Was "Jesus" a "bastard" & the Church tried to Cover it up with the VirginBirth Stories?

you got it !...its a shame ppl spend so much time dwelling over the possibility of rape by a Roman... how would a child of a Roman rape have the capacity to perform "miracles" ? how many women were raped by romans??? what would make this one sospecial they would have to make up stories to cover it up ....?

While we are still on the topic of Jesus and Santa Clause,..... would anyone( let alone a great scientist) say the following about Santa?

Blaise Pascal, French Mathematician:

"There is a God-shaped vacuum in the heart of every man which cannot be filled by any created being, but only by God, the creator, made known through Jesus Christ."

This same Pascal who observed that the pressure of the atmosphere decreases with height and deduced that a VACUUM existed above the atmosphere, reasoned that the VACUUM in man's heart can only be filled by Christ..


And I can quote others like Copernicus, Newton, Kepler in this regard but I think I've already made my point.


God Bless All,



[edit on 13-12-2004 by Logician]

Here are 4 questions to discuss with an atheist with a searching mind:


1. Is truth absolute?


2. Is the law of noncontradiction always applicable?


3. Is there doubt in conclusions based on inductive-reasoning?


4. Is epistemology more important than metaphysics in seeking truth?

Logic:

One argument used to rationally support the existence of God is the ontological argument. The ontological argument for the existence of God was first structured in the Proslogion of Saint Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury (1033-1109 A.D.); though it was actually Immanuel Kant, an 18th century German philosopher, who first called the argument �ontological.�[ Besides Anselm, Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza, Hegel and Godel also made notable versions of the ontological argument.]

Anselm defines God by saying God is that �which nothing greater can be conceived.� One way to interpret this phrase is to define �God� as maximal perfection, i.e. the greatest possible being. Anselm himself used a reductio ad absurdum argument in the book Proslogion to explain his ontological argument.

�If therefore that than which nothing greater can be conceived exists in the understanding alone [and not in reality], then this thing than which nothing greater can be conceived is something than that which a greater can be conceived. And this is clearly impossible. Therefore, there can be no doubt at all that something than which a greater cannot be conceived exists in both the understanding and in reality.�


[edit on 13-12-2004 by Logician]

Riddle:

What's more powerful than God?
More evil than the devil?
Rich people need it?
Poor people have it?
If you eat it you die?

Oh man, I knew there would be skeptics. Santa exist, and I don't care if you people ridicule the notion. I have the book that says he exist.

I guess it would take an adult to distinguish between real figures and make believe.

Faith, is all a person needs, is what they say. I believe in Santa, therefore he exist.

Self delusion is grandeur I suppose, resting a premise on the fantasies contained within as being real simply because historically it provides names and places. Yet none of those fantasies have ever been proven. It never occurs to the blind believers that to record a fantasy as fact, is best served when using known names and faces. Those of who look at the resurrection for example, as recounted, do not question the towns, cities or even kings and queens. But the four accounts of one single event, where the object is to present a divine being, are so blatantly inaccurate, distorted and contradictory between themselves, the story can only be swallowed by those who just want to believe that this was in fact the saviour. I can only imagine how the legend of Bin Laden will pass through the ages as having been commanded by God to smite the enemy. From the way the Christian apologists look at it, they would have to conclude it was by the hand of God, for surely there is proof all over the place of the calamity known as 9/11. And that leads me

When faced with the glaring truth of their scriptures, they can only retort to the effect that we are atheists, or that we rely on books from others to make our case, yet all contradictions to the NT which I have introduced are those taken directly from the NT or the epistles of the church fathers, rendering their mute responses to those, proof that they have no counter, save for empty deflective rhetoric. The blatant lies they live by is not only found in those contradictory scriptures I bring front and centre, but by their generalization of atheism. I suppose the one who made this claim sees the Jews, the authors of the books he himself is offering as proof, as atheists. Confusion obviously reigns for them when it comes to trying to find clarity of mind in their convoluted thoughts. Such is the narrow-minded and unworldly view of exactly those who rely on �a� book as their proof, because they lack the wherewithal and or common sense necessary to notice the hundreds of contradictions within its covers.

Then they offer up the names of men of renown and their beliefs as proof, once more showing how incapable of reasoning they actually are, as they obviously expect us to believe that only these great minds existed, and that their superstitions renders the like superstitions of the neophytes in here indisputable. More importantly they totally sidestep the documented evidence put before them from the church fathers themselves, for that would be far too painful to acknowledge that yes indeed, the facts as reported in the Bible are not in synchronicity with those of the forgers of the church.

Then they toss out little nuggets like: �Before archeologists confirmed the existence of Sodom and Gomorrah,� as though that is proof of anything other than a city of salt in an area where the salt concentration of the Dead Sea is 5 times that of the oceans, and such that not a single organism could live in it. Or chime in about a Roman court, which somehow is supposed to prove that Jesus was not just another thief or one of the Jewish seditionists of the day. The historical references they say prove everything, yet there is not even the minutest proof of any of any event ever been done by God on behalf of the Jews, much less even a roll with the roman courts or Jewish scribes, these very same scribes previously exalted for being meticulous, of a man performing miracles. I can only imagine all the times the Jews were conquered, and butchered, where the enemy went off claiming their god or gods brought destruction upon the enemy, and the Jews pass it off without a word in the OT, or as the God who promised them everything and saved them for so much, as being angry�yet again.

It is an unmistakably unworldly view without any basis of merit, which causes one to state: �We know there is a God because no one can prove otherwise and science eludes to it through intelligent design theory.� Where the obvious is that no one can prove there is a God, and therefore he does not exist. Never mind the myopic presentation of the scientific view proffered as though the only school of thought is that there is a God.

But not to stop there, the author of the above quote declares exactly how little or next to nothing s/he knows of the Old Testament authors: �We know that the tradition of transcribing the Torah and the writings of the prophets was a very strict practice and if any mistake was made in transcribing they had to burn the page and start over again. You could trust the transcriptions to be accurate becuase of comparing contemporary translations to the old manuscripts, which are exactly the same (i.e. Dead Sea Scrolls).�

Had this person the credentials to put forward a half reasonable argument, s/he certainly would not have so with the above, for Moses supposedly wrote the Pentateuch some 3,500 years ago, which, along with all the rest, according to the Esdras II, was lost and had to be rewritten circa 6BCE, where God recited the laws to Ezra and his band of scribes. Of course I expect nothing more than a chorus of yes but God told him what to write, from the apologists. How easily manipulated they are, why this makes the warnings against the devil and false prophets far too ominous and real. But then to state the Dead Sea scrolls provide the same translations, as further proof is laughable. For yes, those using the DSS as back-up never stop to think that only few fragments in the hands of Christians are allowed to be published, likewise the same with the Jews. Some 60%, how many decades later still lingers in stasis and why? because the heads of the churches and synagogues do not want you to know the truth.

The apologists don�t tell you the DSS are 12 to 1600 years after Moses, and 2 to 600 after Edras. They either do not know of the controversy over the LXX also around the 3rd century BCE, or they don�t want you to know. They would also have you believe that in the absence of a printing press, the only way to copy and disseminate writings was by copying same. They don�t tell you of all the marginal changes on the papyri. They don�t tell you that not all copies of each text were in agreement. They don�t tell you that just last month, the challenge leans to be that the DSS were a collection of various manuscripts with differing texts used as a central library, and collected by a very wealthy sect and had nothing to do with delineating the word. They don�t tell you that the Christian church prefers to think these were poor fools living in penury, for they either don�t know, or hope to keep you in the proverbial dark, the former most likely being the case.

If I were as licentious as they and their various church masters who do not want the truths revealed, I would put a moratorium on who can translate the scrolls and what can be published too, after all, who in their right minds would give their hard earned money to knowingly support frauds? And I would certainly not respond to the blatant contradictions as I have shown, for how can they possibly be explained save for making a mockery of the authors, themselves and the other half of their congregation who happens to believe that the Bible is the divine word of God?

With that epistle, I have nothing further to add on this thread.

Hi 'justanotherperson',

You sound very angry, and illogical. Why?

I guess it would take an adult to distinguish between real figures and make believe.

Like I said before, even children do not acknowledge Santa as Lord and Saviour , but you apparently do.


'Inbetweenperson' wrote:

Where the obvious is that no one can prove there is a God, and therefore he does not exist.

Her logic seems to be that if something is unprovable, it can't exist.... Therefore the 'big bang theory ' is false because 21st century science cannot prove it.


God bless both of you








[edit on 13-12-2004 by Logician]

Obviously the Roman Catholic Church did cover up a lot. That was not one of them. Origin asks the Church "If we must change so much of this mans history perhaps we should start with someone more to your liking".
The cove up seems more likely that Jesus was the blood line of David. When John, his elder cousin was murdered, then Jesus became King of the Jews, the Essiene Jews. When he ordered all wealth to be distributed he was calling for the Jubalee. That is spread all wealth to destroy the tax base and provide the Roman Military with no means of staying in so distant of outpost. Sounded good to the poor but not so great to the wealthy. This is why it looks like Jesus tested out a poison that simulates death first on a young girl then a few men then finally on Lazerus. Four days was one too many from the looks of Lazerus so Jesus planned on three. Worked on a disguise until no one recignized him then went to England to Josheph of Amatheaus's tin mine. James his younger brother became the next king and he too was murdered. Paul was an agent of Rome and went out looking for Jesus to arrest him. I believe it was Paul who had his ear cut off by Peter at Gesthemeny (sorry about my spelling, I'm very tiered). All this is not to say Jesus was anything other than the Son of God. I believe He was. But he took on the flesh and left Heaven for about 20 minutes if Peter is correct : A day is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day. Jesus took the flesh to better understand us, or limitations and weaknesses and to be a shepard that could guide his flock back to the safety of His Sactuary-Heaven. We are to increase our salt, our uniqueness. But we are also to study the guide left by Jesus and so to help us Jefferson wrote his red book, his own story of Jesus. Oh the story of his birth, his parents would not have been looking for a room. Jesus was born during Sukot (Feast of Tabernacels) that is why a troth was used for a crib. Common in those days during that Holiday. This means his cousin, John was born during Passover. When Jesus was 12 (and a half) and left behind by his parents in Jerusalem, they had gone there for his cousins 13th birthday. The Roman Catholic Church took both the Jewishness and the humanity from Jesus and filled in empty spaces with sectular beliefs of the Empire.

Originally posted by npareed
Riddle:

What's more powerful than God?
More evil than the devil?
Rich people need it?
Poor people have it?
If you eat it you die?

The answer is: NOTHING! Did I get it?

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Such is the narrow-minded and unworldly view of exactly those who rely on �a� book as their proof, because they lack the wherewithal and or common sense necessary to notice the hundreds of contradictions within its covers.

My proof did not come from a book. My proof came from my experiences with God. The Book came as a guide to continue to grow in my walk with God and the wisdom to help others.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
And I would certainly not respond to the blatant contradictions as I have shown, for how can they possibly be explained save for making a mockery of the authors, themselves and the other half of their congregation who happens to believe that the Bible is the divine word of God?

With that epistle, I have nothing further to add on this thread.

I love the implication here that your words are the gospel truth. Do you for a moment think that people like myself, Logician and others are going to bow to your words because you think they are right? The Bible offers love, truth, hope, and eternal life. What are you offering? If your posts are any indication then I'd say anger, resentment, frustration, and a depressing end to life.

You got it right Saint4God... The answer is NOTHING

Thanks! Now all I have to do is give my credit card and social security number for my prize? Great! I can't wait to get my 'God Rules' T-shirt. It's 54** **** **** **** and my social security number is ***-**-***....hey, why do you need this information again to mail me my prize?

Do you for a moment think that people like myself, Logician and others are going to bow to your words because you think they are right? The Bible offers love, truth, hope, and eternal life. What are you offering? If your posts are any indication then I'd say anger, resentment, frustration, and a depressing end to life.

Well said. Are we supposed to trade the blessed hope found in Christ for an anonymous , frustrated and malcontent 'inbetween' person? Nay , we would not even consider trading Christ for all the riches in the world. Jesus told us, "what benifits a man if he gains the whole word but loses his soul?"

This is a small sample of what we have in Christ:

Rev. 2:27

To him who overcomes and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations-- 'He will rule them with an iron scepter; he will dash them to pieces like pottery' --

just as I have received authority from my Father. I will give him the morning star. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches


God Bless All,


[edit on 14-12-2004 by Logician]

Originally posted by Logician
This is a small sample of what we have in Christ:

Rev. 2:27

To him who overcomes and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations

Basically saying do as I say, when I say, dont question and you'll be rewarded. To any intelligent person it would seem ridiculus to not think for yourself and not question the acts of others.

Originally posted by Logician
'He will rule them with an iron scepter; he will dash them to pieces like pottery'

Ok.. so the reward for obeying without question is to be placed in a position of power as a dictator ruling people with an iron fist and smashing the 'people' into pieces of pottery.
Wow, no wonder Hitler was Christian, it offered him everything he needed.

just as I have received authority from my Father. I will give him the morning star. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches

So whatever any priest says in any church is automatically true, simply because the spirits he heard in his head told him so?.

Hi Johnny Redburn,

How are you? Fine I hope.

Basically saying do as I say, when I say, dont question and you'll be rewarded. To any intelligent person it would seem ridiculus to not think for yourself and not question the acts of others.

Where does it say in Rev 2:27(or for that matter anywhere else in the bible) that we are supposed to follow Christ blindly? Infact quite the reverse is true.

John 20:24-29
Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe". Eight days later, His disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, "Peace be with you." Then He said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing". Thomas answered Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me?..�

Plesase don�t attribute faulty generalizations to the Bible. It either shows dishonesty or lack of understanding of scripture.

Ok.. so the reward for obeying without question is to be placed in a position of power as a dictator ruling people with an iron fist and smashing the 'people' into pieces of pottery.

Again, you�re misrepresenting scripture. The Saints won�t be �dictators� in the Hitlerian or Stalinist sense, which you seem to be implying, but righteous co-rulers with Christ on earth. According to the Bible, the present world system is a vicious dictatorship of Satan. The signs of his handiwork are everywhere; thousands of children starving to death each day, millions of people perishing each day through disease, natural causes,pestilence, wars, murders. When Christ takes charge, there would be no hunger, death, hate, sin, frustration, sexual immorality, deceit, disease, etc. But everlasting life,peace and joy.Which do you prefer, Satan�s dictatorship or Christ�s ? The bible only affords us two choices. �or are you one of the minions of Satan whome Milton quotes in his Paradise Lost as saying; �Better to reign in hell than serve in Heaven�? � The evil souls who do not wish to see Christ's king come to fruition will justly be smashed into pieces of pottery.

So whatever any priest says in any church is automatically true, simply because the spirits he heard in his head told him so?.

Please don�t confuse �priest� or �Catholic� with Christian. For that matter any old �Protestant�,�Lutheran�,� Mormon� is not automatically a Christian etc. Only God knows his elect. A safe bet to �Christianhood� would be Shindler who saved thousands of Jews in WWII at risk to his own life.

"Religion is a social disease of the intellectually disabled."

You�re again generalizing. By your logic the following very �religious persons� [ "christians"] were �intellectually disabled�� Nicolaus Copernicus, Johannes Kepler,Blaise Pascal, Issac Newton, Michael Faraday, Lord Kelwin, etc. etc�.

This coming from someone who�s probably not achieved anything of substance intellectually.


God Bless, .. search the scripture friend.

Originally posted by Logician
Hi Johnny Redburn,

How are you? Fine I hope.

I am quite happy logician thank you for asking!
I apologize for not considering how you felt, how art thou?

Originally posted by Logician
Where does it say in Rev 2:27(or for that matter anywhere else in the bible) that we are supposed to follow Christ blindly? Infact quite the reverse is true.

Then explain to me how the reverse is true?
To lose confidence and not obey what your god has stated in his book would be considered going against his word, correct?
In my opinion the bible does not give someone multiply roads in which to choose from. Therefore to be loyal and follow, means to disregarding logic and the basic human inquisitiveness.

So when it states:
"To him who overcomes and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations"

Do you really think as a loyal follower you are going to question such acts which are included in his will, or blindly agree so as to not tarnish your belief in your faith?

]Originally posted by Logician
It either shows dishonesty or...

Do not even perceive to call me a liar unless I have stated something that is blatantly not true, thank you.

Originally posted by Logician
According to the Bible, the present world system is a vicious dictatorship of Satan. The signs of his handiwork are everywhere; thousands of children starving to death each day, millions of people perishing each day through disease, natural causes,pestilence, wars, murders. When Christ takes charge, there would be no hunger, death, hate, sin, frustration, sexual immorality, deceit, disease, etc. But everlasting life,peace and joy.Which do you prefer, Satan�s dictatorship or Christ�s ?

Unfortunately your bible also states that your god is "all-powerful" (can do anything logically possible) and "all-good" (does everything in power to eradicate evil) which nullifies the statement that the "current" world is a vicious dictatorship of Satan, for an all good and all power god would not allow such a series of events to take place.

Originally posted by Logician
�or are you one of the minions of Satan whome Milton quotes in his Paradise Lost as saying; �Better to reign in hell than serve in Heaven�? � The evil souls who do not wish to see Christ's king come to fruition will justly be smashed into pieces of pottery.

Well seeing as the origins and meaning of the word 'hell' were taken from earlier Norse religions where as 'Hel' was referred to as 'Witch Goddess of the Underworld', but nonetheless I will try to answer your question.

How can I be a 'minion of Satan' seeing as I don�t believe such things or beings even exist? Because I do not believe in Christ does this automatically make me a Satanist, and does this mean that I will be smashed into pieces of pottery for not taking Christ�s path?
If this is the case I would rather take the full force your god's angry vengeance than be forced to obey his will, for I refuse to be oppressed by anyone that negates my free will.

Originally posted by Logician
Please don�t confuse �priest� or �Catholic� with Christian. For that matter any old �Protestant�,�Lutheran�,� Mormon� is not automatically a Christian etc. Only God knows his elect. A safe bet to �Christianhood� would be Shindler who saved thousands of Jews in WWII at risk to his own life.

Then I shall re-phrase the question, if the priest in a Christian Church said he heard voices from spirits, how does that make what they said true?
Lots of people hear voices, echo's of the mind, but those that do as the voices tell them to do somewhat scare me.

Originally posted by Logician
You�re again generalizing. By your logic the following very �religious persons� [ "christians"] were �intellectually disabled�� Nicolaus Copernicus, Johannes Kepler,Blaise Pascal, Issac Newton, Michael Faraday, Lord Kelwin, etc. etc�.

This coming from someone who�s probably not achieved anything of substance intellectually.

Being intellectually disabled would not mean that the mind would not work at all, so yes there have been religious people in the past that have achieved great things. However in my opinion the quote holds true in the sense that people like these did not allocate any of their minds power to question what they had been fed, only what they were trying to achieve. This inadvertently acted to expand such a disease further.
However this as I said is only what I think, so you don�t have to agree.

By the way does anyone know who actually wrote this quote so I can put a name to it.?

Originally posted by Logician
God Bless, .. search the scripture friend.

Thank you for statement of 'God Bless' however seeing as I find no god ruling my existence all I can offer in return is to say enjoy life to the fullest friend.


[edit on 15-12-2004 by Johnny Redburn]

But I think you've raised some good points and will try to address...

Originally posted by Johnny Redburn
Unfortunately your bible also states that your god is "all-powerful" (can do anything logically possible) and "all-good" (does everything in power to eradicate evil) which nullifies the statement that the "current" world is a vicious dictatorship of Satan, for an all good and all power god would not allow such a series of events to take place.

There is the human element involved causing our world to be broken whereas there are consequences for our greed, the want for power, selfish-ambition, hate and pride. It's convenient to blame God for our faults, yes? What happens here is our fault. So, one can immerse themselves into this world, or look to what happens after. I love the phrase "There are no atheists in a foxhole". God, through the words and sacrifice of his son, showed he was willing to forgive these sins and offer eternal life and happiness with him. What's not to like? We are afraid of being enslaved when God offers to liberate. We fear losing who we are when in fact we can discard sin-baggage and truly be ourselfs.

Originally posted by Johnny Redburn
Because I do not believe in Christ does this automatically make me a Satanist...

No, Satanists are willful servants of the Devil.

Originally posted by Johnny Redburn
I refuse to be oppressed by anyone that negates my free will.

God gave you free will. Why would he negate it? He wants you to use it for good. What's wrong with that? Isn't that what you want for your children too?

Originally posted by Johnny Redburn
Then I shall re-phrase the question, if the priest in a Christian Church said he heard voices from spirits, how does that make what they said true?

It would only be true for that priest. The only way for anyone to believe anything like this is by experiencing it.

Originally posted by Johnny Redburn
Lots of people hear voices, echo's of the mind, but those that do as the voices tell them to do somewhat scare me.

This is hard to explain. You know the source of the 'voice'. It's not a question really. If you close your eyes and your mother walks into the room and starts talking to you, you know it's her. I don't hear voices telling me what to do but I get answers one way or another.

Originally posted by Johnny Redburn
However in my opinion the quote holds true in the sense that people like these did not allocate any of their minds power to question what they had been fed,

Ask questions. Ask often. Ask God himself. You don't need a book, pastor, or church.

God Bless and enjoy life to the fullest.

[edit on 15-12-2004 by saint4God]

Thanks for you post Saint.

Originally posted by saint4God

There is the human element involved causing our world to be broken whereas there are consequences for our greed, the want for power, selfish-ambition, hate and pride. It's convenient to blame God for our faults, yes? What happens here is our fault. So, one can immerse themselves into this world, or look to what happens after.

Sorry, but I don�t think you understood the reasoning. An all powerful and all good god would not be able to create a race that had the opportunity to perpetrate any evil, only good.

Originally posted by saint4God
I love the phrase "There are no atheists in a foxhole". God, through the words and sacrifice of his son, showed he was willing to forgive these sins and offer eternal life and happiness with him.

Well I tend to disagree with the quote seeing as both of my grandfathers fought in WWII for the British, one of them is Christian but the other was an Atheist and seeing as he was a combat solider can only assume he was in a foxhole at some point...

Originally posted by saint4God
What's not to like? We are afraid of being enslaved when God offers to liberate. We fear losing who we are when in fact we can discard sin-baggage and truly be ourselfs.

For some people it is easy to accept such an offer on the basis that it 'sounds' good. Some people prefer to understand something and know that it is truth before they follow.

Originally posted by saint4God
No, Satanists are willful servants of the Devil.

The reason I jumped to that conclusion is that Logician states there are only two ways in the bible, that of God or that of Satan.
Seeing as I don�t believe in God or Satan I am I to believe I fall under a third category that does not exist in Christian literature?

Originally posted by saint4God
God gave you free will. Why would he negate it? He wants you to use it for good. What's wrong with that? Isn't that what you want for your children too?

If God gave me free will he would have not stated in his bible that I had no choice, and I quote "...Thou who sayeth there is no God hath committed the ultimate sin." He also would have provided undeniable evidence that he exists so that I would not have to question.
Also I like to think that I am a good person even if I am not a Christian, I don�t lie or hurt people, I am kind and will go out of my way to make sure I don�t hurt peoples feelings. This is how I would want my children to be should I ever have any. Even though I am an Atheist I would not push that on my children, in fact I would encourage them to read about as many religions and choices as possible, and have them choose what makes them happy.

Originally posted by saint4God
It would only be true for that priest. The only way for anyone to believe anything like this is by experiencing it.

So if anyone who believes what a certain Christian priest says he heard would be relying totally on 'faith' whether it be true or false? (Not an argument, just trying to understand the logic)

Originally posted by saint4God
This is hard to explain. You know the source of the 'voice'. It's not a question really. If you close your eyes and your mother walks into the room and starts talking to you, you know it's her. I don't hear voices telling me what to do but I get answers one way or another.

What I would say to this is that you should be able to tell the difference between real sound waves and voices of your mind. The reason you know that your mother would be talking to you is that you can you hear the familiar sound coming from an external source, and would have a previous image in which to associate the voice to. If you have never seen a person physically speak how could you possibly associate a certain voice tone to that person?

Originally posted by saint4God
Ask questions. Ask often. Ask God himself. You don't need a book, pastor, or church.

To whom would I direct my questions, a fellow human? Someone who only has answers that were in turn fed to them at some point?

Also tell me how I would ask questions to your god? Speaking aloud or silent with no evidence that anyone or anything is listening could not logically offer me answers. I always used to pray when I was a child before I went to sleep, nothing ever came of it, and no answers were forthcoming.

Should I ask the bible? From which I can read 'answers' but ask no counter-questions?

Anyway I have rambled on long enough once again thanks for replying.

Hi Johnny,

I�m glad you�re well.

Then explain to me how the reverse is true?
To lose confidence and not obey what your god has stated in his book would be considered going against his word, correct?
In my opinion the bible does not give someone multiply roads in which to choose from. Therefore to be loyal and follow, means to disregarding logic and the basic human inquisitiveness.

You�re confusing faith with works.


Let me quickly quote Paul and OT to highlight this. Paul says, "What then shall we say about Abraham, our forefather, according to the flesh. What has he found? If Abraham was justified by works he has something to boast about, but not before God, for what does the Scripture say?" And Paul is refering to this portion of scripture in this regard, Genesis 15:6 that is very important: "Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness. Now to the one who works, his wage is not reckoned him as a favor but what is due."

So the botton line is this: If you work for it, then God owes you forgiveness. Do you understand?


BTW, no one is asking you to disregard logic or the basic human inquisitiveness. Didn�t you learn anything from my quote of John 20:24-29 last post about 'doubting Thomas' ? Now there�s a fella who was all inquisitive yet at the same time one of the most faithful apostles of Christ . Jesus didn�t fault him for it. Infact a person who outright denies the possibility of God (like you do ) suffers from a docile,myopic and uninquisitive mindset, I believe. Even Einstein acknowledged an all powerful God. � It�s easy to generalize and throw around labels Johnny, but back up your claims with reason.

Do you really think as a loyal follower you are going to question such acts which are included in his will, or blindly agree so as to not tarnish your belief in your faith?

All Christians fall short of God�s perfect standards, all the time. Even Paul was not immune. You�re confusing faith with works as I stated above. If works is the fiat for justification , Christ need not to have been crucified. But faith does imperceptibly produce good works(not the other way round); kindness, holy living,charity etc; though Christians will never be perfect in their works. Please don�t be under the false impression that Christians are forced to obey Christ, nay, we obey Him simply because we love Him. �If you love me , you will obey my commands�. (John 14:15). ..

Look it Johnny. My wife honours me not because I�m a good provider but simply because she loves me to death. It�s hardly forced. Same principle with Christ and his followers. Also, I don't pack my bags simply because she disobeys me occasionally, or even frequently. Further, it is illogical to asume that my wife doesn't love me if she disobeys me. But most of her actions do suggest that she is indeed devoted to me, and I to her. Infact, I would not divorce my wife but for the most severest of transgressions. In the same way, we are not afraid Christ will abandon us simply because we don't live up to His perfect standards. Do you understand?

Sorry, but I don�t think you understood the reasoning. An all powerful and all good god would not be able to create a race that had the opportunity to perpetrate any evil, only good.

Here's where you start contradicting yourself, profoundly. God created man with a free will, to choose good from evil, he did not manufacture machines incapable of evil. Youre funny, first you complain about Christians lacking basic human inquisitiveness, and
bible not give someone multiply roads in which to choose from, then in the same breath you fault God for creating humanity with free will.

In the Eden allegory, God allowed Eve to sin precisely because He loved inquisitiveness/free will more than automation. Infact, it is Godless people who blindly follow the lusts of their hearts. These are the real , robotic slaves to lust. Jesus said, "Everyone Who Sins Is a Slave to Sin. John 8: 34.

Unfortunately your bible also states that your god is "all-powerful" (can do anything logically possible) and "all-good" (does everything in power to eradicate evil) which nullifies the statement that the "current" world is a vicious dictatorship of Satan, for an all good and all power god would not allow such a series of events to take place.

If you understood the concept of free will you would not find a contradiction in the above.

Well seeing as the origins and meaning of the word 'hell' were taken from earlier Norse religions where as 'Hel' was referred to as 'Witch Goddess of the Underworld', but nonetheless I will try to answer your question.

You can do better than that, I'm sure. The English bible I quote from is just that, an English translation from the Greek. Would �Sheoul� or �Hades� be more to your liking? BTW, the word �God� is also of pagan origin, but that's not the issue since YAHWEH is best vocalized in the English as God, it very well brings the point across.

Do not even perceive to call me a liar unless I have stated something that is blatantly not true, thank you.

I gave you a choice between being dishonest or being ignorant because you made puzzling, general comments. Don't overreact, this is a discourse. Nothing personal.

If this is the case I would rather take the full force your god's angry vengeance than be forced to obey his will, for I refuse to be oppressed by anyone that negates my free will.

Johnny, logic dictates that if an all powerful God wanted to force obedience off you, you would have absolutely no choice in the matter. The mere fact that you have choice(to do evil) implicitly proves God respects free will.

Then I shall re-phrase the question, if the priest in a Christian Church said he heard voices from spirits, how does that make what they said true?

Any preacher who hears voices from God today should consult a psychologist. The NT canon was closed with the Book of Revelation before even the first century AD.

By the way does anyone know who actually wrote this quote so I can put a name to it.?

Karl Marx said something similar in his Das Kapital, I think; �religion is the opiate of the masses.�.

Thank you for statement of 'God Bless' however seeing as I find no god ruling my existence all I can offer in return is to say enjoy life to the fullest friend

That's your right; free will, if you will.



God Bless,






[edit on 15-12-2004 by Logician]