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.
Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
reply to post by MrXYZ
I have Just given you the places where there is Material Proof.... READ....
[edit on 4-9-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]
Byzantium architecture is rooted in Roman design.
I know full well what my soul is and I have felt existence without the body.
By using geometry you make the soul physical.
By trying to represent it by physical means you place the soul in a box when all it is limited by is the body it is in.
56. Jesus said,
“Whoever has come to understand the World
has found only a corpse,
and whoever has found a corpse
is superior to the World.”
49. Jesus said, “Blessed are the Solitary and Elect,
for you will find The Kingdom.
For you are from it,
and to it you will return.”
50. Jesus said, “If they say to you,
“Where did you come from?”
say to them,
“We came from The Light,
the place where The Light
came into being
on Its own accord
and established Itself
and became manifest
through their Image.”
If they say to you, “Is it you?”
say, “We are its children,
and we are the elect
of The Living Father.”
If they ask you, “What is the sign
of your Father in you?”
say to them, “It is Movement and Repose.”
You design geometry as if it is relevant to the soul.
All it is is pretty colors and lines
Occasionally it is structural. It does nothing else.
Like I said, you decorate where there is no need to decorate. You use bible quotes where they are irrelevant to a conversation. The bible states quite clearly that nothing made by man is relevant for salvation nor relevant to God. there is nothing of the physical form nor formed in physical shape that matters to God in terms of salvation. Drawing stars on a grid is as relevant to the soul ad a tree is relevant on the sun.
28 ”and I will give him the morning Star.
”And to the angel of the assembly in Sardis write,
“These things says He who has the 7 Spirits of God
and the 7 Stars…
1. Now a great sign appeared in heaven:
a woman clothed with the Sun,
with the moon under her feet,
and on her head a crown of 12 Stars.
2. Then being with Child,
she cried out in labour and in pain to give birth.
5. She bore a MAN Child (In Ionic Greek; ΙΝΙΣ in other words “The Man Child”
16. “I Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you
these things in the Assemblies.
I am the Root and Offspring of DAVID,
The bright and Early Morning Star.”
Stop calling it rubbish without proof. Stop claiming without proof. Stop misleading for no other reason than to prove some silly drawings. 10,000 years of human creation has not done anything in adv acing mankind to something more. Only by abandoning those thousands of years of failure have we advanced. Only by making our own future and history.
There is no such thing as destiny nor is the future written. There is simply an endpoint that God has. Man had free will. One of the first prayers I prayed when I was young was release from any timeline. To make my own future.
14. Jesus said to them,
“If you fast, you will give rise to sin for yourselves;
and if you pray, you will be condemned;
What I've learned is that I very much so can chose my own path
I cannot explain what it feels like. All I know is yes God does have a timeline. But that this timeline is made by man. God knows the full book, we experience it page by page.
God is outside of time.
If he wishes to amend it for our own good, he does.
If people ask for help in writing their part good,
"No One cometh unto The Father except by Me."
14. Jesus said to them,
“If you fast, you will give rise to sin for yourselves;
and if you pray, you will be Condemned;
God can intervene and help them amend their pages to something right. Otherwise, the will of men command the timeline.
And it is a doomed timeline for that reason. Free will will bring us death. God must intervene eventually to take out of the timeline those who seek salvation in Christ and God will let the rest who desire separation by staying in their time line get what they desire.
So I prayed to be released from the timeline young in life.
And since I decided to listen to God's waybpoints, my life has been pretty awesome.
And what is the relevance of that to the soul? Nothing at all.
Where is my proof? Personal experience. Where is your proof? Personal experience. Personal experience cannot be proven and so thus is irrelevant.
You do not have to claim the soul is physical. by drawing anything you do. Drawing is the minds attempt to add physicality to something.
By using geometry you make the soul physical.
Can’t you read ??? I guess your ability to recognise what is in your sight lacks the same ability to read… I wrote…
I have never made the claim the Soul is physical…
That quote is related to how the world is always dieing and is death. life is death, death is life. It's the core nature of Christianity in terms of this life and the next. To use that to relate to the soul is so very very flawed.
56. Jesus said,
“Whoever has come to understand the World
has found only a corpse,
and whoever has found a corpse
is superior to the World.”
Hows about we stop taking that out of context?
First things up is that it is non-cannon. So thus it is not relevant to Christianity. I fail to see your reason to connect it to Christianity.
The context in total of that heretical section is nothing more than that The world is dead,
and to earn your part in heaven you should not be part of the world
49. Jesus said,
“Blessed are the Solitary and Elect,
for you will find The Kingdom.
For you are from it,
and to it you will return.”
Luke 14-16 shows how Christ desires people to release their bondage to the world and its crude and erroneous ways and follow him. That the world has been wrong for the last 10,000 years and that it should be abandoned.
Now if you think i am wrong on this, I am willing to debate you. But first you will have to explain how the whole section proves what you claim, not an out of context few lines.
Do me a favor. Stop quoting excessive and start making an opinion using them. Quotes without words are not a provable claim.
You are trying to prove something that has no physical evidence with a non-cannon book of a man who was a full 150 years after Christ.
“Let NOT you put your trust in any man but The Father Only !”
How do you hope to have a case?
"Koko also has some thoughts about God," Patterson tells me. The psychologist is now downright delighted with herself. "Our conversation went like this," she says.
Patterson: "Who is God?"
Koko: "Me."
Patterson: "Who created the world?"
Koko: "Another woman."
Simplistic? Reductionistic? Maybe. Who's to say?
The fact remains you are trying to represent that which is non physical with physical items, which simply does not work. You can claim it does.
You can claim you witnessed one pile of crap or another pile of crap.
one pile of crap or another pile of crap.
but the fact remains that you cannot put it into physical form and to claim you know the soul is to claim to be God.
Now excuse me while I take out my heresy cap:
Only God is God. Only God knows the heart.
Only God knows the soul. You do not.
In your Patience, poses ye your Souls…
I know full well what my soul is and I have felt existence without the body.
I know full well what my soul is and I have felt existence without the body.
You are not God.
28. “For in Him we Live and move
and have our being,
as also some of your own poets have said,
For we are also His offspring’
Be gone false prophet and take your play shapes with you.
* heresy cap off*
“LOVE your Enemies”…
The primate understanding is very simple. I'll quote a primate for you:
See, they taught a primate sign language and then asked. So it seems you are wrong there too. sigh.
Life being death and death being life is supported in even your heresy gospel.
You quote it but do not say it in context. You just quote it like it says what you want it to.
how about you stop using quotes and start speaking.
After that you continue in mindless drivel from you heresy gospel.
FYI, Jesus did mention Romans. he said a Roman soldier had more faith than the whole of Israel. Nice going there. Seems you don't even know the bible you claim was made by priests.
My Lord Jesus Christ made NO reference to The "Roman church" or its breakaway denominations….
I wonder why ???
Jesus made No mention of the “Roman” N.T. bible…
I wonder why ???
Want to know why they left out your Gospel of Thomas? Same reason they left out the book of Enoch. Because it was written after all the books.
In fact, if there was a book to be written by priests and corrupt Romans, the Gospel of Thomas has a higher probability of being such a book, because it was written when the Romans got more involved with Christianity.
FYI, all books of the bible both canon and non canon were written by priests and very likely members of the Roman Catholic church. So to claim otherwise also shows your lack of historical knowledge.
There is a good reason why many of the gospels write about the same thing. To get multiple perspectives in order to get the context.
Now I invite you to prove, in your own words, using all the gospels, that your interpretation is true.
Where is my proof? Personal experience. Where is your proof? Personal experience. Personal experience cannot be proven and so thus is irrelevant.
if you do not wish to, then you are indeed a false prophet parading around like you know things that only God knows when in fact you are a very very sad little lad probably abandoned by God years ago.
fact you are a very very sad little lad
You can always turn back. Just stop being so false.
I offer facts. You ignore them.
Originally posted by Methuselah
then it goes on to say that early beneficial mutations...blah blah blah
no one has ever observed a beneficial mutation. show me one that increases information complexity
the ones ive seen or heard of is either duplication of existing information or scrambling of existing information.
no new information added.
the Miller-Urey experiment created a GOO that was 98% toxic to its own 2% remainder.
i would not call this success.
Originally posted by oozyism
I'm sick of Atheist and any anti-Religious, or anti-God movement who revolve all their arguments around evolution.
Originally posted by oozyismGOD takes the idea of evolution as an insult to him. I would also be insulted if someone came around and claimed computers and technology came to exist by mere chance.
Originally posted by iterationzero
Originally posted by Methuselah
then it goes on to say that early beneficial mutations...blah blah blah
no one has ever observed a beneficial mutation. show me one that increases information complexity
the ones ive seen or heard of is either duplication of existing information or scrambling of existing information.
no new information added.
This sounds like moving the goalposts. Please define "beneficial mutation" and "information complexity" in objective terms and explain how making duplications or altering that information is different from increasing its complexity. The "conservation of information" argument against evolution has been thoroughly disproven at this point.
the Miller-Urey experiment created a GOO that was 98% toxic to its own 2% remainder.
i would not call this success.
Conflating abiogenesis with evolution is a common mistake. Keep in mind that, while they are related to a degree, they are two different subjects. That being said, please explain this assertion in more detail. Which compounds in particular are you suggesting are "toxic" to which other compounds? Also, if you're talking about the orignal M-U experiment from the 50's, it has been acknowledged repeatedly that it was performed using a mixture of gases that, while believed to be correct at the time, probably wasn't representative of what's referred to as the "second atmosphere" by our understanding today. Since then, the experiment has been repeated with updated versions of that atmosphere with similar results.
[edit on 6/9/2010 by iterationzero]
That is why I say I know my soul. Because I have come to know it through Jesus.
Only God knows the soul. You do not.
mankind is banned from the tree of knowledge. he cannot know that which God knows and only God knows.
He cannot know the soul, he can only know the truth of his own heart. And even then that's blurred. Only God knows the true Heart.
Only God knows the true soul.
You do not.
You only have a human perspective of your own soul, nothing more. Nothing less.
That is why I say I know my soul.
He cannot know the soul, he can only know the truth of his own heart. And even then that's blurred. Only God knows the true Heart.
Because I have come to know it through Jesus. Claiming to know THE soul automatically means you do not know your own soul, because in order to know your own soul, you need to know what it is. And that is not what you claim it is, therefore how can you know your own soul?
Because I have come to know it through Jesus.
Originally posted by Methuselah
for the first rebuttal...
im not sure i can any more simple than what i have posted already, but ill try.
beneficial mutations DO NOT happen in real life.
mutations that add information no already existing in the organism itself DO NOT happen.
for M-U...
Actually M-U experiments have been tried again and again with different gases since scientists now think that early earth did have quite the combination of gases used in the M-U experiment. and the results have gotten worse. if im not mistaken they switched out ammonia for nitrogen.
but may i refer you to this source for your answer.
take it or leave it, i dont care
Is there any other evidence to support this? Yes. The fact that the “early” atmosphere had a high concentration of oxygen in it is backed up by the large amounts of oxidised materials that are found in the “earliest” Pre-Cambrian geological strata. This problem has been known for a long time, yet was conveniently disregarded. This is another “trade secret” of the Miller-Urey experiment/s.