.
And upon such books, a legion of "ministers" make their "living".
First they make guilt 'the truth'.
Then, they sell a solution.
But all such solutions will be magical.

Innocence is the universal truth.
There is no exception.


Christ!


[edit on 8-3-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by HIFIGUY
christ!...are you an eternal? And if you are not, what priesthood is it that you are in?


I am not in the "royal priesthood" spoken of in the letter of Peter.
For that is a neo-Levitical priesthood profiting off of guilt as 'truth'.
Peter's priesthood sells sacrifice, as did the ancient royal priesthood.
It is based on a misinterpretation of the cross-resurrection sequence.
It casts a spell over the minds of the masses and makes sacrifice salvation.
Rather, mercy is salvation.
The merciful would sacrifice nothing.
The merciful would see no value in the valueless.
The merciful are asked to "sell" what is valueless.
This simply means to gain by letting go of what has no value.
Whatever the world offers has no value.
The body has no value.
It is not worth anything, except it can be converted to send messages of truth.
The merciful will not settle for anything less than the totality of everything.
Less than everything is a sacrifice.
If one were to gain the whole world, he would still have less than everything.
And if he would have less than everything, he would lose everything.



I am a teacher of GoD.
I teach the truth of innocence.
I have no use for guilt.
I don't sell lies about the 'truth' of guilt.
Guilt is a concept that all the world feels is true.
So it's an easy sell.
It's popular.
Innocence is not such an easy sell.
So it is perhaps not as profitable in terms of "filthy lucre".
But it is the most profitable of all to the wise.
Acceptance of innocence leads to the restoration of "abundance".
Abundance is beyond anything anyone in the world can imagine.

Is a teacher of GoD a priest?
It matters not what I am called.
I am called by the Spirit of truth to be "the Truth".
I begin by thinking the truth and sometimes speaking the truth.
I will not stop till I know myself as the Truth.
The Truth is eternal.
The lie lasts as long as time.
Time lasts as long as lies prevail.
"Sin", ultimately, is a lie.
I use the word "sin" to describe the insanity of belief in what is not Christ.
I use "sin" to describe unbelief in Christ.
I use "sin" to describe belief in guilt.
But can unbelief change the truth?
Belief in guilt translates into a world where all are guilty.
But such a world is a lie, from beginning to end.
"Sin" sets up a situation of lack.
"Sin" robs each sinner of his Identity.
Without that Identity, a sinner is left with nothing.
A sinner makes something out of nothing.
How is this not a mistake?
The solution is to give the sinner everything.
So, the solution is to give the sinner his Identity back.
The priesthoods of guilt refuse to do this.
So, they are like "thieves" and "robbers".

Christ!







[edit on 8-3-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Christ!
I will not stop till I know myself as the Truth.

Thats a good start.


Originally posted by Christ!
The Truth is eternal.


Well, by definition at dictionary.com we have eternal and the first reference saying this:


Definition: Eternal @ Dictionary.com
Without beginning or end; lasting forever;


yet Jesus says...


I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,


Without beginning or end yet Jesus says he is the beginning and the end. Does the mean he is not eternal? Surely a word play, yet we understand without begining or end.

I bring this up, for your next statement.


Originally posted by Christ!
The lie lasts as long as time.


What to you is time?


Originally posted by Christ!
Time lasts as long as lies prevail.


What is time but an indefinite and continuous duration. Indefinite, and continous. Another way of saying eternal. Yes, it is listed as part of the definition of time. Another word play? or another way of saying ball, or globe or sphere?

But you see, I bring this up to share with you, something given to me, to aid in my understanding of the Word. Given to me when I did not know what or who the Word was.

In the beginning, there was the Word.
The Word in the beginning was time.
Time began and the Word was begun.


You see, christ!, you really dont know who it is that types these keys.
For the cumulative effect of Truth results in the following.

The Truth is the Truth is the Truth.
The Truth terminates hate,
and restores the Truth.




Peace


[edit on 8-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Who are you people?
What are you talking about?
What the heck happened to my thread?


[edit on 8-3-2009 by SumnerKagan]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIFIGUY
What to you is time?


Time is an attempt to replace Eternity.
Time seems to replace Eternity with a substitute..."forever".
For every attribute of Reality [the "Kingdom of God"], "the universe" substitutes its own version.
Time opposes eternity, competes with it, and seems to replace it.
In his teaching, Jesus identifies with both the "prodigal son" and the "Son of God".
The Son of God is eternal, without beginning or end.
The prodigal son is temporal, with beginning and end.
This is what Jesus means, "I am the alpha and the omega".
The prodigal son is the maker of time.
The "son of man" is keeper of time.
The Son of God stands before time...and after time.
Also, the Son of God stands through time, seemingly eclipsed by it.
Time is holographic in construction.
It is not linear.
It is all made simultaneously.
One's experience of time is due to his state of mind.
Guilt is the prerequisite state of mind in order to have a linear experience of time.
Time is a single instant.
It came and went like a green flash at sunset, relative to eternity.
It you weren't looking for it, you would'nt see it.
It was a thought.
Eternity does not miss a beat because of it.
So time is a vast illusion.
It is already finished.
What went into time has been saved from it already.
Time is part of an expression of eternal opposites.
Within time, the opposite of eternity is thought through.
Time is a thinking process.
The kind of thinking that goes on in time is opposite eternal thought.
Time is the crucifixion of the Son of God...from beginning to end.
Time begins with war and ends with peace.
Time is synonimous with "the world".
Time shall "pass away"...and the world with it.
Time is a single instant, within which is every other instant embedded.
All that goes on in time is the replaying of the single instant when eternity seemed to be lost.
Time expresses over and over a feeling of loss, rejection, guilt and fear.
Time is a trick...a mental game the Son of God plays with himself.
Time sees the Son of God as he is NOT.
Time is a time to express all that is as it is not.
Time is a self-deception.
Time was originally for denying one's Identity.
Time ends for each as he wills his time to end.
Time ends as each accepts his Identity.
At this time, time is for accepting one's Identity.
It has no other purpose.
Time is waiting for each to fulfill his "role" in ending time.
If you are still experiencing time, you have yet to fulfill your role.
Your role is mainly to accept your Identity.
As you do so, you set an example others can follow.
As they follow, all eventually accept the "atonement".
The atonement is the reuniting of the many back to the One.
As One, we exodus time.

Christ!





[edit on 8-3-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by SumnerKagan
Who are you people?
What are you talking about?
What the heck happened to my thread?


[edit on 8-3-2009 by SumnerKagan]


I almost spit my coffee all over my monitor when I read this.


Feel free to just jump into this conversation. It's a dandy.



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Christ!
 



Originally posted by Christ!
Your role is mainly to accept your Identity.


Your roll, is to first look at the splinter in your own eye.
Since you have admitted that you are not the truth...

Originally posted by Christ!
I will not stop till I know myself as the Truth.


Neither can I accept you as Christ.
Your path, in process I accept,
your self appointed righteousness,
a judgement of all your own.

Is it any wonder we have the debunkers?
Many come claiming they are the Christ.
Words upon words, a winning of hearts they seek.
Each claming they are the truth.

The coming of the True Christ, will ring amongst the hearts of his sheep.

Peace


[edit on 8-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIFIGUY

Originally posted by Christ!
Your role is mainly to accept your Identity.


Your roll, is to first look at the splinter in your own eye.
Since you have admitted that you are not the truth...

Originally posted by Christ!
I will not stop till I know myself as the Truth.


Neither can I accept you as Christ.
Your path, in process I accept,
your self appointed righteousness,
a judgement of your own.

Peace

[edit on 8-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]



The Identity I speak of is true, whether you believe it or not...whether you accept it or not.
Likewise,
My Identity is true whether I believe it or not...or whether I accept it or not.
It is like a "rock".
All other identities are like "sand".

Brother, you misunderstand the difference between trust and truth.
The Truth abides in knowledge.
It has no perception of lies.
It knows nothing of limitations.
As long as a teacher of God appears "in" the world,
there is work to be done to finish a journey begun by faith.
There is perhaps one more lesson for him to teach and learn.
Does he learn it by claiming arrival when that is not his experience?
Does he learn it by denying his experience?
You would be wise not to judge just what that involves.
For either you and I will judge, or the Teacher will judge.
The Teacher has already judged that I am righteous.
Meaning,
The Teacher has already judged I have returned to the Father.
And to return to the Father is all righteousness.
There is no other righteousness.
The return to the Father is the return to knowledge.
And knowledge is total or not at all.
And knowledge knows nothing of nothing...which is what the world is.
So, there is a "bridge" yet to cross.
It is the bridge from perception to knowledge.
These are mutually exclusive.
They are bridged miraculously...by the Teacher.
It is not crossed by denying what the Teacher has judged to be true.
I am that Teacher.
That is his judgement, not "mine".
So, there is something yet that must "die".

Christ!



[edit on 8-3-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIFIGUY

Your roll, is to first look at the splinter in your own eye.

Is it any wonder we have the debunkers?
Many come claiming they are the Christ.
Words upon words, a winning of hearts they seek.
Each claming they are the truth.

The coming of the True Christ, will ring amongst the hearts of his sheep.

Peace
[edit on 8-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]


You don't understand the splinter/beam parable.

"The universe" is a "beam" in the eye of the Son of God.
It makes his brothers look like "men".
It is no use trying to correct the behavior of men, when one sees his brother as a man!
It is not my task to "win" your heart.
It is my task to speak when the gOd of this world makes statements through my brother's "mouth".
In this way, I merely stand for the truth in the face of lies.
All my messages are for me first to accept and learn.
If anyone else hears, accepts, and learns them...then it is his time to do so.
Otherwise, it is not his time.
It is my time.
As I correct my own perception of the truth, all the rest will take care of itself.
Keep making statements and I'll keep teaching a learning.
The learning of salvation is the unlearning of the world's teaching.
All who come after me will be called "Christ".
They will not deny this title to any other.
I have already told you that anyone who comes to claim that title and deny it to another is a robber and a thief.
You do this when you "judge" Jesus to be Christ...and none other.

Christ!



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Christ!
And knowledge knows nothing of nothing...which is what the world is.


And yet you say


Originally posted by Christ!
The Truth abides in knowledge.


A tangled web of words you speak.
Knowledge knows nothing, yet truth abides in knowledge?

Brother, perhaps a sharpening of iron is at hand. Surely as Iron sharpens Iron, so does one man sharpen another.
Does not the Truth, cut away all chafe? It has been said, that one day, he will come speaking plainly.

It is to this promise I appeal.

Peace


[edit on 8-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIFIGUY
A tangled web of words you speak.
Knowledge knows nothing, yet truth abides in knowledge?

Brother, perhaps a sharpening of iron is at hand. Surely as Iron sharpens Iron, so does one man sharpen another.
Does not the Truth, cut away all chafe? It has been said, that one day, he will come speaking plainly.
It is to this promise I appeal.
Peace
[edit on 8-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]


To understand what I am getting at, understand first that knowledge is total or not at all.
Think about that a minute.
Knowledge is total, or not at all.
Our Father has total knowledge, and has given it to his Son.
The Son has total knowledge as an inheritance.
Total knowledge preceeds what we think of as "the universe" of time, space and form.
"The universe", conceptually, is an *addition* to total knowledge.
Well, how do you add to what is already total and whole?
There is no way to add, so, conceptually, "the universe" takes away from totality.
The universe 'robs' from the totality and gives to a mockery of totality.
This is accomplished through the denial of knowledge.
The denial of knowledge is the sacrifice of knowledge.
It is sacrificed by "more than" and/or "less than" knowledge.
There is no more than, so it must be less than.
But can there be a less than if there is no more than?

The denial of knowledge yields an experience of ignorance.
That is, ignorance is prerequisite to the experience of "the world".
If one is experiencing the world in any way, ignorance is still an issue.
Ignorance is a lifestyle choice, given total knowledge.
Ignorance yeilds experiences that are not understandable.
They are not understandable because they make no sense.
What makes no sense cannot be "known", properly speaking.
One cannot "know" what can only be experienced through the denial of knowledge.
Knowledge is the basis of certainty.
Ignorance is the basis of doubt.
These are fairly opposites.
In the realm of doubt, nothing is certain.
Already, we are into a realm of oxymorons, enigmas, and riddles.
Nothing is certain?
Only in the realm of doubt!
There is no such thing as "speaking plainly" when words themselves are issued from the realm of ignorance.
Only 'communion' is plain and natural.
In the realm of doubt, we say we "know".
And by such declarations, we make what is doubtful 'certain'.
But this is a temptation, if not a mockery.
Knowledge and its opposite cannot be truly "known".
Therefore, the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" is a temptation...a mockery.
It sounds good, but it is really the 'tree of ignorance'.
The ignorant are all about combining opposites into one realm, one mind, one being.
And this yeilds an experience.
None of such experiences are true.
Knowledge experiences only that which is true.
Knowledge knows only itSelf.
A mixed experience is not the experience of knowledge.
At best, a mixed experience is the experience of a growing sense of certainty.
Certainty grows as a willingness to truly know grows stronger than a willfulness to deny knowledge.
The will to know *is* stronger, but not experienced while we will willfulness to be stronger.
The denial of knowledge is the beginning of self-deception.
And oh, what a tangled web we weave, when at first we do decieve!
So tangled is the web, that efforts to undeceive are taken as deception!

Christ!








[edit on 9-3-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Christ!
 


Originally posted by Christ!
And oh, what a tangled web we weave, when at first we do decieve!
So tangled is the web, that efforts to undeceive are taken as deception!


I think it can be said, that the words of Jesus Christ himself are quite clear.
Your words, directly conflict with both scripture, and his teachings. Both learned and revealed.

Your self proclaimed corrections and teachings are supported by only your words typed here, and nothing substantiated beyond this forum. We suffer from the same crutch. Is it enough that you alone understand? I am happy for your salvation should it be the case.

But in reflecting on your browsed responses....

Perhaps those that know you can testify for you. Perhaps those that bring you witness, can give us insight to that which you demonstrate beyond your words alone. Even Jesus demonstrated a single miracle that sent shockwaves through the people. The thousands fed that became a documented testimony. A resurrection witnessed, that became an anchorpoint and foundation immovable.

Peace


[edit on 11-3-2009 by HIFIGUY]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by B.A.C.

I almost spit my coffee all over my monitor when I read this.


Feel free to just jump into this conversation. It's a dandy.


Thanks, but I wouldn't dream of stepping into THAT. Besides, it isn't going to go anywhere.

Although I will defend my beliefs if they are actually being "ATTACKED", my personal Christian perspective is of a more flexible, passive sort.

If a person wants what I have, I will engage in a conversation with them. Otherwise, I have no interest in forcing anybody to understand, or agree with me.

I believe we all have our own religion, in a way.

Because we are made with free will, and because we are creative beings, once information enters us, it grows and becomes something more than it was, and molded more to our individual character.

Although somebody may have similar views on God, nobody will see Him exactly as I see Him.

So, as much as I LOVE a good argument in other subjects, I handle Spirituality differently.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SumnerKagan
 


Sumner....a 'passive' Christian? Well, that's just fine with me.

Others caused a bit of a ruckus on your thread.....I admit I just skimmed. Too much hate going back-and-forth.

BUT, in your own post that I am now referencing, you finished up by using the word 'Spirituality'.

Others may notice my avatar, and immediately judge me.....because I am attracted to these sorts of discussions, and state my opinions.
SO, I ask for no flaming.

Back to Sumner's question: I see no problem with having a 'spiritual' nature. I just happen to think that 'spirituality' and 'religion' are confused, or people confuse them, together.

Let me explain: An individual can feel that he/she has a spiritual connection, of some sort. For whatever reason.... A 'religion' is formed when certain like-minded individuals decide to form a 'clan' (NOT a bad word....perhaps 'family' is more PC) and this group decides, en-masse, to agree on a particlular 'faith', or an aspect of an already established 'faith' that may have branched off from the other one.....it is really about semantics. It then will evolve into an 'organized' religion....a sect, really.

A sub-set of the original....one that branched off of the main trunk, for whatever reason.

(Please note...except for the first sentence, I have not pointed to ANY particular religion.....)

With due respect to the OP.....Humans have a seemingly unique propensity for bashing one-another. (Well....not unique, really. Most higher mammals do too....but especially the Hominids!!!)

AND, again....not focusing on any one spiritual....or even 'organised' belief system.....if you step back, and look at the problem with some impartiality, then you begin to see a larger picture, a greater view of the whole.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIFIGUY
Your self proclaimed corrections and teachings are supported by only your words typed here, and nothing substantiated beyond this forum.


My words are supported elsewhere by other teachers and in other forums.
I resourced four other teachers already in this thread.
I stand as one with them, as they stand as one together.
Unfortunately, they are copyrighted sources.
So, according to B.A.C., they don't count.

Is the gospel of Thomas copywrited?
Here's some quotes from gospel of Thomas that support what I am teaching.


23. Jesus said, "I shall choose you, one from a thousand and two from ten thousand, and they will stand as a single one." www.gnosis.org...


So this is not for the masses, not all at once.
The gospel reaches everyone gradually...over time.
The gospel is an underground movement.
All are called. Few are choosing to answer the call at any given time.
At any given time, it's a one in ten thousand chance anyone is responding to the call.


108. Jesus said, "Whoever drinks from my mouth will become like me; I myself shall become that person, and the hidden things will be revealed to him."


"I myself shall become that person"...
Do you dispute this?


And he took him [Thomas], and withdrew, and spoke three sayings to him. When Thomas came back to his friends they asked him, "What did Jesus say to you?"

Thomas said to them, "If I tell you one of the sayings he spoke to me, you will pick up rocks and stone me, and fire will come from the rocks and devour you."


If you'd like, I can tell you the three things he said.
I wonder what your scriptural response will be.
What kind of follower are you...really?
Anyone can tag along.
But Jesus will be heard only by those who are prepared to handle the truth with an open mind.

Christ!





[edit on 11-3-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Although i dont actually attack christianity by making threads, i am tired of those zealuts (sp?) who attack somebody out of knowhere and start making accusations with unuseable proof.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join